NPAN drags APCON, IGP to court

The Registered Trustees of the Newspaper Proprietors Association of Nigeria (NPAN) has dragged the Advertising Practitioners Council of Nigeria (APCON) and the Inspector-General of Police (IGP) before a Federal High Court sitting in Ikoyi, Lagos, over alleged harassment of media advertisement executives.
The newspaper owners filed an originating summons brought pursuant to Order 3 Rules 6 and 7 of the Federal High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules 2009, through their lawyer, A. Labi-Lawal on the ground that APCON does not have the power to regulate the activities of the plaintiffs members or any of their employees who are not registered members of APCON or practising advertising. In the suit, NPAN is asking the court to make a declaration that Articles 21 and 137(a) of the Nigerian Code of Advertising Practice and Sales Promotion are ultra vires (beyond the powers) of APCON in so far as the provisions of the Articles affect media houses who do not practise advertising.
The association is also asking the court to declare that Article 21 of the Nigerian Code of Advertising Practice and Sales Promotion which requires that all advertisements except public notices, goodwill messages, obituaries and vacancies should be vetted and approved by the Advertising Standards Panel (ASP) before publication, is inconsistent with the provisions of Section 39 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (FRN) and therefore, is unconstitutional, null and void.
The plaintiff is praying for a declaration that APCON has no power under the Advertising Practitioners (registration etc) Act, Cap A7, Laws of the Federation, 2004, to create offences and impose penalties as done in Article 137 (a) (b) and (c) of the Nigerian Code of Advertising Practice and Sales Promotion and as such, the said Article is unconstitutional, null and void. It wants the court to make an order of perpetual injunction restraining APCON from treating the said Articles 21 and 137(a) as valid articles in the code.
They are also asking for an order of perpetual injunction restraining the defendants, their servants, agents/ representatives from implementing or applying the provisions of Articles 21 and 137 (a) (b) and (c) against any member of the plaintiff’s association or their servants, officers and representatives.
The suit is predicated on whether the provisions of Section 1(d) of the Advertising Practitioners (Registration, etc) Act, Cap A7, LFN 2004, Articles 21 and 137 (a) of the Nigerian Code of Advertising Practice and Sales Promotion are not beyond APCON’s powers in relation to media houses who do not advertise. It is also on whether the said Articles are consistent with Section 39 of the 1999 constitution which guarantees the freedom of expression including freedom to hold opinion and to receive and impart ideas and information without interference.
Another issue to be determined in the suit is whether having regard to the provisions of Section 4 (1) of the 1999 constitution, it is competent for the first defendant to create offences and impose penalties as done in the Nigerian Code of Advertising Practice and Sales Promotion.
The suit is supported by a 22-paragraph affidavit deposed to by Ms Comfort Obi, Secretary of NPAN who averred that officers of the second defendant in a letter, invited two members of the plaintiff/association over a complaint by APCON asking them to release some of their staff for interrogation. It averred that they were interrogated before they were released on bail but that the police had threatened them with further arrest and prosecution for allegedly violating the provisions of Article 21 of the Code.

It averred that unless restrained as prayed, the defendants would continue to harass and intimidate members of the plaintiff/association and their staff with threat of arrest and prosecution in purported implementation of the said code. It added that APCON does not have the power to regulate activities of the plaintiff members or any of their employees who are not registered members of APCON or practising advertising. No date has been fixed for the hearing of the case.