Chief Julius Bokoru, Special Assistant on Media and Public Affairs to former Minister of State for Petroleum Resources, Chief Timipre Sylva, has raised concerns over what he described as the pattern and timing of media reports linking his principal to an alleged coup plot.
In a statement issued on Friday, Bokoru said some reports on the matter appeared to have gone beyond legitimate investigative journalism and were increasingly reinforcing what he described as a predetermined narrative against Sylva.
Bokoru, who said he had not been able to establish contact with Sylva since the controversy began, stressed that his intervention was not intended to undermine investigative journalism. He acknowledged the important role Nigerian journalists have historically played in holding governments, institutions and influential individuals accountable.
He, however, urged journalists and media organisations reporting the allegations to scrutinise not only the information they receive but also the sources, methods, timing and circumstances surrounding its release.
According to him, the allegations against Sylva had been “repeatedly serialised, repackaged and amplified” in a manner that increasingly created the impression of a deliberate effort to cement a particular narrative in the minds of Nigerians.
Bokoru questioned the provenance of materials reportedly forming the basis of some of the reports, asking: “Where are these materials coming from? Who is supplying them? Why are sensitive investigative documents appearing in carefully sequenced instalments?”
He also questioned why successive reports appeared to reinforce the same conclusion about Sylva despite the allegations not having been established in court.
The media aide was careful to state that he was not accusing any media organisation of receiving sponsorship from any individual or group, noting that he had no evidence to support such a claim. He nevertheless said the pattern of coverage raised concerns about whether some organisations were pursuing independent investigations or, knowingly or unknowingly, operating within an information strategy driven by other interests.
Bokoru further cautioned against presenting allegations contained in investigative materials as established facts. He emphasised the distinction between an allegation, investigative theory and a judicial determination of guilt.
“An allegation is not evidence; an investigator’s theory is not a conviction; and a statement contained in an investigative file is not a judicial finding of guilt,” he said.
He urged those with evidence against Sylva to submit it to the appropriate authorities and allow the matter to undergo the normal legal process.
“If there are allegations, report them as allegations,” Bokoru insisted.
He expressed concern that the repeated publication of untested allegations could effectively amount to prosecuting Sylva in the court of public opinion, where evidence could not be formally tested and witnesses could not be cross-examined.
Bokoru also raised the possibility that confidential investigative materials could be selectively leaked to the media in an attempt to influence public opinion. If that was happening, he said, media organisations should consider whether they were independently investigating the matter or inadvertently becoming instruments of an information campaign.
He maintained that Nigerian journalism must remain independent regardless of the identity, influence or interests of the sources providing information.
“Our journalists have fought too hard for the freedom to investigate power to become unwitting instruments of power,” he said.
While acknowledging the media’s right to investigate and report on Sylva, Bokoru maintained that Nigerians equally had the right to scrutinise the methods, sources, timing and editorial decisions behind the reports.