Says Its routine replacement
The Kano State government has denied claims that it banned 14 accredited journalists from covering the Government House.
Recall that yesterday, 14 journalists were reportedly asked to return to their respective organisations for replacements without prior notification or official reasons. The decision was linked to a disagreement between the journalists and the state media managers over issues of privileges.
Reacting to the development, Dawakin-Tofa Bature, spokesperson of Kano state governor, Abba Kabir-Yusuf, said it is a routine to replace reporters who cover the activities of the governor.
Bature explained that the State government can decide at any time to ask for the replacement of reporters with or without an explanation. According to him, Replacement is normal. From time to time, people are changed from Government House beat with or without reason. It is a normal in any organisation.
Many at times, media organisations replace their reporters or we ask for replacement, Bature further said.
The affected persons include: Aliyu Yusuf, director for public enlightenment; Sani Abubakar, public relations officer (PRO); Adamu Dabo, Chairman crew, Federal Radio Corporation of Nigeria (FRCN); Naziru Yau, Abubakar Rimi Television (ARTV); Sadiq Sani AA, (ARTV); Rabiu Sunusi, (Triumph); and Umar Sheka, (Freedom Radio).
Others are Jabir Danabba, (Nasara Radio); Labaran, Sound operator; Simon, AIT cameraman; Nasiru Danhaki, Nigeria Television Authority (NTA); Abdullahi Sule, driver; Baba Kusa, (Express Radio); and Ibrahim Muazzam, (Radio Kano).
Meanwhile, the Independent Broadcasting Association of Nigeria (IBAN) had earlier voiced serious concerns following the Kano State Government’s decision to revoke the accreditation of the 14 journalists.
In a press release issued yesterday, signed by its Chairman, Dr. Ahmed Tijani Ramalan, and Publicity Director, Greg Odutayo, IBAN condemned the revocation, describing it as a “troubling development” that threatens press freedom.
According to the association, the withdrawal of accreditation without a detailed explanation is alarming, as it undermines the principles of accountability and transparency that are crucial for a healthy democracy.
