Limitations To Freedom Of Expression

2. Disobedience To Regulations: Notwithstanding that the Constitution allows freedom of expression, a media house which goes against regulations in its operations may be shut down. A media house which publishes materials which may cause disaffection may be sanctioned, inspite of freedom of the press. Films, videos and publications which are unfit for the public may be disallowed or banned.

3. Seditious Publications: Though the Constitution allows you freedom of expression and freedom to establish your means of communications, there is a limit to this. You cannot hide under freedom of expression to publish seditious materials. Seditious materials are any document or information intended to bring the government of the Federation or a State into disrepute for the purpose of causing disaffection against that government. The publication may also be intended to provoke or incite the people against government. Any publication of such seditious materials is a criminal offence under the law and you cannot employ freedom of expression as a defense.

4. Deliberate Misinformation: You cannot deliberately misinform the people, especially if it’s with the intent to provoke the people against one another or against the government. This is not allowed under the law inspite of your rights to freedom of expression.
A press man who deliberately misinforms the public with the intent of portraying another person in bad light would be liable notwithstanding freedom of the press.

5. Libel: Libel is the publication of malicious falsehood which is intended to put another person in a negative light. For example, if Mr. A publishes in a newspaper that Mr. B is a thief and such allegation is false, then Mr. A will be liable. Mr. A cannot hide under the constitutional provision of freedom of expression to publish damaging things against Mr. B, particularly when the allegation contained therein is false. Mr. B can sue Mr. A for libel and claim damages against him for injuring his reputation. Publication here does not necessarily mean going public with the information. It is libel if John merely writes a letter to his friend Jack, alleging that he caught James stealing from another person. If that allegation is false, then John would be held liable, notwithstanding that he merely wrote a letter to his friend.

6. Slander: This is more or less like libel. The only difference is that slanders are words uttered by words of mouth and not written, printed, or published in readable or tangible form like libel. If Alice tells Jane that she caught Doris committing adultery with another man, which she knows to be false, then she has slandered Doris who is entitled to take it up legally. Alice cannot claim freedom of expression as a defense. (I have dealt fully with libel, slander and other civil wrongs in one of my other titles, “KNOW YOUR CIVIL RIGHTS AGAINST OTHER PEOPLE”).