A recent report by Daily Nigerian revealed that a Kano-based journalist, Dan’Uwa Rano, was arrested and detained by the police after a petition from an aide to Governor Abba Kabir Yusuf. His alleged offence: defamation and operating a YouTube channel without the approval of the National Broadcasting Commission (NBC).
The case, which stemmed from a satirical online programme featuring a fictional character named “Imalu,” has sparked widespread outrage and renewed debate over whether the NBC has the legal authority to license or regulate online broadcasting platforms.
The claim that the NBC must approve or license YouTube channels betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of the law. The NBC’s powers, derived from the National Broadcasting Commission Act of 1992 (as amended) and the Nigeria Broadcasting Code, are confined to terrestrial, satellite, and cable broadcasting — that is, content transmitted through electromagnetic frequencies like radio and television.
Online platforms, by contrast, operate through private internet data services, which fall under the Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC) — and even then, the NCC regulates infrastructure, not journalistic content.
The NBC’s framework was written in a pre-digital era and has no statutory mandate to control online journalism, podcasts, or YouTube programming. Any claim to the contrary is an overextension of authority.
This is not the first time the NBC has attempted to stretch its reach into the online domain. In 2020, under then Minister of Information Lai Mohammed, the Commission announced plans to regulate “internet broadcasting.” The move met strong resistance from journalists, digital rights advocates, and civil society groups who argued that such regulation violated Section 39 of the 1999 Constitution, which guarantees freedom of expression and the press.
Without a clear legislative amendment, any attempt to impose NBC licensing on online media remains unconstitutional. Moreover, Nigerian courts have repeatedly cautioned the NBC against assuming powers it does not have. In 2024, the Federal High Court in Lagos ruled that the Commission had no authority to impose fines or sanctions on broadcasters, declaring such actions “ultra vires” — beyond its legal mandate. Even in the traditional broadcasting space, NBC’s overreach has been judicially curtailed.
A notable precedent emerged when the Kano State Film and Video Censors Board (KSFVCB) clashed with Arewa24, the widely watched Hausa satellite TV channel. Around 2016–2017, the Board banned one of Arewa24’s drama series, alleging that it promoted indecent dressing and cultural immorality.
The Censorship Board claimed that no film or programme could air in Kano without its approval, even though Arewa24 operates under a federal NBC licence and broadcasts nationwide via satellite. Media observers and legal experts were quick to point out that the Board had no jurisdiction over nationally licensed broadcasters.
Under Nigeria’s 1999 Constitution, broadcasting lies on the Exclusive Legislative List, meaning only the Federal Government — through the NBC — can regulate it. The Board’s attempt to censor a national satellite channel was therefore unconstitutional and unenforceable.
I previously examined this same issue in detail in my article, “Arewa24, NBC and the Courts: Untangling Jurisdictional Knots”, where I argued that such conflicts expose a persistent confusion over who truly holds regulatory authority in Nigeria’s multi-layered media system.
The Arewa24 controversy remains a prime example of regulatory overreach, where state cultural agencies attempt to extend control over platforms far beyond their lawful remit.
The trend didn’t stop with Arewa24. In 2025, the Kano Censorship Board again made headlines after suspending 22 Hausa-language film series streamed online, claiming producers failed to submit them for censorship. It also cracked down on TikTok users for “indecent content,” working alongside the police to “curb social media abuse.”
Similarly, across Nigeria, both federal and state bodies have invoked outdated laws to justify attempts at controlling digital expression. The result is a confused regulatory environment where journalists, filmmakers, and online creators face overlapping and sometimes conflicting demands from authorities who either misunderstand or deliberately stretch their mandates.
Beyond the NBC and state censors, the police themselves have increasingly inserted into media regulation, often acting at the prompting of political interests. The case of Dan’Uwa Rano shows how far this can go. Despite the fictional nature of his programme, the police insisted he must “produce” the imaginary character “Imalu” before release — a demand both absurd and unlawful.
Such actions reflect a worrying pattern of law enforcement operating as political tools, not neutral enforcers of justice. When police officers detain journalists on vague or invented charges, or invoke nonexistent NBC regulations, they violate not only press freedom but also public trust in law and order.
The explosion of digital media — YouTube, podcasts, online radio, and blogs — represents the democratization of information in Nigeria. These platforms have empowered citizens to tell their own stories and hold leaders accountable, often filling gaps left by traditional media that face bureaucratic control or self-censorship.
Trying to subject these digital voices to outdated broadcast laws is both technologically unworkable and constitutionally indefensible. The global norm is toward promoting online transparency and responsibility, not suppressing digital innovation under old regulatory frameworks.
The arrest of Dan’Uwa Rano, the ban of Arewa24’s drama, the suspension of online Hausa series, and the NBC’s failed attempt to police internet broadcasting all highlight a recurring theme: regulatory overreach rooted in misunderstanding of the law.
The NBC’s authority stops at traditional broadcasting. The Kano Censorship Board’s power ends at state-level film exhibition. And the police have no business enforcing nonexistent “NBC approvals” for YouTube channels.
Nigeria’s democracy depends on respect for both the rule of law and the freedom of expression. Regulatory bodies should stick to their legal boundaries, and journalists — whether on radio, TV, or online — must be free to operate without fear or intimidation.