By Divine Sam

The Nigeria Union of Journalists (NUJ) has called for justice, a fair hearing and respect for press freedom in the case of Farida Isiak, a 23-year-old journalist with Nagarta Radio in Kaduna State, following her reported arrest, detention and sentencing over a Facebook post criticising the police.

In a statement issued on Thursday, the NUJ National President, Alhassan Yahaya Abdullahi, said the circumstances surrounding the journalist’s ordeal raised serious concerns about freedom of expression, personal liberty, due process and the possible abuse of public authority.

According to the Union, the incident reportedly began with a disagreement over ₦100 change from a charcoal sale between Farida’s mother and a neighbour. Her mother was allegedly arrested, while her father was also detained after visiting the police station to secure her release.

The statement said Farida subsequently presented herself at the police station but was accused of defaming the police in a Facebook post concerning the reported treatment of her parents.

Abdullahi said the journalist reportedly deleted the post and apologised but was later arraigned before a court in Kawo, where she was sentenced to four years’ imprisonment or a fine of ₦1.75 million for defamation.

He added that the intervention of lawyers following the reported proceedings prevented her immediate transfer to a correctional facility.

The NUJ president disclosed that Farida was subsequently granted bail, while a retrial had been scheduled for November 3, 2026.

Although the Union welcomed her release on bail, it cautioned that the development did not resolve the broader legal and constitutional concerns surrounding the case.

Abdullahi said the NUJ would continue to monitor proceedings and advocate for a transparent, lawful and fair judicial process.

He cited Section 39 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, which guarantees freedom of expression, including the right to hold opinions and receive and impart information and ideas, subject to constitutional provisions and applicable laws.

“Sections 35 and 36 also protect personal liberty and the right to a fair hearing. These constitutional guarantees are fundamental to a democratic society. They protect not only journalists but every Nigerian who wishes to express an opinion, question the conduct of public institutions or seek redress for an alleged injustice,” he said.

The Union acknowledged that journalists were not above the law and that freedom of expression did not exempt anyone from lawful consequences.

However, it insisted that defamation allegations must be handled in accordance with the law, while respecting the rights of all parties and ensuring that constitutional safeguards and fair-hearing requirements were upheld.

The NUJ expressed particular concern about the possible implications of Farida’s case for press freedom and journalists’ safety, warning that criminal proceedings against media practitioners following criticism of public officials require careful scrutiny.

It said such cases must be handled in ways that uphold accountability without allowing legal processes to become instruments of intimidation.

“Public institutions must remain open to legitimate scrutiny. Criticism of the police or any other public institution should be addressed through lawful and appropriate procedures, not through actions that could discourage citizens from reporting misconduct or expressing legitimate grievances,” the statement added.

The Union stressed that protecting journalists was closely linked to safeguarding the public’s right to information, noting that intimidation of media practitioners could undermine democratic participation and discourage citizens from raising concerns about matters of public interest.

It consequently called on the relevant authorities to exercise restraint, ensure accountability and respect due process in handling the case.

The NUJ further urged authorities to address the circumstances surrounding Farida’s arrest, the reported detention of her parents and the initial court proceedings through appropriate legal and institutional channels.

The Union maintained that the forthcoming retrial must be conducted fairly and transparently to strengthen public confidence in the administration of justice and protect the constitutional rights of all parties involved.