SERAP sues Tinubu govt over arbitrary, unlawful ban on Eedris’ song ‘Tell Your Papa’

The song, which allegedly criticised President Bola Tinubu’s economic policies, was prohibited from radio and TV broadcast over its “objectionable nature”. The NBC cited the song’s violation of “public decency standards” on radio and TV stations.

In the suit number FHC/L/CS/797/2025 filed last Thursday at the Federal High Court, Lagos, SERAP is seeking: “an order setting aside the arbitrary and illegal ban on Eedris Abdulkareem’s song ‘Tell Your Papa’, for being inconsistent and incompatible with the rights to freedom of expression, access to information, and media freedom.”

SERAP is seeking: “an order of perpetual injunction restraining the NBC whether jointly or severally or any other authority, person or group of persons from preventing the airing of Eedris Abdulkareem’s song on all broadcast stations and other similar media platforms in Nigeria.”

SERAP is also seeking “a declaration that the NBC’s directive, issued via a letter dated 9 April 2025 to all broadcast stations in Nigeria, banning the airing of Eedris Abdulkareem’s song is unlawful and inconsistent and incompatible with the rights to freedom of expression, access to information, and media freedom.”

In the suit, SERAP is arguing that: “The NBC is censoring music under the guise of ‘protecting public decency’. Public decency is not a carte blanche for banning Eedris’ song and placing a chokehold on information and suppressing peaceful dissent.”

SERAP is arguing that, “Freedom of expression constitutes one of the essential foundations of a democratic society and extends not only to information or ideas that are favourably received, but also to those that offend, shock or disturb in such domains as political discourse and commentary on public affairs.”

SERAP is also arguing that, “The ban on Eedris’ song has a chilling effect on freedom of expression, access to information and media freedom. The NBC has not shown that the song would impose a specific risk of harm to a legitimate State interest that outweighs the public interest in the information provided by the song.”

According to SERAP, “Section 3.1.8 of the Nigeria Broadcasting Code is overbroad and excessively intrusive, as it breaches the fundamental rights to freedom of expression, access to information and media freedom.”

The suit filed on behalf of SERAP by its lawyers, Kolawole Oluwadare, Ms Oluwakemi Agunbiade and Ms Valentina Adegoke, read in part: “All persons enjoy the rights to freedom of expression and creativity and to enjoy the arts.”

“The ban on Eedris’ song fails to meet the requirements of legality, necessity, and proportionality.”

“The requirement of necessity also implies an assessment of the proportionality of the grounds, with the aim of ensuring that the excuse of ‘objectionable nature’ and ‘public decency’ are not used as a pretext to ban Eedris’ song and unduly intrude upon Nigerians’ human rights.”

“Expressions, whether artistic or not, always remain protected under the right to freedom of expression. The NBC directive is also inconsistent and incompatible with the right to freedom of artistic expression and creativity.”

“Art constitutes an important vehicle for each person, individually and in community with others, as well as groups of people, to develop and express their humanity. Artists may entertain people, but they also contribute to social debates, sometimes bringing counter-discourses and potential counterweights to existing power centres.”

“The vitality of artistic creativity is necessary for the functioning of democratic societies. Banning or removing creative expressions from public access is a way to restrict artistic freedom.”

“It is inconsistent and incompatible with the Nigerian Constitution 1999 [as amended] and the country’s international human rights obligations to use vague and overly broad grounds of ‘objectionable nature’ and ‘public decency’ as justifications to ban Eedris’ song.”

“The action by the NBC is arbitrary, illegal, and unconstitutional, as it is contrary to the provisions of section 39 of the Nigerian Constitution, article 9 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, and article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which Nigeria is a state party.”

“Media freedom and media plurality are a central part of the effective exercise of freedom of expression. The media has a vital role to play as ‘public watchdog’ in imparting information of serious public concern and should not be inhibited or intimidated from playing that role.”

“While the media may be subject to some restrictions necessary for the protection of certain vital interests of the state, such as national security or public health, the media has a role and responsibility to convey information and ideas on political issues, even divisive ones and the public has a right to receive them.”

“Article 19(2) of International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, states that the right to freedom of expression includes the freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds ‘in the form of art’.”

“The effects of art censorship or unjustified restrictions of the right to freedom of artistic expression and creativity are devastating. They generate important social and economic losses, deprive artists of their means of expression and livelihood, create an unsafe environment for all those engaged in the arts and their audiences.”

“Restrictions of the right to freedom of artistic expression also sterilize debates on human, social and political issues and hamper the functioning of democracy.”

“Article 19 (1) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights establishes the right to freedom of opinion without interference. Article 19(2) establishes Nigeria’s obligations to respect ‘the right to freedom of expression,’ which includes the freedom to seek, receive and impart information, regardless of frontiers.”

“Under article 19(3), restrictions on the right to freedom of expression must be ‘provided by law’, and necessary ‘for respect of the rights or reputations of others’ or ‘for the protection of national security or of public order (ordre public), or of public health and morals’”

No date has been fixed for the hearing of the suit.