WORLD PRESS FREEDOM DAY: Cause for Hope and Concern in Southern Africa

By Moyiga Nduru Reprint | | Print |

Moyiga Nduru

JOHANNESBURG, May 3 2006 (IPS) - As countries around the world commemorate World Press Freedom Day on Wednesday, a mixed picture has emerged of the state of media freedom in Southern Africa.

“Angola, which is recovering from decades of conflict, is…opening up. Angola passed its access to information act in 2002. It’s a good gesture by the government to come out with such an act – but it needs a lot of improvements,” said Kaitira Kandjii, regional director of the Media Institute of Southern Africa (MISA). This non-governmental organisation (NGO), based in the Namibian capital of Windhoek, lobbies for press freedom in the 14-nation Southern African Development Community (SADC).

In a publication issued Wednesday titled ‘So This Is Democracy? Report on the state of media freedom and freedom of expression in southern Africa 2005’, MISA said it issued 155 alerts in 2005 about media freedom and freedom of expression violations in the 11 SADC countries it covered.

“This is a decrease of 8.3 percent over the 169 alerts recorded the previous year in 2004, and a 57 percent increase over the 84 alerts issued in 1994, when MISA first began monitoring…violations in the sub-continent,” noted the publication.

The countries monitored were Angola, Botswana, Lesotho, Malawi, Mozambique, Namibia, South Africa, Swaziland, Tanzania, Zambia and Zimbabwe.

“A breakdown of the 155 alerts issued in 2005 reveals among others, that 16 journalists were attacked, 14 detained (and) 36 censored whilst 9 victories – either through the adoption of positive legislation or where charges were dropped against a journalist – were recorded,” MISA noted.

“No journalists were killed as a result of their work in 2005.”

Nonetheless, “We have some severe challenges to press laws in the region, Zimbabwe and Swaziland being (among) them,” William Bird, director of the Media Monitoring Project – an NGO headquartered in South Africa’s financial centre of Johannesburg – told IPS.

MISA agrees that Zimbabwe is currently one of the worst SADC countries for journalists to work in.

“Although Zimbabwe continues to lead in terms of the number of individual violations recorded, MISA documented a 62 percent decrease in the number of violations (from 120 in 2002 to 46 in 2005) in Zimbabwe,” says the organisation in its May 3 report.

But, this is not necessarily a sign of improvements in press freedom. Kandjii attributes the 62 percent decrease to “the fact that the independent media in Zimbabwe has been effectively silenced with the vigorous application of the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act (AIPPA) and the Public Order and Security Act (POSA).”

He told IPS that government had tightened the noose around the media with the signing into law of the Criminal Bill last June: “(This) makes it increasingly difficult for the few remaining journalists who survived the implementation of AIPPA and POSA to perform their newsgathering tasks without fear or favour.”

In addition, the General Laws Amendment Bill had increased penalties against journalists who were convicted of publishing statements thought to insult or undermine the authority of the president.

Zimbabwe has been in the grip of a political and economic crisis in recent years, during which the country has adopted a problematic land redistribution programme, and held several elections marred by human rights abuses.

In Swaziland, Africa’s last absolute monarchy, a new constitution that endorses media freedom and freedom of expression was given the green light by parliament and King Mswati the Third last year. However, there is “much public scepticism” about whether authorities will observe it, notes MISA.

“While on the surface government projects itself as friendly to critical and crusading media, politicians continue with an undeclared and covert policy of assimilating journalists through threats; recruiting them as ministerial private secretaries; or offering them perks,” adds the organisation.

“These ploys seem to be working to the extent that they have sown distrust within the profession, polarised the media and divided journalists.”

Litigation was also described as a threat to media freedom in Swaziland.

Opposition parties have been banned in this country for more than three decades. King Mswati has also come under heavy criticism for his extravagance at a time when – according to the United Nations World Food Programme – two thirds of Swazis live below the poverty line.

While the SADC Protocol on Culture, Information and Sport, adopted in 2002, seeks to increase access to information in the region, its benefits have yet to be fully realised.

“It still needs to be ratified by some countries,” said Kandjii, adding that “…the practice on the ground needs to change. Lower government officials continue to deny access to information. We are calling on governments to change their attitudes and their old cultures and open up.”

He also hopes that anti-corruption acts introduced in Namibia, Malawi and Zambia will boost access to information, as these oblige governments to make available certain details to organisations probing allegations of graft.

But, are journalists themselves taking advantage of access to information laws where these are in effect?

“The laws are in place, we are comfortable with it. But I don’t think the media have used them frequently,” Joe Thloloe, chairman of the Johannesburg-based South African National Editors’ Forum, told IPS.

“It’s a state of lack of resources and staff that make them not use the access to information act to investigate stories,” he added. “There are very few news organisations that are investing in it like the ‘Mail & Guardian’ and ‘Sunday Times’. On the whole, people resort to the easy route of newsgathering and publishing.”

Bird thinks ignorance may also have something to do with this trend: “I don’t think the majority of people in South Africa are aware of the existence of the act (the Promotion of Access to Information Act, of 2000),” he said. “There is a great need for awareness campaigns about the law.”

MISA also has concerns about other developments in the South African media sector, notably last year’s high court ruling that prevented the ‘Mail & Guardian’, an independent weekly based in Johannesburg, from publishing a report on the so-called “Oilgate” scandal. This matter concerned allegations that an oil company named Imvume had diverted public funds to the ruling African National Congress ahead of general elections in 2004.

“The banning presented the genuine fear that the judgement may open the way for others seeking to prevent newspapers from publishing articles about their questionable or irregular conduct, by enabling them to obtain legal censorship of the media through the courts,” Kandjii said.