In the suit, MRA is urging the Court to declare that recurring incidents of harassment, intimidation, assault, unlawful detention, and other violations of the rights of female journalists in Nigeria constitute breaches of their fundamental rights as guaranteed under the Constitution and international norms.
This statement was originally published on mediarightsagenda.org on 6 October 2026.
A Federal High Court sitting in Abuja has fixed a hearing for October 29, 2026, in a suit filed by Media Rights Agenda (MRA) against the Federal Government, the Attorney-General of the Federation, the Inspector-General of Police, and the Nigeria Police Force, seeking judicial intervention over what the organization described as “persistent, escalating, and gender-specific attacks” against female journalists in the country.
Justice Binta Nyako fixed the date for hearing on September 23, 2026, at the request of Mr. Oluwafisayomi Aina, representing MRA, after confirming that all the respondents had been served with the court processes but had failed to file any response to the suit despite the fact that they have had more than the 30 days provided by the rules of court to do so.
In the suit, filed on its behalf by Abuja-based human rights lawyer, Ms. Mojirayo Ogunlana-Nkanga, MRA is urging the Court to declare that recurring incidents of harassment, intimidation, assault, unlawful detention, and other violations of the rights of female journalists in Nigeria constitute breaches of their fundamental rights as guaranteed under the 1999 Constitution, the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, and the Declaration of Principles on Freedom of Expression and Access to Information in Africa.
Among other reliefs, the organization is seeking declarations that acts of harassment, intimidation, physical assault, arbitrary arrest, unlawful detention, online and offline threats, and other forms of violence against female journalists violate their rights to dignity, life, liberty, freedom of expression, and freedom from discrimination as guaranteed by Sections 33, 34, 35, 39, and 42 of the 1999 Constitution, as well as Articles 4, 5, 9, and 18(3) of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights.
It is also contending that the failure of the Federal Government and the Police to prevent and investigate such attacks, as well as prosecute the perpetrators of such violations, constitutes a breach of Nigeria’s domestic and international human rights obligations.
MRA is therefore seeking an order of mandamus to compel the Federal Government to establish gender-sensitive protection mechanisms for female journalists, ensure the prompt investigation and prosecution of offenders, and implement institutional reforms, including mandatory training for law enforcement officers on journalists’ rights, safety, and professional protections.
It also seeks an order of perpetual injunction restraining security agencies and other state actors from further harassment, arrest, detention, or interference with the professional duties of female journalists.
The suit has, however, experienced multiple adjournments, delaying its resolution. When it previously came up on June 4, 2026, court officials said the judge was unavailable due to other official engagements and that the court would be occupied with pre-election matters for some months.
The parties were therefore advised to take a fresh date later in the year, and the matter was consequently adjourned to September 23, 2026, for mention, with hearing notices to be served on the parties.
At an earlier sitting scheduled for March 19, 2026, the proceedings could not hold due to a public holiday declared by the Federal Government, and the matter was subsequently adjourned to May 18, 2026, for mention.
When the matter came up on May 18, 2026, the Court did not sit, with no specific reason disclosed. The parties were informed that the judge was engaged in other judicial assignments, and the matter was then adjourned to June 4, 2026, for mention.
When the suit came up on September 23, 2026, Mr. Aina informed the court that the case was for mention and that all Respondents had been served with the Originating Motion. He therefore applied that the case be deemed mentioned and fixed for hearing.
Justice Nyako reviewed the court records to confirm when the suit was filed and served and the addresses where the Respondents were served.
She observed that the Respondents had had more than the required 30 days to file their processes but had failed to respond to the application.
The judge therefore granted Mr. Aina’s request and fixed October 29, 2026, for hearing. She ordered that “Hearing Notices” should be served on all Respondents to notify them of the date.
