Maravi

Who do they represent?

Who do they represent?
Written by Editor

It is clear that the greatest danger to the establishment of a free and plural media in this country lurks in the insidious encroachment by men and women of zeal, seemingly well-meaning but without understanding. If anyone had any doubt about what type of media council Sr Rose Nyondo and her friends are seeking, her statement to the parliamentary committee on information and broadcasting on Tuesday should leave them without any doubt that they are seeking a statutory regulation of the media and not self-regulation, as they claim.

Sr Nyondo, the chairperson of the Media Council of Zambia (MECOZ), made it very clear that they want to licence the practice of journalism in this country. They want to give themselves the powers to licence who covers elections in this country.

It seems they want MECOZ to have similar powers to that of the Law Association of Zambia, a statutory body.

We have serious difficulties with their approach because journalism is not just a profession. It is the exercise by occupation of the right to free expression available to every citizen. And that right, being available to all, cannot in principle be withdrawn from a few by any system of licensing or professional registration by Sr Nyondo and her friends, but can be restricted and confined by rules of law that apply to all who take or are afforded the opportunity to exercise the right by speaking or writing in public. There are today in Zambia a myriad of rules that impinge upon the right to present facts and opinions and pictures to the public.

The statutory controls that MECOZ is championing, albeit in a disguised form, would undermine the freedom of the press and would not be so successful in raising standards.

It is clear to us that MECOZ has joined forces with the enemies of press freedom, and especially of The Post. There is nothing in what the representatives of MECOZ say that in any way purports to be defending press freedom. What Sr Nyondo and her friends have done is to join hands with the worst elements in our politics and have a joint assault on press freedom in this country. And because they are working with the politicians who control the legislative processes in this country, they will achieve their goal of establishing a statutory media council directly or indirectly.

Theirs is really a strange media council – a licensing media council. They should just openly constitute themselves as one of the departments under the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting.

We are, and we will always be, for self-regulation. But our membership of any body that is involved in self-regulation will be on a voluntary basis, unless it is a statutory requirement for us to join it. We are not the makers of laws in this country, that is a preserve of our legislators. We are law-abiding citizens and we will respect any law that comes from our Parliament whether we agree with it or not.

And we will use all legal channels available to us to challenge such laws, whatever it takes. We will fight such laws in our courts of law under judicial review if they are in conflict with our country’s Constitution. And this crop of politicians will certainly not be the last one. New and probably better representatives will one day emerge among the ranks of our people to change things. We are revolutionaries who know how to fight for just causes without tiring. We have got patience and we know how to wait. We think we are defending certain principles that are of tremendous value at a time of confusion and opportunism in our country, a time when many people are feathering their own nests.

Sr Nyondo and her friends can have their day with the support of the most reactionary of our politicians, the most anti-press freedom elements in our politics and Parliament. This doesn’t mean it will be eternal – far from it, for the line they have taken, the things they are defending are beset by all kinds of contradictions. But this is the time we are in, and we think that, right now, the preservation of values is of decisive importance for us and for all progressives and true democrats in our country – all who want the best for our people and who cherish the noblest sentiments. Preserving those values is of unquestionable importance.

We have a proud record and reputation of fighting for press freedom the world over. Our enemies choke with envy over that. None of these characters masquerading as champions of so-called media ethics can match our record of fighting for and defending press freedom and everything that is right.

No matter what happens, other times will come. Right now, we are in the midst of a huge reactionary wave; later, a huge progressive wave, will come again. That is for certain. This is the reactionary high water mark; with or without us, another progressive wave will sweep our country and its media. And when we say “progressive”, we are referring to goals and purposes, not the form in which those ideas are propagated. Just as the reactionary ideas of MECOZ and the politicians who support them are strong in government and among some parliamentarians, the time will come when progressive, democratic, fair ideas will prevail – whether or not we are here. There is no doubt that there is an onslaught from all angles, including from MECOZ, on The Post. Therefore, even though we are a solitary newspaper, the very fact that we exist at all is of great value. If we defend this solitary newspaper with everything that we have, that will be of great value, too. If we stand firm, come what may, that will be of great value. If we win, as we unquestionably would because it would be impossible for MECOZ and the politicians who are supporting them to move this country backward politically, and more so in terms of press freedom, that would be of great value for the ideas, the principles and the cause that we are defending. Nobody can take that away from us – that’s in our own hands, no one else’s.

Therefore, we think that what we are doing is of great importance for the future of press freedom in this country, but it doesn’t make us believe that the future of press freedom in this country is entirely dependent on us. It gives us great encouragement to know that we are defending that future and that we are a symbol of that future and of those principles for a country filled with people who are hungry, suffering, marginalised and politically counting for nothing.

We have a clear, precise idea of our role, and all of those factors stimulate and encourage us in our work to promote and defend press freedom. That is the link between what we are doing and what we are ready to do, on the one hand, and the future, on the other.

And it will be of great help if Sr Nyondo and her friends could open their hearts and pay attention to the advice given by Gerald Mwale who says: “…only a fully free media can be fully responsible. Self-regulation and the promotion of quality journalism are among important safeguards of media freedom and even media power…media self-regulation must lie at the heart of the Media Council of Zambia if it is to win the confidence of both journalists and members of the public. The media needs to be convinced that subscribing to the Media Council of Zambia is for their own good.”

There is need for Sr Nyondo and her friends to learn something from the objectives, organisation and operations of the Australian Media Council. Very few journalists, including ourselves, would be opposed to a media council that is constituted and operates on similar lines as the Australian Media Council which seeks to ensure the freedom as well as the responsibility of the press.

As for us, we are not at all worried about the threats of a legislated media council. We don’t desire it. Only despotic and repressive regimes have such kind of arrangements. But if it comes, we are more than well-equipped intellectually and otherwise to deal with it. After all, anything legislated brings it in the realm of law - and we are lawyers. Moreover, what are they going to come up with in their legislated media council that is not already in our current laws without risking violating the Constitution that guarantees press freedom?

We know very well that although there has been so much talk about press freedom in this country, in practice it hasn’t worked very well. And the space that we have today, we had to forge it for ourselves – nobody gave it to us. And who doesn’t know the price we have had to pay to be what we are and to do what we are doing? We cannot therefore be worried by the machinations of some opportunists who have not produced, and do not produce, any meaningful media products but are going round masquerading as specialists in the media. The professional journalists, those practising journalism, are at the Times of Zambia, the Daily Mail, ZNBC and The Post. But what role are these playing in the Media Council of Zambia? Almost none. And if this is the case, what type of self-regulation is this? Who is trying to regulate them? Who constitutes MECOZ? Who do they represent?

Labels: MECOZ, PRESS FREEDOM, ROSE NYONDO

posted by MrK @ 2:47 PM