South Africa: Media allowed ANC to fast-track the media tribunal [opinion]

WHAT goes around comes around. Time has now come for the South African media to learn it the hard way. Many people might wonder why the recent furore over the proposed media tribunal in South Africa is not a surprise to the Media Institute of Southern Africa (Misa).

Misa has been expecting such a turn of events in the South African media environment, but as they say, a comfortable dog cannot be compelled to bark until danger looms closer. As a prominent media rights organisation with media freedom watchdog status in southern Africa, Misa has recently noticed a paradigm shift in media operations in SA and has been calling for alertness from the media fraternity, with a need to put preventative mechanisms in place to avoid the imminent danger of media freedom erosion. But prominent media gurus and stakeholders chose to neglect the call, and rather sit idly in the comfort of their ‘democratic SA’.

 

Likewise, through Misa’s media monitoring strategy, we have since noticed developments regarding SADC’s quiet diplomacy against Zimbabwe, and have been asking questions as to whether other SADC countries care anything about the violation of media freedom in Zimbabwe.

 

Their courage and political ability to stand against unjust practices has been tested, and our conclusion is clear: the political structures of SADC are not a friend of the media, and what goes on in one SADC country, is also in danger of being replicated in other SADC countries. Zimbabwe can therefore be seen, in this context, as a pioneer of SADC’s political leadership strategy, worthily nicknamed ‘The New SADC Order’.
It is imperative to note that the very strategy, which gave birth to the ‘Access to

 

Information and Protection of Privacy Act’ in Zimbabwe (Paiza), is similar to the strategy that brought about the Media Practitioner’s Act in Botswana, the Media Commission Bill in Swaziland, and now the Protection of Information Bill and Media Appeals Tribunal in SA. All these laws have no other motive in them, but to control the media through statutes. What a clandestine move by SADC countries, to muzzle the media and suppress free expression?

 

It is therefore quite embarrassing to note that most SA media did not notice this in advance. When Misa made mention of the deterioration of media freedom in SA during the world press freedom commemoration in Maputo, Mozambique on May 3, 2009, a great resistance was mounted by SA’s media representatives. This in itself was a sign that the SA media resembled a vehicle driven in darkness while facing a cliff.
Similarly, during the commemoration of world press freedom day in May this year, Misa and other media rights organisations pointed out the negative changes in SA’s media environment, a sign that the country’s political relationship with the media was about to sink. For example, in its annual media freedom index, Freedom House downgraded SA to its ‘partly free’ category, based on negative trends noted in 2009; it was the first time the country had not been ranked as having ‘fully free’ media since the mid-1990s.

 

Misa also proposed more advocacy which, among others, included a debate organised by Misa in partnership with Freedom House and the Institute for the Advancement of Journalism (IAJ) in Johannesburg on May 28, in order to bring urgent attention to the new threats that are emerging in relatively free media environments in southern Africa.
However, it was quite disturbing that major and mainstream SA media stakeholders neglected the invitation, and could not bother to pitch-up at the event. During the debate, Misa pointed out the emergence of repressive media laws in SA to be signs of a deteriorating media environment.

 

It was thus Misa’s concern that the SA government has gone too far, hence a stronger approach is needed in order to bring the situation to a complete halt. Misa therefore calls on the SA government to stop invading the peaceful media environment that existed in that country, and honour the access to information, and the freedom of expression rights, as guaranteed by the SA Constitution.

 

We salute the media self-regulatory mechanism that exists in that country, and denounce the ruling African National Congress (ANC)’s proposal for a Statutory Media Appeals Tribunal. The ANC should be reminded that they must desist from going ahead with restrictive proposals that disturbs the existing media fabric in that country.
Misa has noticed the ANC’s control over SA’s legislative body, which makes them instigators of ideas, even bad ones, for that matter, like the proposed Protection of Information Bill, nicknamed the ‘Secrecy Bill’ and worse, the Media Appeals Tribunal. We reiterate our call to the SA President, Jacob Zuma to at least respect democratic principles by desisting from endorsing his signature on the Secrecy Bill, or approving the draconian Media Appeals Tribunal.

 

SA is a vibrant democracy in SADC and this is immensely evident given the country’s transparent constitutional guarantee of freedom of information. The ANC government thus need to note that enacting the Protection of Information Bill and establishing a Media Appeals Tribunal will not add value to that flourishing democracy, but will rather cast spanners in the successful achievement brought about by freedom of information guarantee in the SA Constitution.

 

The Media Appeals Tribunal and the Secrecy Bill will together clamp down on the free flow of information, and the media’s ability to gather and publish information for the benefit of the public. Therefore not only the media will be kept hostage by these repressive laws, but all citizens of SA will be denied access to information and corruption will glitter as it goes unexposed.

 

-August 31, 2010 by Kaitira Kandjii and Reagan Malumo

……………..

Source: www.namibian.com.na/columns/full-story/archive/2010/august/article/media-allowed-anc-to-fast-track-the-media-tribunal/ (accessed on 31.08.10)