The PR Industry is about to see some fireworks.
Thisday's Raheem Akingbolu makes startling findings in his examination of the undercurrents in the impending legal battle between XLR8 and NIPR

Can Company A write a letter to Company B instructing it to sack Company C, a company which Company B has legitimately hired? Can an organisation which by its own admission, is “registered as a private company limited by guarantee” also be an association, trade union and regulator all in the same breath? Can a company be penalised if it fails to join a trade association?

These are some of the issues that the courts will have to rule on in the next few weeks as the Nigerian Institute of Public Relations (NIPR) and the Public Relations Consultants Association of Nigeria (PRCAN) go to court to face libel charges filed by Calixthus Okoruwa, Chief Executive Officer of XLR8.

Genesis of the Matter

Last July, in a letter written on the letter-head of the Nigerian Institute of Public Relations, NIPR, the duo of Rotimi Oladele, President of the Nigerian Institute of Public Relations, and John Ehiguese, President of PRCAN Limited by Guarantee, had written a letter to Guinness Nigeria. In the letter, they alleged that Guinness had breached the law governing public relations in Nigeria because Guinness had recently awarded its corporate public relations portfolio to XLR8 Nigeria. They argued that it should not have awarded the job to XLR8 because the company’s CEO is neither a member of the Nigerian Institute of Public Relations nor the Public Relations Consultants Association of Nigeria. The duo argued that PRCAN is a creation of Bye Law 3 of the enabling Act setting up the Nigerian Institute of Public Relations, and is consequently empowered to enforce the rules. Consequently, the duo requested that XLR8 be fired within 7 days.

The engagement of XLR8 by Guinness was one of the three of such cases in recent time. Few months ago, stakeholders in the industry were shocked when MTN, a leading telecom operator appointed DKK, an integrated marketing company, to manage its PR brief. A feeler from the industry has also revealed that Lafarge WAPCO Cement had secretly hired an unknown organisation based in Alausa Ikeja that is neither a member of any of the two regulatory bodies to also manage its image.

After the pronouncement by MTN, the entire industry was jolted on why a multinational like MTN could descend so low to have thrown its account to an agency that was not known to have handled any PR brief before. While defending the reason behind the appointment, the immediate former General Manager, Corporate Communications, MTN, Ms. Funmi Olajide, said the telecom company followed international standard before the appointment. According to her, a pitch process was organised, where all the invited agencies displayed their expertise. She also disclosed that DKK and Brook and Blakes presented the best presentation, which marvelled everybody including the participants.

While the debate continues, industry players are divided over the issue. While some accuse PRCAN of stressing its luck too long, a few people have also condemned the nonchalant attitude of Okoruwa and others and urged them to join the association.

Was the letter written in a hurry?

It has since turned out that the letter was apparently hastily prepared, signed and dispatched without even the most basic due diligence as Calixthus Okoruwa is a member of the Nigerian Institute of Public Relations.

Many industry watchers have raised questions about the motivation of the duo of Messrs Ehiguese and Oladele to have sent a letter to a third party, a multinational company, making what has turned out to be an embarrassingly false allegation. While some agree that the letter may have been driven by genuine intentions, others believe that the motivation may have been more of professional envy than anything else. People who hold on to this view say that this is evidenced in the haste with which NIPR and PRCAN prepared a letter and sent off to the multinational company, without even cross-checking the facts let alone engaging the man in question. The letter, unfortunately, may make its authors liable for libel.

Libel Case is Brewing

Interestingly, reports reaching THISDAY indicate that a libel case is now in the offing. Okoruwa is reported to have since commenced legal actions against NIPR and the duo of Rotimi Oladele and John Ehiguese for libel. He is contending that in writing to his client and making a false allegation that he is not a member of the NIPR, both parties have attempted to soil his professional reputation. In addition, he contends that PRCAN is unknown to the Nigerian Institute of Public Relations Practitioners’ Act of 2004 or indeed any law operational in Nigeria today. Even if it were a genuine association, joining it would have been voluntary and certainly not by compulsion.

Is PRCAN a Private Company?

Interestingly, investigations by this reporter have also shown that Public Relations Consultants Association of Nigeria may actually have been registered as PRCAN Limited, a company limited by Guarantee. In this light therefore, according to a lawyer, Mr. Kabir Akingbolu of Akingbolu and Salawu and co, Ikeja, it is a private profit-making company and not an “association” as its “executives” have made the public believe.

It is possible that even its executives do not realise this, as the lawyer explained that there are clear statutory differences in the registration of an association and the registration of a private company even when it is limited by guarantee. “Given that the body is currently registered as PRCAN Limited by Guarantee, its legal status is that of a private profit-making company with a finite number of subscribers, and certainly not an association or a regulatory agency,” Akingbolu emphasised.

By law, the lawyer said, PRCAN Limited by Guarantee, being a private company ought not to have more than 50 members; otherwise it would need to apply to the Corporate Affairs Commission for registration as a Public Liability Company, PLC.

PRCAN Incorporation Profile

According to documents obtained by this reporter from the Corporate Affairs Commission in Abuja, PRCAN Limited by Guarantee was incorporated on 4th of May 2007. Its directors and subscribers are Emeka Maduegbuna, Benedicta Upaa Ayede, Adetokunbo Modupe, Mfon Amana, Idris Mohammed, Chido Nwakanma, Toye Ogunnorin, Osita Ike, Akin Peter-Thomas, and Ladosu Ogunmakin. Meanwhile, Mr. John Ehiguese, who is president of PRCAN Limited by Guarantee, is not listed among the directors or subscribers to the company.

Commenting on the development, another Lagos lawyer, Abednego Igboanego, stated that there is a great deal of ignorance surrounding the registration of corporate bodies in Nigeria. He advised that people wishing to set up companies or trade associations should contact knowledgeable and experienced professionals such as lawyers in order to be properly guided through the process.

Trade Association Cannot be a Regulator

Igboanego stated categorically that the Nigerian Institute of Public Relations Practitioners Act of 2004 is a law that can easily be accessed by anyone. “There is no bye-law attached to the act,” he said. “Anybody claiming that there is a bye-law empowering a voluntary trade association to play the role of government regulator is either ignorant, fraudulent or plain mischievous,” he added.

For weeks, Mr. Ehiguese has struggled to justify the letter which he jointly signed with Rotimi Oladele and issued to Guinness Nigeria, claiming that it was in a bid to cleanse the public relations industry. Last week via a motion reportedly moved by Yomi Badejo-Okunsanya of CMC, members of PRCAN Limited by Guarantee passed a vote of confidence on Ehiguese’s leadership, applauding his efforts at making the industry more professional. Ironically, it would appear that it is PRCAN that is more in need of professionalising. “It certainly does not have the powers that it claims to have,” stated Igboanego, adding that “no responsible government will empower a trade union or trade association to perform the role of a regulator.” At best, he said, a trade association can play the role of self-regulation, ensuring that all its members conform to a certain code of behaviour or practice.

Another lawyer Ayodeji Arowosebe agreed. “A doctor does not cease to be a doctor just because he does not belong to the Nigerian Medical Association, neither does a lawyer cease to be lawyer just because he does not belong to the Nigerian Bar Association,” he said.

Both NMA and NBA are mere trade associations and do not confer professional legality on anyone. While it is true, for instance, he said, that only a doctor can join the NMA, it is not membership of NMA that makes one a doctor. That role is performed by the Medical and Dental Council of Nigeria and the NMA does not go about claiming to “regulate” medical practice. In the same vein, while only a qualified pharmacist can join the Pharmaceutical Society of Nigeria, it is not membership of PSN that makes one a pharmacist. “There is a need for people to better understand these things,” he said, to avoid unnecessary embarrassment.

Tragedy of a Witch-hunt Gone Wrong

Abiola Ogusola a brand manager in an advertising company lamented that “what we are witnessing is a tragic case of a selfish witch-hunt gone wrong.” She added that, “The duo had intended to embarrass, intimidate and punish somebody, apparently for reasons best known to them. Instead they are the ones who now have to face the music.”

If reports reaching THISDAY are anything to go by, then there are indications that unless both gentlemen, Oladele and Ehiguese, apologise to Okoruwa over the next few days, a full-fledged litigation will be inevitable. Libel prosecution procedure, THISDAY gathered, are such that the litigant must first provide evidence to show that it offered the other party adequate opportunity to make amends and apologise for its actions, failure of which it proceeded to court. Oladele and Ehiguese have reportedly been requested to apologise and retract their defamatory letter since July, but till date, according to a source close to Okoruwa and his company, they have refused to do so.

In a telephone interview with THISDAY, Mr Ehiguese emphasised that the act that established NIPR empowers it to regulate Public Relations practice. He also stated that PRCAN derives its power from the bye law no 3 of 1993, which was created by NIPR to give the association the power of regulation in the industry. On the fact that PRCAN was not registered as an association, Ehiguese said he couldn’t explain the legal implication but pointed out that the body was out to bring the needed sanity to PR practice not to witch-hunt any individual or association.

It was gathered that the Permanent Secretary of the Federal Ministry of Information has since written to the NIPR, advising it to seek a peaceful resolution of the issue rather than wait for it to get to court.

As things stand, the marketing communications industry is likely to witness legal fireworks in the weeks to come.

Source:
http://www.thisdaylive.com/articles/prca-vs-xlr8-has-the-hunter-become-the-hunted-/221234/

lalasticlala abeg waka with this post to front page.

This is a long piece. Not a bad read though. The impunity with which some people act is just amazing. How can a private company claim to be a regulator? And they are just riding and bullying people.

Naija I hail thee.

Rainmaker69:
This is a long piece. Not a bad read though. The impunity with which some people act is just amazing. How can a private company claim to be a regulator? And they are just riding and bullying people.

Naija I hail thee.

Na so. Many things popping in this country.

Na wa oh. If to say na naked photo d post for done reach fp tey tey... God dey sha

In summary?