By Louise Redvers and - -
LUANDA, Mar 13 2012 (IPS)

Rights groups and activists are warning of a rapidly deteriorating political climate in Angola following a police raid on a private newspaper and a violent crackdown on anti-government protests.

An anti-government demonstration photo. Credit: Louise Redvers

The effective shut-down of the paper and the questioning of its editor, William Tonet, whose mobile phone battery was also confiscated, comes just 48 hours after attempts by Angolan youths to stage demonstrations in the capital Luanda and southern coastal city of Benguela.

The marches had been convened to protest about irregularities in the electoral process including the appointment of a member of the ruling party to run the National Electoral Commission.

Although only a few dozen people gathered in each city, neither protest was allowed to go ahead.

In Benguela heavily armed police broke up the crowds making several arrests, while in Luanda, where in the days running up to the events there had been reports of house raids, threats against the organisers, an unidentified armed gang launched a violent street attack on the organisers leaving several people seriously injured.

Lisa Rimli, from New York-based lobby group Human Rights Watch, said: “We are especially concerned about what is happening in Angola because this is an election year when people should be allowed to express themselves freely.

“That people are not being allowed to stage public demonstrations, which is their right under the constitution, and that private newspapers are being targeted like this, it is very worrying,” she added.

Rimli said she was most concerned about the type of violence being pursued against the protestors.

“What we saw at the weekend was a step up from previous marches, the attackers were armed and they were aiming for people’s heads,” she said. Adding: “It is very lucky no-one was killed.”

Angola’s Policia Nacional or national police has denounced the violence, blaming the clashes on rival gangs and “hooligans”, and a spokesman pledged a full investigation into what happened.

A leaflet has started circulating in Luanda, claiming to be from a separate youth vigilante group, which says it carried out the attack to stop the protests out of “respect for the elections” and to preserve the peace.

But Luaty Beirão, a popular Angolan rapper who helped organise the march in Luanda, and who was himself struck on the head, said he and his friends had been deliberately targeted by a well-trained undercover security operation.

He told IPS: “As soon as we arrived at the arranged meeting place, we could see a group beating up random people and then they came towards us and tried to encourage us to fight back.

“When we refused to be provoked, they changed their tune and said if we went away and cancelled the demonstration, they would leave us alone.

“We refused again and then they just went for us. I just remember being hit on the head and falling to the ground and then hearing shot after shot being fired into the air.”

Beirão, 30, who needed stitches for his head wound, added: “The police were nowhere to be seen and you could tell just by the way those guys surrounded us, they knew what they were doing, they weren’t just ordinary thugs.”

A few kilometres away, 57-year-old Filomeno Vieira Lopes, the Secretary General of the small opposition party Bloco Democratico who was on his way to join the protest, was also attacked and had to be taken to hospital with a wounds to his head and arm.

Sizaltina Cutaia, from the Angolan office of the Open Society Initiative for Southern Africa, said: “Considering that 2012 is an election year these events are indeed very concerning.

“It indicates to us the low status of political participation in Angola, where freedom of assembly and manifestation are systematically denied to citizens. It is a real threat to democracy.”

Until recently, political protests were rare in Angola where few have dared to criticise the authorities for fear of losing their job or the little stability they had found since the end of the country’s three-decade civil war in 2002.

But in response to what is seen as the government’s failure to share out a peace dividend to the majority, despite the country’s enormous oil wealth, and the weakness of the parliamentary opposition, since March last year youth movements have been taking to the streets.

As well as complaining about inequality and poor public services, the youth have been calling for Angola’s president of 32 years, Jose Eduardo dos Santos, to step down.

Beirão, whose stage names are Brigadeiro Mata Frakus and Ikonoklasta, said: “For us the big issue is Dos Santos, he must go. We want him to step down, 32 years is too long for one man to rule a country.

“The youth is fed up with what is happening here. People can pretend everything is alright but it is not, our country is not being run properly, there is no investment in health or education and many people are suffering.”

Angola is one of Africa’s fastest-growing economies whose GDP is forecast to swell by 12 percent this year.

Half the population, however, remains in poverty with no access to drinking water and the country has one of the highest child mortality rates in the world with one in five youngsters dying before their fifth birthday.

Hitting out at middle class silence and people’s general reluctance to confront government which controls the media and most private enterprise, Beirao, whose late father was a dedicated member of the ruling party, said: “People know things aren’t right, but they are too scared for their own jobs and families to stand up to what is happening.

“But for me, those who remain silent are merely being complicit and contributing to the injustices taking place here.”

Clearly sensitive to the growing tide of anti-government sentiment so close to the elections Dos Santos and his party, the Movement for Popular Liberation of Angola have been trying to turn on the charm offensive.

Dos Santos, for many years a recluse, has been making more regular public appearances, even switching his stiff suit for more casual shirts and caps.

In a string of recent speeches he had denied he is a dictator and has urged Angolans to be patient and recognise what his government has done for the country since the end of the war.

Last week the 69-year-old, whose own family is accused of mass acts of corruption, lashed out at what he called “dishonest propaganda” said people with foreign influences were trying to destabilise the country for their own ends.

Angolan journalist and anti-graft campaigner Rafael Marques, who has a website dedicated to outing corrupt government officials, said Dos Santos was clearly struggling to deal with the new generation who unlike their parents were not shaped by the fear of war or fooled by Soviet-style propaganda.

“Dos Santos is looking weaker by the day,” Marques said. “The fact that he is resorting to violence to suppress his own people shows he is losing his control.”

Beirão said he and fellow members of the protest movement Central 7311 (named after their first demonstration last year) had extensive film and photographic footage of the recent violence and planned to use social media to spread it to as many people as possible in order to raise awareness of their struggle.

Excerpt:

Radio Mega FM’s transmission tower rises from the centre of Gulu town, transmitting talk shows and the latest Ugandan radio hits to listeners across the district. But it also serves as something of an informal memorial to community radio-driven peace efforts during the Lord’s Resistance Army’s destruction of northern Uganda.

During the Lord’s Resistance Army’s insurgency in northern Uganda, John Lacambel hosted a programme on Mega FM encouraging soldiers to return home. Credit: Will Boase/IPS

The LRA opened its war against the Ugandan government in 1987. In the mid-1990s, the commander of the LRA, Joseph Kony, turned on his own people, the Acholi. His fighters slaughtered thousands of villagers, kidnapped and impressed thousands more children into his army and caused nearly two million people to flee to Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) camp.

Acholi leaders and NGO officials, responsible for communicating to a chaotic population where literacy was low and poverty high, needed a way to begin reorganising communities and to talk to the rebels about peace and reconciliation. Community radio stations in Gulu – the heart of Acholiland – became the linchpin of those efforts.

They turned to radio because it “can reach to the very least, to the farthest of places,” said Arthur Owor, the head of the Media Association of Northern Uganda, which is based in Gulu. With one handset and one battery, presenters could communicate with dozens of people. “The net returns were really high, in terms of the message,” he said.

On the handful of local stations like Mega that were around in the early 2000s, programming cropped up to engage the rebels in a peace dialogue, to offer a forum for communities to begin discussing justice and for family members to plead for their kidnapped children to flee the LRA and return home.

Okema Lazech Santo is the programme coordinator for Ker Kwaro Acholi, an organisation of traditional Acholi leaders, who described himself as being in “the thick” of the war and reconstruction efforts. He said radio was “useful in mobilising the people. Was useful in appealing to those abducted to come back home… The single tool that really worked effectively in bringing peace into northern Uganda.”

Members of northern Uganda’s radio fraternity take their role as peacemakers very seriously. They frequently draw contrasts between their response to the conflict in their community and the Rwandan genocide, where radio was used to incite murder.

Mega, which was founded in 2002 and was soon shored up with support from the Ugandan government and the British Department for International Development, was “set purposely to help settle the conflict in the region,” according to Nicky Afa-Ei, the station’s programme officer. He has been with the station since inception.

Mega’s primary message was that the region wanted peace. And the target audience was not necessarily the community, but the rebels “carrying their own handsets” who were within reach of the station’s signal, Afa-Ei said. Mega developed programs to discuss amnesty and traditional justice, sometimes with support from NGOs, and they invited people from “all walks of life” to record messages of peace: traditional leaders, parents, even schoolchildren.

And Mega found its audience. One day, during the height of the conflict in December 2002 – two months after the stations launched – Afa-Ei was running a talk show programme when he got a call from Kony, himself.

“That’s when people heard his voice for the very first time after a long, long time,” Afa-Ei said. “It was kind of friendly, but he was blaming the government on some parts. Saying the government were not being realistic.”

That began a pattern of Kony and his deputies using local radio stations to communicate with officials – and directly with the people – until the government deemed the rebel communiqués too propagandistic and refused to allow radio stations to run interviews without an official representative present.

Mega’s flagship programme “Come Back Home” – Dwag Paco in the local Luo language – is still spoken of reverently in the community, even by employees of rival stations. The programme attempted to cut through LRA propaganda and encourage children who had been forcibly conscripted to return to their villages. The host of the programme, John Lacambel, would bring former child soldiers onto the show to describe their return. To contravene the LRA’s contention that they would be killed if they went back to their families.

Dwag Paco was key to the region’s reconciliation efforts, Santo said. It “made so many of the rebels to defect and come back home.”

Now the north – especially Gulu – is beginning to boom. The cessation of hostilities – the result of inconsistent peace talks and a 2008 push by Ugandan forces – and the migration from IDP camps back to villages has paved the way for renewed infrastructure and new business. Mega’s radio mast no longer stands out in a skyline cluttered with gleaming banks, hotels and a grocery store. Seven other community radio stations now light up the dial.

“We are now in the process of recovery and stability,” Owor said. That means radio stations have also seen their roles transition toward helping rebuild and entertain Gulu. Instead of NGO programming, there are more talk shows and regional news programs. Music call-in programmes highlight the lunch hour.

But the programming still deals primarily with the fallout from the war, said Willy Chowoo, a presenter on Choice FM. That includes the divisive question of amnesty for returning soldiers. One of the LRA’s most horrific practices was forcing rebels to return to their own communities to loot, kidnap and murder. It helped sever the ties between the soldiers and their homes. With no place to return to, they were more securely attached to the army.

But with the LRA on the run, some of those rebels – many of whom were child abductees themselves – are trickling back into their villages. Pre-recorded dramas set up situations where villages are confronted with the question of how to handle the situation. The message, Chowoo said, is “you should not retaliate. People should not pay back. People should not take the worst with the worst.”

The work the stations are doing dovetails with the fourth of four interventions – reintegration of former rebels – that President Barack Obama laid out for the region ahead of sending U.S. troops to help hunt Kony down earlier this year.

There are also issues of land grabbing as people return from IDP camps only to find their homes taken over by someone else, food security in a community that has long been provided for by NGOs and basic health care in the absence of infrastructure. Traditional leaders and community members hash out these problems in call-in shows and experts offer solutions during educational programmes.

While northern Ugandans are constantly confronted with the legacy of the past, Afa-Ei said the area’s community radio stations are trying to “forge a way forward for the future.”

*This story was produced with the support of UNESCO.

Critics call it “the Secrecy Bill”. And it comes at a time when several African countries are adopting promising new legislation on access to information. But campaigners say South Africa’s draft Protection of Information Bill represents a step backwards.

The Right2Know Campaign will march on Sep. 17 to parliament in protest against the Secrecy Bill. Credit: Davison Makanga

Intended to replace an apartheid-era law on official secrets, the Protection of Information Bill has faced severe criticism from opposition parties, journalists and ordinary citizens. They have challenged the broad powers initially granted government to classify information as secret and a vague definition of “national interest” that justifies classification.

Under sustained public pressure, the government heavily revised the bill, but campaigners remain opposed to the lack of a public interest defence for disclosing secret information and the retention of draconian penalties for even possessing information deemed sensitive.

The bill stipulates that jail sentences of up to 15 years will be handed to anyone who possesses information relating in any way to any aspect of the security services. It also proposes jail sentences of as long as 25 years for anyone accessing classified information.

“Even though the committee added limited whistleblower protections, many other clauses remain under which they could be prosecuted,” says Sithembile Mbete, a member of Right2Know Campaign, a civil society coalition created to oppose the bill.

On Saturday, the campaign will march to parliament in Cape Town in protest; a candlelight vigil is planned for Sep. 20, the night before the bill is expected to be tabled in the legislature.

Elsewhere on the continent, there are positive signals that governments are embracing principles of freer access to information. Nigeria adopted a progressive freedom of information law in 2010; Uganda passed an Access to Information Act in 2005 and in 2010 the country debated the Whistle Blowers Protection Bill 2010, which aimed to create an enabling environment for citizens to freely disclose information on corrupt or improper conduct in public and private sectors.

In Kenya, activists and lawyers are pushing government departments to bring in changes to comply with its new constitution, which grants citizens access to information held by the state.

Paul Waihenya, a journalist based in the Kenyan capital, Nairobi, says the new constitution’s provisions on access to information represent a giant leap forward by the government in terms of transparency and accountability. But he points to a recent instruction from the Ministry of Internal Security warning local authorities against speaking to the media, after a local official in the north told the press about the severe famine gripping parts of the country.

“The interdiction move against the chief who gave (the press) information about his community is a reminder that this right to access information is not (yet) absolute,” he told IPS.

Other observers say it is still impossible to get vital details of public finances or the release of official reports into corruption investigations. Court action has been launched to challenge delayed responses to access to information requests as well as to fees that are an obstacle to ordinary citizens’ access to information such as land ownership records and vehicle registrations.

But Laura Neuman, project manager for the Carter Center’s Access to Information Project, sees signs of progress on the continent. She points to the central role played by Liberian civil society – actively supported by her centre – in the drafting of that country’s new Freedom of Information Act.

She told IPS by phone from Washington that this engagement will help to ensure that the legislation will have positive impacts in ordinary people’s lives.

“It’s a myth to think these are laws for the media or the elite, because frankly those groups already have access to information,” she says.

“We have seen (access to information laws) used in transformative ways all over the world.

“We’ve seen people use it to promote their educational rights in various countries. We’ve seen it used around health care. We’ve seen it used to protect children in orphanages. There’ve been hosts of great uses of the right to information to protect the environment,” Neuman said.

She says an essential component of expanding rights is to establish processes by which governments provide information – and where they fail, to give citizens a clear and accessible way to demand it.

It is ironic that South Africa is moving in precisely the opposite direction.

“The pending enactment of the Protection of Information Bill means South Africa has lost its leadership on matters of advancing the right to information on the African continent,” says Mukelani Dimba of the Open Democracy Advice Centre in Cape Town.

“In the decade since the adoption of South Africa’s freedom of information (FOI) law, the Promotion of Access to Information Act (PAIA), South Africa had been an important reference point for other countries on the continent to draw lessons from regarding the operationalisation of the right of access to information in the context of a developing African country,” he says.

Dimba says good legislation has not been matched by implementation. The Right2Know Campaign’s Mbete agrees.

“The problem is that in many ways PAIA hasn’t been quite functional and the implementation of the act has been problematic,” Mbete says.

“The majority of requests for information actually go unanswered, which is effectively to refuse them. And there’s been no independent appeal mechanism created in terms of PAIA, so the only way to dispute a denial of access or refusal to give information is to go to the court which is a mechanism that is not available to most South Africans.”

On the 20th anniversary of the Windhoek Declaration – issued by African print journalists in 1991 to assert that a free press is a fundamental human right, and essential to democracy – journalists, bloggers, information campaigners and government officials will be meeting in Cape Town from Sep. 17 to 19 to launch the African Platform on Access to Information.

The conference will advance the idea that governments hold information as custodians of the public good, and everyone has a right to access this information via clearly defined rules.

Dimba has advice for campaigners seeking to go beyond setting out principles and passing legislation. “African access to information (ATI) activists and advocates need to move away from their fixation with adoption of Freedom of Information laws in Africa,” she told IPS.

“African governments will not be open and transparent simply because of adoption of such laws: this is a lesson that we should learn from South Africa.”

She argues that African countries will transform themselves into open societies by adopting effective information practices.

“This means the FOI movement and the open data movement have to start working closely together. Kenya provides an important opportunity on how to use information and communications technology to promote better access to information. Through the M-PESA, Ushahidi platforms and the recently launched Transparency Portal, Kenya is showing the rest of the continent how to exploit ICTs to create opportunities for the exchange, sharing and transferring of information for socio-economic development and all of this has been done without an access to information law in place.”

*Miriam Gathigah in Nairobi contributed to this report.

By Mantoe Phakathi
MBABANE, Aug 5 2011 (IPS)

Many public officials in Swaziland do not think that access to information is a public right, but rather a privilege – which can be withdrawn at anytime.

Information is one of the most important tools citizens need to make informed decisions, especially about education. Credit: Mantoe Phakathi/IPS

Nothile Dlamini, 16, found this out first hand when she participated in the Right to Know, Right to Education project, whose focus is on budgets, child rights and education and the concept that access to education and information are inextricably linked.

As part of the project Dlamini was one of seven people who had to seek public information from various government institutions in order to assess the response public officials give to different people. The project was carried out by Save the Children-Swaziland in collaboration with the Department of International Development (DfID).

“I realised that for someone to get information in the country it depends a lot on who you are,” said Nothile Dlamini.

She said most government officials, especially at national level, did not even want to hear her out because they only saw her as a child who was wasting their time. Not only did some officials refuse to give her an ear, they were also rude to the point where she nearly broke down and cried.

The study found that only 27 percent of public officials were willing to give out information.

Save the Children legal advisor, Jackson Rodgers, said while it is difficult for many people to access information, it gets worse for children.

This is particularly relevant in a country where 26 percent of the reproductive age group between 15 and 49 years old is infected with the virus that causes AIDS. And where, according to UNICEF, the United Nation’s children’s fund, about 70,000 children have been orphaned from HIV, and the number of child-headed households is high.

“Access to information among children is particularly relevant for child-headed households because these are children who have the responsibility of taking decisions that affect their families,” said Rodgers.

Public institutions in the southern African kingdom denied citizens access by saying the information requested related to issues of national security, privacy, commercial secrets, public safety and effectiveness and integrity of government decision-making.

Rodgers said access to information may be granted in accordance with Section 14 of the constitution under the freedom of expression and association clause, but it is not clear whether it is guaranteed.

And the public has no external body to which to appeal if it feels a public official has unfairly refused to share information.

The participants of the study were a trade unionist, a person working for a non-governmental organisation, student Nothile Dlamini, a school committee member, a person living with disabilities, a journalist and a parent.

Launched in September 2010, the study took place over five months and all seven participants had to visit the same public institutions at different times, requiring access to public information.

The exercise revealed the different attitudes civil servants display to members of the public when seeking information.

According to Save the Children monitoring and evaluation officer, Nomfundo Dlamini, participants who produced requests for information on letter heads got better attention compared to their ordinary counterparts like Nothile Dlamini, the person living with a disability and the parent.

“Public institutions claim that they give information to people they can trace and that’s why they would rather deal with organisations and not individuals,” said Nomfundo Dlamini.

However, smaller institutions such as schools are more accessible compared to national public organisations such as the Regional Education Office. In fact, some regional and national institutions refused to accept letters requesting information.

“Getting appointments with relevant officials to (get) reasons for refusals proved to be difficult,” said Nomfundo Dlamini.

Swaziland is among six countries in Africa to take part in the Right to Know, Right to Education project. The other countries are Ghana, Malawi, Kenya, Uganda and Zambia.

According to Save the Children-Swaziland director, Dumisani Mnisi, this project is aimed at promoting the participation of ordinary people, especially women and children, in the education sector.

Information, said Mnisi, is one of the most important tools citizens need to make informed decisions, especially ones that affect the education system of the country. He said the project will help build capacity for ordinary citizens to see how they can have an impact on the education of their children through participating in decision making from schools to national level. With government already rolling out the Free Primary Education Programme since 2009, reasoned Mnisi, ordinary people need to be more informed so they can decide on the kind of education the country needs.

Access to information has also been proven to be an anticorruption tool, said Mnisi. Swaziland scored poorly in the 2011 Corruption Perceptions Index, drawn up by global watchdog Transparency International, ranking 91 out of 178 countries. Minister of Finance Majozi Sithole has repeatedly told the nation that Swaziland loses 11.5 million dollars a month because of corruption.

“Governments do not function well in secret,” said Mnisi.

Getting information is also very difficult even for journalists whose jobs depend on the right to know, said Swazi Observer senior reporter, Fanyana Mabuza, who also participated in the study.

“I realised that there is no policy addressing access to information (from) government,” said Mabuza. “It just depends on the discretion of each public official.”

There is a general fear in the country when it comes to giving out information, said Thembinkosi Dlamini, an economist at the Institute of Democracy in Africa (IDASA).

“What are you going to do with the information?” was the most common question from public officials, said Save the Children’s Nomfundo Dlamini.

Officials were comfortable giving out basic information, such as the number of pupils at school, but were reluctant to cooperate when quizzed on sensitive issues like audited financial statements.

“School principals would refuse to give financial statements saying it is only the principal secretary at the Ministry of Education who can request that information,” said Nomfundo Dlamini.

However, said Nomfundo Dlamini, no legislation or policy prohibits the public from getting school records.

“If you’re dealing with the education sector, you’re told to appeal (to) the Education Ministry, which makes it difficult to get any redress,” said Rogers.

However, said Rogers, the Education Sector Policy, 2011 is a huge step in the right direction in ensuring that schools and institutional information is shared. The policy compels schools to compile information and data and avail it to the public to help guide the education sector at all levels.

“The challenge would be the implementation of the policy because it can only be effective only when followed,” said Rogers.

Excerpt:

By IPS Correspondents
MOGADISHU, Jul 15 2011 (IPS)

The appointment of a new prime minister in Somalia amid protests and a media crackdown will do nothing to resolve the country’s problems of corruption and cronyism, political analysts say. But they hope the new appointee may be able to do something about media freedom in the country.

Journalism is a risky profession in Somalia. Credit: Abdurrahman Warsameh

Mohamed Abdullahi Mohamed had enjoyed popular support as prime minister for his attempts to deal with the Somali Islamist insurgency, runaway corruption and insecurity in Mogadishu, which is one of the few places the weak Somali government controls.

But following the protests a number of journalists were arrested. And the spate of crackdowns on the media has made being a journalist in the country more risky.

Political analyst Mohamed Suley said that the appointment of Abdiweli Mohamed Ali as prime minister would neither bring about any change in the way local politicians work, nor solve the core problem of rampant corruption and cronyism in Somali politics.

“The change at the top or the sacking of the (previous) prime minister is nothing more than (a) cosmetic change that will not affect the way politicians conduct politics in this part of the world,” Suley told IPS in Mogadishu.

Ali, a Harvard-educated Somali-American and former minister of planning, was appointed prime minister in late June after an agreement had been reached between the country’s president and his rival, the speaker of parliament.

President Sheikh Sharif Sheikh Ahmed and the speaker of parliament, Sharif Hassan Sheikh Adam, had agreed that Mohamed would resign after Adam insisted that he could not work with him.

Mohamed, who was forced to resign on Jun. 19, was a close ally of the president and had often been at loggerheads with Adam on a number of policy issues. These range from the appointment of ministers – a role that is constitutionally the sole prerogative of the prime minister – to fighting graft. (Adam had allegedly been implicated in corruption during his previous post as finance minister.)

But Suley contends that apart from the first days of “show-making”, government will get back to business as usual and the infighting will continue to the detriment of the country, which is dealing with Islamic extremism, drought, famine, widespread disease and lack of schools.

Meanwhile, Ali is expected to name his cabinet in the next few days. He has said his new cabinet will be small and will consist mostly of technocrats, with perhaps a few key ministers from the previous government. However, despite criticism, Ali has promised to follow the same policies of his predecessor, who was widely accredited for his fight against corruption. Suley believes that although media freedom is not currently Ali’s priority, the prime minister, who hails from the United States, will do a lot to protect media freedom.

“The Somali media situation, in terms of its freedom and professionalism, has come a long way since the start of the independent press in the country back in the early 1990s. Hopefully that momentum of improvement in the media has reached a point of no return. It is self-perpetuating, in a sense,” Suley said.

But currently the general insecurity under which journalists have to work in Somalia makes the profession one of the most risky jobs in the war-torn country. The country is ranked as one of the most dangerous places for journalists to operate.

Recently a reporter was sentenced to a year in prison for allegedly “publishing false news”. A court in the northeastern Somali state of Puntland sentenced Faysal Mohamed Hassan, who works for Somali news portal Hiran Online, to one year in prison for allegedly “publishing false news” and jeopardising state security.

Police would not elaborate on what Hassan had done, but the accusation is a general term used against journalists seen to be reporting unfavourably on the ruling elite and the semi-autonomous state.

Local and international media watchdogs condemned the ruling as harsh and called on the authorities for its reversal. But Hassan still remains in custody.

During the June protests in support of Mohamed six journalists were among an unknown number of people arrested while covering the event. The journalists were taken into custody and were held for 24 hours without charge and without access to their lawyers. They were finally released after pressure from local media watchdogs.

“We are working to inform the public about what is happening in the country but by arresting our reporters the security forces are trying to muzzle our coverage. But we will never be intimidated,” Ali Bashi, a senior staffer at Radio Kulmiye in Mogadishu told IPS.

Several reporters and photographers were injured early this year after a shell landed near parliament, following a barrage of mortars fired by the Islamist militant group Al Shabaab.

Media advocacy groups say that the risk faced by Somali journalists is further worsened by the lack of protective gear.

Most journalists don’t have protective flak jackets and helmets, which are often beyond the reach of local reporters whose meagre salaries barely cover essentials for their families.

“I have no other option but to go out to work on the frontlines without such protective stuff because I cannot afford it and I need to do my job. It sometimes happens those fighting against each other have bullet proof vests, while journalists have to (report on) the fighting (wearing) our shirts and trousers,” a journalist in Mogadishu told IPS.

Abdulahi Mohamed Hassan, director of the local Mogadishu Media House, says that press freedom in Somalia has come a long way. Over the years journalists have been gunned down and others injured while some were tortured in government prisons.

Al Shabaab, which controls much of the south and centre of Somalia, is suspected of having a hand in some of the deaths.

But the Al-Qaeda linked militant group has never openly taken responsibility for the murders. However, the group resents any opposition to its authority and almost all media outlets in areas under its control have either been closed by the group, or have relocated to Somali government-controlled parts of the country.

But the working conditions for journalists in the government-controlled parts of the country are not ideal.

Hassan told IPS that on occasion government security forces detain journalists on ‘the spur of the moment’ for the feeblest of reasons, mostly because of a lack of awareness about press freedom.

“We never tolerate any suppression of the media’s right to freely and openly report (the news) because the current national charter guarantees freedom of speech and press,” Hassan said.

“We mostly manage to get media people released and outlets reopened soon after we hear of any arrests or closures of radio stations. The authorities here are mostly cooperative with us on these issues. But we also need to educate our journalists as to the legal and right way of covering news, and of their rights and obligations under the law of the land,” he said.

Excerpt:

As Côte d’Ivoire’s bloody leadership contest draws to a close and the surrender of Laurent Gbagbo, the incumbent president, seems imminent, a long list of atrocities and electoral irregularities mark the records of both him and his opponent, Alassane Ouattara.

Alassane Ouattara casts his vote in the second round of presidential elections in November 2010. Credit: Basile Zoma/UN Photo

Ethan Zuckerman, the founder and editor of Global Voices, believes the situation is more complex than a one-man blame game.

“The challenge with the situation in Ivory Coast is that neither side has clean hands. Forces working for both have committed atrocities and, unfortunately, it’s very hard to see how any resolution to the conflict will avoid further bloodshed, as both sides seek to settle scores.”

Good guy, bad guy

While Gbagbo’s behaviour deserves no defence, the role of the media and key figures in shaping the discourse of international diplomacy by casting Ouattara as the good guy and Gbagbo as the bad guy does raise uncomfortable questions about how support (and disdain) for political figures is manufactured on the world stage.

Offering some insight into the dilemmas of casting political figures in the mould of the good/bad oppositional binary, Zuckerman says: “The narrative of Gbagbo as the bad guy who won’t give up and Ouattara as the good guy with international backing and an electoral victory isn’t terribly far off base. It does, however, oversimplify and makes it harder to see crimes committed by Ouattara’s forces with the same clarity as we see those committed by Gbagbo’s.”

Although the few media organisations that have not ignored the crisis have consistently reported the violence from day one, there has been little interrogation of Ouattara and his rebel forces in the same forensic manner as critiques on Gbagbo and his Young Patriots. Both sides have burnt and butchered hundreds of non-combatants. And both sides have, at different times, rejected African Union (AU) efforts at mediation.

Before the massacres in Duékoué, which shifted international opinion on Ouattara’s forces, the greater violence was rightly attributed to Gbagbo. But the atrocities committed by pro-Ouattara forces have not received the same attention as those committed by pro-Gbagbo troops.

Compare the wide coverage of the fatal shooting of six women protesters in Abidjan on Mar. 6, with the minimal reports of violence in Attecoube, a suburb of Abidjan, or the displacement of 700 people in the village of Anokua-Koute by pro-Ouattara forces, a few days later.

Zuckerman cites the lack of attention to the Ivorian crisis as one of the main reasons for the absence of critical perspective.

“It’s unfortunate for the Ivory Coast that there’s been so many other high profile international stories demanding attention, from the Arab Spring revolutions and protests to the tragedies in Japan. It’s possible that, if Ivory Coast were the major international story unfolding, we might have gotten more subtlety in reporting,” he says.

As more details emerge about the massacres in Duékoué and elsewhere, about the atrocities committed in the struggle for Côte d’Ivoire, the international community finds itself in a difficult position. As Salon asked of U.S. Republican Senator James Inhofe’s “backing [of] a brutal despot,” it must be asked: Will the international community, led by the U.N. and France, continue to support a man implicated in such gross violations?

Daniel Balint-Kurti, a researcher and campaigner at Global Witness, suggests that global endorsement hinges on what happens in the future. “A lot will depend on Ouattara’s reaction to investigation. If he takes responsibility for atrocities committed, it will be much easier for him to benefit from the huge international support he’s gotten, but if he doesn’t it will be problematic.”

For now, the tone of diplomacy seems to be one of lamentation and regret, rather than condemnation. Ban Ki-moon, the U.N. secretary-general, responded with “concern and surprise” to the news of mass killings in western Côte d’Ivoire, while Hillary Clinton, the U.S. secretary of state, was “deeply concerned” and Jean Ping, the chairman of the AU, has urged both sides to “show restraint and protect civilians”.

By contrast, after the shooting of six women protesters by pro-Gbagbo forces, the world upped the ante in a united call for the incumbent to “step down immediately”. Even after allegations of pro-Ouattara fighters massacring 800 civilians were made, on Monday, Apr. 4, Yousouffou Bamba, Côte d’Ivoire’s ambassador to the U.N., said: “Mr Gbagbo is a shame on Africa. He is a dictator, he is killing his own people.” Nothing on our guy, the good guy, Ouattara.

That his name as genocidaire does not appear on a Google search while ‘Gbagbo genocide’ is a pre-figured search phrase, may seem superficial, but it is nonetheless an indicator that, thankfully, the world will not play the same trial by media game with Ouattara. That will be a post-conflict task for the International Criminal Court (ICC).

At that point journalists may have to work backwards filling in the blanks that were missed when the world’s cameras were focused on revolutions in the Arab world and events elsewhere.

Not that Sanaa, Benghazi or Fukushima did not deserve attention, they most certainly did. But Côte d’Ivoire also needed the likes of Anderson Cooper to fulfill his Twitter promise on Feb. 26, that on “Monday [he’d] try to do something”.

A pound of flesh

For now, a defence of Ouattara may be that the massacres in Duékoué were largely carried out by traditional hunters known as dozos, an independent militia acting in Ouattara’s name. Therefore, neither he nor Guilliame Soro can be held responsible.

But the fact that Ouattara and Soro, as minister of defence and prime minister in-waiting, are leading this offensive means they are accountable and have a duty to reprimand the perpetrators. When Ouattara’s hour of triumph finally comes to pass, what will the dozos and little militias within the FRCI (Republican Force of Ivory Coast), demand in return for their support? Immunity? Money? Power? Cocoa beans?

Aware of the tough road that lies ahead for Ouattara, TIME magazine’s Monica Mark, based in Abidjan thinks, “it’s going to be unstable for quite a while”.

“He [Ouattara] needs to address the issue of national reconciliation. That will be difficult because he relied on rebel forces so now he owes them. And these people, they don’t do things the proper way … he’s going to have a low-level insurgency on his hands as the leader,” Mark says.

Echoing similar sentiments, Balint-Kurti explains: “He’s going to have a hell of a job. The country is very divided and he [Ouattara] is hated in parts [of the country] and he’s not just going to take the presidency and everything is going to be okay.”

In Ouattara’s final transition from his luxury suite at the Hotel du Golf to the presidential palace, it is sincerely hoped that he can unite the country and restore peace. However, hard questions will need to be asked of him by seekers of truth and justice.

Despite the efforts by the media and international community to produce a clear-cut good guy, bad guy narrative for easy mass consumption, countless disturbing images and stories of violence perpetrated by rebel and patriot forces, show there are no clear lines distinguishing the righteous from the heathens. In war, all are sinners, even the guys with major international support.

* Published under an agreement with Al Jazeera.

By Marshall Patsanza
JOHANNESBURG, Oct 4 2010 (IPS)

In the rural KwaZulu Natal town of Jozini, Thembeni Madlopha-Mthethwa has been the town’s mayor for a decade. And in contrast to the rest of the country, which has experienced numerous civil strikes and service delivery complaints, Jozini has rarely had any such problems.

Thembeni Madlopha-Mthethwa, the IFP mayor of Jozini, says gender is not a limiting factor when it comes to leadership. Credit: Marshall Patsanza/IPS

But despite the good work done by her municipality which also includes successful gender-based violence and development projects, people across the country cannot learn from their example because of the lack of media coverage about them, she says. South African women in politics are often only covered by the media if they are in the forefront of their organisations or if they are involved in scandals, the Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP) mayor says.

Excerpts of the interview follow.

Q: What challenges did you face when trying to get political support? A: When I started most women did not want to associate themselves with me. Women in my area in Jozini refrained from political activity and often left it for men (to participate). Despite politics being frowned upon by many women in my community I decided to stand up for what I believed in and for the change I wanted to see in my community. So I joined the IFP.

When I decided to campaign to become a Mayor, most of my support initially came from my relatives and close friends. Then women slowly started to join in as they liked the ideas I was bringing across. As my campaign grew, male politicians began to see the leadership qualities in me and they began to have confidence in me as a leader. The male members of the IFP supported my campaign and this motivated me to continue with politics as I realised that I had broken barriers and entered into what was perceived as a male-dominated field. When I became a Mayor in 2000 I felt that I had gained the confidence and support from my community and party colleagues both male and female.

Q: How did you break through into a mostly male-dominated political party which also has deep cultural roots? A: There is huge perception that the Zulu culture does not have room for female leaders because of its patriarchal roots. This perception is not true because even back in the day of King Shaka Zulu (the early 19th century Zulu King) there were women leaders. If you show the right leadership qualities and have confidence in standing (up) for what you believe in, then the men and the community will respect and support you. So culture does not offer any boundaries to female political leadership.

Q: How supportive has your political party been of your candidacy? A: When the political party appoints you as their ambassador they give you all the necessary support. They provide you with the financial support, documentation and necessary material to do your job regardless of whether you are male or female. Even with the support there will be times when you get the occasional opposition and lack of co-operation from party members who feel that they deserved to be appointed before you. These small things come with the job and should be seen as challenges that help build ones character.

Q: How is your relationship with the media? A: In my years as Mayor I have realised that it is really difficult to get media coverage on female politicians who are not controversial, especially if you come from a deep rural area. Our municipality really struggles to get the media to notice our good work and the achievements we have made in the community. The covering of women in politics by the media is very biased in this country. If you are a woman politician from a small constituency and is not viewed as big enough on the political scene, the media usually ignores you.

Q: How does the lack of media coverage affect the situation of women politicians in general? A: The lack of adequate media coverage on the work done by female politicians contributes to the lack of knowledge of what other women leaders are achieving in South Africa. Women will not be inspired by the works of other women if they are not made aware of it. The reason why people think politics is a male-dominated field is because they hardly hear of any effective contributions by female politicians.

Q: What are you doing as a leader to increase the presence of women in politics? A: As mayor I have tried to increase the number of women involved in politics in my area especially at council level and community level. Women are often motivated by other women in political positions so when they see a fellow female in a leadership role they also develop an interest in politics. Even if we do not go door to door enticing women to join politics we do notice that women in our area are offering themselves to wanting to joining and showing an interest in politics.

Personally I have been mentoring other female mayors from the IFP. When these women heard about the work I have been doing, they began to call me and wanted to know how to work with male politicians and how to establish good relationships with stakeholders in the community. My main advice to them is that they should not view themselves as women but as representatives of their people. Gender is not a limiting factor when it comes to leadership.

Excerpt:

International media freedom watchdog Reporters Without Borders ranks South Africa’s press as among the freest on the continent. Two proposed new measures are drawing unfavourable comparisons to repressive laws in Zimbabwe and Ethiopia.

Nigeria and Zimbabwe have their Official Secrets Acts. In Kenya, it’s called the Communications Bill.

And in South Africa, it would be called the Protection of Information Act (POI).

Across Africa – and beyond – governments have sought to control the media, be it through stiff penalties for disclosing or possessing leaked documents or the imposition of tribunals to oversee the press.

The POI gives broad powers to the government to classify almost any information involving an organ of state in the interests of national security. It prescribes penalties of up to 25 years in jail for those disclosing protected information, refusing to reveal their sources, or even attempting to uncover protected information.

The ruling African National Congress is also proposing the establishment of a Media Appeals Tribunal which would have the power to sanction journalists for misconduct.

“The media has put itself on the pedestal of being the guardian. We therefore have the right to ask, who is guarding the guardian?” South African president Jacob Zuma writes in a letter published on the ANC website. “All institutions, even parliament, have mechanisms in place to keep them in check.”

Media backlash

Both the tribunal and the proposed bill have come under fierce criticism from journalists and advocacy groups in South Africa and elsewhere.

“The broad language of the POI Bill would criminalise information-gathering methods essential to investigative journalism,” Ayesha Kajee, executive director of the Freedom of Expression Institute (FXI), told IPS. “It would chill the practice of this field of journalism essential to keeping the government accountable to the public.”

Both the POI Bill and the tribunal could also be considered unconstitutional, and would likely elicit an immediate legal challenge if passed, Kajee said.

In his letter, Zuma defended the proposal for the tribunals, and said that the ANC would respect the constitution’s guarantee of a free press.

“Let me reiterate that the ANC will never do anything that undermines the spirit of the Constitution of the Republic, and which erodes the dignity and rights of other people, regardless of their standing in society.”

In bad company

In opposing the twin proposals, press rights advocates have pointed out that laws and institutions such as those proposed in South Africa tend to be tools of repressive regimes.

“All the repressive countries have [media tribunals],” said Joe Thloloe. Thloloe is South Africa’s Press Ombudsman, responsible for settling complaints over violations of the press code adhered to by members of the country’s independent self-regulatory media body, the Press Council.

The ombudsman pointed to the press tribunal in neighbouring Zimbabwe, which has been used to jail journalists and restrict publications.

FXI’s Kajee said Zimbabwe’s Protection of Secrets Act resembles the draft POI Bill, and has been used to censor government officials as well as journalists.

“The ANC’s Media tribunal proposal is the latest in a series of attempts by various African governments to force the media under statutory regulation,” said Mohamed Keita, advocacy director for the New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists.

He said the ANC’s proposed tribunal was comparable to a 2008 effort in Botswana, which has not gone into effect due to resistance from hat country’s press.

In Ethiopia, the government closed down 13 publications in 2005, then passed the Proclamation Governing the Media in 2008, which Kajee said has since been used to threaten fines and defamation cases against media outlets.

A dozen journalists fled Ethiopia in 2009 after being intimidated, harassed or censored, according to a report from the CPJ, and there are currently five journalist imprisoned in the country, making it the second biggest jailer of reporters on the continent, after Eritrea.

Future effects

In South Africa, two systems are already in place for handling complaints about the media, Thloloe said. Complainants can pursue a court case, or take up a dispute with the ombudsman.

“The ANC argues that very few go to the courts because they can’t afford to, but it’s the government’s responsibility to reform the courts, and to make them cost less,” Thloloe said. “Two systems are in place. We don’t need a third.”

Besides the two methods of resolution, Tholoe said media organisations already practice a measure of self-regulation.

“Once a code is imposed outside the newsroom, it takes away the editors right to decide what to publish,” Tholoe said. “[Many] editors have already adopted codes of conduct.”

Despite ANC claims that it will not undermine the constitution if the POI Bill is passed, Kajee said the bill could have effects beyond the current government.

“It must be remembered that laws stay on the statute books long beyond the administration that passes them,” Kajee said. “There are no guarantees that [in the] future a more conservative, less liberal regime will not use the POI Bill in repressive ways.”

By Busani Bafana
BULAWAYO, May 3 2010 (IPS)

Fourteen months after Zimbabwe’s government of national unity was formed, harassment, arbitrary arrest and general intimidation of journalists remains common.

In a statement issued on May 3, World Press Freedom Day, the Zimbabwe chapter of the press watchdog Media Institute of South Africa deplored repressive legislation constraining journalists.

These include the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act, which prevents media organisations from hiring unaccredited journalists; the Public Order and Security Act which has been widely used to prosecute critics of the president, his government and policies; and the Broadcasting Services Act, which sets such complex requirements for registering broadcast media that the government-controlled Zimbabwe Broadcasting Corporation remains the only station on the airwaves.

“These laws are unnecessary and unjustified in a democratic society and should therefore be repealed in line with the principles of the African Charter on Human Rights, Banjul Declaration on the Principles of Freedom of Expression in Africa, [and the] SADC Protocol on Information, Sports and Culture and African Charter on Broadcasting,” the statement read.

“The changes to the restricted media space have been cosmetic to say the least,” MISA-Zimbabwe chair, Loughty Dube told IPS. “Journalists still face the same harassment and intimidation that was common before the GNU.”

In January this year, freelance journalist and IPS contributor Stanley Kwenda fled into exile after a senior police officer allegedly threatened him with death over a story.

A correspondent for the government owned Chronicle working in the border town of Beitbridge, Mashundu Netsianda, was arrested for reporting on police officers fleeing gunfire. In March, a Mexican journalist was arrested in Masvingo gathering footage for a World Cup documentary.

Photo journalist Anderson Manyere has become a regular guest in police holding cells and has been arrested for doing his job at least than three times since the start of the year.

Five journalists from the Standard newspaper have been summoned to appear in court in connection with a story about a land scandal involving prominent businessmen Phillip Chiyangwa and the Minister of local government, Ignatius Chombo.

Radio journalist and documentary maker Zenzele Ndebele has also been threatened for his documentary on the “Gukurahundi” atrocities committed by Zimbabwean security services in Matabeleland in the early 1980s.

“Press freedom in Zimbabwe is guaranteed by whoever is in power and that is clear in the manner journalists have to constantly watch their backs each time they write a story or make a broadcast,” said Ndebele.

“Radio Dialogue has been waiting for 10 years for a community radio broadcasting licence and we cannot fully operate as a radio station,” he said.

The announcement by the Zimbabwe Media Commission at the end of April of greatly reduced fees for media registration and calling for media houses and journalists to renew their registration by Jun. 4 has been welcomed by journalists as a small sign of change.

“A free and unfettered media plays a critical role in advancing citizens’ universal right to access to information held by both public and private bodies,” said MISA-Zimbabwe in its statement, “and is a panacea to socio-economic development, accountable governance and political stability.”

Human Rights Watch, which published a critical report on failure on the Zimbabwean government’s failure to protect press freedom in April, warns that credible elections – which President Robert Mugabe has suggested will take place in 2011 – cannot be held in the absence of a free media.

Excerpt:

By Joshua Kyalimpa
KAMPALA, Apr 12 2010 (IPS)

The proposed media law is a monster, says Dr George Lugalambi, chair of a coalition fighting to preserve press freedom in Uganda. Publishers and journalists would have to apply annually for a licence, which could be revoked at will in the interests of “national security, stability and unity,” or if coverage was deemed to be “economic sabotage.”


Presiding over the system under the proposed Press and Journalist (Amendment) Bill 2010 would be a new Media Council, appointed by the Minister of Information and National Guidance. To obtain a licence, publishers would need to show “proof of existence of adequate technical facilities” and the “social, cultural and economic values of the newspaper.

“

Journalists would have to prove they are qualified – a degree in journalism, or in another field but accompanied by a post graduate diploma in journalism or mass communications – plus a clean criminal record.

Professor Fredrick Jjuuko, a media law expert says such provisions violate the constitution.

“The constitution provides for a freedom of expression and media and the presumption is that means for everybody. The new bill is making this freedom exclusive for those with university degrees which is unfair.” says Jjuuko.

Lugalambi, who is also head of the Department of Mass Communication at Makerere University, says the Ugandan media is already burdened with repressive laws such as the one that makes it a crime to publish unfavorable information about government activities and public officials.



“Criminalising these activities opens up the media to the partisan and subjective actions of people in power. For instance, we have been asking ourselves: Who defines and what constitutes prejudice to national security or injury to Uganda’s relations with her neighbors or friendly countries?

“Won’t any politician or government functionary with interests in a particular business decide that certain reporting and commentary about the activities of that business amount to economic sabotage?”

Instead, Lugalambi’s coalition – known as Article 29 after the section of Uganda’s constitution that guarantees freedom of expression – calls on the government to support self-regulatory initiatives.

Uganda has more newspapers, and radio and television stations than ever before, and the media have consistently exposed corruption, human rights abuses and impunity for top politicians. The country boasted a vibrant independent press in the earlier years of President Yoweri Museveni – he assumed power in 1986 – but with growing opposition to his regime, those days could be drawing to a close, says Dr Livingstone Sewanyana, executive director of the Foundation for Human Rights Initiative.



One example is the case of the host of the talk show “Spectrum”, Kalundi Serumaga, who was taken off the air on Radio One on the orders of the Broadcasting Council. He was accused of abusing the president while appearing as a panelist on current affairs programme on WBS TV called “Kibazo on Friday.”

Jjuuko says the absence of public accountability mechanisms in the Broadcasting Council has stifled the culture of openly discussing public affairs on radio.

“Who is the Broadcasting Council working for?” he asks. “I think they are bound to want to appease the appointing authority who in this case will be government”

But Princess Kabakumba Labwoni Matsiko, Uganda’s minister for information, insists she will go ahead with the proposed bill.

“Freedoms go with responsibilities. Do you want a media that does not follow any rules? What we are proposing is to create a responsible media and Ugandans will have chance to contribute when it’s finally tabled in parliament.”

The minister told a pan-African media conference in Nairobi on Mar. 19 that media freedom in Uganda has been abused and legislation is necessary to put it back on track.

“They write (about) everything. They draw cartoons of the president and sometimes pornography, like in the Red Pepper tabloid,” Kabakumba says.

Media activists say government wants to gain the power to deny, revoke or refuse to renew newspaper licenses at will and without recourse to the courts of law. Article 29 has united various media organisations, including the Ugandan Journalists’ Association, to resist further encroachment on media freedom.

From a business perspective, newspaper publishers also fear that the proposed amendments will hinder foreign investment into the publishing business; the annual registration introduces an element of uncertainty into any investment. Currently, newspapers and magazines are required by law to register just once, at the General Post Office.

Excerpt:

By Mohamed Fofanah
FREETOWN, Mar 30 2010 (IPS)

Sierra Leone has become a place of torment for journalists practicing their profession.

Secretary-general of the SLAJ, Mustapha Sesay, says the association will fight against the intimidation of the press. Credit: Mohamed Fofanah/IPS

“Some members began to walk out of the hall, we (journalists) wanted to capture this moment and do interviews, but we were surprised when youths and senior party members fell on us. They beat us, confiscated our cameras, recorders and then prevented us from covering some of the other sessions,” explained Ishmael Bayoh, one of the journalists who was attacked. Bayoh works for Awoko newspaper, a local tabloid.

But this is not an isolated incident, it follows several other persecutions by public officials and ordinary citizens on journalists.

Reporters Without Borders, an international NGO that seeks to protect the interest of journalists, reported that in February 2009 four journalists were abducted and intimidated by members of a women’s secret society that practices female genital mutilation (FGM). One of the abducted journalists was forced to walk naked through the streets of the city because they had been conducting a series of interviews in order to mark International Day of Zero Tolerance of FGM. The matter was reported to the police but the women were not prosecuted.

In September 2009, the correspondent for Standard Times, Fayia Amara, was beaten up by a police constable for trying to photograph the constable allegedly smoking marijuana.

Another recent incident was the alleged threatening calls received by radio journalist Melvin Rogers, from the Deputy Minister of Labour, Employment and Industrial Relations, Moijue Kaikai.

Rogers filed a report on a local station, Radio Democracy 98.1, on Feb. 25 alleging that Kaikai had visited Lugbu, Bo District in the run-up to the recent local council by-election. He had allegedly done so after reported violence in the area, allegedly fuelled by government officials, had led the president to issue a warning that all persons not involved in the conduct of the elections should avoid the area.

The director of Society for Democratic Initiatives, a media advocacy group, and some of his staff members, reported that they received death threats after publishing a report highlighting the press conditions in the country.

The report lashed out against the continued use of the Criminal Libel Law, which the report states is hampering the work of journalists. Under the law, a journalist or anybody who writes and publishes material considered libellous can be arrested and jailed, whether or not what they published was true.

The report also catalogues over seven cases of assault on journalists and the fact that nothing was done by police about these incidents.

“These attacks and many more are calculated attacks on journalist to gag us and deprive us of our freedom of expression,” said Bayoh.

The secretary general of the Sierra Leone Association of Journalists (SLAJ), Mustapha Sesay, said that these continued attacks on journalists and the inability or willful neglect by the police to prosecute these matters shows that the state is against journalists.

“The association will fight tooth and nail against those who think that they can get away with intimidation to restrain the press,” he vowed.

The Minister of Information, Ibrahim Ben Kargbo, said it is very unfortunate that members of the media were subject to attacks, but stated that government upholds the right to freedom of expression and would protect the lives of its citizens.

Bankole Morgan, the regional officer of the Human Rights Commission of Sierra Leone condemned the attacks and the intimidation of journalists. He said journalists must be free to ask tough questions and demand accountability from their elected officials.

“I am so afraid now as I am practicing my profession. I don’t know when my very presence will threaten and infuriate people and they will beat me up because I am a journalist, or what I write would sooner or later land me in prison because some government official feels slighted,” said Bayoh, who is still recovering from his attack.

Sesay said that the SLPP officials who beat up the 10 journalists have admitted to their crime and agreed to pay the journalists’ medical bills, replace their damaged items and to also compensate them.

“We are actually concerned about compensation, because we do not want people to mistreat journalist and then pay them afterwards,” Sesay said. He referred to an instance where the police paid compensation to several journalists they beat up. The journalists were covering a SLPP stalwart demonstration in March 2009 when the attacks too place.

“As an association we are ready to support our membership to ply their trade without fear or favour and nobody will continue to trample on our rights,” Sesay said.

Excerpt:

By IPS Correspondents
HARARE, Jan 21 2010 (IPS)

Death threats allegedly made by a senior police officer to a journalist and the arrest of a photographer, all in the space of a few days, have heightened fears of a new onslaught on the country’s media.

Journalist Stanley Kwenda fled Zimbabwe after receiving death threats allegedly from a senior policeman. Credit: Ephraim Nsingo/IPS

Kwenda had “named and shamed” the policeman in a story published in The Zimbabwean newspaper. The story alleged that Makedenge’s late wife’s relatives had demanded to see the note she had allegedly left after she committed suicide.

After spending the whole day reading articles about the violation of journalists’ rights in the Index on Censorship 2009 Review, it never dawned on Kwenda’s that by the end of that very day, he would be going through a similar experience. It seemed so unlikely that what he thought were rather long lists of journalists who had been harassed, incarcerated and killed would get longer with the addition of his own name.

“I was preparing to get my weekend into swing,” said Kwenda, a freelancer who writes for IPS and The Zimbabwean newspaper, among others. He is also the director of Artistes for Democracy in Zimbabwe Trust (ADZT), an initiative that uses artistes to campaign for civil participation in democratic processes in the country.

“I received a call at 7.15 pm from an unknown number while having a drink with a friend at a hotel in Harare. On the other end of the line was a male voice, and it was clear to me that this was none other than the senior police officer I had named and shamed in a story I wrote for The Zimbabwean newspaper,” Kwenda alleged.

Much to the surprise of his colleague and other patrons at the hotel’s bar, the burly Kwenda started trembling. And it was clear that something was wrong.

“The man told me in a very harsh and angry voice that: ‘Kwenda. You are not going to last this weekend’. I failed to get a chance to make head or tail of the essence of his phone call, he was hurling all sort of profanities and repeatedly reminding me that I was going to die before people at my church finish their evening Sunday prayers.”

Kwenda is generally viewed as a brave journalist among his colleagues, but after the call, he was just out of sorts. Having covered some of the harrowing experiences of people who have implicated his alleged caller, Kwenda did not need anyone to warn him of what was likely to happen after the call. Makedenge’s name has featured prominently among officers involved in the abduction of activists in the aftermath of the March 2008 elections.

“I have never felt so afraid but on the day in question I was left trembling. I was left with no option but to think of a way out,” he added.

Earlier in the day, Kwenda says he had received numerous calls from a suspicious character who claimed she wanted to give him an exclusive expose related to a story he had written for The Zimbabwean.

“At that point I realised I was in for a trap. I told her to put her information on the e-mail of the newspaper. She insisted on a face-to-face meeting,” said Kwenda.

And that very evening, Kwenda was on the next flight out of Zimbabwe. His destination: South Africa where he is currently hiding.

“Fleeing Zimbabwe was the only way out for me after receiving very specific death threats from a senior police officer. All this is happening sadly at a time when we should be celebrating a new democratic dawn for Zimbabwe,” said Kwenda.

However, police spokesperson Wayne Bvudzijena said despite Kwenda’s allegations police will not investigate the claims based on media reports. He said Kwenda was required to open a case in order for police to investigate the matter.

“In the first place he should have made a formal report so we could investigate it. Should there be any threats outside the law made against him (Kwenda) they should be investigated,” Bvudzijena said.

He added that only Kwenda could open a case regarding the death threats and would have to return to Harare to do so. Bvudzijena said even though Kwenda feared for his life, if he laid a complaint, police would not be able to protect him.

“We don’t have that capacity to provide security to individuals. He would have to provide his own security,” Bvudzijena said.

He also expressed scepticism that death threats had been made against Kwenda. “I would like to know why he should be threatened, particularly at this time. What is so drastic why anyone would want him dead?” Bvudzijena asked. When IPS informed him about the article Kwenda had written concerning Makedenge, Bvudzijena said he was unaware of it.

“Fleeing does not help anyone. My suspicions are that it is to raise some (negative) perceptions about the whole issue. We have investigated police officers before,” Bvudzijena said.

Three days after Kwenda fled the country, another freelancer, photographer Andrison Manyere was arrested while covering a demonstration in the capital. This is the second time Manyere has fallen victim to the machinations of state security agents. In 2008 he was abducted and dragged to the courts at the height of political violence along with opposition party members and human rights activists. This spate of arrests are the very same ones that Makedenge’s name had been linked to.

Kumbirai Mafunda, a journalist who is also a spokesperson for the Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights (ZLHR) said the threats on Kwenda’s life and Manyere’s arrest were “clear signs that we have not moved an inch in terms of media reforms”.

“What happened to our colleague Stanley Kwenda is really worrying,” said Mafunda. “As journalists we thought that threats and arrests of journalists were things of the past. It is really sad that in this era we still have journalists being threatened and hounded out of the country.”

Mafunda said there was need for the inclusive government to show commitment to ending the violations of voices perceived to be against certain forces in the system.

“We honestly do not expect these things to continue even in this day and age,” said Mafunda.

This was the general sentiment at the Quill Club, the meeting point for journalists in Harare.

“We do not take these threats lightly, because we have seen it in the past. This is a sign that the profession is in danger, and the government needs to do something about it,” said one journalist at the club who requested anonymity.

Secretary General of the Zimbabwe Union of Journalists (ZUJ), Foster Dongozi said they had since launched an investigation into the matter, in collaboration with the police and other players in the media industry.

“We have set up a team which will investigate the harassment of our fellow member and we want to establish whether the threats were done at individual or official level,” said Dongozi.

“But whatever the case might be, we are saying harassment of journalists by the state should come to an end. We expect the state security to protect its citizens not victimising them like what has been happening here for the past decade.”

Dongozi said the incident was unfortunate as it came at a time when everyone was now “expecting media reforms and respect to journalists”.

In a statement, the Media Institute of Southern Africa (MISA) Zimbabwe chapter condemned the threat on Kwenda, saying this was “yet another serious threat to media freedom and the right of journalists to conduct their lawful professional duties without fear or hindrance from any quarters”.

“MISA-Zimbabwe urges the inclusive government and the Police Commissioner General to unequivocally guarantee the safety of journalists and to assure Kwenda of his security pending full investigations into the alleged threats,” reads the statement.

The burly scribe is conspicuous about his absence from the Quill Club. The general concern among colleagues is that something bad might happen to him. But he believes all is under control, at least for now.

“I am safe and sound in my hiding place,” he told IPS.

When the members of the Zimbabwe Media Commission were announced in December, hopes were so high among journalists that this marked a beginning of better fortunes for the media industry. They even dubbed the New Year “twenty-turn”, hoping things would turn for the better. But for Kwenda and others, they seem to be turning for the worse.

IPS Africa was unable to reach Makedenge for comment.

*Additional reporting by Nalisha Kalideen

Excerpt:

By Kelvin Kachingwe
LUSAKA, Dec 9 2009 (IPS)

Chansa Kabwela faced a five-year jail sentence when she sent photographs of a woman giving birth, without medical assistance while in the country’s largest hospital, to government officials.

Chansa Kabwela speaking to the media after her acquittal. Credit: Kelvin Kachingwe/IPS

The recently acquitted news editor of the country’s largest independent daily, The Post, says the case certainly will not deter her from pointing out wrongs or alerting the authorities to any public issue that she deems needs their attention.

Kabwela, 29, told IPS that she believes leaders are elected to serve the people and that they are paid tax payers money to look after the welfare of the people. As such, they should not hide their shortcomings in the name of culture or the law.

“I have learnt a lot through this harassment. I have always believed that human nature is always tilted to justice and that was exactly what happened in my case. Justice prevailed,” she said.

Kabwela faced a five-year jail sentence if she was convicted of sending graphic images of a woman giving birth without medical help at the country’s biggest hospital, the University Teaching Hospital, to various prominent people in Zambia. These included the minister of health and the vice president, who also doubles as the minister of justice.

“The case itself was a very big inconvenience but the most important thing is the lesson I and The Post have drawn from it. I sent the letter on behalf of The Post, asking the government to address a particular problem. My concern was about the poor that suffered during that period. It is a pity my intention was misunderstood and deliberately so,” Kabwela said.

Although she did not publish the picture, she was charged with circulating pornography with intent to corrupt public morals after President Rupiah Banda raised alarm about the images during a press briefing.

Kabwela, who is chairperson of the Post Press Freedom Committee, had argued that she sent the pictures because she wanted to highlight the effect the strike had on the health care system.

In acquitting Kabwela, Magistrate Charles Kafunda said the prosecutors had failed to prove its case against her.

“The prosecution failed to establish an element of a prima facie case and I therefore dismiss the case and subsequently acquit the accused. The state has, however, the right to appeal,” Kafunda told a packed courtroom.

The Post editor-in-chief, Fred M’Membe, who is facing a contempt of court charge for publishing a story headlined “The Chansa Kabwela Case: A Comedy of Errors”, challenged Banda to appeal.

The Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) said it is pleased with the decision to acquit Kabwela on the spurious charge of disseminating obscene photographs.

“The Zambian government must stop seeking ways to intimidate and censor the country’s leading independent daily,” CPJ’s Africa Program Coordinator Tom Rhodes said.

The Southern Africa Centre for Constructive Resolution of Disputes (SACCORD) says the acquittal is a clear sign that trumped-up charges against innocent citizens by the state can never stick.

“Her victory is a victory for all Zambians, particularly the media fraternity. The judgment is a clear sign that trumped-up charges against innocent citizens by the state can never stick,” executive director Lee Habasonda said.

“The ruling should send a message to those planning to regulate the media using government instruments to oppress and suppress the truth. Hence any law they are planning based on targeting people and settling scores will fail to stand the test of time and the victims will at some point triumph.”

Habasonda said government must have realised that it was an exercise in futility to waste such time and resources for a clear case. It did not even require a lawyer to know that it was damned, he said.

He urged government to ensure that they critically consider some of the cases before they are taken to court. He said it is not only a continuous source of embarrassment for government (to prosecute such cases), but also shows lack of proper priority setting in the country.

He said government legal advisors must begin to advise against some of these politically nuanced legal undertakings because they reflect badly on them in the final analysis.

“The manpower being used to pursue those with divergent views can well service the country to rid it of criminals and other people who are the real threats to the well-being of our society,” Habasonda said.

“To the media, we urge you to fight on and reject any manoeuvres to encroach on your freedom to tell the truth and improve our democratic dispensation. We are happy that this in the end has made Kabwela a heroine of our time.”

The Paris-based Reporters Without Borders (RSF) says the Lusaka chief resident magistrate Charles Kafunda took the right decision to acquit Kabwela, as the charges against her were ridiculous and baseless.

“We nonetheless regret that the authorities subjected her to this ordeal for many months for no reason,” RSF stated.

And United Party for National Development vice president, Francis Simenda, said Banda’s directive for the police to arrest and prosecute Kabwela following his failure to address the desperate situation in the hospital was unreasonable.

“People were giving birth on the streets because no one was there at the hospitals to help them. Just (when you) tell them that the situation in the health sector is desperate they arrest Chansa and victimise and embarrass her to the levels of agitating for the people of Zambia to turn against her,” he said.

Excerpt:

By Mohamed Fofanah
FREETOWN, Dec 7 2009 (IPS)

Journalists in Sierra Leone can still be arrested and jailed for writing material considered “libel” regardless if what they published is true or not.

Secretary-general of the SLAJ, Mustapha Sesay, says his organisation is disappointed with the court's ruling. Credit: Mohamed Fofanah/IPS

The SLAJ had argued that the provisions of the 1965 Public Order Act, which stipulates prison terms for journalists guilty of libel, contradicted section 25 of the country’s 1991 National Constitution, which guaranteed freedom of expression.

Under the criminal libel law, a journalist or in fact anybody who writes and publishes material can be arrested and jailed, whether or not what they published or said was true. Several journalists have been arrested, detained or jailed under this act.

The SLAJ sought to have this aspect nullified, as the standard defence against a libel suit in developed countries is that the offending article is the truth.

“It is the toughest legal setback for the struggle for Press freedom, media pluralism and freedom of expression in Sierra Leone. This has far-reaching implications for professional media practice and democratic governance in the country,” said Mustapha Sesay, the SLAJ’s secretary-general.

The 44-page, three-hour judgment by the Supreme Court threw out the matter, ruling the provisions were in line with the country’s 1991 Constitution, and that “journalists were under no imminent threat”, Sesay said. “The court has kept us waiting since February 2008. They also flouted the provisions of the Constitution, which says that they should give a ruling three months after closing argument. Now, when they finally give their ruling nine months after, they throw out our case.”

“Actually, we did not expect much from them,” Sesay said, adding that Chief Justice Umu Tejan Jalloh, who heard the petition, had also been a member of the bench that had jailed Paul Kamara, editor of For Di People newspaper, a tabloid, for two years for “breaching the Public Order Act”.

Kamara was jailed for a series of articles in his newspaper alleging that the former President of Sierra Leone, Ahmed Tejan Kabbah, was a “convict”, and constitutionally unfit to hold office. The articles focused on a 1967 Commission of Inquiry report that implicated Kabbah in embezzlement of public funds.

“How could Justice Jalloh now overturn her previous decision?” Sesay asked.

But not every journalist in the country is not against the court ruling. One such journalist is the editor for the Awareness Times newspaper, Dr Sylvia Blyden.

Blyden herself has been arrested and detained by the criminal investigation department in Freetown, for publishing a caricature of the state president, according to the State of Human Rights Report 2008.

But she still supports the law. “I do not think the criminal libel law should be repealed. I think it is quite in place. My arrest was government’s abuse of the criminal-libel law, like the way in which they are abusing other laws.

“We should also note that the criminal libel law does not only apply to journalists but to everybody, so I am never a victim of the criminal-libel law,” Blyden reasoned.

In an article stating her personal views on the repeal of the Public Order Act, Blyden said: “The Public Order Act of 1965 should remain firmly in place, until such time as a Parliamentary Act requiring that libel insurance be taken out by local newspapers and media houses is passed.”

According to Blyden, the criminal-libel law is the only legal provision that prevents certain SLAJ members from becoming “total journalistic despots” on the loose. “Some influential people had absolute carte blanche to turn white into black and black into white. They controlled what information the public was fed. If they did not like any person because of his or her views, they could put out the type of information that would make the public turn against that person, and effectively reduce the credibility of their viewpoints.”

Elean Shaw, a human rights activist, said she also felt the criminal libel law should stay, “simply because to every right there should be responsibility”.

“Journalists should be very careful about what they write in the papers, or what they say on the radio, because it is very difficult to take back what one has said wrongly about people who have worked very hard on their image.”

But Sesay maintains that government anti-corruption initiatives such as the Attitudinal Change campaign (a strategy to encourage all Sierra Leoneans to be less lethargic with regard to work, and change their attitudes to corruption and nationalism), will work only if the seditious-libel law is repealed, and a freedom of information Act introduced.

But deputy minister of information, Saidata Sesay, criticised the SLAJ for poor strategy in their fight against the seditious-libel law. She told IPS the Freedom of Information Bill had been sent to parliament by private organisations, and as they had not gone through the ministry they could not take the lead in piloting the Bill. The Freedom of Information Bill seeks to ensure public access to government records.

The deputy minister said: “SLAJ hurriedly went to court, and now the Supreme Court has upheld the seditious-libel laws, we just have to live with it.”

Meanwhile the SLAJ are considering the next line of action for the repeal of the criminal libel law. The issue was top of the agenda at their recent Annual General meeting in Makeni, northern Sierra Leone. The whole membership decided that since they have lost their legal battle, they will now continue to engage Parliamentarians and the cabinet for a repeal of the criminal libel law. “We want this law to be repealed at all cost and we are ready to bend over backwards to see that this obnoxious law is expunged from our law books”, Sesay stated. Betty Milton, a local reporter, revealed the mood of many journalists in the country when she stated the fight had come full circle.

“The fight for the repeal has come to the point where we started, we do not know where it will take us again,” Milton said. She added that the only option for journalists was to rely on the All People’s Congress government that had promised journalists during their election campaign that they will repeal the criminal libel law.

Excerpt:

By Miriam Gathigah
JUBA, South Sudan, Nov 19 2009 (IPS)

The guns have gone silent – except for sporadic conflict in parts of the vast South Sudan region, such as the Eastern Equatoria State. It may not be the absolute end of the conflict in the region, but it is a reason for renewed hope.

It has been two decades of bitter civil war in Sudan, the southerners bearing the burden of massive destruction which has left an estimated 1.9 million people dead and four million displaced, according to United Nations agencies.

Although many of the estimated six million living in South Sudan are daring to expect a new dawn, the effect these expected changes will have, particularly on women, remains to be seen.

In many African countries women are in the majority, and South Sudan is no exception, with the national report on Millennium Development Goals revealing that women make up 60 percent of the population.

“Despite democracy being understood to be a government of the people and by the people, the role that women can play in both the democratisation process of South Sudan, and the sustenance of this democracy, is still not clear,” says Alice Michael, executive director, Voice for Change, and a member of the Women Union, a movement which began in the 70s and commands a massive following.

“Media coverage of the coming elections (scheduled for April 2010), for instance, is usually supported by pictures of men seemingly caucusing, perhaps to create the impression that they are deep in serious political discussions.”

This, says Michael, makes politics appear very masculine – and when it becomes a general public perception males find it difficult to view women as equal counterparts.

Her remarks are echoed by Mary Sadia, another member of the union. “The manner in which the media represent us (women) is key in deconstructing the perception that our roles are in our homes, to bear and rear children.

“A few months ago a woman leader worked so hard to put together a public forum, but when we watched its news coverage that evening, male politicians had been accorded centre-stage at her function, and she was reported only to have been there.”

She said the power of the media to perpetuate and solidify gender stereotypes could not be over-emphasised. “It is even more critical to bear in mind that the most powerful and memorable social changes are instigated by the media, usually in subtle ways. Ways that nonetheless paint very powerful pictures in people’s minds,” said Sadia.

But the director-general in the ministry of information and communication in Eastern Equatorial State, Hon Alex Locor, counters these claims “There have been deliberate efforts to accord women as much media space as men, particularly in this highly charged political atmosphere.

“There are few media outlets. In Eastern Equatoria State we have only 97.5 FM, which means the media are still acclimatising themselves, and may not meet all expectations, but there are clear efforts towards equitable gender representation.”

Lucy Lokololong, a businesswoman in Juba, in explaining the relationship between women and the media, says the injustice towards women happens at two levels.

“The manner in which women are portrayed, say in a photograph. Are they feeding their children and doing chores considered feminine? Then their reported opinions – are they often quoted as making remarks perpetuating gender inequality?

“In essence we are talking about gender as constructed by culture, but perpetuated by the media. All this can be in blatant or subtle stereotyping,” says Lokololong.

“A photograph, for instance, is a powerful tool for subtle stereotyping. A news item that covers an entire political rally and gives not a single woman’s voice making a contribution speaks volumes.”

Lokololong also referred to 97.5 FM, as an example of a media outlet that has caused discontent, particularly with women. “The only programme for women, dubbed ‘The Women’s Programme’, airs at 3 pm. how many women are in the house to listen at that hour?

“That too is a way of trivialising women’s issues. Other programmes that seem to target men, say on the economy and politics, air at prime time while people are home unwinding.”

Pauline Luguma, a journalist, adds that women are under-represented in media institutions as practitioners. “This has also compromised the manner in which women are portrayed in the media.”

She said that out of the 11 journalists in Eastern Equatoria State, only two are women. “Women therefore are assigned ‘soft news’, on subjects such as lifestyle, while men cover ‘hard news’, such as the economy and politics.”

The outcome, she says, is a very visible and imbalanced gender disparity, with men appearing as sources and key newsmakers while women are depicted as objects.

“This therefore sabotages any chances of women being taken seriously as leaders and potential movers of any political process.”

John Kennedy Okema, editor-in-chief of 97.5 FM, said although there were challenges in changing from patriarchal news-making angles to more gender-representative ones, “there have been initiatives to drive this much-needed paradigm shift, such as deliberately incorporating women’s voices in key headline news. But it is not a change that can happen overnight.”

The editor’s remarks are echoed by the minister for Information and Communication for Eastern Equatoria State, Bernard Loki. “It is indeed a process that takes a bit of time. In my ministry, for instance, there is a lot of discontent on gender representation because of male dominance.

“The South Sudan story is more complex than this. We are talking about media that only just recently rose from the ashes of war. With time women will take much more media space than they do now.”

As women continue to stand at the periphery of newsworthiness, the wheels of change are grinding and democratisation beckons with the coming general elections, as well as the referendum.

This therefore calls for a clear media transformation that accommodates more women, and the opinions they hold as inarguably equal stakeholders in society.

Excerpt:

By Lansana Fofana
FREETOWN, Nov 11 2009 (IPS)

It may be seven years after the country’s civil war, but Sierra Leone is still battling to obtain an independent judiciary.

Recent claims that the president’s office had inside knowledge of the date a judgment, in a case brought by the media, would be handed down has left many wondering if the country has independent courts.

Since the end of the 11-year civil war in 2002, the British Department for International Development (DFID) has been pouring huge amounts of money into helping reform the judiciary which, like many state institutions, had virtually collapsed.

Judges and magistrates were provided with luxurious vehicles, the law courts were given a facelift, judicial officials were trained and the prisons system overhauled. But there is still much to be desired.

Sierra Leone’s 1991 constitution clearly affirms the independence of the three arms of government – the judiciary, legislature and the executive (presidency) – but the judiciary has often been accused of allowing some of its activities to be interfered with by the executive, eroding neutrality.

A long-awaited ruling is expected on a matter brought before the Supreme Court by the Sierra Leone Association of Journalists (SLAJ), demanding a repeal of the criminal and seditious libel laws of the 1965 Public Order Act.

The law criminalises libel, and has seen many journalists sent to jail or have their publications proscribed.

Arguments in the matter were concluded in March 2009, and a ruling was expected within 90 days, according to the country’s constitution. But when the Supreme Court reneged on giving a verdict, the SLAJ imposed a news blackout on the judiciary and other arms of the government, such as the police and the ministry of information, which the media association saw as accomplices in thwarting its goal.

Apparently embarrassed by this stand-off, the president’s office wrote a letter to the SLAJ informing the association the ruling would be given in mid-September, when the judiciary resumed sittings following months of recess.

The SLAJ was re-assured and hopeful, but this provoked widespread condemnation of the president’s office by rights monitoring groups and democracy watchers, who accused the executive of interfering in the activities of the judiciary. As yet, there has been no ruling on the matter.

First to fling down the gauntlet was the Awareness Times, a daily tabloid that has been a thorn in the flesh of the administration.

Its publisher, Sylvia Blyden, told IPS: “It is not that we are opposed to the cause of SLAJ. We are simply pointing out the constitutional abuses of the executive, and how these undermine democracy. How would the president know when the courts were to pass a ruling if he was not interfering with their activities?”

Her campaign resonated with that of others who believed democracy was under threat. The president’s office was forced to issue a press release insisting that it was neutral. It claimed its message was simply that the ruling would be given any time within the judicial year, which started mid-September.

Blyden claims she has herself been a victim of what she described as executive interference in judicial proceedings. In July 2008 she took the president’s press secretary, Sheka Tarawalli, to court for alleged libellous articles about her.

The matter had barely started in court when the attorney-general, through the director of public prosecutions, issued an order of nolle prosequoi, which automatically quashed the matter, apparently to save the image of the presidency.

This was no isolated incident. The history of Sierra Leone’s judiciary is replete with allegations of executive interference, and this is not peculiar to the current government. Past regimes, both civilian and military, are similarly accused of such executive excesses.

During the past administration of the Sierra Leone People’s Party (SLPP), journalist and editor of the vocal For Di People newspaper, Paul Kamara, was jailed for criminal libel, after alleged interference by the executive.

His deputy, Harry Yansaneh, died after being brutally assaulted by aides and the children of a former member of parliament. After alleged executive interference no one was brought to trial, in spite of the courts having ordered arrests.

Easmon Ngakui, spokesperson for the bar association, agrees there are shortcomings in the judiciary – but denies it is been influenced by the executive.

“I don’t think the executive influences the judiciary. Rather, the judiciary has a long way to go in terms of meeting the logistical challenges and manpower requirements,” Ngakui told IPS.

Judges and magistrates, he argued, did not even have computers and were poorly paid. In addition to Ngakui’s position, there is an apparent shortage of judicial personnel, and allegations of corruption abound.

On top of this, the head of the judiciary, the chief justice, is appointed by the president as are senior members of the bench. Some believe this has undermined the effectiveness of the judiciary, as decisions sometimes get influenced by the executive.

“How can the judiciary be effective when poor people don’t have access to justice? Suspects spend years on remand without having their cases heard in court, and most people cannot afford to hire the services of lawyers because of poverty,” commented Michael Jones, a legal analyst in the capital, Freetown.

Sierra Leone has had to hire foreign judicial personnel from neighbouring countries like Ghana, Nigeria and the Gambia to shore up its system, and the difficulty in meeting legal costs by the majority of the citizenry drove a group of young lawyers to set up a legal aid service, which provides services to the poor and marginalised.

Melron Nicol-Wilson, executive director of the Lawyers’ Centre for Legal Assistance (LAWCLA), told IPS they were motivated by the growing number of people who had no access to justice.

“It is a huge sacrifice but a worthy cause. The majority of people in this country have no access to justice, because for them the legal charges are prohibitive and they are too poor, so we are stepping in to help,” Nicol-Wilson said.

LAWCLA has gained a reputation for championing the poor and helping them gain access to justice through its many lawyers, free of cost.

It is widely believed here that politicisation and under-funding of the judiciary have over the years been the main cause of ineffectiveness. So the intervention of DFID, which provides financial support for its overhauling, is seen as a ray of hope.

Excerpt:

By Kelvin Kachingwe
LUSAKA, Nov 10 2009 (IPS)

When journalists were beaten by political supporters for covering the president’s return trip from abroad, and cabinet ministers and police officers looked on without stopping it, it seemed to be the last straw in the victimisation of the media. But it was not.

Lusaka-based journalists march on the Great East Road campaigning for the violence against journalists to stop. Credit: Kelvin Kachingwe/IPS

The Zambian media have always had a dodgy relationship with politicians, depending on whether they are in government or opposition, but never before have the attacks been so intense and frequent.

Last month journalists from both the public and private press had to scamper for their safety when political cadres stormed the Zambia Institute of Mass Communication (Zamcom), where Robbie Chizyuka, suspended United Party for National Development (UPND) Member of Parliament for Namwala, was addressing a press briefing.

It is believed the UPND supporters were opposed to Chizyuka’s speaking critically of the party. His own party members have accused him of being a "traitor".

Then, a few weeks later, political party cadres attacked journalists from various media organisations, and confiscated recorders during a forum being addressed by George Mpombo. The former minister of defence’s attacks on government in the media have infuriated the ruling Movement for Multi-Party Democracy (MMD).

Interestingly, these attacks come barely three months after media bodies in the country presented a joint petition to President Rupiah Banda, demanding protection by law-enforcement agencies and the government in the course of their journalistic duties.

This petition followed the beating up of Times of Zambia senior reporter Antony Mulowa, photojournalist Richard Mulonga and The Post reporter Chibaula Silwamba by cadres from the MMD in the presence of several cabinet ministers and police officers. The journalists were beaten at the Lusaka International Airport, where they had gone to cover President Banda’s return from a trip abroad.

The joint petition was signed by several of the country’s leading media institutes including the: Press Association of Zambia (PAZA); Zambia Media Women Association (ZAMWA); Zambia Union of Journalists (ZUJ); Press Freedom Committee of The Post; United Nations Information Centre; Media Institute of Southern Africa-Zambia (MISA-Zambia); and PANOS Institute Southern Africa.

The Media Institute of Southern Africa-Zambia says it is deeply concerned at the unsafe working environment of the media, especially during press conferences on controversial political issues.

"MISA-Zambia urges the government and police to address the problem immediately before lives are lost, or serious injuries take place. Zambia is a democratic state in which citizens have the right to enjoy their constitutionally guaranteed freedoms, which include freedom of expression and the right to access information," says MISA-Zambia president Henry Kabwe.

Lieutenant-General Ronnie Shikapwasha, the chief government spokesperson, says both the ruling party and the government do not condone the harassment of journalists.

"Government condemns in the strongest terms the reported violence against the men and women in the media. It is criminal, uncalled-for and unacceptable, and the government’s position on this matter is loud, clear and consistent," says Shikapwasha.

But Shikapwasha says the media should be professional, and adhere to the ethical requirements of journalism, because careless reporting can lead to turmoil in the country.

For a long time now, Zambian journalists have been demanding speedy media-law reforms, as well as the creation of an Independent Broadcasting Authority (IBA) and enactment of the Freedom of Information Bill (FOI).

Andrew Sakala, PAZA president, says the government should enact the FOI Bill and establish an IBA to foster media development.

"We as PAZA expect that this year’s media reforms should continue, meaning the IBA should be operationalised this year, so that there are no restrictions on how broadcasting journalists and houses conduct their work. The FOI Bill has also stalled for a long time without implementation," he says.

But Shikapwasha, who is also the information and broadcasting services minister, says the process of selecting board members to the IBA has started, and he expects the ratification of its members before the end of the year.

The government will also soon present to Parliament the FOI, which once implemented, will enhance access to public information and promote transparency, he says.

But in August, Vice-President George Kunda challenged media bodies to come up with a draft Bill for self-regulation within six months, failing which the government will subject them to statutory regulation. "There is a lot of irresponsible reporting in Zambia, and therefore a need to change the scenario. The ball is in your court (the media). As soon as possible give us a draft of your blueprint on self-regulation. Otherwise, know that we have a draft legislation which we can present to Parliament anytime," says Kunda, who is also the minister of justice.

But media bodies immediately rejected the six-month ultimatum, saying they believed the country had enough laws already that inhibited their operations. ZAMWA member Sally Chawama said on behalf of other media organisations that they would not accept the arrangement of coming up with a statutory regulatory body.

"There are many laws that govern the media, including ones on defamation, sedition and prohibition of false publication. We don’t have intentions to accommodate statutory regulation, whether it comes today or in the next 100 years, because we feel there are adequate laws in Zambia inhibiting the operations of the media," Chawama says.

Chapadongo Lungu, the ZUJ general secretary, said the media in the country were already regulating themselves well, saying statutory regulation would be subjecting themselves to political manipulation.

"The only thing that the media haven’t done is dance to the tune of politicians, and they’ve used that as an excuse to demand statutory regulation," he said.

Last week MISA-Zambia, PAZA, ZAMWA, PANOS Southern Africa, Press Freedom Committee of the Post, the Catholic Media Services and the Zambia Union of Broadcasters, announced that they had come up with a framework that will be used to create a self-regulatory body to promote accountability, peer review and the professionalism of media institutions.

Henry Kabwe, speaking on behalf of the other media bodies, said they had created the Media Liaison Committee (MLC), which will ensure journalists, media houses and the general public were protected in the dissemination of information and self-expression. "As the MLC, we have consulted locally and some committee members will be leaving for Kenya and South Africa to study how self-regulatory frameworks are being run in those countries," Kabwe said.

But as to whether this step by media bodies will be enough to appease the government and other political elements who want statutory regulation of the media houses is yet to be seen.

Excerpt:

By IPS Correspondents
KAMPALA, Nov 3 2009 (IPS)

Specioza Nakabugo (63) sits on a mat under a mango tree on a well-mowed grass patch, her expression a blend of boredom and gloom.

Mary Ndagire (78) will not listen to the radio ever since her favourite radio station was shut down. Credit: Evelyn Matsamura Kiapi/IPS

But she was a happy woman until a few weeks ago, when her favourite local radio station, Central Broadcasting Service (CBS), was shut down by the state.

For an ageing woman with no formal education, CBS – which broadcast in Luganda, a local language – had been her only source of information, entertainment and companionship since she moved to the city to live with her son a couple of years ago.

Now Nakabugo wants to return to her home in Mityana village in central Uganda, as she says her only companion is gone.

"I enjoyed all the programmes on the radio because they were in the only language I understand – Luganda. I especially enjoyed listening to the news and Birango (personal announcements), because that is how I knew what was happening around me," she tells IPS.

Shut down

CBS, which is also known as ‘The Kabaka’s (King’s) radio’, is one of four Luganda radio stations the government shut down, accused of inciting violence, following riots that recently rocked the city and its suburbs. Only one, Catholic Radio Sapientia, has since been reopened.

The clamp-down occurred after a stand-off between the Ugandan Government and the largest ethnic group, the Kingdom of Buganda, which culminated in city riots that saw dozens lose their lives, and property worth more than 250,000 dollars destroyed.

The riots were sparked off when the government prevented Kabaka (King) Ronald Mutebi, the King of Buganda, from travelling to Kayunga to address his subjects on National Youth Day. Since then more than 200 radio workers have lost their jobs, and thousands of dollars in advertising revenue have gone begging.

But the closure of the radio station has meant something more to the Baganda (people of the Buganda Kingdom). For some it has felt like a loss of their heritage.

Seventy-eight-year-old Mary Ndagire, a banana seller in Mengo market says the link to her culture is gone with the closure of the radio stations.

"It’s so disappointing for someone who loves her country, culture and local language that our favourite radio should be shut down," she tells IPS as she peels a pile of green bananas. The influence and subtle assimilation of the Baganda culture into other Ugandan communities is clearly visible across the country.

The Baganda traditional wear – the Kanzu (tunic) for men and Gomasi (flowing gown) for women – are traditional wear in many regions. The Baganda cultural styles such as in cooking using banana leaves, and traditional marriage ceremonies (Kwanjula), have been copied by other clans.

And although the Constitution does not recognise Luganda as a national language, it is universally used by all ethnic groups as a business lingo.

Ndagire says she does not listen to other radio stations since CBS was closed, fondly describing the station as ‘family radio.’ "One would sit and listen with your family without fear of hearing ‘heavy’ (difficult) language," she said.

"If there was something that went wrong between the radio and the government, there is need for understanding and forgiveness on both sides. I just request that our radio is turned back on."

She said in the meantime government had only succeeded in punishing fans of CBS and not the station. "They (the state) are not punishing the radio owners; they are punishing us, the listeners. We, the listeners, are the ones suffering."

Rights groups described the closure as a violation of the right to information and self-expression. But the closure of the Luganda radio stations is also being interpreted as an attack on the historic and cultural heritage of the Baganda people.

It has rekindled a historical rift between the state and the kingdom that goes back to 1966, when the then Prime Minister of Uganda, Dr Apollo Milton Obote, stormed the palace in Lubiri and exiled Kabaka Muteesa II, the then King of Buganda.

Broken promises

The 1995 Uganda Constitution reinstated the kingdoms, and political commentators viewed this as President Yoweri Museveni’s way of rewarding the Baganda for helping him in the guerrilla bush war of 1980-1985. The current regime came to power after a long and painful war fought in the Luwero triangle, which is within the Kingdom of Buganda.

The kingdom was reinstated countrywide, but the Baganda say the president has not fulfilled all his promises, as some of the issues concerning the kingdom were not settled. These included giving the Baganda federal status and full control of their land. Federalism is a system of rule where power is divided between a central government and number of regions, which have limited self-governing authority. In addressing Members of Parliament shortly after the recent Buganda riots, Museveni claimed that the Kabaka had refused to answer his phone calls for two years, exacerbating the unfriendly relations between Buganda and the state.

"This (misunderstanding) is not about failure to pick up calls," says Buganda spokesman Charles Peter Mayiga. "This is about the disappointments that the kingdom has suffered at the hands of the people in the centre (state). When the guerrilla war was won, one would have expected that the issues concerning the kingdom were going to be conclusively settled," he told IPS in an interview.

"This talk of failure to pick up phones is just a simple way of putting it. It’s a collection of so many disappointments. We should look at the genesis of the unfriendly environment. It’s got a long history of disappointments."

Feudalism Vs Capitalism

But some analysts think Buganda’s demands for federal status are unrealistic, as they could create a ‘pseudo state-within-a-state’ situation.

"A monarch can exist within a state, but there is no need. Kingdoms are institutions that have lost their usefulness," says political scientist Professor Rutanga Murindwa, of the School of Politics at Makerere University.

"The collapse of many great empires in Africa gives you a sense that the time of kings and empires has gone, and we have reached a new stage of capitalism. The existing way of production reflects the type of politics at the time. You cannot have a king in a capitalist era," Murindwa told IPS.

He says as the impact of globalisation builds up, feudalism cannot thrive under capitalism, and monarchs are bound to be phased out.

"In a capitalist society monarchs have lost their usefulness. They are just like any fossilised institution. They are just monuments, and parasitic because they are not productive. So we have to learn from history that capitalism cannot allow the archaic and obsolete forms of production to be dominant. You cannot bring them to the centre of politics."

But Mayiga does not agree. He believes suppression of their heritage is only because political leaders do not want to cede power: "Why is the state not comfortable with that (federal) arrangement? It’s because federalism thrives under a democratic system, and curtails the power of the people at the centre.

"Federalism is about handling your internal affairs in a constitutionally agreed manner. Buganda does not intend to run as an independent state. It wants to have a government to manage its heritage."

The demands

The Baganda have since rejected a law passed in 2005, introducing a regional tier system of administration, claiming that the system does not give power to the regions in meaningful terms, as districts will continue to report to the central government administration.

Furthermore, the Baganda are not comfortable with the 2007 Land (Amendment) Bill transferring control of land from the Kabaka to the central government.

"Our original homes are situated on land in certain geographical areas. Buganda is not a concept. It is a geographical expression. If the central government is in charge of land and they come and take over my ancestral home, then the whole essence of my clan will be swept away. Our heritage rotates around a number of things, and land is one of them. We are not going to give this up," Mayiga says.

But Murindwa says the Buganda demand for land in an independent country is unrealistic.

"Once a state has come into existence no ethnic grouping or individual can claim land, because it becomes a national project, a formation of the nation. Land belongs to the population, present and future," Murindwa says.

Preserving Heritage

While the fight for federal status and control of their lands continue, the Baganda still hang onto their culture.

The kingdom boasts several tourist sites, including the Kasubi Tombs, where four Buganda kings are buried. The Baganda think the only way they can continue to preserve that rich heritage is through self rule in a federal system.

"When we were approaching independence, Buganda was adamant about preserving her heritage. They said they either got a federal system of governance – where Buganda would continue managing their own internal affairs – or Buganda would become a sovereign state once again," Mayiga says.

"And the Baganda are saying they are not going to sacrifice their history of 1,000 years. We want to preserve our heritage. That’s what defines who we are.

"Who is going to protect our heritage for us? We must protect it ourselves. That is the basis," Mayiga says.

Excerpt:

By IPS Correspondents
KAMPALA, Oct 27 2009 (IPS)

Charles Odobo Bichachi, editor of the Independent Newspaper has in a span of a year, been summoned to the police several times accused of publishing seditious statements. And just last month, Bichachi fell into trouble again: this time over a cartoon.

Bichachi is on police bond, which requires him to report to the Criminal Investigation Department every fortnight.

His recent sequence of arrests has left the seasoned journalist so disturbed that sometimes he feels like quitting the profession. But, he says, that is not an option because battle for press freedom must go on.

"If I quit, then possibly tomorrow will be worse than today. Somebody will have to fight for democracy, for freedom and we must fight against corruption because if we give up now, it is going to weigh down on everybody," he says.

The cartoon

The cartoon Bichachi was arrested in relation to was an illustration predicting events ahead of the 2011 Presidential elections. It had a caricature of Uganda’s president, Yoweri Museveni, from the ruling National Resistance Movement (NRM) party holding a piece of paper headlined, 'NRM Campaign Strategies: Things to Do'.

Ticked as point one on the list was ‘Re-appointing the EC’. Ironically, Museveni had just re-appointed top officers of the national Electoral Commission (EC) that had been accused by civil society and election observers of having caused flaws (alleged rigging) during the 2006 Presidential elections.

"The cartoon was therefore lampooning that re-appointment. It showed the first steps towards the rigging of the 2011 elections," Bichachi says.

"What we were trying to do is raise awareness that the process of the next election might follow the pattern of the previous one… The cartoon was posing questions for people to talk about, to ask themselves whether this is where we are heading."

"We stood our ground and insisted that these are pertinent public issues… the cartoon creates, it laughs and ridicules and yet brings up issues for discussion," Bichachi says.

Government did not see it that way and Bichachi was arrested for sedition.

Alarm bells

In the last two decades, over twenty media practitioners have been summoned, arrested and detained for different reasons and charged with crimes like sedition, sectarianism and criminal libel.

However, this is the first time in Uganda’s media history that journalists have been summoned over a cartoon. In the earlier days, Museveni joked about newspapers sketching his caricature. This change of attitude is now creating a new wave of fear in the media as the 2011 Presidential elections draw near.

"I think it is an alarm bell," Bichachi says, "It is telling us that the bar is getting lowered further and the room for independent journalism is actually getting narrower."

"We know that next year is the crunch time and our strategy is to survive any closures or any harassment so that we are able to play our role in the 2011 Presidential and Parliamentary elections when an independent media will be very much needed," Bichachi says.

Silencers

Uganda has a history of silencing independent journalists. Over the past two decades, several media houses have been shut down for publishing or broadcasting information that the state deems prejudicial to national security.

In September this year, the Broadcasting Council shut down four FM radios accusing them of inciting violence following a stand-off between the government and the Buganda Kingdom which culminated into city riots.

These riots culminated after announcements were made on some local FM stations that the Kabaka Ronald Mutebi (King of Buganda, Uganda’s largest ethnic group) had been banned by government from travelling to the neighbouring Kayunga District to preside over the kingdom’s Youth Day festivities.

Government said it was not safe for the Kabaka to travel to Kayunga because there were some internal disputes in the same area. But his subjects interpreted it differently, causing a riot in the city and its suburbs.

Meanwhile, a growing crackdown on independent and critical reporting in general is causing concern among rights activists. Criminal prosecutions against Uganda’s largest independent newspaper the Daily Monitor are on the rise against the backdrop of mounting national tensions in the lead-up to general elections in 2011. Four journalists from the Daily Monitor are facing criminal prosecutions, joining four others already charged since 2007.

In August two editors, David Kalinaki and Henry Ochieng, of the Daily Monitor and its sister title the Sunday Monitor respectively, were charged with forgery. This was after the paper ran a reproduction of a leaked presidential memorandum. The Daily Monitor had acknowledged some errors in the reprinting of the document and published a correction.

Veteran journalist David Ouma Balikowa who is one of the founder members of the Daily Monitor is not surprised at the developments.

"The media is only free as long as one does not antagonise the state," Balikowa says.

He recalls when an advert ban was imposed on the Daily Monitor by the state, prohibiting all government institutions and discouraging private companies from running adverts with independent media for almost six years. This crippled the media house financially.

However, Balikowa attributes increasing media suppression to President Museveni’s overstay in power. He has ruled for 23 years after amending the 1995 Constitution and lifting the Presidential Term limits. He has also often hinted at standing for Presidency again in 2011.

"Governments that do not want to leave power are likely to be less tolerant to the media," he says.

Draconian laws

But that’s not all. Laws on sedition, sectarianism, criminal libel, criminal trespass and sections of the Penal Code Act and Press and Journalists Act continue to distress press freedom.

However, the law on terrorism is the most extreme. It hands out the death sentence to any journalist whose work is deemed to be promoting terrorism.

Little wonder, many young journalists are now becoming reluctant to venture into political reporting thus undermining the ability of the media to play its watchdog role, observers say.

"We are increasingly getting into a situation where the media is simply moving towards coverage of social issues like entertainment and love relationships because these are not what government is worried about," Balikowa says.

No freedom, just numbers

Uganda has one of the most vibrant media industries in Africa. In 1993, the state liberalised the airwaves leading to the mushrooming of over one hundred FM radio stations.

There are also over 20 newspapers of newspapers and fifteen TV stations. Little wonder this trend has often been associated with press freedom. However, observers argue, numbers are a wrong yardstick to measure media freedom. Indeed, the seemingly free media has encountered a lot of stumbling blocks like censorship, state interference and harsh regulations.

"Some talk about the freedom of the media by counting the number of radio and TV stations. But there is no freedom of media…Whether you have 100 radio stations or more, that says very little about the state of media freedoms in this country," says Prof. Fredrick Jjuuko, a senior lecturer at the Faculty of Law, Makerere University in Kampala.

He says with liberalisation of the economy, radio stations were merely created for commercial purposes and therefore carry the flag of economic rights rather than the one of civil and political rights.

"That is why you find a lot of commercialism on radio stations and the government does not mind that. What it minds is the civil-political content like the Ebimeeza and other political statements made," Jjuuko tells IPS.

Civil society speaks

Civil society organisations have expressed concern at the state at which media freedoms are shrinking.

"No state gives people rights of expression and media freedoms. Their role is to protect and preserve these rights. As human rights defenders therefore, we feel that our country has betrayed the trust of the people by continuing to gag these rights that they are supposed to preserve and protect," Patrick Tumwine Advocacy and Research Officer Human Rights Network an umbrella organisation for human rights bodies in Uganda told IPS.

Recently, the Uganda Human Rights Commission (UHRC) also called for the repeal of the laws on sedition, sectarianism and criminal libel because they infringe on media freedoms which are a fundamental right.

In its 2008 report released recently, UHRC referred to the laws as ‘an ever present threat’ to democratic principles. However, government spokesperson Kabakumba Masiko who admits that she has not yet read the report is adamant, arguing that human rights groups are characteristically biased towards the media.

"Democracy? What democracy? Holding someone accountable for his/her actions and words is undemocratic? Human rights are not going to run Uganda," she says.

She also said press laws are in place as a ‘disciplinary measure’ to ensure ‘responsible reporting’ in the media.

"The bottom line is that the media has to be responsible in their reporting and management. Once that is done, and then other things can be handled. These laws are in place because there is a problem and a gap that we are trying to fill. It is clear from the way they (the media) report and from what they say that they are not responsible," she told IPS.

However, Kalinaki does not agree with Masiko whom he says does not have the competence to advise the media on responsible reporting.

"Laws, such as that of sedition, criminal defamation and the Anti Terrorism Act which we have on our books, are designed to stop the media from scrutinising and critically assessing what those in power – the likes of Kabakumba Masiko – are doing in the name of the people.

"The government, which is the subject of media scrutiny, must not be the one to determine how well the media operates and therefore legislate against media freedom. The market will eventually punish poor journalism and reward good, responsible reporting. If the state is interested in helping the media, then it should just leave it alone," Kalinaki says.

The future

So does independent journalism have a future in Uganda?

"Yes it does," says Balikowa, "but the journalists themselves have to fight for it. The media needs to realise that freedom of expression and free media and rights cannot be granted on a silver plate," Balikowa says.  

Excerpt:

By Charles Mpaka
LILONGWE, Oct 21 2009 (IPS)

While campaigning in the last election, Margaret Roka Mauwa, Member of the Malawian Parliament, did not promise her voters that when she won she would buy them coffins.

Margaret Roka Mauwa, the deputy Minister of Agriculture in Malawi, says she believes in working with the media. Credit: Charles Mpaka/IPS

It is a common practice, but one Mauwa refused to follow. Instead, she promised her voters what she knew she would be able to deliver

And as the deputy minister of agriculture, in a country that once was forced to import food, and now has a surplus of crops that it exports throughout the world, Mauwa has proved her point.

Mauwa believes that in a democracy, it is important for politicians to tell people the truth. In that way, you avoid misunderstandings with the constituents and you participate well in making democracy grow, she says.

But she is painfully aware that however hard she tries, she may not escape from the critical eye of the media, especially because she is also deputy minister of agriculture. Agriculture has recently become one of Malawi’s main source of income.

She likes the media because, she says, they are partners in shaping Malawi’s political system and help public servants to inform the nation about what their government is doing.

However, she has also learnt that the media can be disappointing.

"I have noticed that often journalists wait until something is wrong and they come to you. Sometimes they bring provocative questions, may be with bad intentions (to put the officials in bad light as being inefficient). That is why you see arrogance on the part of some of the politicians when dealing with journalists," Mauwa says.

Mauwa is proof of the development of democracy in Malawi.

Malwai’s president, Bingu wa Mutharika, is also the active minister of agriculture. And Mauwa, a female, is second in command in a department that has won Mutharika praises around the world for Malawi’s improved food security situation.

She is among the 42 female MPs that made it to parliament in the elections. Of the 193 members that were elected to the national assembly in the May 2009 elections, 145 were new people. Mauwa was one of the new faces.

For the first time in the history of multiparty politics in Malawi, people did not vote for political parties and candidates because of the region from which the leadership of the parties came.

Catholic Commission for Justice and Peace (CCJP), one of the prominent civil society organisations in Malawi, says one of the outstanding features of Malawi’s democracy to- date has been that voters have turned the corner from choosing people just because they have been around in politics for a long time and because they belonged to a certain region or political party.

"This recent election has shown how grown up Malawian voters are becoming. They are electing people based on issues," says Christopher Chisoni, National Coordinator for CCJP.

The elections beat many bookmakers’ expectations. It was not expected that Mutharika and his party would win with a landslide. It was also not expected that Malawians would go for as many new faces in parliament.

"Citizens have come of age and politicians know now that voters can no longer be taken for granted. We have reached a stage where even ordinary Malawians are able to speak out loudly on issues that are affecting them," says Chisoni.

CCJP gives thumbs-up to the media, among other key players, for keeping public servants on their toes. According to the organisation, Malawian media has been questioning the performance of public individuals and making them accountable to the people that elected them.

There are many such cases of this. A former minister is currently in jail after a newspaper revealed that he had spent public money on a wedding of his daughter.

And an investigation is reportedly going at the country’s communications regulator after a newspaper investigation uncovered corrupt practices in awarding of mobile licences. The minister involved is Patricia Kaliati, minister of gender, women and community development.

The public officers have also been relying on the media to account to the nation about what is being done by, for example, publishing information like country’s progress and shortfalls on reaching the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs).

But the organisation observes that in the name of being seen to be doing a good job, some public officials are "exploiting the poverty" of some media to meet personal public relations matters rather than to bring worth to public debate and move development agenda for Malawi.

Not all media houses in Malawi are very profitable and not all journalists are well paid. There have been claims that some public officials give money to journalists so they can publish only the good about them.

However, there are some media houses that protect the independence of the fourth estate and have carried articles faulting public officials for failing to tackle real issues in their areas.

"As civil society, we are not interested in public figures who want the media when they are donating 20 balls to some barefoot young men in their village. That sounds like raising a personal profile. We want them to use the media in a way that adds value to national debate on our politics and development," says Chisoni.

Executive Director for Media Council of Malawi (MCM) Baldwin Chiyamwaka says the media, which played a crucial role in bringing democracy in Malawi in 1993 through publishing diverse views in favour of change, has been facilitating the growth of that democracy by being a place where people discuss failings and successes of the process and of those meant to drive it.

"The media has been there with us every step on the way. As an emerging democracy, Malawi will continue to rely on the media as a tool to make public servants answerable to the people because that is a sure way of making our democracy strong," he said.

On whether the media in Malawi are too hard on public officials, Chiyamwaka said that at times, journalists have expected too much from politicians, even when they are new and without adequate information on parliament. He said this has resulted in indifferent treatment of journalists by some politicians.

"Sometimes, in our hunger for news we seem to forget that politicians are human beings too. They experience what we experience. They have failings like us. They are not special machines to be producing miracles all the time. So, on occasions, it would pay to give them time. It would be worthwhile to put our pens down on them and look elsewhere where we can get better quality news," Chiyamwaka said.

However, the authorities should not always expect the papers to be carrying positive stories only. He says it is the nature of the media to tackle both positive as well as the negative stories even if the public officials will not like it.

On her part, Mauwa said that the troubles that some Malawian MPs find themselves in are self-made.

A musician-cum-MP stirred anger among the people in his area when in his contribution in parliament last August, he complained that the music he had composed had been pirated. His constituents were angry with him, saying when he was campaigning, he did not say that he would fighting against music piracy but that he would be building bridges and schools in his area.

But in Mauwa’s campaign for the elections, she told her voters that she would not tell them what she would not be able to do just for the sake of getting votes.

"I told them that my job as their Member of Parliament would be to facilitate development. I did not promise to buy coffins for whoever dies in the area because I knew that I would not do it and that it was not the job of an MP.

"Because I told them what they would expect from me, there is a good understanding between us so far. I think that in a democracy, it is important to tell people the truth," she says.

Kaliati, minister of gender, women and community development, has held various cabinet portfolios since 2004. Since then she has been an MP and was one of few female MP survivors in the recent election.

One of the few public officials readily accessible to media in Malawi, Kaliati says her strength has been to be approachable to everyone.

"My policy is to be there for anyone, rich or poor, the media. Democracy is about being with people. That has helped me to know my weaknesses and strengths and I think that is useful for our growing democracy," she says.

Kaliati, who was minister of information before the elections in May, says media in Malawi has, however, been irritating with "their lack of judgement on what to publish and not to publish."

She has been in the papers herself several times for wrong reasons including corruption allegations and fights with ordinary women she is claimed to have suspected to be going out with her husband, a business man in her home town. (Kaliati is the minister involved in the corruption scandal with the country’s communications regulator which is currently under investigation.)

"The greatest challenge that we have in our democracy is poverty and that is also affecting the way you people report. You concentrate on reporting on issues in urban areas because that is where people who can bribe you are found. These are only the people that will see the sense in democracy. You are leaving out issues in rural areas and people there cannot see any change," she argues. CCJP is wary that most new, energetic and accessible representatives like Mauwa and Kaliati are now in a majority government.

According to CCJP, what has not ticked with Malawi’s emerging democracy is that demands from citizens are often sabotaged by political power.

"Citizens have often called upon government to explain on poor social service delivery in sectors such as health, education and water development but government has not been forthcoming. The fear of CCJP as a representative of citizens is that a majority government would be as defiant as was the case with a majority opposition in the past five years," says Chisoni.

MCM hopes though that the media in Malawi, in spite of the capacity and legislation problems that they face, will continue to play their role in bringing the MPs back to their constituents and to the service of the nation.

"That is the duty of the media, to make democracy grow and work for the people, to give people a continuous voice until somebody hears it," Chiyamwaka says.

Excerpt:

By IPS Correspondents
KAMPALA, Oct 13 2009 (IPS)

Every Saturday afternoon at a public house in the capital city, Lynne Anite, a journalism student at Makerere University, would join senior government officials, academics, and even business people to debate about current affairs.

In her final year of university, Anite had never been able to get at internship at a media house and she was not even sure she would find a job after graduation.

But Anite was a regular discussant at an Ekimeeza, an open-air public forum unique to Kampala. She would listen and participate in the public debates building her skills on the art of public speaking as she prepared for a career in journalism. Then one day, Anite was offered a job.

"This is because my current boss heard me speak on air and built trust in me," she says. Anite now works at the government-owned Uganda Broadcasting Corporation (UBC) as well as the Uganda Media Centre.

Notably, without exposure from the Ekimeeza, Anite would have not got the job she now enjoys. And also millions of Ugandans would not have had a voice to air their views about their country.

And it seems as if they will no longer be able to do so. A month ago all the public forums, except those broadcast by the state-owned Star FM and UBC were indefinitely suspended by the Ugandan government.

It is a move that has left the media, academics and even the public in shock.

The ban

Last month government’s media regulatory body, the Uganda Broadcasting Council, announced that it had indefinitely suspended the broadcast of Ebimeeza (plural for Ekimeeza) until an adequate legal and technical framework has been provided for them.

The decision came a day after a stand-off between the Ugandan government and the largest ethnic group, the Kingdom of Buganda which culminated into city riots that lasted two days and saw tens of people lose lives and property worth over 250,000 dollars destroyed. It also inflicted losses on the country’s economy worth 500,000 dollars, business analysts said.

Government also shut down four FM radio stations, accusing them of inciting the violence. Only one radio station, the catholic Sapientia has since been re opened after three of its presenters were dismissed.

"Ebimeeza programmes are increasingly becoming difficult to manage due to the inability of the radio stations to manage them adequately. Therefore, any radio heard airing them will be dealt with," Godrey Mutabazi Chairman of the Broadcasting Council said then.

"We believe that Ebimeeza’s were not properly established, and secondly they did not have regulations at all. The law says if one wants to get a broadcasting licence, he/she must indicate location and geographical area of coverage.

And the location clearly means the studios and the transmitter sites," Mutabazi later said in an interview with IPS.

"So for someone to leave their studio and establish a location in a bar or night club or under a tree is not within the law. It was also wrong for a programme to come from a bar where everybody comes on the microphone with a glass of beer in one hand. You cannot conduct a meaningful debate in such an atmosphere," he says.

Ironically, government-owned Star FM and Uganda UBC Television still broadcast their live Ebimeeza programmes every Saturday afternoon in a subway pub, uninterrupted. Little wonder, veteran journalist David Ouma Balikowa, who is also a media consultant and a university lecturer of Mass Communication, disagrees with Mutabazi’s justification for the closure.

"One of the important things in economic development is that you should be able to involve the people in the process of development. And if we believe that communication is one of the things that empower people, then, the starting point of people’s participation in economic development and governance is through participating in the communication process," Balikowa says.

Ekimeeza

The first Ekimeeza started in a local pub; the Club Obliggatto, an open-air public house on Old Port Bell Road, east of the Ugandan Capital, Kampala. A gathering of approximately 10-20 middle-aged locals made it routine to assemble for discussions over cold beers every Saturday afternoon. Just like a typical African village beer party, they combined several tables together to make one big platform that could accommodate the numbers for a forum.

Under the confines of a huge plastic canopy, senior government officials, legislatures, academics, sports and media personalities as well as business people alike shared views and debated on topical political, social and economic events and processes that had made the week. As the numbers grew, so did the tables.

Then one day, members of the club decided to call their forum ‘Ekimeeza’, a local word for ‘the big table’. That was nearly two decades ago.

The concept has gone on to become quite popular and culminated in several radio stations airing live broadcasts of the forum and also allowing phone-ins for those who could not attend. It has made Ekimeeza one of Uganda’s most popular public forums.

The concept of Ebimeeza as a medium of communication has since been acknowledged as unique to Uganda, a country with over 100 radio stations, one of the highest numbers in Africa.

"(The) Ekimeeza is a unique innovation as far as broadcasting in Uganda is concerned; where people and communities are allowed to discuss issues of national importance through open forums on air," says Balikowa.

"The Ekimeeza concept should be researched into; on how it can be improved and institutionised in broadcasting, not only in Africa but the rest of the world especially in communities," he tells IPS in an interview.

Setting the agenda

Meanwhile, regular discussants of the forum expressed shock over the indefinite suspension.

"The suspension (of Ekimeeza) came to us as a shock because we have never had any complaint from government that our forum was reporting malicious propaganda," James Wasula, Chairman and founder member of the Ekimeeza, told IPS in an interview.

"These discussions were very healthy because people freely expressed their views and minds. The issues discussed were very important. To a certain extent, they shaped the political destiny of this country because we had people from the government as well as opposition parties – people with divergent views," Wasula says.

He also illustrates that the forum was beneficial for national development. "I can confidently say that we influenced a lot of decisions. There were a number of issues government had come up with; issues they wanted to put forward as policies, as laws. But when we debated them in our forum and exposed the shortfalls, in most cases, government withdrew or refined them or completely scrapped them," he says.

Moreover, the forum did not only discuss political issues, but also social aspects like football and health. For instance in 2000, Wasula says, it successfully hosted sex workers to one of the forums.

"And we had a positive response. Some of the sex workers were reckless with their lives and we could not stop them. But we invited them and they participated in these discussions. At least we told them the dangers of HIV/AIDS and they changed their behaviour to a certain extent.

"There was also a change in football administration, structures and even their Constitution was reviewed," he says.

People missing out…

Regular discussants now hope that government can lift the suspension soon. "It’s (the ban) like being in a prison. This forum was given to us by the private sector (media) to enjoy ourselves, to assemble and associate and peacefully express our views," says Charles Rwomushana, a lawyer and political actor who has actively participated in the forums since 1993. He also once served as Head of Intelligence and Security in the office of the President.

"We are also missing that social interaction. People were changing views and positions, both government and opposition as well as the neutral ones because after discussions on air, we would sit back and analyse each others contributions, criticisms and defences and I thought that was very good," adds Wasula.

…but state looses more

However, Wasula argues, these forums were even more beneficial to government. "These forums would point out the weaknesses of government and their programmes and since these were informal discussions, government could borrow a leaf from what had been discussed. I really think the government is missing out a lot," he says.

"I participated on two fronts," says Rwomushana. "I would listen and follow up public opinion while doing my intelligence work. But later on, I also became an active participant."

"I was monitoring the Ebimeeza because they would help in capturing public mood and opinion. Here, you get the feelings of the population as freely expressed, and as a politician, come in and influence public opinion.

"There is monitoring public opinion, but there is also influencing it by being an active participant," Rwomushana says.

Illegal ban

Rights activists are now challenging the banning of Ekimeeza which they say is illegal.

"I do not know where the government gets the basis for banning it because there is no law that really prohibits Ebimeeza. So it appears that the banning is just an extra-judicial move by the State. "Ordinarily before you ban channels like Ebimeeza, it has to be through court action which they (government) have not done. How do you close radio stations without even going to court?" Balikowa asks.

Censorship

Activists are also concerned that this move is now creating self censorship among citizens.

"There is already a culture of fear and self censorship which is building up not only in the media, but even among the public because people are very conscious on what they say…This is denying the public freedom of expression because the government has not at all given us any convincing reasons as to why the Ebimeeza have been harmful. Short of that, we really think that their move is politically motivated. You must subject the content to a harmful test which they have not done," Balikowa says.

Rwomushana concurs: "The media is not free. Actually the freedom of the media is gone. But there is hope because we can struggle for it," Rwomushana says.

Balikowa on the other hand, calls for political tolerance. "The government is trying to shut down dissenting views and that demonstrates that we are still living in the culture that is still politically intolerant. There is no democratic consensus. And where there is no political pluralism, you cannot have media pluralism at all."

A long wait

However, there is hope. Government is going back to the drawing board in an effort to revive the Ekimeeza, but only after guidelines with a foundation within the law have been formulated.

"We are going to try our level best to ensure that these regulations and legal framework comes out as soon as possible. But things take time. We want to do a good job, and not a rush one. So people will have to be patient," Mutabazi promises.

In the meantime Ugandans eager to participate in the governance of their country, like Anite, have to wait and see when the forums will be reinstated. "I joined the Ekimeeza because I love to debate and express my views. The controversial environment attracted me to join an Ekimeeza… I felt I could do the same or even better," Anite tells IPS.

Excerpt:

By Mohamed Fofanah
FREETOWN, Oct 9 2009 (IPS)

Umaru Fofana looks dishevelled. His hair is overgrown and people who do not know him could be mistaken for thinking he just joined an Afro band. And his hanging beard will surely solicit suspicious glances.

But Fofana is not some musician or an unkempt hobo. He is the president of the Sierra Leone Association of Journalists (SLAJ) and his appearance is all for the cause of media freedom.

"I will not have a haircut until the Supreme Court gives a ruling on our matter; as a result I have grown more beard and hair on my head than any other time since I was born." The SLAJ is presently at loggerheads with the country’s Supreme Court – over the failure by the court to deliver a verdict six months after final arguments on the SLAJ’s case. By law, the court is bound to deliver a verdict in three months.

The association petitioned the court for an interpretation and repeal of the criminal and seditious libel law contained in the Public Order Act of 1965.

Under the current law a journalist, or anyone who writes and publishes a story can be arrested and jailed whether or not what they published or said was true. Several journalist have been arrested detained or jail under this act.

The SLAJ argued that this was detrimental to media freedom and freedom of expression. The SLAJ also argued that the Act contradicted the country’s constitution, which guarantees freedom of speech.

But the association is still awaiting a ruling on the matter, and the court’s delay, Fofana says, is unconstitutional.

"The court has still not given its verdict and this is a contravention of the 1991 Sierra Leone Constitution, which states that every court established under the constitution shall deliver its decision in writing not later than three months after the conclusion of the evidence and final addresses or arguments," said Fofana.

The SLAJ went as far as imposing a temporary media blackout on the judiciary in order to force the Supreme Court to rule.

But the association later dropped the blackout after the country’s President Earnest Bai Koroma promised judgment would be delivered in mid-September. But this is yet to happen.

Elwin Bailor, the Master and Registrar of the Courts of Sierra Leone told IPS that there is no problem or reasons why the court has not given a verdict up till now. Bailor refused to explain further.

When asked when the court will finally give its rulings, Bailor hesitantly said "soon, pretty soon," and ended the conversation. President Koroma is on record as saying that government was interested in reviewing the criminal libel law but could not do so while the matter is in court. "This is why I feel ashamed for the country’s highest court’s continued violation of the constitution by failing to give a ruling on the case," Fofana sighed. Journalists and other citizens all over the country are questioning the separation of powers in the government; after President Koroma promised the verdict would be delivered last month.

Many are arguing that this ability of the president’s office to force the court to rule smacks of executive control over the courts. They pointed out that it is unsatisfactory that the Supreme Court can only be moved into action by direct appeals to the president. Rosemarie Blake, the programme director for Society for Democratic Initiatives – a non-governmental organisation that focuses on freedom of information and expression – expressed similar sentiments. "This standoff is totally undermining the fairness and independence of the Supreme Court. It is also affecting the of work journalists, especially in reporting sensitive issues that borders around government officials." "It is hard not to look at this situation as a ploy by government to continue to suppress press freedom." Blake added. Fofana agreed saying that the current law allowed corruption to continue. "Journalists feel hounded by the existence of this law, which inhibits their freedom to checkmate public officials. So it is as much in the interest of (financial) donors as it is in the interest of Sierra Leoneans to get this law expunged and have the Freedom of Information Bill passed into law."

Blake said her organisation was also calling for the repeal of the seditious libel law and the passing of a Freedom of Information Bill.

Last year Human Rights Commission of Sierra Leone in its State of Human Rights report in of 2008 also recommended that Parliament should take immediate steps to repeal the seditious libel provisions in the Public Order Act, 1965 and enact the Freedom of Information Bill. The report had stated the current Act was still being used to control the media.

Inasmuch as the wrangling continues, Fofana’s hair keeps growing and only on the day the Supreme Court’s gives its ruling, will he set an appointment with the barber. How long that is nobody knows.

Excerpt:

By IPS Correspondents
KAMPALA, Sep 29 2009 (IPS)

In the wee hours of one Saturday morning, Mary Serumaga was woken up by a disturbing phone call. Her younger brother Robert Kalundi Serumaga had just been abducted by four unknown gun-wielding men the previous night.

He had been dragged by the belt and kicked. They even tried to undress him. They hit him to the ground until he fell unconscious. He was then whisked off into the night in the trunk of a Toyota saloon car.

For Mary, this sounded more like a scene from a movie rather than real life. And what could have Robert done that was so bad that he had to be treated that way, she asked herself. For all she knew, her brother is neither a politician nor criminal, but rather a writer, broadcaster and filmmaker. Mary was helpless.

"My first reaction was to pray for Divine Mercy. After that I was confident my brother would be delivered," Mary told IPS in an interview.

Journalist Robert Kalundi Serumaga was abducted on the night of September 11, after leaving a weekly television talk-show, Kibazo on Friday on Wava Broadcasting Service (WBS TV). His partner Mary Ibazo, two fellow panellists and show host Peter Kibazo witnessed the abduction.

The show had discussed the then on-going stand-off between the Ugandan government and the largest ethnic group, the Kingdom of Buganda which culminated into city riots that saw tens of people lose their lives and property worth 40,000 dollars were destroyed.

Serumaga, who allegedly belittled President Yoweri Museveni on the show that evening, blaming him for the riots, was detained at unknown locations in Kampala city over the night of Friday and Saturday morning. It was until his family raised concern over his whereabouts that Serumaga was later brought to the Central Police Station. He told his family he had been beaten, tortured and threats made to his life.

The trend of events has created a fresh round of fear for the future of press freedom in Uganda. Four radio stations have since been closed down, accused of fanning the riots and inciting violence.

The Kibazo on Friday show was also suspended indefinitely. Government also banned public forums commonly known as Ebimeeza that were usually broadcast live on radio stations. These shows discussed topical social, economic and political issues. One of the stations, the Catholic Radio Sapientia was later re-opened on condition that management dismissed three presenters.

The Uganda Journalist Association (UJA) condemned the events: "There was an overreaction on the part of the government and the Broadcasting Council. Our own investigation showed that while there could have been some mistakes on the part of some radio stations, government just chose improper channels of handling the matter," says Joshua Kyalimpa, President of the Association.

"The manner in which Serumaga was abducted and the excessive use of force by security forces was also uncalled for," he told IPS.

Four days after Serumaga’s arrest he appeared before the Kampala Magistrate’s Court and was charged with six counts of sedition. He was granted bail.

But Serumaga’s abduction and torture opened fresh wounds from the past for a family that spent a decade in exile for similar reasons. Their father, renowned playwright, actor, novelist and freedom fighter Robert Serumaga was similarly persecuted by Ugandan dictator President Idi Amin’s government and later murdered in 1980.

Serumaga’s family feel that the charges against him are part of a tragically familiar pattern of intimidation and repression they experienced over two decades ago. "My father was accused of spying. He used to travel a lot and it was suspected that he had contacts with the ‘enemy’ which were not true. His plays were topical. They talked about the injustices at that time," Mary tells IPS.

But this time around, Serumaga’s family are determined to fight the charges against him for the sake of freedom of expression for future generations in Uganda.

"It (the incident) makes me sad but it does not make me feel that we have to leave (the country). I think it makes me feel that we have to stand and fight. And I think I would like to join other people who are fighting injustice… So it is really motivates me to be brave and fight," Mary, a publisher, told IPS. Her brother was unable to comment because his case is currently in court.

Serumaga’s case is not unique. Uganda has a history of silencing independent journalists. For the past two decades, several media houses have been shut down for publishing or broadcasting information that the state deems prejudicial to national security. Several top ranking journalists are also in court battles with the state charged with different crimes including criminal libel, sedition and ‘promoting sectarianism.’

Just last week, two editors of Uganda's weekly news magazine, "The Independent" were arrested, charged with sedition and released on bail.

Managing editor Andrew Mujuni Mwenda and editor Charles Bichachi were taken to the police's Criminal Investigations Department headquarters in Kibuli and within minutes, taken to the Buganda Road Chief Magistrate's Court and charged with sedition.

Their charge stems from a cartoon the magazine published on August 21st this year, showing President Museveni seated in a chair ticking a list of things his party is doing ahead of the 2011 General Election. One of items on his list was the introduction of ghost voters on the voters' register after he re-appointed disputed members of the Electoral Commission.

This is the fourth case Mwenda, founder of the 21-month old "The Independent", faces in court. He is already charged with promoting sectarianism, sedition and incitement. He risks over 20 years in jail on conviction in all the cases.

"Minus the beatings and drama (of Serumaga), this was a typical Friday arrest that most journalists and others considered to be enemies of the State are routinely subjected to," says Nicholas Ssengooba, a newspaper columnist in Kampala.

Article 29 of the Uganda 1995 Constitution guarantees free speech and expression. In 1993, the State liberalised the airwaves and this saw the growth of a vibrant media industry with hundreds of FM stations broadcasting both in English and local languages.

There are also over 25 newspapers and over ten TV stations. However, observers argue that the media is not as free as it seems.

"The relationship between the media and the state is not a clear black and white situation. You have freedom on one hand and limitations on the other especially when you publish what (does) not please the authorities," says managing Editor of The Observer newspaper, James Tumusiime. He has been on police bond since 2006 on charges of ‘promoting sectarianism’.

However, draconian colonial media laws still being used today continue to suppress media freedom, rights activists say. These include sections of the Penal Code Act such as laws on sedition and criminal libel.

In June 1997, the Uganda Journalists Safety Committee brought two petitions in the constitutional court, challenging the law relating to the press and journalist as well as the sedition and criminal libel sections of the criminal code.

"We are opposing the sedition charges placed on Serumaga. This charge has already been challenged in the courts of law," Kyalimpa said. He said the UJA did not believe that there was a valid case against Serumaga because the law of sedition was questionable.

In June this year, four journalists from the Daily Monitor also filed notice that they would challenge the constitutionality of the criminal libel laws before the Supreme Court, the country's highest court.

In 2004, Mwenda, who was a political editor at the Daily Monitor successfully petitioned the Supreme Court to strike down the offense of "publishing false news."

"We are struggling with our pressures and we plan to expand on the space we have to practice to exercise our freedoms," The Observer’s Tumusiime says.

However, there is also fear that state intimidation is negatively impacting on freedom of expression and the media, creating fear among journalists. Some are even practicing self-censorship.

"The problem now comes in my story writing. Because there is tension in the media, I am prompted to leave out some of the stories that I feel may cause problems to both the radio station and me," said Rose Namale, a journalist with one of the closed stations, Radio Two.

"Although I know it is an objective story and I have my facts, I may be forced to put it aside. So in most cases, we have to write stories that are in favour of government," she explained.

Editors too are feeling the pinch: "Self-censorship always crosses your mind. I think it’s a matter of judgment. You must understand the environment within which you are. I would be lying to say that I am totally blind to anything," Tumusiime tells IPS.

And what does the trend of events tell about the state of press freedom in Uganda? "Well, it shows that the powers that be are afraid of the press and secondly it shows that a free media is part of service delivery… Media freedom is an essential part of that service delivery because you the media keep the issues in the public domain. Robert was released partly because the news had reached the internet and the world's media," said Mary Serumaga who has just published a book, The Service Delivery Framework.

Excerpt:

By Lansana Fofana
FREETOWN, Sep 28 2009 (IPS)

Sierra Leone's largest opposition party has taken the country's media monitoring body to court for banning its radio station.

The Independent Media Commission (IMC) banned the Sierra Leone Peoples' Party (SLPP) station, Radio Unity, in March. This followed political clashes between the SLPP supporters and the ruling All Peoples' Congress (APC). The APC’s station, Rising Sun, was also banned.

Just before the Rising Sun’s suspension, the station broadcast messages claiming the SLPP had mobilised former militia fighters at its Freetown office to unleash terror on city residents. The outcome of that broadcast was an attack on the SLPP at its Freetown office.

The SLPP and APC’s radio stations were taken off air for what the media watchdog says was "incitement and non-compliance with the media code of ethics".

The SLPP dismisses this charge, insisting the ban was politically motivated and had nothing to do with the reason given by the commission. The party also claims that the APC’s station was merely banned to justify the banning of Radio Unity. And it plans to fight its case in court.

"The IMC's reason for banning our radio station was purely political. The ruling party knew our station was a thorn in its flesh, and so it was in its interests to take such a decision. We are now in court to seek redress," claims Jacob Jusu Saffa, secretary-general of the SLPP.

He told IPS that the inclusion of the APC mouthpiece in the ban was simply to justify the action taken against Radio Unity. Saffa accuses the commission of colluding with the ruling party to stifle freedom of speech and expression, a charge the commission strongly denies.

The courts resume sittings at the end of December, after a three-month recess, and the SLPP application is expected to be heard then. It is expected to be followed with great interest, given that it is politically charged and also hinges on human rights, democracy and media freedom.

The two radio stations were established in the run-up to general and presidential elections in 2007, which brought the APC to power, after 15 years in opposition. The establishment of its station gave the APC a big advantage over the SLPP in the polls. Its daily broadcast, along with growing discontent among the electorate at the performance of the SLPP, won it significant votes.

But since the APC assumed office SLPP’s Radio Unity has taken centre-stage in criticising the government. Its attacks over the performance of APC officials often angered the ruling party. This attracted more listeners, and caused support for the APC to dwindle, just two years into the party's rule.

This is not to say the APC's own radio station did not have a wide audience. It became an efficient propaganda organ for the party, with its supporters using it to justify every action of the APC, and helping to further party unity.

Information and Communication minister Ibrahim Ben Kargbo told IPS the government had no hand in banning the two stations. "The decision to ban the two radio stations was purely that of the IMC. They have a clear mandate to regulate both the print and electronic media. We are not contesting their decision because we believe in their independence and neutrality," Kargbo said.

Kargbo supports the IMC decision, saying the two political stations were leading the country to the path of "national disunity, regional divide and creating a stumbling block to reconciliation".

But this view is not generally accepted by the wider public and media watchers. Many believe the ban on the two stations is nothing but the revoking of media freedom in the country.

Hadji Bah, a spokesperson for the rights monitoring group Democracy-Sierra Leone, opines: "We are totally opposed to the ban slammed on the two radio stations. It is unacceptable in this our fledgling democracy, and we will support all efforts to get the decision overturned."

Political commentator Joseph Johnson in the capital says; "I do not belong to any political party, but I believe the existence of the SLPP radio constantly kept the government on its toes, while giving voice to the ordinary people. The ban must be lifted, it negates the values of democracy."

Sierra Leone has had a chequered history in media freedom in recent years. A bloody 11-year civil war that ended in 2002, and successive military regimes, brought the media under serious censorship and practitioners were prosecuted or jailed.

There is also an obsolete law, the 1965 Public Order Act, which the Sierra Leone Association of Journalists (SLAJ) has been battling to get scrapped. It criminalises libel, and has seen many journalists thrown into jail. It is yet to be expunged from the statute books.

Like the campaign against the criminal libel laws, as contained in the Public Order Act, SLAJ is challenging the government to lift the ban on the two political radio stations. Its president, Umaru Fofana, told IPS the association was firmly behind the SLPP and independent advocates to see this done.

"We believe the banning of the two stations is ominous for media freedom and plurality. The IMC is authorised to monitor and regulate the media and not to ban them. This is a clear blow to freedom of speech and expression. The decision must be overturned."

With the closure of the two radio stations the government says an alternative has been found – the transformation of national broadcaster, the Sierra Leone Broadcasting Service, into a public corporation. It now becomes the Sierra Leone Broadcasting Corporation (SLBC), with corporate status, and it is claimed to be is autonomous and politically independent. The authorities say this will give equal voice to all shades of political opinion, and enhance free speech and expression. But both the SLAJ and the opposition disagree with the official position.

The SLAJ questions the idea that the director-general of SLBC will be appointed by the president, as this would result in the corporation boss being answerable to the president, and probably leaning towards the party in power. This was the case under the old SLPP, where the state broadcaster became mouthpiece for the government of the day, and the opposition was denied air time.

Given this climate of suspicion, civil society has stepped in with its own ideas of resolving the situation. Charles Mambu, chairman of a coalition of civil society organisations, says there is a need for the government, SLAJ, the IMC and the opposition to sit together and thrash out solutions.

"As rights monitors we think any attempt to muzzle the Press, either by proscription or imprisonment of journalists, is unacceptable. The media's role in informing and educating the people is vital, especially in this country where we are just awakening to democracy," Mambu says.

He suggests such a debate could be widened into a national consultative conference that would include other stakeholders in the democratic process.

Excerpt:

By Ebrima Sillah
DAKAR, Aug 6 2009 (IPS)

A high court judge in Gambia has convicted six Gambian journalists on charges of defamation and sedition.

The journalists have each been sentenced to a mandatory jail term of two years and must pay an additional fine of 250,000 dalassi – about 10,000 dollars – or serve a further two years in prison.

In his judgement, Justice Emmanuel Fagbenle said he was convinced that "the journalists conspired among themselves to defame the name of the president and the Gambia as a country when they communicated among themselves through emails and agreed to publish a press release as their reaction to a presidential press interview on the state radio and television."

The press release issued by the Gambian Press Union (GPU) was full of innuendo, the judge said, and accused the president and his government of involvement in the 2004 killing of Gambia’s investigative journalist and publisher of the Point newspaper, Deyda Hydara.

The statement in question was an angry response to comment made by Gambian president Yahya Jammeh on state television in June, when he said those alleging government was involved in Hydara's killing should ask the dead journalist about it.

The Gambia press union angrily reacted to the president’s statements. The press release in question said, "We find it most unfortunate that the champion for the promotion of Gambian and African culture, traditional norms and values, and someone, who claims to have total respect for religion in particular, Islam, President Jammeh finds it appropriate to ridicule and to speak ill of the dead. Such behaviour and countenance is most unreligious, un-cultural and certainly discredits traditional African norms and values!"

The judge said such a statement was meant to "ridicule the head of state and bring his person into disrepute among his colleagues and in the eyes of the public." He therefore convicted the accused as charged.

The GPU has reacted to the judgement as "outrageous and a mockery of justice in the Gambia."

The journalists' union says Justice Fagbenle has allowed himself to be used by the government "to further enforce its reign of terror".

A statement released immediately after the six were sentenced reads in part, "The pain and trauma inflicted on these gallant journalists and their families, the Union and its membership by the state authorities and a legal system geared towards bolstering tyranny and oppression is unimaginable. Today’s Court decision only confirms our claims that the Gambian judiciary is being used to bolster State-supported tyranny and oppression."

Three of the six journalists are GPU executives: secretary general Emil Touray; vice president and reporter for Foroyaa Sarata Jabbi Dibba – mother of a seven-month-old baby-, and treasurer Pa Modou Faal, treasurer. The others are Sam Sarr, editor of Foroyaa newspaper, Ebou Sawaneh, present editor of the Point newspaper, and Pap Saine, the Point's publisher, who suffers from a serious heart condition.

The GPU says it will immediately launch an appeal while simultaneously seeking redress through the African Commission on Human and People’s Rights and the ECOWAS Community Court of Justice.

The handful of independent media outlets in the Gambia have operated under a climate of heightened fear and self-censorship, particularly since the unsolved murder of Deyda Hydara and the 2006 arrest and subsequent disappearace of journalist Chief Ebrima Manneh.

Excerpt:

By Julio Godoy
BERLIN, Jul 27 2009 (IPS)

A project to create a Pan-African Media Observatory (PAMO), sponsored by the European Union in cooperation with the African union, has been rejected by numerous African journalist organisations.

In a joint declaration, thirty-two members and partners of the Canada-based International Freedom of Expression Exchange (IFEX), rejected the PAMO, arguing that, as it is presently conceived, it "cannot lead to… advancing media development in (the continent) and particularly in ensuring media freedom, independence and professionalism."

The declaration, whose signatories included media organisations from across Africa as well some African journalists in exile, was made in a letter addressed to Habiba Mejri-Cheikh, spokesperson for information and communication at the African Union Commission (AUC), and to Ian Barber, in charge of the Information and Communication at the European Commission (EC) Directorate General for Development and relations with African, Caribbean and Pacific States.

Implement existing mechanisms instead

The African journalists reject the project saying that its framework is founded on erroneous premises, ignores the reality of media repression by states, as well as previous milestones in the history of African journalism. They argue it is likely to crowd out existing independent initiatives in the region.

The PAMO "would ultimately create further problems for the media and the right of African peoples to independent sources of news and information for personal, professional and political decision-making," the statement reads.

Instead of creating a new body, the journalists affirm that the objective of ensuring media freedom, independence, pluralism and professionalism would be more likely achieved through clear recognition and a more conscientious implementation and enforcement of existing commitments

They urge African leaders to "make a clear commitment to effectively implement relevant existing African instruments and principles, including the Windhoek Declaration on Promoting an Independent and Pluralistic African Press; the African Charter on Broadcasting; the Declaration of Principles on Freedom of Expression in Africa; as well as the relevant provisions of international instruments such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights."

The real issue for the vast majority of African media players, the journalists say, is how to overcome the over-bearing and pervasive influence of the state: a look at Africa's recent past quickly reveals that goverments consistently seek to control the media for propaganda purposes – usually to prevent any real public scrutiny and to implement their agenda of self-perpetuation in power.

Flawed approach

The Pan-African Media Observatory project was first considered during a joint meeting of the AU and the EC, which took place in September 2008 in the Burkinabé capital, Ouagadougou.

Following the debates at the meeting, Jean Ping, chair of the AU, and Louis Michel, European commissioner for development and humanitarian aid, formulated the principles and practical lines of action for the creation of the observatory.

According to the official joint statement by the African Union and European Union, "The short-term objectives (of the project) include the drafting of a charter laying down the rights and responsibilities of the media, the development, implementation and updating of a pan-African portal for all media, which could be used to draw up a state of play on what exists to date while constituting a local and international showcase shared by all the media in Africa."

The joint declaration of the African journalist associations recalls that in many parts of Africa, media enterprises are sometimes shut down by government or security agents while scores of journalists and media workers as well as other citizens are regularly forced into exile, assassinated, https://www.ipsnews.net/africa/nota.asp?idnews=43480 and unfair trials and subjected to other forms of aggression for exercising their rights to free speech.

"This repression, more than anything else, undermines the ability and capacity of the media in the different countries to challenge established authority," the declaration says.

"Yet, the project document completely ignores this reality in outlining the context and background to the project. Not surprisingly, therefore, the Media Observatory project contains no concrete strategy for addressing this fundamental problem."

IPS contacted Bright Blewu, general secretary of the Ghana Journalists Association which is one of the signatories of the IFEX declaration. He said, "The PAMO project just looks like someone has just gotten up to promote an idea without consulting the stake-holders on the ground.

"The media climate in Africa is uneven and (it) would thus be difficult to know which standards are to be used," Blewu said. "The whole idea is a recipe for disjointed work and looks like an imposition."

Blewu complained that, "If you have not had any consultation, how would you set standards? If we are not careful, this would rather create further divisions on the continent. This is likely to be another of those media institutions to be used to siphon money from outside the continent."

Ghana has no "media observatory", Blewu pointed out, "but we do understand the concept which… entails a lot of work."

The Ethiopian National Journalists' Union was not a signatory of the IFEX declaration, but in an interview with IPS, ENJU president Anteneh Abraham supported the criticisms, referring specifically to the pervasive state influence upon and repression of the media.

"Though the initiative has good elements, it is fairly reasonable for us to be alarmed with the implications of some aspects of it (which) may lead to suppressing freedom of the press directly or indirectly," Abraham told IPS.

ENJU is concerned that given the track records of most African governments in relation to press freedom, some provisions of the PAMO, as presently conceived, "will embolden them to further suppress the media and harass journalists."

Abraham pointed out that the gravest concern stems from the phrase "the responsibilities of the media", used in the AU-EU formulation of project: "(This) is too broad to refer to issues of ethics and professionalism.

"Any provision that will open the door for further worsening of freedom of expression in Africa should be rejected. We suspect elements of the proposed PAMO may lead to that. Thus, we expect a serious consideration and revision in this regard," Anteneh said.

*Francis Kokutse in Accra and Omer Redi Ahmed in Addis Ababa contributed to this report.

Excerpt:

By Lansana Fofana
FREETOWN, Jul 15 2009 (IPS)

Two Sierra Leonean radio stations have been stripped of their licences. The national regulatory body, the Independent Media Commission (IMC), says the stations failed to comply with the country’s media code.

Turning down the volume: rival radio stations have been blamed for fanning political tensions with inflammatory broadcasts. Credit: Tugela Ridley/IRIN

A statement from the media regulator reads: “Notwithstanding the provisions of the Media Code of Practice and the IMC Act relevant to the suspension of radio stations, and despite efforts by the Commission to get the two political radio stations to comply with the media code, without success, the Commission is regrettably left with no option but to withdraw their licenses with immediate effect.”

The banning of the two radio stations follows their suspension in March by the country’s vice president, Samuel Sam Sumana, after a series of politically-motivated clashes between militants of the two parties that resulted in many injuries and destruction of property.

Sumana’s action received widespread condemnation, not only from the opposition but also from the Sierra Leone Association of Journalists (SLAJ) and rights monitors.

For instance, just before they were suspended, Rising Sun broadcast messages claiming the SLPP had mobilised former militia fighters at its Freetown office to unleash terror on city residents. The outcome of that broadcast was an attack on the SLPP office where people got injured and property destroyed.

Incidents like these explain why their ban is welcome among many people here.

“These were hate radio stations that were simply fanning the flames of tribalism, sectionalism and disunity in the country. They were pushing the country to the brink of another conflict which this country can ill-afford,” comments Michael George, a political analyst in the capital.

A truce between the groups of militants was brokered in April by the United Nations Peace-building Office. But the sanctioning of the radio stations now threatens to inflame an atmosphere that is still politically charged.

The president of SLAJ, Umaru Fofana, has condemned the ban, describing it as “lacking any moral justification.”

Fofana has resigned from the IMC’s Policy Committee in protest. “This ban is incompatible with my principle and belief in media pluralism and a free press,” he says.

It is curious to see that the journalists’ association is split on the ban on the two political radio stations. Officially, SLAJ is opposed to the ban, but some members say it was a wise decision by the IMC and support the move.

David Tam-Baryoh, a newspaper commentator and former publisher who is a member of SLAJ says the two stations had failed to comply with the media code of ethics and were grossly unprofessional.

“I have been a strong advocate of media freedom and pluralism but I think the two political radio stations had taken this too far. Their broadcasts were highly inflammatory and given that this country has just emerged from a brutal civil conflict, their existence would only plunge us into anarchy.”

The opposition SLPP, however, is more disturbed by the ban. Radio Unity had been very vocal in challenging policies of the ruling APC. Radio Unity repeatedly pointed out the ruling party’s failures and naming and shaming ministers and government officials it considered under-performers, much to the annoyance of the APC government.

Jacob Jusu Saffa, the secretary general of the SLPP, told IPS his party is contemplating taking legal action against the IMC seeking to overturn its decision.

“The IMC is only independent in name. It is acting on the orders of the ruling APC and is helping the ruling regime to stifle free speech and pluralism of the media. We in the SLPP consider this unacceptable and so we are going to court to challenge this action,” Saffa told IPS in Freetown.

As for the ruling APC party, its officials have remained largely silent. This is understandable because it has little to lose if the two stations are off air. After all, it controls the state-owned Sierra Leone Broadcasting Service and enjoys more air time than the opposition.

Frank Kargbo, the assistant national publicity secretary of the APC, says his party respects the decision of the IMC. “The IMC is the official media regulatory body and so if it decides to shut down the two political radio stations, we (APC) can only respect their decision because we believe they have done so in the interest of peace and national stability.”

The minister of information and communication, Ibrahim Ben Kargbo, denies the government is behind the ban imposed on the two political party radios.

“Our government believes in the freedom of the press. We have not thrown any journalist in jail, for publishing or airing his or her views, since we assumed office nearly two years ago, so for anyone to suggest that the government is behind the ban is totally untrue. At the same time, we respect the decision of the IMC, which is an independent body.”

While the IMC continues to endure the condemnation of media watchers and rights activists in the country, with some accusing it of collusion with the ruling party, Sierra Leoneans are waiting to see if the opposition SLPP will carry out its threat of going to court.

Excerpt:

By Busani Bafana
BULAWAYO, May 16 2009 (IPS)

While journalists welcomed a pledge by the government to reform the country’s closed media space, fears run deep over a horde of laws that continue to make Zimbabwe a media minefield where a ‘wrong’ story can land a journalist behind bars.

Last Monday the Zimbabwe Independent Editor, Vincent Kahiya and the News Editor, Constantine Chimakure, spent a night in police cells after the newspaper published “falsehoods” in a story that named Central Intelligence Officers and police officers in the alleged abduction and torture of MDC and other human rights activists last year. They were charged under the Criminal Codification and Reform Act.

Co-Minister of Home Affairs, Giles Mutsekwa, told the House of Assembly this week that the journalists were arrested without his knowledge and that of the Police Commissioner-General Augustine Chihuri. It is said the arrest was authorised by the Attorney General, Johannes Tomana.

“However, in this particular incident, I want the nation to know that my ministry was not involved in giving instructions to arrest. I was also disgusted that these journalists (Kahiya and Chimakure) have been arrested,” Mutsekwa told the House of Assembly in remarks carried in the media.

The criticism of the conduct by law enforcement agents comes on the heels of the arrest of the Chronicle Editor, Brezhnev Malaba and reporter, Nduduzo Tshuma who had criminal defamation charges levelled against them over a story about a grain scam.

The uncertain safety of journalists has prompted mixed views on the performance and delivery of the GNU in the last 100 days in regard to media reform. While government appears to have taken the right move in calling for dialogue with the media and making a pledge for reforms, journalists are waiting in anticipation and in fear that not much would change.

A recently national media conference in Kariba – at which government sought to solicit the input of journalists on media reforms – heard calls for the overhaul of laws such as the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act (AIPPA) which restrict media freedom.

“The main issues around media and freedom of expression in Zimbabwe remain the skewed, repressive media laws and abuse of the state media by Zanu PF and its functionaries,” wrote Rashweat Mukundu, a Programme Specialist with the MISA Regional Secretariat, in an opinion piece in the weekly, Zimbabwe Independent.

“Media reforms in Zimbabwe would therefore have to look first at the state policies in relation to media issues, especially how the state, through its arsenal of laws, has virtually destroyed the media in Zimbabwe – save for a few newspapers – harassed for exposing state abuse of citizens,”

Some journalists are convinced the media conference did not achieve much but the MDC was optimistic it would set the tone for media reforms.

“Though the conference was blighted by the justified absence of some key players in the media industry, we note with approval and satisfaction the readiness of the ministry of Media, Information and Publicity to play an active part in the changing times by partaking in a constructive and profitable process which should lead to a multiplicity of media players so that we give Zimbabweans the wide choices they deserve,” MDC Secretary for Information and Publicity, Nelson Chamisa, who is also the Minister for ICTs, said in a statement.

Zimbabwe Union of Journalists (ZUJ) Secretary General, Foster Dongozi, said government pledges are not the same as action.

“The GNU has done nothing in terms of reforming the media in line with Article 19 of the GPA,” Foster Dongozi, told IPS. “It shows government is not interested as we have a situation where journalists are still being arrested even during the Kariba conference.

“Media reform seems to be the last thing in the priorities of the GNU and we will continue talking about this with no concrete results. If anything the first 100 days of GNU have seen the escalation of repression against journalists and again what is frightening is that it is no longer the private media but even journalists from the state media are victims.”

Thanks to a catalogue of laws working as a journalist has become a risky profession in Zimbabwe. Some of the laws include the Broadcasting Services Act, Criminal Codification and Reform Act, Official Secrets Act and the Privileges, Immunities and Powers of Parliament Act which creates the offence of contempt of Parliament and journalists will be in contempt if they wilfully publish a false or perverted report of any debate or proceedings of Parliament among other issues.

The Interception of Communications Act allows government authorities and agencies to open post office mail and electronic mail as well as demand that internet service providers (I.S.P.s) provide details of such without seeking warrants from the courts.

The raft of laws that undermine press freedom has forced many journalists to work underground as freelancers or to leave Zimbabwe altogether. Fear runs deep in media that the press freedom is still not there because at the publication of an unacceptable story, journalist easily found themselves in jail.

Books detailing Public Order and Security Act, formerly LOMA which was inherited from Smith’s regime, are probably the most worn out of use. This Act has been used to cower, if not to silence political dissent, activists, artists, farmers and journalists.

Deputy Prime minister, Arthur Mutambara, told a public consultative meeting in Gweru this week that government was working on a bill to reform the media allowing the entry of other players.

“We are meeting as cabinet next Tuesday and I do not want to pre-empt things. You should expect to hear something in the near future,” Mutambara was quoted as saying.

MISA says it is time that government commits itself to media reform by doing away with the laws that make it difficult for journalists to do their job.

“The conference served to show nothing had changed because the intension to do something is not the same as doing it when the laws still restrict the freedom of the media” said MISA Zimbabwe Chapter Chairperson, Loughty Dube.

Veteran journalist, Charles Rukuni, told IPS that while the current situation on the application of the laws reflected badly on government and press relations, it was critical for the fraternity not to ignore professionalism at the time of calls for media reforms.

“In Zimbabwe there is need to get back to basics,” Rukuni said. “There in need to re-instil professionalism because some of the reports of the situation in Zimbabwe are not based on facts but perceptions. We are still not getting the two sides of the story. I think every journalist needs to go for retraining because we have been covering issues more from an emotional position rather than looking at the issues objectively.”

Excerpt:

By IPS Correspondents
GABORONE, May 13 2009 (IPS)

While the international theme for World Press Freedom Day was “Fostering Dialogue, Mutual Understanding and Reconciliation”, the Botswana government and the media seemed to take the opposite route – taking turns to snub each other’s calls for dialogue.

Journalists protest new media law requiring, among other things, registration and accreditation of journalists and an enforced right to reply. Credit: Ephraim Nsingo/IPS

After honouring his invitation and arriving at the event on time, all seemed to be on track that government spokesperson, Jeff Ramsay, would take part. And indeed, he was the first to take his place on the podium. But when it was his turn to speak, Ramsay shocked the audience by using the platform to merely state that he would no longer participate.

“Last month I willingly accepted an invitation from MISA-Botswana to participate in this panel. I did so in the context of government’s continued willingness to openly engage with stakeholders and the general public on issues surrounding the Media Practitioners Act, as passed by parliament last year,” Ramsay told the audience.

“It has, however, come to my attention that a legal notice relevant to tonight’s panel topic was received by the Attorney General’s Chambers yesterday (May 6), which was moreover authored by tonight’s moderator [Mr Batsho Nthoi]. Given these facts, as well as additional information that has also come to my attention over the last 24 hours, I have come to the inescapable conclusion that it would be inappropriate for me to take any further active part in these proceedings.”

The media lobby, stunned by Ramsay’s reaction to their registration of the statutory notice, has defended its actions.

“The step brings to substance the publishers resolution in March 2009 in which they resolved to take the legal route in their quest to have the law repealed,” reads a MISA statement.

“Among other issues, the notice challenges clauses of registration and accreditation of journalists, enforced Right to Reply, as well as its implications on the constitution of the country and its international commitments. The notice continues to call on the courts to declare the Act as invalid.”

Civil society activists outside the media have also been drawn into the drive to contest the MPA and its impact on access to information and freedom of expression.

“This law is basically draconian and is very limiting and will shut down the space for meaningful debate on key issues,” argued Diana Moswele, a policy advisor with the Botswana Network on Ethics, Law and HIV/Aids (BONELA).

South Africa-based media lawyer Lloyd Kuveya explained that the new law could impact negatively on Botswana’s international standing.

“What has happened has shocked many people who have always praised Botswana as a successful democracy.”

But not everyone supports a total rejection. Journalist Regis Maburutse of the Business Diary publication rounded on the media for boycotting debate on the MPA when it was still a Bill.

“The law was passed, and now we are crying foul. A militant stance will not work, we need to be diplomatic with the government because this is now law, and they can enforce it anytime.”

University of Botswana law academic, Mike Mothobi, has also advocated for a less confrontational stance. “We need to have a system of both self and statutory regulation. This is what in my view the new law seeks to achieve.”

Civil society and the media are being backed by the country’s main opposition party, the Botswana National Front (BNF). In a solidarity statement, BNF spokesperson, Moeti Mohwasa, accused the government of having “overplayed its hand to the extent of putting its palm on the mouths of the people” which he described as “an affront to democracy”. There is also unease with the MPA in the ranks of the ruling party.

After numerous standoffs over the MPA in 2008, President LT. Gen. Seretse Khama Ian Khama met a delegation of the Botswana Editors Forum on April 20. The parties seemed, for the first time since the enactment of the law, to draw closer to each other. A follow up meeting on May 6 appears to have been similarly conciliatory. But the legal action by publishers has evoked a new round in the tit-for-tat battle and has set the stage for a bruising battle ahead.

In an address to a protest march staged by journalists in the capital, Gabarone on May 9, the secretary general of the United Congregational Church of Southern Africa, Reverend Prince Dibeela, said it was “ironic” that the Botswana government, was an “outspoken critic” of Zimbabwe, yet it was “plagiarising their laws” and over regulating the country.

Excerpt:

By Busani Bafana
BULAWAYO, May 8 2009 (IPS)

Media organisations this week dug in their heels over boycotting a national media conference in the resort town of Kariba. State-owned media reported that the much-postponed conference finally opened on May 8, with information minister Webster Shamu lamenting the deep divisions within the media fraternity in Zimbabwe.

"We have all been divisive. Far from standing apart and above as an estate we wish and proclaim ourselves to be, we have been appendages to a squabbling first estate which we are supposed to watch and countervail," Shamu is reported as saying in Bulawayo's state-owned daily, the Chronicle.

The Media Alliance of Zimbabwe (MAZ), an umbrella group of media watchdogs and practitioners, is boycotting the summit over the detention of journalist Shadreck Andrisson Manyere, the MDC Director of Security Chris Dhlamini, and Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai's former aide Gandhi Mudzingwa, who are facing charges of terrorism, insurgence, banditry and sabotage.

The trio are among 18 activists whose bail conditions were first revoked, and then restored earlier this week, but Manyere and the others have remained under police guard in hospital. Manyere’s bail hearing was scheduled for Friday morning. The trio’s cases have been separate from others as they are in hospital nursing injuries from the torture in prison.

The 18 activists, including Manyere who are facing terrorism charges are, through their lawyers, seeking US$7 million in compensation from the Ministry of Home Affairs for physical and psychological trauma suffered during their "unlawful" detention.

The re-arrest and re-detention of Manyere and other human rights activists triggered wide condemnation in Zimbabwe and led the Media Alliance of Zimbabwe, Media Institute of Southern Africa (Zimbabwe Chapter) and the Zimbabwe Union of Journalists) (ZUJ) to boycott the media conference convened to review Zimbabwe's media environment and policies with a view to advising the inclusive government on a new media policy.

Government convened the media conference as an outcome from the Victoria Falls cabinet retreat in March this year which agreed that the unity government should speedily work to restore a conducive media environment in Zimbabwe through policy reforms. Government’s position on the conference has been to solicit the input of stakeholders on the way forward with media reform.

Media, Information and Publicity Deputy Minister, Jameson Timba, said government wanted the conference to give guidelines on opening up both the print media and the airwaves under the existing laws and secondly to review the existing media policy and laws. He said the current laws as amended through the negotiation of the three political parties will in the interim allow for the registration of new media houses – including foreign ones – by the Media Commission provided for under Amendment 19 of the Constitution of Zimbabwe.

However, the government-designated line up of speakers and the choice of topics has drawn criticism from media stakeholders. The 20 thematic topics range from media freedom and regulation, media and electioneering, unionism in a divided media industry and the role of ghost sites and blogs.

Media organisations under the MAZ banner argue that they were not consulted in the preparation of the conference. Instead they have been invited to a platform whose contents and speakers are already established.

They have taken offence at the invitation of people such as chairman of the defunct Media and Information Commission (MIC), Dr. Tafataona Mahoso, and former Information Minister Jonathan Moyo, who they say represent a ‘media Taliban’ that shut down the media and press freedom in Zimbabwe.

Moyo, who is now the member of parliament for the Tsholotsho constituency will speak on "Media Policy-making in Zimbabwe – a historical perspective". The Attorney-General Johannes Tomana will address the meeting on "Freedom of Expression and the Rights of the State".

According to media organisations, government should walk the talk when it comes to media reform as the continued arrest and harassment of journalists speaks volumes about the absence of press freedom in Zimbabwe.

Under the GPA, it was agreed that steps should be taken to ensure that the public media provides balanced and fair coverage to all political parties and that both the private and public media refrain from using abusive language that may incite hostility, political intolerance and ethnic hatred or that unfairly undermines political parties and other organisations.

The media in Zimbabwe has proposed self-regulation which would meet the expectations of all stakeholders. In 2007, the media set up the Voluntary Media Council of Zimbabwe (VMCZ) to promote self-regulation but it never got the opportunity to prove itself. Government was not committed as it feared that there would be breach of media ethics and hence it enforced the raft of media laws. The VMCZ has drawn up a code of conduct for journalists supported by sound editorial guidelines.

MISA Zimbabwe Chapter Chairman Loughty Dube confirmed to IPS that his organisation was not attending the conference, while the ZUJ Secretary General, Forster Dongozi, told IPS that it looked certain that ZUJ will not be participating at the national conference, pending the outcome of Manyere’s bail application.

"The conference should have been cancelled. Although engagement is important, as the conference goes on there should be knowledge that the next meeting should not be planned in a government office but should be inclusive in nature and avoid the hiccups where the media become the invitees," Dongozi said.

The Media Alliance of Zimbabwe welcomed the release of Mukoko and other political prisoners but expressed concern about Manyere’s continued detention which it said undermined the letter and spirit of the Global Political Agreement and was against terms relating to media law reform

"Such action by the authorities suggests a lack of political will to adhere to the terms of the GPA, especially as regards the restoration of a political environment that is democratic and respectful of the fair and just execution of the judicial process that is cognizant of the need to ensure the security and freedom of all Zimbabweans," reads an MAZ statement. "In the circumstances, MAZ has no option but to stand by its earlier decision not to participate in the government organized All Media Stakeholders' conference unless he is released in time for delegates to travel to the conference's Kariba venue."

"We are waiting to hear the outcome of court hearing and we appreciate that they have released 13 others but one of those held at present is a journalist and it would therefore be inappropriate to head off to the conference just because others have been released," Iden Wetherell, the ZNEF chair told IPS.

*(Adds details of media practitioners' reasons for boycott, comment from opening of summit. First moved May 7, 2009.)

Excerpt:

By Joyce Mulama
NAIROBI, May 2 2009 (IPS)

Four years ago, a furious Lucy Kibaki, Kenya’s First Lady, marked World Press Freedom Day by storming the offices of leading independent publisher the Nation Group with her entourage.”

David Makali Credit:

She was outraged by the group’s portrayal of her dispute with a neighbour and seized phones and laptops in a demonstration of the low respect one powerful figure has for a free press.

Today the situation is little better. In Kenya and Uganda which are considered heavyweights in the region, continued backsliding in press freedom has threatened their democratic gains.

David Makali, chairman of the East Africa Editors’ Forum says, conditions in these two states set the pace for how other countries in the region handle press freedom. Hopes for a free press have been deflated with the continued existence of repressive media laws and heightened attacks on media outlets in East Africa.

In a candid interview with IPS, Makali shared his thoughts on trends of press freedom in the region.

IPS: How would you rank press freedom in East Africa? David Makali: I think East Africa is not very well-ranked in terms of press freedom. On a scale of A to E, probably East Africa is at C; not the worst, but not the best.

I think there is moderate respect for press freedom but that respect is not founded on any solid legal or political foundation. It is dicey and the media is vulnerable to sporadic attacks from predators such as politicians, private gangs as well as commercial forces.

These threats don’t seem to be relenting. They are actually getting worse, because the political systems in all these countries are not geared towards protecting press freedom as a fundamental policy.

As a matter of practice, governments in this region do not hold press freedom as one of the cardinal rights or freedoms that they need to guarantee for society.

IPS: What other factors have jeopardised media operations? DM: I am most worried about the corporate and commercial impact on the freedom and independence of the media. It is not visible but it probably the most dangerous threat that we have. It has taken over the position of government as a threat to press freedom.

Because of competition and the whole struggle for survival by media enterprises, they become susceptible to manipulation by corporate entities, and the integrity of the news can no longer be ascertained. You do not know whether what you are reading is motivated by corporate and commercial interests or the genuine public interest.

Then of course there is the second threat to press freedom which comes from non-state actors; either private citizens working in cahoots [with the state] or [government agents] disguising themselves as private but attacking the press, media houses and individual journalists anonymously.

We see that in Tanzania, for example, the attacks on MwanaHalisi [a weekly publication which was banned for three months in October 2008] which was unprecedented.

Museveni did the same in Uganda when he banned the Monitor just like that. We have seen [private television station] NTV- Uganda being put off-air for indefinite periods; attacks on the Red Pepper, attacks on the New Vision journalists [two independent Ugandan newspapers].

In Kenya we remember the hooded guys who attacked the Standard Group [a media house comprising newspapers and a television station], acting on the guise of private people aggrieved by the content of media houses, but in fact I think they are accomplices of the state.

IPS: What is your take on media laws in the region; is the situation getting better? DM: No. They are the obvious government threats to press freedom by virtue of their oppressive nature, and are being enforced on the media across the region to protect political interests or to prevent uncomfortable truths from being published.

IPS: The theme of this year’s World Press Freedom day is the “Potential of the media in fostering dialogue, mutual understanding and reconciliation”. How can the media be effective given the environment under which it operates in the region? DM: First of all, for people to begin demanding any responsibility from the press either in terms of achieving reconciliation, fostering unity, there has to be regard and respect for press freedom by governments. Governments cannot want to have their cake and eat it or societies for that matter cannot want to have their cake and eat it.

They must first give to the press what is theirs; freedom to practice, and then begin demanding of it certain obligations to serve the society in which they operate. If that can be guaranteed, then I think the media has a significant role to play because as we have noticed when there is conflict, the media cannot thrive.

IPS: Authorities have justified their actions by accusing the media of exercising irresponsible journalism. What are your thoughts? DM: There can be no press freedom without responsibility.

It is reciprocal and it is the bare minimum that should be expected of journalists that if you are given certain privileges, you need to reciprocate in terms of how you practice.

And journalists, media owners and practitioners need to give back to society ethical products that promote social harmony, development and peace.

It has come across since the 2007 election in Kenya that radio stations, especially broadcast media, incited ethnic disharmony. The jury is still out because no clear-cut evidence has been provided to link particular broadcasts with particular flare-ups or crimes. But the assumption is that the general conduct of the media encouraged ethnic disharmony.

I think the media in this country, in this region, need to reflect on their role and see how they can become agents of positive change and aggregate conflict rather than maximize on differences.

That calls for responsible editorship. So perhaps it is time to begin asking who are the decision makers within our media outlets, and there has not been sufficient regard of consideration given to qualifications of people who are in that crucial gate-keeping role.

From where I sit, there is clearly need to consider strongly some benchmarks for the gate-keeper role within all stations, all media outlets that are coming up, especially the vernacular stations where people have been appointed more for their ability, knowledge of folk-lore and ability to communicate in their vernacular languages than their capacity for ethical decision-making and editorial judgment.

That is the challenge that faces our media which must be addressed through thematic training and exposure to the code of ethics of journalism, so that we can have a reduction in the number of the incidences of unethical decisions and unethical broadcasts and content going out.

Excerpt:

By Kelvin Kachingwe
LUSAKA, Mar 30 2009 (IPS)

After almost a decade of fighting for self-regulation, the Zambian media may finally have its wishes entrenched with constitutional protection.

The new draft constitution of the country prohibits legislation that would undermine media freedom and administrative behaviour that could hinder the development of the sector.

Press Association of Zambia (PAZA) vice-president Amos Chanda told IPS that separate provision is made that “categorically” safeguards the freedom of the media while clauses in the current constitution on freedom of expression are also retained.

Just fewer than 500 representatives from all sectors of the Zambian population who are working in 11 commissions are drafting the new constitution. Changes being considered include a new electoral system, an independent electoral council and greater control by parliament over the government. The National Constitutional Conference (NCC) will convene a plenary discussion on its proposals in May and is expected to hold a referendum on a final draft by December.

“The NCC is to date the greatest window of opportunity for the country to begin repealing, amending and enacting progressive legislation in tune with credentials of a rather robust democracy that Zambia has become in the last 18 years of plural politics,” said Chanda.

PAZA is elated that over 90 percent of its submissions to the Constitution Review Commission are reflected in the draft document.

But there are still parliamentarians on both sides of the political divide who would prefer for the media to be regulated by the state. The calls intensified in the wake of accusations of media bias during the last Presidential election.

The opposition United Party for National Development MP, Brian Ntundu, told parliament that some media organisations are disregarding journalistic ethics and had reduced them to campaign managers for some parties.

“Clearly, the media has failed to regulate itself, and I’ve got difficulties defending them,” the United Liberal Party’s Sakwiba Sikota lamented.

Information and Broadcasting Services Minister, Ronnie Shikapwasha, also railed against the media. “Even some people that supported self-regulation of the media can no longer do that because in the last few months, some media organisations have shown that they cannot regulate themselves.”

In a joint statement, PAZA, the Zambia Media Women Association (ZAMWA), Zambia Union of Journalists (ZUJ), the Press Freedom Committee (PFC) of The Post and Media Institute of Southern Africa (MISA), lashed out at what they see as attempts to muzzle the media.

“We condemn the calls for such regulation because media freedom and the public’s right to know, which is the cornerstone of any vibrant democracy, cannot be regulated through a statutory body as this will stifle freedom of the media, an important platform on which the Zambian people express themselves,” the statement read.

The journalists have urged politicians to use the channels provided for in the Electoral Code of Conduct to address their allegations of unfair treatment or coverage during the Presidential poll. Parties are entitled to lodge complaints in writing with the Electoral Commission of Zambia and could request offending media to correct misrepresentations in their coverage.

The debate on the media even cracked a mention in President Rupiah Banda’s opening of parliament address this year. He expressed his administration’s preference for media self-regulation and pushed for all media houses to affiliate to the non-statutory, self-regulatory Media Ethics Commission of Zambia (MECOZ) that was formed in 2002.

MISA Zambia has appealed to media institutions to heed President Banda’s call for a single media regulatory body. But The Post, the leading privately owned newspaper in the country, has received President Banda’s comments with suspicion.

“There is no way the same government can say it supports media self-regulation and at the same time force media houses to join MECOZ. Forcing the media to join MECOZ amounts to regulation. The moment threats are applied it becomes regulation. So for us, we’ll not do that,” Post news editor Chansa Kabwela told IPS.

“We don’t need to belong to MECOZ because we always regulate ourselves on a daily basis. We get a lot of information, stories and even letters and we try as much as possible to pick from what we have and that in itself is regulation. If the government is truly committed to self-regulation by the media, then joining MECOZ should be voluntary.”

MISA chairperson, Henry Kabwe, bemoaned the “disunity” in media ranks that he ascribed to the “lack of common ground” on ethics and professionalism. He said the current state of affairs was sending the “wrong messages” to Zambians who rely on the media for credible and accurate information.

Kabwe said that MISA is “disheartened” that citizens had “little knowledge” of the ethical codes on which the media operates. “This has made it hard for the ordinary citizen to seek redress… because they do not know what to base their complaint on.”

Excerpt:

By Lansana Fofana
FREETOWN, Mar 19 2009 (IPS)

Sierra Leone’s vice president, Samuel Sam-Sumana, on Mar. 13 ordered an indefinite ban on radio stations owned by the ruling All Peoples Congress (APC) and its main rival, the Sierra Leone Peoples Party (SLPP).

This comes in the wake of a wave of politically-motivated clashes between rival party militants across the country these past two weeks. The situation has deteriorated so much so that by-elections in Gendema, a remote town bordering Liberia, had to be put on hold.

The APC-owned Rising Sun FM 88.8 and opposition-controlled Radio Unity 94.9 were registered in the run up to the 2007 elections. There’s been no let up in the volume of inciting messages being broadcast since they first went on air.

“This is assuming frightening proportions,” Information and Communication minister, Ibrahim Ben Kargbo, told IPS. “We cannot allow this to continue because it will destroy the hard-earned peace and stability we now enjoy.”

Many pundits believe the radio wars helped to bring the APC to power after 15 years in the political wilderness. During the 2007 election campaign the radio platform was used to mobilise grassroots support for the APC and to discredit the then ruling SLPP. Now the opposition is employing the same strategy to stage a political comeback.

“I don’t see anything wrong with our broadcasts. We are simply putting the APC government on its toes and creating awareness among our members,” claimed Jacob Jusu-Saffa, the secretary general of the SLPP.

But the ruling party has accused the opposition station of preaching hatred, tribalism and violence.

“One of their programmes, Inside the Papers, is simply used to ridicule anything meaningful that the government does. This, in no small measure, drives away investors and creates a platform for civil unrest,” charged Victor Foe, the APC secretary general.

Even before the banning of the two radio stations, there have been public calls, especially from ruling party sympathisers, to take them off the air. Comparisons have been drawn with the role that radio stations played in the Rwandan genocide.

But the Sierra Leone Association of Journalists (SLAJ) has been quick to condemn the clampdown.

“It is not the job of the vice president to ban radio stations. We have the Independent Media Commission (IMC), which is the regulatory body for the media, and so we condemn the action and call for an unconditional lifting of the ban,” said SLAJ president, Umaru Fofana.

He described it as a bad omen for the country’s fledgling democracy and an attempt to muzzle freedom of speech. The journalist body has indicated that it will be engaging the authorities to lift the ban.

The constitution of the IMC allows for a ban to be slapped on a media house only after a thorough investigation of alleged misconduct and breach of the media code of ethics. It makes provision for the government to ban a radio station in the case of a national emergency or a state of war but it does require that the IMC do a thorough investigation before such action is taken.

Civil society too has joined the fray. Charles Mambu of the Coalition of Civil Society Organisations has also condemned the ban.

“This move to ban the two radio stations is a reversal of our democratic gains. It is unjustified and unacceptable. We will press for an urgent reversal of that decision.”

This is the second time that Radio Unity has been taken off air. Last year the government claimed the opposition mouthpiece was not properly registered and temporarily closed it down. Its headquarters have also been vandalised. Radio Unity resumed broadcasts after the government caved in to pressure from civil society groups and the media fraternity.

Notwithstanding the democratic posture of rights activists and civil society, there are many who support the move to shut down the two radio stations.

Margaret Sesay who lost five members of her family during the war opined: “I don’t want another war. Already, I am an impoverished widow looking after four children. A fresh war would only kill me.”

Political analyst, George Thomas, too expressed fears of a return to civil war. “If these two radio stations are not banned, the country may well slip back to chaos and civil strife. There is no doubt that they are calling their supporters to arms and are helping to split the country apart.”

Sierra Leone fought a bloody civil war from 1991 to 2002 leaving the country’s infrastructure in ruins and the economy paralysed. More than 50,000 people were killed, thousands amputated and a quarter million of the population displaced. The process of reconciliation has been painfully slow and difficult and the radio wars have exacerbated tensions in a country that is still highly polarised along ethnic and regional lines.

Excerpt:

By Francis Kokutse
ACCRA, Mar 6 2009 (IPS)

There has been a clamour to tighten up oversight and regulation of Ghana’s broadcasters from unusual bedfellows – the state-sponsored National Media Commission (NMC) and the Ghana Journalists” Association (GJA). The bodies have, in separate initiatives, slammed attempts to “privatise” the state-owned Ghana Broadcasting Corporation (GBC) and have railed against the practices of commercial radio stations.

The trigger for this rare convergence was “unsubstantiated” news reports by two commercial stations, Radio Gold and Oman FM, that publicly backed rival political parties in the run up to the Dec. 7, 2008 national elections.

“These two stations nearly plunged the country into serious trouble with stories that were not substantiated and openly accused personalities of offences that are yet to be substantiated,” explained Bright Blewu, general secretary of the GJA.

“The way some of these commercial stations work has gradually produced a recipe for chaos in their handling of what they spew out to the listening public.” When the country’s airwaves were liberalised by the National Communications Authority over a decade ago, 130 commercial broadcasting organisations received licenses to operate in the country. It was widely hailed by Ghanaians of every stripe as evidence of the country’s growing democratic tradition.

“The whole spectrum of commercial broadcasting has become a jungle and the award of frequencies has come to serve the political interest of some politicians,” Blewu complained.

The election broadcast controversy, according to the journalist body, has exposed the need for a “proper” broadcast framework that would distinguish the public broadcaster from commercial services that “considered profit before the national interest”.

The GBC started out as a single station called Radio Zoy in 1939 under colonial rule. It now has one television channel with a national footprint and operates eleven regional radio stations that broadcast in six languages with coverage across the country.

“The GJA owes it as a duty to Ghanaians to ensure that the GBC is saved to provide a platform that would hold the country together,” Blewu told IPS.

“We want to see a broadcasting service that would be for the benefit of the people and which would not be based purely on commercial considerations. This means that news and programming content should not compete with adverts for airtime.”

Officials at the national broadcaster have hit back at their detractors, blaming the unregulated broadcast environment and scant government funding as some of the constraints to producing quality content.

“Currently we are forced to compete for advertisers with commercial radio stations and this has stifled our ability to get the necessary funding to improve our services, our programming and getting more and better equipment,” one official explained. Privatisation “has its good sides,” retort officials of the GBC who spoke to IPS on condition of anonymity. “It would make the organisation more flexible and businesslike,” they claim.

But the journalist body has found an ally in the government funded NMC that has resisted calls to “privatise” the public broadcaster.

“When the former minister for public sector reform tried to privatise the GBC in 2007, we wrote to the board of directors of the corporation not to deal with the ministry on the subject since we have oversight responsibility,” maintained George Sarpong, the NMC’s executive secretary. He said the entire board was removed for ignoring the Commission’s advisory and has warned his staff that a similar fate would befall them if they “assist in the privatisation of the GBC”.

The NMC was set up under the constitution to oversee the operations of the GBC and other media activities in the country. In 1992, the NMC took the government to court for meddling in the appointment process of a director general for the GBC.

“We also resisted further attempts by former President [John] Kufuor’s government to control the GBC and as a result, the NMC has had to suffer from a lack of funding,” said Sarpong. He remains resolute though and told IPS that the Commission “Believes it is right to suffer than to go along with government.”

Sustained funding of the national broadcaster and rules and regulations to guide broadcast operations emerged as key findings of a nationwide public survey conducted last year by the GJA in partnership with the development agency, Friedrich Ebert Stiftung. “During our rounds civil society has come to see the need for the GBC to play a serious role to integrate the country,” said Blewu.

“We have even suggested that a tax on mobile telephone operators be used to finance the operations of the GBC. Currently they rely on television license fees, which not many people pay anyway as well as government funding which has become inadequate.”

The report on their study to gauge public opinion on the broadcast sector has been presented to the minister of information.

Excerpt:

By IPS Correspondents
GABORONE, Feb 28 2009 (IPS)

There is growing dissent in the ruling Botswana Democratic Party (BDP) over laws that enable the government to regulate the media. Member of parliament, Keletso Rakhudu, broke ranks with his party by publicly criticising the Media Practitioner’s Act as an "assault" on the "fundamentals" and "undermining" free and independent media. He claims a number of his colleagues shared his dismay but were fearful of speaking out.

"I am bound to accept the majority decision but I believe that government has no business regulating the media. Part regulation or weak regulation is untidy. The fervour with which the Bill was embraced creates the impression that we have an ulterior motive," Rakhudu, the MP for Gaborone North told IPS.

Referring to Botswana's minister of communications, science and technology, Pelonomi Venson-Moitoi, Rakhudu said, "The Minister was emotionally charged. It was the Bill or nothing. But we wanted her to listen to others nationally and internationally to reflect and introspect why she was receiving so much resistance. She agreed to put the Bill in abeyance to allow further consultation."

The MP said that he was out of the country when the Bill was passed without further debate in parliament on Dec. 10.

"If the media is less than fair or honest then I believe there are ample avenues to address that. I believe that self-regulation of the media is part of the democratic dispensation of Botswana."

And there’s support for this view from citizens. An Afro Barometer survey on press freedom conducted by the University of Botswana in October 2008 reveals that 80 percent of Batswana are in favour of the news media reporting stories as "they see fit".

"These figures confirm that a large majority of Batswana support the view that the media are an important means for making sure that their leaders are held accountable," explained Mogopodi Lekorwe, a senior lecturer in the department of political and administrative studies at the university.

"In the last few months there seems to be increasing indicators of growing intolerance of free speech, such as political parties clamping down on free-speaking members and government coming down hard on critical press. The ruling BDP has institutionalised its parliamentary caucus such that its decisions are binding on its members of parliament, irrespective of how their constituents feel on the matter," Lekorwe said.

The preliminary results of the survey were released on Feb. 16.

The Media Practitioner’s Act, which sailed through parliament on Dec. 10, 2008, seems to fit the bill of this growing intolerance. Opposition politicians walked out of parliament in protest at the refusal of the ruling party to allow further debate on the law.

It empowers a state-appointed Media Council to assume a similar role to that of a court. It can impose penalties of more than $600 and prison terms not exceeding three years for transgressions.

"It is a very repressive law because one cannot practice journalism in Botswana without the consent of the Media Council, whose executive committee excludes media practitioners, publishers or anybody with an interest in the media from its decision making structures," said Thapelo Ndlovu the Botswana director of the Media Institute of Southern Africa (MISA).

He claims the minister is on the "warpath" against MISA because of their opposition to the media laws.

"It shows her low regard for civil society and dissenting views. She wants everyone to toe the line. The minister insists that she wants publishers to go and register with the Media Council. If they are not forthcoming she says she will choose her own Media Council. This confirms long held fears that political involvement in running the Media Council is designed to control media."

Ndlovu said they are weighing up their legal options and will mobilise public support through newspaper adverts, radio interviews and workshops. The government is however contemptuous of criticism.

"The express purpose of the Media Practitioner’s Act is to establish a Media Council whose objectives are to preserve media freedom, uphold standards of professional conduct and promote good ethical standards and discipline among media practitioners," said Dr Jeff Ramsay, presidential spokesperson.

"In March 2003 the Press Council of Botswana a non-statutory body itself agreed at a meeting of the Media Advisory Council to engage in a process that could strengthen its mandate through legislative recognition."

Not so is the rebuke from publishers who maintain that they were not consulted. "That is why the minister ultimately postponed the debate on the Bill – to consult stakeholders," said Clara Olsen, managing editor of the Botswana Gazette.

Olsen said the law would lead to self-censorship, journalism would be rendered an unattractive, even dangerous career; investigations would be practically impossible and officials will be even less likely to grant interviews or comment on issues. "It is the government’s and parliament’s prerogative to pass laws. If a law is bad we shall campaign for it to be repealed," said Olsen.

Excerpt: