Mumena calls for full implemention of FoI Bill
By David Chongo in Solwezi
Tue 26 June 2012, 13:23 CAT
THE enactment of the Freedom of Information Bill into law will be meaningless if it is not fully implemented, says chief Mumena.
Speaking during a public discussion initiated by the Coalition on Access to information at his palace in Solwezi on Saturday, chief Mumena said the PF government had done a commendable job in reviving the Freedom of Information (FOI) law, saying it was one way of giving power to the people.
He noted, however, that while there was encouraging political will by the PF administration in making FOI Bill into law, in the past, there had been a tendency by government not to fully implement the provisions of similar laws.
Chief Mumena of the Kaonde people in Solwezi said people would feel cheated if FOI was not fully implemented by the PF government.
He stated that the current government was brought into power by poor people who expected to be given respect and kept informed on important matters related to the governance of the country.
Chief Mumena said there was unfair distribution of the FOI draft copies, saying he himself did not even have a copy and wondered how the ordinary people were expected to contribute to the enactment of a law that should benefit them effectively.
And Coalition spokesperson Kafupi Banda said citizens had a right to demand for access to information through an established law.
He said when society had access to information, it would be easy for them to hold government accountable for its actions, being the ones who choose leaders through the ballot box.
Chief Mumena's senior induna, Jackson Kakoma, said members of parliament had abrogated their responsibility by keeping the electorate without vital information on governance issues.
He said people in rural areas had little information on a lot of issues like constituency development funds and therefore did not have a say in development matters as members of parliament kept them uninformed.
Kakoma, an alderman of the Solwezi Municipal Council, proposed as an alternative that district commissioners be the ones to disburse CDF because they were closer to the people than members of parliament.
Labels: CHIEF MUMENA, FOI, FREEDOM OF INFORMATION BILL
Read more...
Ronnie hails stance on FoI Bill
By Moses Kuwema
Sat 23 June 2012, 13:24 CAT
IT is nice that the government is taking the Freedom of Information Bill to Parliament, says Lieutenant General Ronnie Shikapwasha. In an interview, Lt Gen Shikapwasha (left), a former information and broadcasting minister in the MMD regime said it was a good move that the PF government had taken.
"That is nice, it is very good. Let's discuss it in Parliament because it will be tabled for people to discuss, so we will discuss it in Parliament also," Lt Gen Shikapwasha said.
Asked if the government had addressed the concerns that the MMD had with the bill which resulted in them dragging their feet to table it in parliament, Lt Gen Shikapwasha responded: "No comment until we discuss it in Parliament."
Information, broadcasting and labour permanent secretary Amos Malupenga announced that a taskforce working on a Bill had completed drafting the document and was expected to launch it next week for public scrutiny and comments.
According to Malupenga, the task force comprising civil society, legal experts, Transparency International - Zambia, Media Institute of Southern Africa (MISA) and other stakeholders had been working on the FoI Bill for the past few months.
After public scrutiny and comments, the bill would be tabled in Parliament.
Labels: FOI, FREEDOM OF INFORMATION BILL, RONNIE SHIKAPWASHA
Read more...
Media bodies commend PF on FOI bill
By Fridah Nkonde and Chiwoyu Sinyangwe
Mon 18 June 2012, 13:22 CAT
THE Patriotic Front government has gone above political rhetoric by bringing the Freedom of Information (FoI) which will ultimately become law in Zambia, says Anthony Mulowa. And Press Freedom Committee of The Post (PFC) has welcomed the proposed legislation of the FoI, urging "ordinary citizens" to lead in the formulation process.
On Friday, information permanent secretary Amos Malupenga announced that a taskforce working on a Bill had completed drafting the document and was expected to launch it next week for public scrutiny and comments.
According to Malupenga, the taskforce comprising civil society, legal experts, Transparency International - Zambia, Media Institute of Southern Africa (MISA) and other stakeholders had been working on the FoI for the past few months.
Welcoming the development, Mulowa, the Zambia Union of Journalists president, said the PF government had shown strong political will to bring about the FoI.
Mulowa said it was pleasing that the PF government had fulfilled its promise of ensuring that media reforms were brought to fruition.
"All media bodies were concerned with the FOI bill left by the MMD government which had certain flaws," Mulowa said.
"We are impressed that government has engaged stakeholders to review the bill and we are confident that the promise is being fulfilled by the PF government."
Mulowa said it was good that government would subject the bill to public for scrutiny and comment.
"This is what democracy entails because a lot of people will be able to comment," Mulowa said.
"Even people in the village can comment on this issue. It is important to appreciate the fact that it will be a people-driven law. It is quite remarkable and impressive in the history of Zambia. The government has to be commended."
Mulowa said having the FoI draft was a stepping stone in ensuring that people access vital information.
He said access to information would help people make informed decisions.
Mulowa said the onus was upon the members of parliament and the public to comment and offer criticism on the FOI bill draft.
PFC chairperson Leah Kabamba said ordinary citizens should take lead in shaping the FoI bill as it was a law that would benefit ordinary citizens.
She said the PFC would continue to sensitise ordinary people about the proposed bill.
"We have been going to chiefdoms to sensitise people about this bill because at the end of day, this bill will benefit the ordinary people and not just journalists," said Kabamba. "We will continue to encourage people to make submissions because when this becomes law, it will enable them to seek answers for the development they are not seeing."
And PAZA president Andrew Sakala said having the FoI draft bill ready was a good development for the media and society in general.
Sakala urged journalists and the public to take keen interest by making contributions to the long-awaited bill.
He said everyone was looking forward to the bill because it was beneficial to the public and media practitioners.
"Society has to be taken into consideration before the final bill is taken to Parliament. We are encouraged by the steps taken by government and the same should be done for other legislations," said Sakala.
Labels: ANTHONY MULOWA, FOI, FREEDOM OF INFORMATION BILL, PFC
Read more...
Freedom of information Bill draft ready
By Masuzyo Chakwe
Sat 16 June 2012, 13:23 CAT
THE Freedom of Information taskforce will next week launch the draft freedom of information legislation for public scrutiny and comment.
According to a statement from the Ministry of Information, Broadcasting and Labour, the taskforce which had been working on the freedom of information legislation for the past few months had completed drafting the document.
The task force comprises government representatives from the Ministry of Information, Broadcasting and Labour and Ministry of Justice, the Civil Society FoI Coalition of the Jesuit Centre for Theological Reflection, Economic Association of Zambia, MISA-Zambia, Transparency International Zambia and the Law Association of Zambia, independent legal experts Kenny Makungu, a lecturer at UNZA and Edem Djokotoe, the World Bank technical team, among others.
Information permanent secretary Amos Malupenga disclosed this when officials from the British government's Department for International Development (DFID) met him at his office yesterday.
"A task force has been working to come up with a draft legislation on the freedom of information Bill. This is now ready and we will be launching it in a few days time for public scrutiny and input. The draft bill will thereafter be submitted to Cabinet and later Parliament for commencement of the enactment process," said Malupenga to DFID governance adviser to Zambia, Sam Waldock and DFID chief professional officer in the governance, conflict and social development division at the organisation's headquarters in London.
Malupenga who is also spokesperson for the Taskforce appealed for financial support from cooperating partners and other stakeholders to publicise the draft bill in the print and other communication channels to enable members of the public access the document countrywide.
"Essentially, we have targeted the month of July for this exercise but our major handicap is money to publicise the draft bill especially in the print media. We are therefore appealing for support form cooperating partners to help us so that people have wide access to the document and make meaningful input," said Malupenga.
And Robinson pledged DFID's support for the ongoing media reforms in Zambia, describing the country's freedom of information process as impressive.
Labels: AMOS MALUPENGA, FOI, FREEDOM OF INFORMATION BILL
Read more...
PF won't be taken seriously if they fail to enact FoI - Kabamba
By Kabanda Chulu and Kondwani Munyeka
Fri 02 Mar. 2012, 10:59 CAT
THE PF government will not be taken seriously if they fail to enact the Freedom of Information (FoI) Bill as promised, says Press Freedom Committee of The Post chairperson Leah Kabamba.
And several media freedom activists have said the term FoI must be changed to Access to Information (ATI) because it is not only journalists that will benefit when public information becomes accessible.
In an interview yesterday, Kabamba said the right to access information held by public authorities, alongside press freedom, would enhance democracy.
"The FoI Bill was withdrawn in 2002 from Parliament. Since there have been numerous pronouncements that it will be taken back but this has not worked and if this government says they will take it back, that is good but there will be no reason to believe or take the PF government seriously if they fail to honour their promise by July 2012," Kabamba said.
She challenged government to avail to the public the contents of the Bill that would be taken to Parliament.
"The Bill should be all inclusive by having views of all stakeholders and when in place, there will be increased transparency in the manner government operates. Since public bodies do things on behalf of people, the public have the right to request for any information about government activities," said Kabamba.
Last week, information minister Fackson Shamenda announced that government will take the FoI Bill to Parliament this July.
And participants to the budget transparency and access to information training workshop hosted by Jesuit Centre for Theological Reflection (JCTR) and the International Budget Partners last week stated that government pronouncements should not be taken for granted.
"There is need for political will and despite having allies in government, we should not take things for granted because politicians are the same," stated the participants. "And there is need to correct the misconception that FoI will only benefit journalists, hence we want it to be referred to as ATI."
Meanwhile, MISA-Zambia says the country's on-going debate about the independence of the state-owned media clearly shows how relevant the media is to the country's growing democracy and development.
Speaking at a press briefing in Lusaka yesterday, MISA-Zambia acting chairperson Nalumino Nalumino said the media enables individuals to access information and impart ideas in society.
"…It is an indispensable tool in any democracy, especially for a budding democracy like Zambia. MISA-Zambia has for this reason outlined in its strategic plan an objective to enhance media professionalism in the interest of good governance and Zambia's democratic growth," said Nalumino.
Labels: FREEDOM OF INFORMATION BILL, LEAH KABAMBA, PF, PFC, PRESS FREEDOM, THE POST
Read more...
‘China has a lot of laws on information release'
By Mwala Kalaluka in Beijing, China
Sat 26 Nov. 2011, 11:59 CAT
CHINESE government departments are legally bound to avail information concerning them which the public have a right to know, says a state information officer. And the Chinese government says the supervision of the country's fast-paced Internet technological development will be managed within the confines of the law.
During a Chinese government-organised seminar for information officers from English-speaking countries at Beijing's 21st Century Hotel on Tuesday, deputy director general of the Information Office of the State Council, Hua Quing, said only in exceptional circumstances can information be withheld.
Hua was responding to a question from The Post on whether China had an information law.
"China has a lot of laws and regulations concerning information release, press and publication. Let me cite the two latest ones and the ones which have been given the most attention by the public," he said.
"On May 1st, 2008, we enacted the regulation on the information release of government departments of China. According to that regulation, government departments in China must open the information concerning them which the public have a right to know."
He said this regulation was usually referred to as China's ‘Sunshie Law'.
"For example, according to this regulation, all the laws and regulations adopted by the Chinese Legislature, all the policy measures and actions and decisions and notices taken by government agencies must be released online," Hua said.
"That's to say the citizens have a right to demand the ministry to release the information. If they make such demand, the government agencies have to do accordingly."
He said another information law is the Law of PRC, which concerns the response to incident and emergencies.
"This law stipulates clearly the action and measures the government agencies should take in the wake of incidents and emergencies. The law also stipulates that after each major disaster or incident, the government has to release information," Hua said. "The law stipulates that government agencies and officials shall not conceal information concerning incidents or report partially or report fake information to the public, otherwise they will be held accountable."
He said China had laws that stipulated what category of information should not be availed to the public.
"As you know China is now building a market economy and this year marks the 10th anniversary of China's ascension to the World Trade Organisation and as we are building a market economy we have to play by market rules," said Hua.
"So information regarding market secrets or business secrets should not be released to the public."
Labels: CHINA, FREEDOM OF INFORMATION BILL, PRESS FREEDOM
Read more...
MMD was misled by public media- Lubinda
TIME PUBLISHED - Sunday, October 2, 2011, 10:28 am
The Patriotic Front government has stated that it will not allow the public media to mislead the party. PF spokesperson Given Lubinda says that the public media managed to mislead the people that the MMD government was popular, when in fact was not.
He says that the PF government will ensure that every person is covered, irrespective of the political affiliation. He says that the party does not want to operate the way the MMD operated the public media, where it was decieved that it was very popular.
Mr. Lubinda added that the voiceless in the country should also be given the opportunity to air out their views.
Mr. Lubinda has stated that the PF government will ensure that professionalism and sanity is brought in the media.
And two Media bodies have commended newly-appointed Information, Broadcasting and Tourism Minister Given Lubinda’s pledge to prioritise the enactment of the Freedom of Information (FoI) Bill, saying it has been long overdue and it will enable journalists perform professionally.
Zambia Union of Journalists (ZUJ) president Anthony Mulowa said in an interview yesterday that his organisation welcomed the assurance by the new minister to enact the FOI Bill into law.
Mr Mulowa said once enacted into law, FOI Bill would not only enable journalists work efficiently but that it would also positively contribute to the country’s governance process.
“As ZUJ, we welcome the assurance by Mr Lubinda that the Government would enact the FOI Bill into law. This is a highly commendable move.
Our appeal is that its enactment should be expedited as it is one Bill that will enhance the country’s governance process by promoting transparency and accountability in the management of resources and thus contribute to national development.
“Journalists must embrace this opportunity and ensure that they perform to the expectation of the public,” he said.
He said it was therefore imperative that media personnel in public media should take advantage of the good will by the PF Government to exercise their talent to the fullest so that the public was well informed.
He noted also that there was need to improve the conditions of service for journalists from the public media to be motivated.
Press Association of Zambia (PAZA) president Andrew Sakala in welcoming Mr Lubinda’s sentiments said the move had been the media’s outcry for a long time.
“The enactment of the FOI Bill has been long overdue. Therefore, as PAZA, we welcome all measures aimed at promoting press freedom,” he
said.
Mr Sakala also appealed to Mr Lubinda to ensure that the Independent Broadcasting Act (IBA) and the ZNBC Act were operational as well by taking them back to Parliament for amendment and that that should be done through a publicprocess.
He added that as the new Government revisits the Constitution making process, the Minister should consider and support the media recommendations in the Mung’omba draft Constitution.
[QFM/Times of Zambia]
Labels: ANTHONY MULOWA, FREEDOM OF INFORMATION BILL, GIVEN LUBINDA, MEDIA, MMD, PF
Read more...
FoI Bill will be priority - Lubinda
By Ernest Chanda
Sat 01 Oct. 2011, 09:00 CAT
GIVEN Lubinda says he will prioritise media liberalisation and enactment of the Freedom of Information Bill. And newly-appointed mines minister Wylbur Simuusa says he will ensure that the windfall tax on the mines is re-introduced.
In an interview after President Michael Sata appointed him information minister yesterday, Lubinda said he would like a free media that would always hold authorities accountable.
"Talking about Freedom of Information laws, that I can assure you. And I am going to discuss with his Honour the Vice-President, and hopefully through him His Excellency the President, that we make the FoI as one of our benchmarks within the first 90 days of the PF government," Lubinda said.
"My priorities are: to liberalise the government-owned media practitioners. I would like the government media practitioners to also feel liberated for them to practice their journalism as professionals.
I am not talking about privatisation, I am talking about journalists being able to write as professionals without them feeling that there's ‘Big Brother' watching over their manuscripts. And I am actually going to encourage the public media to also practice in the same way that the private media is practicing; to be able to raise criticisms against their government."
Lubinda said it was only through objective criticism that the nation's welfare could be improved.
He said both the public and private media played the same role in national development.
"And I would not like to be considered an inconsistent person. I shall do whatever is required to ensure that the press has space in which to perform their very important role to be the fourth estate. And the fourth estate has a function of being a watchdog over other players, over the Executive, over the Legislature and over the Judiciary. And I want the media to be a true mirror of society," said Lubinda.
And Simuusa said he would work towards making Zambians benefit from their mineral wealth.
"We shall create a situation where as Zambians we can manage our mineral resources well for the benefit of every Zambian. Issues of proper accounting for minerals, looking at the way our people have been looked after in the mines.
And obviously to make our people more involved in the mining sector and make it the backbone of our nation's economy. Call it windfall or whatever tax but we will re-look the mining tax and see how we can create a win-win situation, both for us as Zambians and for the foreign investors," said Simuusa.
Labels: FREEDOM OF INFORMATION BILL, GIVEN LUBINDA, MINING, WINDFALL TAX, WYLBUR SIMUUSA
Read more...
Work professionally, Sakala advises journalists
By Masuzyo Chakwe and Mwala Kalaluka
Tue 04 May 2010, 04:00 CAT
PRESS Association of Zambia (PAZA) president Andrew Sakala has appealed to journalists to work professionally and objectively so that the government does not find an opportunity to pass unnecessary laws that impede on media freedom.
And Association of Zambian Diocesean Catholic Clergy (AZADCC) president Fr Cletus Mwiila yesterday said the enemy of press freedom in the country is a small group of people that want to curtail information from reaching the citizens.
Commenting on the World Press Freedom Day which fell yesterday under the theme The right to know: Access to information, Sakala said it was important that journalists operated professionally so that they could win the confidence of the public.
“It is important that journalists operate professionally so that the government does not take advantage and start accusing the media of being unprofessional and thereby begin to pass unnecessary laws that impede on the media,” Sakala said.
He urged the public to support media laws as the National Constitutional Conference (NCC) would very soon publish a draft constitution.
“We want to urge the public and media practitioners to ensure that the provisions on the media in the draft constitution are those that will promote media freedom,” he said.
Sakala urged the public and the media to take a keen interest in the draft constitution and submit to the NCC so that it could pass laws favourable to media freedom.
He also said information minister Lieutenant General Ronnie Shikapwasha had not categorically stated when the government would take the Freedom of Information (FoI) Bill to Parliament.
Sakala said the right to access information was anchored on the FoI law.
He urged the government to take the Bill to Parliament and pass the law because access to information depended on it.
“We hope that at the next sitting of Parliament, the government will take it back. Shikapwasha at the United Nations made a commitment that the Zambian government is committed to promoting a free media so he should match his words with deeds,” he said.
Sakala condemned the violence against journalists and urged political leaders to refrain their cadres from attacking journalists.
He said it was unfortunate that in the past year, there had been an increase on journalists’ attacks.
However, Sakala hoped that the public and politicians would desist from attacking journalists.
And Fr Mwiila said it was the citizenry that suffered if the media were not given sufficient freedom within which to operate.
“World Press Freedom Day for me is a very important moment for the media in the world,” Fr Mwiila said. “And all the important things that go together with development in any given nation. There can be no development in any given nation where there is no development because when we are talking of development today we should be talking about press freedom.”
Fr Mwiila said given what the country’s journalists went through to inform the nation, they should be supported to work in a free environment.
“We want to argue that… unless you have an informed nation you can’t talk about development,” he said. “Development is borne from what people are made to know and how they are helped to discuss what they know and turn it into positive living.”
Fr Mwiila said what he sees as an enemy of press freedom in Zambia was the hegemony that seemed to make people not to be aware of happenings in the nation, especially if they get into certain offices, which they wanted to protect.
“Hegemony is a small group of people who are in the offices who think no one else should be made aware unless they are within that circle,” Fr Mwiila said. “If you are from the other side then you are wrong.”
Fr Mwiila said in an environment where the media was free the press would be used to harness all the issues in order to allow many people to participate in the governance of the country.
“To realize all these the writers or scribes should be able to be given freedom to access to information so that the citizens can also be informed,” said Fr Mwiila.
Labels: ANDREW SAKALA, CLETUS MWIILA, FREEDOM OF INFORMATION BILL, JOURNALISM, PAZA, WORLD PRESS FREEDOM DAY
Read more...
Zambians need access to information
By Patrick Hatontola
Saturday, February 20, 2010, 10:55
On Feb 18th 2010, the NCC rejected article 56 (1) (a) of the Willa Mung’omba draft constitution which states that a person shall have right to access of information held by the state. Generally, the purpose of the article was to: afford Zambians their right to participate in national issues from an informed point of view; hold government accountable through transparent operations; and to have a say in the governance of their country by timely accessing valuable information. Zambians would then air timely views on democratic issues that foster their socio-economic aspirations. This was the Zambians’ wish. At the moment, it stands as a dream deferred if not a dream shut.
At the pace through which the NCC is rejecting progressive clauses; starting with the adoption of the degree clause for a Presidential candidate; to the current rejection of the right of access to information clause in disguise of preserving state secrets; Zambians may as well brace themselves to the time when the NCC would declare the national budget; the auditor general’s report and perhaps the constitution itself as “state secrets”.
This will mean that government will preside over the national affairs at their pleasure. Zambians will be made to believe that government is a philanthropic service to the “undeserving Zambians”. Provision of social services such as basic health care and basic education will be declared a prerogative of those called “government” with sole rights to access of information.
The constitution review process was conceived by Zambians because they felt that the current constitution was inadequate, restrictive and remote from their social and economic aspirations. Therefore, the purpose of the NCC was to deliberate on the Mong’mba draft constitution diligently in order to bridge that constitutional vacuum. Unfortunately, the NCC has abdicated its moral duty to strengthen the weak constitution as mandated to. They have rather opted to weaken it by rejecting the recommendation of the Mungomba draft that reflects the views of the majority Zambians.
Information is power! Without public information, no one can make informed decisions on issues of public interest and discourse. The NCC has deliberately disempowered the people by restricting them access to information. This infringement is not without cost to the growth of our democratic dispensation. It is a grievous assault to the Zambians’ dream; a dream that one day they will know and question the actions of those in power; a dream that one day they will know how their country is managed by those they have entrusted it with; a dream that one day they will have information to express their views from an informed point of view. This is neither a collective statement nor personal conviction but a summation of the general view. The rejection of the clause cannot be seen to be in public interest. Every sincere person will tell that the NCC has rejected this clause as a means of power preservation. It is common knowledge that the less information the public has, the more it advantages those in government in their endeavor to sustain their political fortunes. But suffice to say that Posterity and history will judge all those who are moved by whims and caprices of power and its preservation to the detriment of the people’s ware fare. The time is coming; perhaps now is the time, the time when Zambians will give themselves their constitution as stated in the preamble of the constitution.
In many African countries such as South Africa, the bill of rights provides for the right of access to information held by the state and/or a person. I am alive to the fact that every right is not absolute. However, the constitution must guarantee the right to access of information provided that, subsequent legislation is enacted to alleviate possible administrative and financial burden on the government in its course of proving this information. To this end, the NCC ought to have qualified and not reject the clause by stating what information may not be made public. Such information would generally limit to the operations of armed forces.
Zambia is not exempt from the general African phenomenon of power abuse resulting from limited information access by the public. In fact, it has a history where a DPP almost succeeded with his illegal nolle proseque. Some NCC delegates such as Japhet Moyo have cited this example to justify limit to access of information. What a fallacy. One will recall the shallow reasoning advanced in refusing to disclose why that nolle proseque was entered. It was “state secret”.
Finally, a state secret became public knowledge-Bulaya is today serving a jail sentence. How about the sad memories of the abuse of the Zamtrop account and eventually the mysterious acquittal of the concerned? Remember their refusal to account for the stolen $8M citing “state secrecy”. These are fresh and bitter memories that Zambians have to endure. Unfortunately, the rejection of this clause means nothing but a guarantee in increase of the aforesaid vices. Transparence and accountability will be compromised in disguise of state secretes.
By rejecting this clause, those in power have rejected the fact that they need to be held accountable and that they must be Transparent in their dealings. What a denunciation of the tenets of good governance.
The rejection of the clause means that all Acts of parliament that prescribe access to information will be repealed because every law inconsistent to the constitution is null and void to the extent of its inconsistence to the constitution. Think of the information bill. I have no doubt that Zambia needs the right of access to information now more than ever. But let Zambians choose a government they want in 2011.
Labels: CORRUPTION, FREEDOM OF INFORMATION BILL, NATIONAL SECURITY, NCC
Read more...
COMMENT - Not a good day for the NCC. First they wanted to exclude Michael Sata from running for president by including an education clause, Clive Chirwa for requiring a residency clause, then they want to specifically ban gay marriage, and now they want to stifle freedom of information. I detect a trend. :) The NCC is all about limiting and taking away the rights and opportunities of citizens, rather than protecting their rights. What a waste of money. Let's just implement the Dean Mung'omba draft constitution and send the NCC home.
NCC rejects clause guaranteeing citizens the right of access to information held by Government.
Thursday, February 18, 2010, 8:21
THE National Constitutional Conference (NCC) has rejected a clause which could have guaranteed citizens the right of access to information held by Government.
Article 56 (1) (a) of the Willa Mung’omba draft Constitution states that every citizen has the right of access to information held by the State.
Contributing to the debate on the article, commissioner Divo Katete said he did not support the article because there was no need to release State information to the public.
Mr Katete said the State held information that was classified and could not be released to the public anyhow.
Another delegate, Japhet Moyo said the article was wrong because people would even be asking for reasons why the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) entered a nolle prosequi.
Foreign Affairs Deputy Minister Fashion Phiri said he did not agree with the article because even in the United States of America, information was kept secret even to researchers until after a certain period of time.
The NCC plenary, however, adopted article 55 (1) (a) which gives citizens freedom to hold an opinion and the freedom to receive or impart information or ideas.
Press Association of Zambia president Andrew Sakala and lawyer Patrick Matibini supported the clause, saying it should include the freedom of artistic creativity and academic freedom which were not covered in the current Constitution.
Bahati Member of Parliament Besa Chimbaka and Independent Churches of Zambia president David Masupa supported the clause while Anti-Voter Apathy director Bonnie Tembo said the article should not state that there would be no interference to receiving some information.
Article 55 (2) which was also adopted said the freedom did not extend to propaganda for war, incitement to violence and advocacy of hatred.
[Times of Zambia]
Labels: CONSTITUTION, DIVO KATETE, FASHION PHIRI, FREEDOM OF INFORMATION BILL, FREEDOM OF SPEECH, JAPHET MOYO, NCC
Read more...
Don’t kill Fr Mwewa over his opinion of Rupiah
By Editor
Wed 06 Jan. 2010, 04:01 CAT
Criticising Rupiah Banda is not a crime that Fr Augustine Mwewa should be taken to Calvary and be crucified for.
Criticising the President of this country is a right that every citizen has. Every Zambian should have an undoubted right to lay what sentiment he or she has about the President of this country before the public; to forbid this or intimidate anyone trying to do so, is to destroy the freedom of expression in our country. And when the freedom of expression is destroyed in a country, meaningful citizen participation in governance becomes impossible. Where there is no meaningful citizen participation, dictatorship and tyranny are bound to appear and become the order of the day.
Fr Mwewa has every right to criticise Rupiah – whether this is palatable or unpalatable. And there is no doubt, of course, that criticism is good for people and institutions that are part of public life. No institution – the presidency, Parliament or indeed the judiciary – should expect to be free from the criticism of those who give it their loyalty and support, not to mention those who don’t.
It also should be borne in mind that the structures of our government and those who serve in them exist and are there to serve the people; the people do not exist to serve the government and its officers.
Freedom of speech and expression is the lifeblood of any democracy. Before people can govern themselves or participate meaningfully in the affairs of their country, they must be free to express themselves. Citizens of a democracy live with a conviction that through the open exchange of ideas and opinions, truth will eventually win out over falsehood, the values of others will be better understood, areas of compromise more clearly defined, and the path of progress opened. And the greater the volume of such exchanges, the better.
But what should the government do in cases where the freedom of speech and expression is abused with statements that may be considered to be false, repugnant, irresponsible or simply in bad taste? The answer, by and large, is: nothing. It is simply not the business of government to judge such matters. In general, the cure for free speech is more free speech. It may seem a paradox, but in the name of free speech, a democracy must sometimes defend the rights of individuals who themselves advocate such non-democratic policies as repressing free speech. Citizens in a democratic society defend this right out of the conviction that, in the end, open debate will lead to greater truth and wiser public actions than if speech and dissent are stifled.
Furthermore, the suppression of free speech that we find offensive today is potentially a threat to our exercise of free speech tomorrow – which perhaps you or someone else might find offensive. It is said that “all people are harmed when speech is repressed. If the opinion is right, they are deprived of the opportunity of exchanging error for truth, if wrong, they lose the clearer perception and livelier impression of truth produced by its collision with error”. And this being the case, why should Fr Mwewa be killed for simply expressing his opinion on the way Rupiah is running the country; for saying that the President is a chintelelwe who moves anyhow without a vision? Probably we will need to go back and reproduce a viewpoint United States president Theodore Roosevelt had on criticism of the presidency:
“The President is merely the most important among a large number of public servants. He should be supported or opposed exactly to the degree which is warranted by his good conduct or bad conduct, his efficiency or inefficiency in rendering loyal, able, and disinterested service to the Nation as a whole. Therefore, it is absolutely necessary that there should be full liberty to tell the truth about his acts, and this means that it is exactly necessary to blame him when he does wrong as to praise him when he does right.
Any other attitude in an American citizen is both base and servile. To announce that there must be no criticism of the President , or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. Nothing but the truth should be spoken about him or anyone else. But it is even more important to tell the truth, pleasant or unpleasant, about him than about anyone else.” This quote was part of an editorial Roosevelt wrote on May 7, 1918 for the Kansas City Star during World War I.
Probably it may be appropriate to also include one of Roosevelt’s top three most requested quotes, that is, the one regarding the “man in the arena” or “not the critic” contained in a speech at the Sorbonne, Paris, April 23, 1910: “It is not the critic who counts: not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes up short again and again, because there is no effort without error or shortcoming, but who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, who spends himself for a worthy cause; who, at the best, knows, in the end, the triumph of high achievement, and who, at the worst, if he fails, at least he fails while daring great, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who knew neither victory nor defeat.”
It is quite true that acceptance of criticism implies the highest respect for the human ideal, and that its denial suggests a conscious or unconscious lack of humanity on our part. Intolerance to criticism must surely rank as one of the worst forms of immorality in human affairs. We can see the horror in people who go out of their way to organise violence or attempt to kill someone for simply being critical of the way Rupiah is governing.
Rupiah’s supporters have every right to disagree with Fr Mwewa. But their disagreement should be expressed in ways devoid of any violence and slander of Fr Mwewa. All citizens must be guided by the truth, integrity and justice which, for Christians, are anchored on God’s commandments.
It is necessary to remind all our people who are in one way or another involved in politics that politics is for the good of people, and not for political survival of any individual or political party. If the spirit of the primacy of the common good were to animate all our political parties and their cadres, we would not witness the politically-motivated violence which leaves the public dismayed and disheartened. The quality of democracy is determined by the establishment of proper structures which facilitate the freedom of thought and expression. The interests of our political parties and their leaders should be kept subordinate to the public good.
As we have stated before, no doctrine, no principle or proclaimed political position and no political differences can justify violence against anyone. No crime should be committed in the name of politics, in the name of supporting and defending Rupiah. It is very easy to start violence but it’s very difficult to stop a culture of violence when it’s planted in a nation. There is only one basis on which violence can be justified by anyone and that is only in self-defence. And this means that if no one can use violence against anyone save in self-defence, then there will be no violence to talk about. But we have seen and heard Rupiah and his supporters justify violence on the basis that their supporters will not tolerate them being insulted. Again, insults cannot justify violence because there are many ways to address and redress such issues. Those who justified the violence of their cadres because they were insulted will today find it very difficult to stop them from committing similar crimes in their name.
It’s easy to start a fire but it’s not that easy to put it out. Similarly, it’s easy to start violence but it’s not that easy to stop it. Violence begets violence and those who try to live by violence will they themselves one day perish in it. This is because no one has the monopoly of violence. And violence can only do one thing, and that is to breed counter violence. Those who hire unemployed youths, propel their weakened souls with Chibuku to go and attack a defenseless Catholic priest with the intention to kill him are no better than animals. And we hope that those who are behind those criminal youths in Ndola will realise that their violent actions against Fr Mwewa and others who from time to time cross their path put them next to animals.
Fr Mwewa has a right and a duty to continue speaking fearlessly and forthrightly about what is going on in our country; about how Rupiah is governing this country. But this culture of violence that they are today encouraging will tomorrow backfire on them. The bells tolling for Fr Mwewa today will tomorrow toll for Rupiah, toll for the whole country. Let’s work to stop violence whatever its source and motivation. Violence is not good for its perpetrators, for its victims and for the whole country.
Labels: FREEDOM OF INFORMATION BILL, MIHA DREVENSEK, PRESS FREEDOM
Read more...
It’s sad govt wants to suffocate freedom of information - Fr Miha
By Margaret Mtonga and Chibaula Silwamba
Wed 06 Jan. 2010, 04:00 CAT
THE MMD government wants to impose statutory regulation of the media because they have seen that Zambians have lost confidence in their governance, Mission Press director Fr Drevensek Miha has said.
And Patriotic Front (PF) spokesperson Given Lubinda has charged that President Rupiah Banda has abdicated his powers to Vice-President George Kunda who is now a defacto President of Zambia.
In an interview yesterday, Fr Miha said it was sad that the President Banda-led government was so much geared to suffocate the freedom of information in the country.
“George Kunda and Lt Gen Ronnie Shikapawasa are busy working hard to ensure that the democratic tendencies of our country are done away with. This is very unfortunate. You cannot have a minister of information who is in the forefront advocating for statutory regulation of the media,” Fr Miha said. “Shikapawasa knows very well that this law that they intend to pass will surely affect the right of individuals to express and access information.”
Fr Miha said it was clear that Lt Gen Shikapawasa and George Kunda were the mastermind of statutory media regulation because they wanted to protect their jobs and please President Banda.
“Why should the government insist on statutory regulation of the media? I smell a rat and that rat is that the government wants to hide a lot of wrongs that they have done in their tenure of office and want to find means and ways of suppressing access to that information. They think by so doing they will win the 2011 elections. They will not win even if they impose this statutory regulation of the media,” Fr Miha said.
He said it was important for the government to leave the media to work in a self-regulatory way.
“I would like to tell George and Ronnie to shut up and not give the people of Zambia statutory regulation of the media. Who are they to start choosing for the Zambians?” asked Fr Miha. “I would like to warn the government that they will not achieve their mission,”
And in an interview, Lubinda said Vice-President Kunda was a very sly man.
“Zambians must realise that Rupiah Banda has got nothing to do with the governance of Zambia, totally. George Kunda is the defacto President of Zambia,” Lubinda said. “It is George Kunda who is governing this country. That is the reason for the arrogance you see in George Kunda because one Mr Rupiah Bwezani Banda is just gallivanting without knowing what is happening in his country.”
Lubinda said President Banda did not even know some of the decisions that Vice-President Kunda was unilaterally making without his input.
“The left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing; this is the reason for the numerous contradictions between the President and the Vice-President,” Lubinda said.
“If you follow all the contradictions that have been exposed, George Kunda ends up taking the order of the day. Whenever there is a contradiction between George Kunda and Rupiah Banda, the one that ends up winning is George Kunda, not the boss.”
Labels: FREEDOM OF INFORMATION BILL, MIHA DREVENSEK, PRESS FREEDOM
Read more...
MISA describes 2009 as most discouraging
By Fridah Zinyama
Sun 03 Jan. 2010, 04:01 CAT
THE Media Institute of Southern Africa (MISA) Zambia has described the year 2009 as one of the most discouraging because of the threats, intimidations, harassments and the government’s commitment to introducing punitive laws to suppress freedom of the press.
And MISA-Zambia chairperson Henry Kabwe has urged government to take back the Freedom of Information (FOI) Bill to Parliament this year as it will enhance transparency in the government and repeal all the draconian laws that impede on media freedom.
In a statement released yesterday, Kabwe stated that the year 2009 saw an increase in harassments and sustained biased coverage in both government-controlled and some private media houses.
“Having reflected on the events which have taken place in the media in 2009, it suffices to say that the government lacks political will to enhance media freedom in the country, as it concentrates on introducing more laws to stifle media freedom,” he stated.
Kabwe stated that the year 2009 was characterised by harassments, threats and violence against journalists which created a very unhealthy environment for the media.
“The government has dedicated most of its time in trying to muzzle the media, hence there has been no progress in the implementation of the Independent Broadcasting Authority (IBA) Act and the ZNBC Act of 2002,” he noted.
Kabwe stated that even as the media was working towards a self regulatory framework, it was important for the government to show some commitment in implementing the aforementioned laws.
“It is very sad that after 18 years, the Movement for Multiparty Democracy (MMD) government has failed to repeal bad media laws in Zambia and has up to now failed to implement the progressive IBA and ZNBC Acts,” he stated.
Kabwe further noted that 2009 saw an increase in incidences where people masquerading as journalists were tarnishing the image of the press through misconduct.
“Some of them were arrested for crimes like stealing,” he stated.
Kabwe also reminded the government of the important role the media played in the democratic dispensation.
“Freedom of expression and access to information is a cornerstone of democracy and therefore, if our government claims to be committed to upholding principles of democracy, it should create an environment where the media can carry out their work free of interference,” he stated.
And Kabwe stated that there was need for the government to take back the Freedom of Information Bill to Parliament this year as it would enhance transparency in government.
“We would also like to thank all members of parliament, civil society and general members of the public who have been supportive of the media in 2009 and we urge them to continue with the same spirit in 2010 as we advocate for a free and independent media,” he added.
“As we go into the year preceding the 2011 elections, we call upon all media institutions, government controlled and private, to be fair and balanced in their coverage of political parties.”
Kabwe said this would enhance professionalism and responsibility unscathed by political or economic interests, adding that political parties should also respect every citizen’s right to expression and not resort to violence when aggrieved.
Labels: FREEDOM OF INFORMATION BILL, HENRY KABWE, MEDIA, MISA, PRESS FREEDOM
Read more...
MPs and a free press
By Editor
Sat 07 Nov. 2009, 04:00 CAT
The report presented to Parliament on Thursday by the Parliamentary Committee on Information and Broadcasting Services is a stimulus to reflection and encouragement to preserving our hopes in causes that have never ceased to be legitimate.
The report delivered by the committee’s chairman Mwansa Kapeya has reaffirmed our convictions and given us more arguments for our enthusiasm for defending a free press in our country and in the world.
We are particularly impressed by the committee’s persuasive arguments for self-regulation of the media and its reflections on the value and role of a free press.
We were also impressed by the contributions from other members of the house in particular Highvie Hamududu and Sylvia Masebo.
However, we were saddened by the pettiness, jealousy and envy of some of our representatives. We were saddened by the weaknesses, grudges, envy and ambitions that surrounded some of our representatives, inhibiting them to see and say the truth.
Anyway, we can excuse some of the deficiencies exhibited in the House over this issue because while our politicians derive great experience from the exercise of their functions as politicians, they do not have the privilege of being – nor could they be – specialists in all social spheres.
They are basically politicians – in itself one of the most difficult tasks in today’s world – and above all, they must be responsible ones. But as public figures, they should be reluctant to talk about things they don’t understand, and try to explain that which is not perfectly clear to them.
We hope Rupiah Banda and his friends will learn something from the committee’s report and start to realise that there is no alternative to voluntary self-regulation of the media because the alternative is tyranny, dictatorship. We say voluntary because if self-regulation is not voluntary, then it becomes mandatory regulation. And we know, from the committee’s report, that mandatory regulation is not desirable.
As we have repeatedly stated, few would argue that the news media always carries out its functions responsibly. And as Hamududu has correctly advised, if the MMD and its government feel they are not fairly and adequately covered by the media outside their control, let them start their own newspapers. Their dissatisfaction or irritations with the perceived inadequacies of the media outside their control should not lead them to take measures, legislative or otherwise, that could compromise or coerce the press.
If they are looking for a media that is subservient to them, they should heed Hamududu’s advice and establish their own newspapers because a free press, whatever its inadequacies, is preferable to a technically good press that serves only their interests. And the Zambian people have demonstrated this preference very well in their support for The Post. For all the deficiencies, real or imaginary, that they accuse The Post of, this newspaper is still the most popular news media outlet in our country. It is the first choice newspaper by most Zambian newspaper readers. It is also the first choice advertising medium for most advertisers. Why? This is the question they should try to answer. A critical, independent press is the lifeblood of any democracy.
We would be very happy if the state-owned and government-controlled media was to follow the recommendation of this committee and start to be critical of the government, exposing its weaknesses instead of leaving this to the private media. It is sad that throughout the period Dr Kenneth Kaunda was president, the state-owned and government-controlled media never published any critical stories, comments or letters about him. Similarly, when Frederick Chiluba was president, no such articles were also published. Why?
For seven years as president, Levy Mwanawasa was never criticised in the state-owned and government-controlled media. The same is happening about Rupiah. We have no doubt that if Michael Sata or Hakainde Hichilema - who today the state-owned and government-controlled media carry critical articles of - were to become presidents, they would do the same. Is this desirable? Is it the way things should be? The committee provides the correct answers to these questions.
We are also particularly impressed by Masebo’s articulation of the issues concerning the media. No one can disagree with Masebo’s observation that while the media could sometimes be irritating, especially when they reported wrong information, statutory regulation was no answer to the many challenges and shortcomings of the media.
Her advice that those in government should not listen to some opposition members who were pushing for statutory regulation just because they had personal battles to wage with the media should be taken very seriously. The solution to the inadequacies of our media is not to devise laws that set arbitrary definition of responsibility or to licence journalists. But as Hamududu has correctly pointed out, the solution lies in broadening the level of public discourse so that citizens can better sift through the chaff of misinformation to find the kernels of truth.
No one can deny that Sakwiba Sikota has made tremendous contribution, at some point in his life, to the development of the media in this country. And The Post will always remain indebted and respectful of Sikota’s contribution to its development. But it will also be dishonest not to acknowledge the errors and shifting positions of comrade Sikota.
This once heroic comrade has changed his progressive position on many things. Sikota is no longer as resolute as he used to be on many issues. Today Sikota tries very hard to walk the middle of the road. In short, today Sikota walks the path of opportunism. He tries very hard to sound objective and balanced when he is pursuing nothing but opportunism.
And as Lenin explained it, an opportunist, by his very nature always evades taking a clear and decisive stand, he will always seek a middle course, he will always wriggle like a snake between two mutually exclusive points of view and try to “agree” with both and reduce his differences of opinion to pious suggestions and so on and so forth. Sikota says he is “a blood relative” of the media. Yes he is.
But we have known relatives who have betrayed their own. Sikota says his defence of media freedoms has been consistent. We say they have been tremendous but they have lost their consistency. Sikota wants self-regulation that is not voluntary, that is mandatory. What does this amount to? Is this consistency? We can only say that we who so staunchly espouse free press and then seek to edit it must be wary that from today’s decisions might leach tomorrow’s hypocrisy.
Of course there are the likes of Besa Chimbaka and Joseph Kasongo who have serious complaints against The Post and are advocating some form of control of the press. But the mere fact that speech is accompanied by conduct does not mean that the speech should be suppressed under the guise of prohibiting the conduct.
We should realise that the greatest danger to the establishment of a free press in this country lurks in the insidious encroachment by men and women of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding. Let us not allow this country to be retarded or destroyed by mediocrity. Let our parliamentarians adopt and follow the path charted by the committee and create an environment where a free press and a creative critic can speak.
We know that some of our colleagues are torn between the pursuit of truth and the desire of being in good terms with the powerful. The most important form of corruption in Zambian journalism today are the many guises of social climbing on the pyramids of power. Some of our colleagues become curiously uncomfortable when they stray too far off the government reservation.
They are discomforted by the slightest evidence that those in government do not love them. They are so close enough to the government to feel curiously shy about calling a lie, a lie. They must retreat from the pyramids of power, remembering that no politician is eternal, they will come and go but the value of a free press is permanent and it needs to be defended at all times.
And we salute all our politicians, all our members of parliament and all our people who have arrived at these stimulating convictions. The highest level of political thought was reached when some men and women became aware that the fruits of the efforts and the intelligence of each human being should reach all others; that man really had no need to be a wolf, but could be a brother to man. In this, a free press will always be key. And for this reason, it must be defended at all costs and under whatever forms of manipulation.
Labels: FREEDOM OF INFORMATION BILL, MPs, PRESS FREEDOM
Read more...
Govt cautious on FoI bill because of some irresponsible media – Kunda
By George Chellah
Sat 07 Nov. 2009, 04:01 CAT
VICE-PRESIDENT George Kunda yesterday said the government was treading carefully on the Freedom of Information Bill (FoI) because it can be used for espionage by what he termed some irresponsible and unpatriotic media houses.
During the Vice-President’s question time in Parliament, Vice-President Kunda, who was responding to a question from United Liberal Party (ULP) president and Livingstone member of parliament Sakwiba Sikota, raised some security concerns over the Freedom of Information Bill. Sikota wanted to know when the FoI would be reintroduced.
“Our main concern is the fact that we are very much concerned about state security. That particular law can destroy this country if it is not properly handled,” Vice-President Kunda said.
“And some of the media houses have displayed that they are irresponsible and they are very unpatriotic and they can sell this country.”
He said the FoI could be used for espionage.
“We are treading on this particular bill very carefully. At the moment it remains shelved for further consultation,” he said.
And Vice-President Kunda said the Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) law was very important for the development of the country.
“The NGO Bill is going to be operationalised. Currently we are working very closely with the NGOs. There are many NGOs which are doing extremely fine apart from a few that are doing politics here in Lusaka,” he said.
He said all NGOs were subject to public criticism and scrutiny.
“Some of them do not take criticism. If you just pinch them, they will be crying the whole month. If they criticise us, they should be ready to be criticised,” he said.
Vice-President Kunda said some NGOs even go to an extent of holding press conferences and putting adverts in the press to defend themselves, once criticised.
“We take criticism and we accept criticism,” he said.
He said the government considered NGOs as public entities.
“That’s why we require them to declare their assets and liabilities. This particular requirement is important,” he said.
He explained that NGOs were public entities and they were funded with public resources.
“So they are supposed to be accountable to the people of Zambia,” he said.
Chitambo MMD member of parliament Dr Solomon Musonda sought to know the relationship between the government and donors.
In response, Vice-President Kunda said the relationship between the government and the donor community was extremely warm.
“Most of the cooperating partners are ready to assist us. They have promised budget support…it’s the intention of government to strengthen cooperation,” he said.
He said the government had made progress on its governance programmes especially in the fight against corruption.
Vice-President Kunda also dismissed criticism on the government’s commitment to the fight against corruption.
“In this country we have what we can call celebrated critics, fault-finders; they never see anything good in what government is doing,” said Vice-President Kunda. “We are committed to the fight against corruption and we shall fight corruption head-on.”
Labels: FOI, FREEDOM OF INFORMATION BILL, GEORGE KUNDA, PRESS FREEDOM, SAKWIBA SIKOTA
Read more...
Trust and credibility
By Editor
Thursday August 07, 2008 [04:00]
PRESS freedom will always be contested. And when courage for that contest is lacking, press freedom itself is terribly diminished. Voluntary self-regulation, whether as individuals or as a collective, is at the apex of press freedom. It is not for Parliament or legislators or indeed the executive or their agents in the Media Council of Zambia (MECOZ) to decide that press freedom is some sort of disease that we must quarantine.
As we have pointed out before, it is crass ignorance of the way laws are enacted and executed for one to think that a legislated media council is a self-regulating body. It is ignorance of the law for one to even insinuate that the Law Association of Zambia is a self-regulating body.
Lawyers in this country are not self-regulated; they are regulated by laws usually initiated by the executive and enacted by Parliament and adjudicated upon by the judiciary. Almost everything that is done by the Law Association of Zambia is a product of the law.
It is also folly for one to think that journalism, as a profession, can be symmetrically compared to professions like law. Press freedom is a right much linked or connected to the freedom of expression to be enjoyed by every citizen.
And like all other rights, its enjoyment doesn't need to be earned by good behaviour or obtaining of some certificate, diploma or degree. Journalism is a profession by occupation and not by any qualification other than that. To regulate that type of profession will be a great injustice to the people of this country.
And this is why we say the greatest danger to press freedom in this country lurks in the insidious encroachment by individuals of zeal, appearing to be well-meaning but without understanding.
Instead of putting additional legal restrictions, like a legislated media council, on journalists, we should be sure to help them handle their responsibilities and give them the freedom to fly.
People believe having freedom of the press is a natural phenomenon. It's not. It's the result of intense care and vigilance.
We are being challenged by members of MECOZ to state why we should fear the law. Probably we understand the law better than most journalists in this country because we have had more encounters with the law than most of them.
No media organisation has been subjected to the trials and tribulations that we have had to endure over the last 17 years.
We have suffered more arrests and criminal prosecutions than any journalist or media organisation in this country at the hands of both the executive and the legislature - and once or so by the judiciary. We have had the misfortune of being the only newspaper in the history of this country with a banned edition - done under the law.
And in these cases we have emerged triumphant. So who can legitimately talk about us fearing the law? Which journalist in this country knows the law as we do?
And with all humility - without being boastful in any way - we are the only newspaper probably in the history of this country whose editor and his deputy are both lawyers, are both advocates.
In life, it's always better to be clear about things.
The unregulated voice isn't as dangerous to the public as the regulated or silenced voice. Again, as Nelson Mandela once advised, "none of our irritations with the perceived inadequacies of the media should ever allow us to suggest even faintly that the independence of the press could be compromised or coerced".
Both freedom of speech and press freedom often provoke public and political controversy, but experience shows us again and again that when freedom is diseased, the only cure is more freedom and not the curtailment of that freedom or its strict regulation.
The government should not have any power whether through its agents in a legislated media council or other to rule the press. Trying to have a legislated media council is a big mistake. And in saying this, we are not exhibiting cowardice or fear of the law. We are merely sounding the warning. If we don't sound the warning, who will?
And in opposing a legislated media council, we are not in any way trying to condone and support irresponsibility or impunity. In any discipline, there are people who pursue it with honour and with decency and there are people who don't.
Using this as pretext to come up with a legislated media council is not right, fair or just. We see journalists as manual workers, the labourers of the word. Journalism can only be of value when it is free from statutory controls under whatever guise, and is passionate.
There is a feeling that the very word 'responsibility' implies wimpiness. One can be a fully 'he-man' journalist responsibly - and we mean that in a gender-encompassing way.
Isn't it up to journalists to wrestle with what is in the public interest, not necessarily what is of interest?
The idea of diversity becomes our strength, sacred to us. The range of broadening, the potential becoming a way and a song. Many have fought this reality. We know the wounds.
To censor in any way is to destroy, or at least to oppose the process of reality. To hear one voice clearly, we must have the right to hear them all.
The essence of a free life is being able to choose the style of living you prefer, free from exclusion and without the compulsion of conformity or law.
And no set of professional ethics is better than your own personal ethics.
A truly free press, that is not subjected to statutory media councils, is to a great people what winds are to oceans and malarial regions, which waft away the elements of diseases, and bring new elements of health. Where free speech is stopped or regulated, miasma is bred, and death comes fast.
We all want to do right and do well. But if you don't do well, you are not going to be in a position to do right.
The freedom of the individual and the rights of conscience will have no place in a society where a small group of people in a legislated media council, protected by the law and supported by the government, espouses a particular view of morality, of what the media should publish or broadcast, one that has no room for deviation from the norm.
We shouldn't forget that news unfolds but is never complete. It is written in haste but not carved in stone. It often wounds but more often it heals.
Our Constitution - even the new one being debated - rebels at the thought of giving government or Parliament the power to control people's minds. When the conspiracy of lies surrounding us demands of us to silence the one word of truth given to us, that word becomes the one word we would wish to utter above all others.
Moreover, a free and independent media that is regulating itself will be more trusted than a media regulated by a statutory body like MECOZ. Trust and credibility are the commodities we trade in.
We say all this in reaction to the remarks made by members of MECOZ on their radio programme yesterday, accusing us of having a misguided notion about the nature of a legislated media council.
We are not cowards. And we have a long track record of fighting for press freedom and other liberties, a record that is recognised globally and for which we have received many international press freedom awards.
We have fought more battles in defence and advancement of press freedom than the combined force of all those who today are championing the creation of a legislated media council. We know the politicians will be on their side in all this.
But this is not the first time most of these elements have sided with politicians against us. And as always, we will be ready to take them on and fight for that which is just, fair and humane.
We may not be able to stop them from having their MECOZ legislated but such a setback will never deter us from struggling with all the tenacity we can marshal against their evil MECOZ Act.
Labels: FREEDOM OF INFORMATION BILL, MECOZ, MEDIA, PRESS, THE POST
Read more...
The Post's fear of legislation for media is misguided - Nkandu
By Chibaula Silwamba
Thursday August 07, 2008 [04:00]
MEDIA Council of Zambia (MECOZ) board member Fackson Nkandu yesterday observed that the fear by The Post that legislative measures on the operations of the media will limit press freedom is a misguided notion. Reviewing the response of the public to MECOZ radio programmes called 'Regulating the media' that were running on Radio Phoenix, Nkandu said there was no need for media practitioners to fear statutory regulation.
"Members of the public have not been coming to MECOZ as such apart from a few phone calls," responded Nkandu when presenter Pamela Munyanta asked him to comment on the response of the public to the programme since it started airing on radio.
"The public reaction we have seen is that which was published by The Post newspaper. The Post newspaper has its own opinion and members of the public and other media personnel have their own opinion.
"All I can say is that they think legislative measure will limit the freedom of the press; I think it is misguided notion on the part of The Post."
He advised The Post to think twice about its position.
"When this council is legislated, it doesn't mean it will be under the control of the government. Like lawyers and like other professionals, they administer their own affairs. Now why fear the law? What are you running away from?" Nkandu asked. "This organization MECOZ must be legislated.
It's my personal view, of course others are thinking differently. This is going to be discussed at the general conference in three months time."
However, Nkandu, a veteran journalist, commended The Post, which he said was the most popular newspaper in the country.
"I think The Post is one of the most popular newspapers in the country; I think they are improving in their reporting; it's a matter of opinion.
There are some people who might say they The Post are not doing this and they are not doing that but others are saying The Post is doing very well. In fact, it's the most popular newspaper today," he said.
Nkandu also urged members of the public to help the media in revealing scandals.
"When the Freedom of Information bill is enacted, we expect members of the public to use it by revealing information that they come across because members of the press although it is their work, depend on information passed to them," he said.
"Go voluntarily and pass the information to the press. They are not selective; they are only selective in so far as limitations are there otherwise they would like to publish anything that is in public interest."
Nkandu urged the media to carry out investigations and expose malpractices in society.
And a caller, who identified himself as Imbuwa, said if the Freedom of Information bill was enacted into law, Zambians would have been given accurate information about President Levy Mwanawasa's illness.
President Mwanawasa suffered a stroke on June 29, this year in Sharm-el-Sheik in Egypt ahead of the African Union (AU) heads of state summit and was admitted to Sharm-el-Sheik International airport.
President Mwanawasa was evacuated on July 1, to Percy Military Hospital in Paris, France where he has been admitted since then.
Imbuwa observed that currently so many things were being hidden under the pretext of state secret and called for openness.
"It's about a month, people have asked for serious information about the state of our President and this information is not given to us. Why? Are we doing any better?" Imbuwa asked.
"I don't think anyone will be wrong to ask whether his father is seriously ill so that he knows, so that we know what next. For me this Freedom of Information bill will just be in order to have an open society so that things are done in a manner where everybody sees what is happening."
Another caller urged journalists to quote preachers during prayer sessions for President Mwanawasa's recovery instead of just concentrating on government officials, who were invited to speak during those sessions.
MECOZ chairperson Sr Rose Nyondo and Press Association of Zambia (PAZA) vice president Amos Chanda urged members of the public to support the FoI bill because it would benefit all Zambians once enacted into law.
Labels: FACKSON NKANDU, FREEDOM OF INFORMATION BILL, MECOZ
Read more...
God bless the media
By Editor
Sunday May 04, 2008 [04:00]
In life it is very important to be clear about things. And we would like our politicians, especially our parliamentarians and government ministers, to make their decisions on the basis of principles and reason. We don’t want them to be led by emotion and fears. They shouldn’t be manipulated into taking certain positions.
We therefore see no reason for anyone to try and comfort them that the media doesn’t intend to injure. We would like to remind our Minister of Information that we belong to the media and not to the insurance business and he must not think that support for the access to information bill should be a premium which would ensure any politician that they would be untouched by the media.
This seems to be an attempt to make a virtue out our inadequacies. We want our political leaders to make intelligent decisions. And it is the triumph of optimism of will over pessimism of intelligence that has always sustained us.
It doesn’t make sense to try and tie the issue of a press or media council to the enactment of an access to information law. The transgressions of any media or journalist should not be tied to this.
Our Minister of Information says our neighbours in Tanzania have a council which is responsible and if one of the media organisations transgresses, they can go to the council and appeal for regulation.
And the Minister is wondering where he should go if his rights are infringed. He says going to court may take 10 years and in the meantime something has been written about him and he is divorced at home. He asks if he is going to be compensated for being divorced.
Actually, when one critically examines the example our minister has given, one will realise that falsities that have usually led to divorces are not in the media; they lie elsewhere. They are usually found in the unpublished or unbroadcast words.
They are not part of the libel but slander. So if this is his concern, then he should look for a council of some form that will regulate slander since he doesn’t want to spend 10 years in court.
No one should be opposed to self-regulation. It is not possible to practice journalism without one form or another of self-regulation. Every journalist and every media house regulates itself in one form or another. Self-regulation does not necessarily mean belonging to a media council of some form.
We have adequate defamation laws in this country and we will not run away from them by creating all sorts of kangaroo courts and trying to force citizens to join such syndicates. If our court processes take too long to complete, it is the duty of our legislators and those in government to ensure that these processes are shortened by providing our judiciary with necessary capacity – financial and otherwise.
And it is not only politicians who are affected by libel. Even us journalists sometimes have our reputations injured by fellow journalists and their media organisations. The editors of this newspaper have had litigation against the Daily Mail, the Weekly Angel, Today, among others, and won.
The cases have taken long but they were eventually closed and judgment passed. No one should injure the reputation of others with impunity.
If we publish anything legally offensive against anyone, they have every right to seek redress in our courts of law. Just the same way if one is slandered by another citizen, they have every right to sue for slander. Usually there are no shortcuts to justice.
We have no problems with a media council as long as it is a voluntary one. And being voluntary means that we have a choice either to join it or to stay away from it. This choice must be respected otherwise the whole thing becomes mandatory.
And as we have stated before, one cannot in one breath advocate for a non-mandatory media council and at the same time try to force everyone to take up membership in it. Again, there is need to be clear about things.
In any given discipline, there are people who pursue it with honour and with decency and there are people who don’t.
To say that the media are terrible is not quite accurate or fair.
To the press alone, chequered as it is with abuses, the world is indebted for all the triumphs which have been gained by reason and humanity, over error and oppression.
The press should be considered not as the fourth branch of the government but as an essential counterweight to the government, the basic check against abuse of official power.
Both freedom of speech and press freedom often provoke public and political controversy, but experience shows again and again that when freedom is diseased, the only cure is more freedom.
A newspaper should tell the truth as only intellectual honesty can discern the truth. It should do what is in conscience needful and right.
No one should be able to pull the curtains of secrecy around decisions which can be revealed without injury. And we will never forget what President Levy Mwanawasa had to say on this in 2002.
When we obtained the Zamtrop Account through a court order following an application we had made in court, we asked our lawyers to go and see President Mwanawasa and find out from him if there was anything in these accounts whose exposure would jeopardise national security so that we could avoid doing so.
The President’s response was simply that there’s nothing of national security in theft, theft could not be hidden behind national security and we should use the accounts as we deem fit. This was our President’s response. Who can disagree with this? Why can’t we use it as a benchmark when looking at our access to information bill?
The truth is, if you don’t like what you are seeing in the news, you probably don’t like what is going on in society right now. If we don’t mirror our communities as they exist, then we may not have thriving and growing newspapers.
People believe that having freedom of expression is a natural phenomenon. It’s not. It is a result of intense care and vigilance.
The unregulated voice, the unregulated media isn’t as dangerous to the public as is the silenced voice.
We all want to do right and do well. But if you don’t do well, you are not going to be in a position to do right.
In our popular discussions, unwise ideas must have a hearing as well as wise ones, dangerous ideas as well as safe, unZambian as well as Zambian.
The need to protect what we detest is the reason freedom of the mind both exists and remains under siege.
Power corrupts, and there is nothing more corrupting than power exercised in secret.
The things we are seeking are about freedom and tolerance – to believe, speak, publish, congregate and lobby as you see fit, while allowing others to do likewise, even people whose expressions you find abhorrent.
It may not be pleasant to see the truth, but we can assure you that the alternative is virtual slavery.
It seems that some government officials never learn that the cover-up can be worse than the underlying conduct.
In every country, press freedom boils down to a three-way deal between state power and popular instinct and the media’s muscle. The freedoms we are seeking are not so that we can freely praise and comfort our public officials. We are seeking them so that we can freely criticise our public officials.
A free press is not necessarily an angelic press. Therefore, tolerance for a free press is the touchstone for a democratic society. We say this because speech is the mark of humanity.
Standing up for what is right isn’t always popular.
The press has a responsibility not only to report the truth, but to do so with a sense of accountability and decorum. Freedom of speech is not about good speech versus bad; it is about who holds the power to decide which is which.
To us, it’s clear that only a strong and secure democracy can guarantee the fullest and more free exchange of ideas, no matter how much those ideas hurt or incite. You cannot have a democracy and you cannot have a community if you do not have a way to share ideas.
And the right to express yourself is not something that is inherently part of being a journalist; it’s part of being a human being.
And we don’t think it’s fair to blame press freedom or access to information when someone makes a fool of himself in public.
As a newspaper, we have to stand up for what is right and not worry about what is politically feasible. And surely, the glory of journalism is its transience.
We think the great thing about the freedoms we are talking about is that they extend to everyone, the wise and the foolish.
For this reason, the best we can say is simply to ask God to bless the media.
Labels: FREEDOM OF INFORMATION BILL, MEDIA, MIKE MULONGOTI, PRESS
Read more...
Don't be arrogant in your push for reforms, Mulongoti urges media
By Masuzyo Chakwe
Sunday May 04, 2008 [04:00]
INFORMATION minister Mike Mulongoti yesterday urged the media not to be arrogant and confrontational in the manner they were pushing for law reforms. But Press Freedom Committee of The Post chairperson Chansa Kabwela said The Post will not beg for the enactment of freedom of information laws.
During the commemoration of the World Press Freedom Day (WPFD) which fell yesterday under the theme 'Freedom of the Press, Access to Information and Empowerment of People', Mulongoti said the confrontation by the media was not necessary because what was needed was dialogue.
Mulongoti accused the media of pushing an open door.
"I don't know why people are busy pushing an open door, you might falland break your bones. It is not necessary. I have spent this time going round seeking information on the benefits. I have gone round trying to learn from the best experiences that others have had over this piece of legislation," he said. "What I need to be comforted with is that we are moving together.
I have spent time studying this piece of legislation and I have looked at the British one and I have the question 'is this all there is to this law' and I was told 'yes' that was all there was to the law. I find that piece of legislation very comforting."
Mulongoti said at no time had the government said the freedom of information bill was for the press alone.
"Like our neighbours in Tanzania, they have a council which is responsible and if one of the media organisations transgresses, they can go to the council and appeal for regulation and that's all we say," he said.
"All we are saying is if I am abused, if my rights have been infringed, where do I go? Going to court may take me 10 years. In the meantime you have written about me having done something and I am divorced at home. Are you going to compensate me for being divorced?"
Mulongoti said people only wanted some consideration and that if one asks for an apology, it should be given.
"Apologise and my wife will reconsider that and we will reconcile. But if I am in court for 10 years, what is going to happen to me? All we are saying regulate yourselves; no one is imposing legislation on you," he said.
Mulongoti said the government only wanted media organisations to report responsibly.
"I have to go to Parliament to convince the other legislatures that it is a good piece but they have also had experiences. I heard Mr Chanda (Press Association of Zambia vice president Amos) the other day saying 'don't fear', surely once bitten, twice shy.
You expect those legislatures not to be scared if you reported something that had injured them? Comfort them that you don't intend to injure them. Comfort them not by insisting that you must put this piece of legislation whether you like it or not. That is not dialogue. We must move together," he said.
Mulongoti said if there were issues that the media organisations were not agreeable to, they should dialogue.
He warned that the beneficiaries of the information, the public, could take the law into their own hands when they get hurt if parties involved do not act together.
"We must provide remedies for each other. In this country we have got situations where we need to consult each other. Consensus does not mean agreeing on everything, consensus means we have been consulting each other. Sometimes you agree and disagree," he said.
Mulongoti said he had been accessible to everybody in the past one year he had worked in the information ministry.
Mulongoti also accused Post columnist Laura Miti-Banda of lacking humility.
"Last week when I was leaving somebody sent me a text that ‘have you talked to Laura Miti because she lacks humility.’ I have got that text in my cell phone.
She lacks humility, those of you who have read her articles, she writes so many things, as if those she is writing about are her age mates. But I believe I’m older than her and some of the things she writes about us, all us, is like our socialisation is meaningless," he said.
Mulongoti said people should have courtesy when they write about each other.
"We have no cause to write to her and say Dear Madame, eeh...you know in life there are people called termagants, they take advantage of freedoms to abuse others because by nature they are termagants. If you don't know that word, check it up," he said.
He said there was need to protect people from injury.
"There are others who suffer in pain quietly and silently and when they die, you can't say that you sat in the way of legislation, legislation empowered to abuse me more? The issue here is not the question of quarrelling, we are trying to put in laws that help," he said.
Mulongoti wondered whether journalists had taken time to read the freedom of information bill in Zambia as well as that of other countries.
"They were telling me that in England that in fact now the people asking for the law are not journalists because they read and found that what they thought, they had difficulties. So colleagues in the press, don't take it as if it is a fight, fight with who? I have given you an example, my office and phone is open to you, what more do you want? Are you not getting access and freedom of information from me?" he asked.
Mulongoti said he had agreed to have a workshop where he could meet with media organisations and sort out the issues.
"It's not me to comfort myself but to comfort other colleagues because they have fears and I must ensure that those fears must be put to rest. And we will not put those fears to rest as long as you intimidate me and insist ‘unless you give us this piece of legislation... we will...’ You don't do that, it's a process of legislation and negotiation," he said.
"And those of you fighting with yourselves, come on board, you are all part of the process.
As your minister, I can assure you I also want freedom of information but I am also mindful of the fact that because human beings are different, people are different. If you give them too much freedom, I don't know what they will do with that freedom."
He said there were people who wrote comforting things about others and people who made him feel like vomiting.
"Because we acknowledge that people are different we can't stop them but we want to implore them to consider that within our society we have respect for each other, we have customs," he said.
"Let us move the process together, we won't move if you insist and intimidate those who say they have another divergent view, consider those views as one opinion, Parliament, civil society, the church, government all have pieces of opinions that must be harmonized. Comfort me that what I am doing is right.
Don't insist from an arrogant position. Insist from a position you have a correct argument because you are making those people dig in and once they dig in, it becomes difficult."
He said media organisations would not have an ally in him if they insisted on positions that could not offer an opportunity for compromise.
"That is not right, democracy is about viewpoints. Respect other views. Help me but don't guide me with a stick. It's like a dog; if you can't call it with a stick it will not come," he said.
But Kabwela said enacting access to information laws was not a favour to the media, let alone The Post.
She said if this was the case then The Post would not ask for it because they were not in the business of seeking favours.
"We have never been favour seekers. We don't trade in favours. And it should not be a reward to us for doing certain things or behaving in a certain manner," she said
Kabwela said some politicians had even suggested that they would only support the access to information bill if the Post joined the Media Ethics Council of Zambia (MECOZ).
She said this would not happen.
"Certainly not for this reason. Membership to MECOZ is voluntary. And voluntary means voluntary; it does not mean mandatory. If they want it to be mandatory let them go ahead and make it so by legislating. However, this will be undesirable.
But if it is their wish, let it be. We are much better placed to deal with laws and courts. We have seventeen years of experience in this area. And we have demonstrated great and increasing capacity in defending ourselves and our rights in the courts of law," she said.
Kabwela said The Post would never seek favours from anyone over these issues because these matters were for the people of Zambia.
She said freedom of information and access to information laws were aimed at benefiting the people of Zambia.
However, Kabwela said The Post would always be willing to share knowledge and experience over these issues with the politicians and anyone else.
"For us, we have demonstrated that we know how to get the information we need. If we didn't, Mr Chiluba and his friends wouldn't be facing corruption charges in our courts of law today. So if you erroneously think that enacting access to information laws is a favour to The Post, please don't do it," she said.
"But the truth is, out of ignorance, you will only be doing yourselves a dis-favour; you will only be harming your own interests. And don't hold us, or the media in general, for the harm you will cause to yourselves."
Kabwela said a free press was non negotiable.
"Don't complain that the media is not informing you adequately. In short, what I am saying is that The Post will not beg for the enactment of these laws; it will not be coerced or blackmailed into joining MECOZ. It will only join MECOZ if it becomes a mandatory requirement," said Kabwela.
Women for Change (WfC) assistant programme officer for information and advocacy Mwaba Simfunkwe said as Zambians commemorated WPFD this year, they should not forget that rural communities were also part of Zambia and that they needed to know how they were being governed.
United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon called on societies to spare no effort in bringing to justice the perpetrators of attacks on journalist.
MISA Zambia chairperson Henry Kabwe said Zimbabwe was the lead country in the southern African region in terms of violations against journalists.
Kabwe said in the course of last year, MISA issued 181 alerts on violence against journalists and Zimbabwe had the highest at 57.
Kabwe also said linking freedom of information to media ethics was wrong.
Press Association of Zambia president Andrew Sakala urged members of parliament to support the bill once it is taken to Parliament.
World Press Freedom Day Organising Committee Chairperson Amos Chanda said the Bill was not meant for the media but for Zambians.
Labels: FREEDOM OF INFORMATION BILL, MIKE MULONGOTI, PRESS
Read more...
