| |
Presentation by Geoffrey Nyarota,
founding editor-in-chief of The Daily News, now banned,
and UNESCO World Press Freedom Prize Laureate
at the commemoration of World Press Freedom Day
at United Nations Headquarters, New York,
on Wednesday, May 3, 2006
In any genuinely democratic political environment free media can be a catalyst for political, social and economic change. Where true democracy and the civil rights of citizens are effectively undermined, as has been the case in some authoritarian states in my part of the world in southern Africa, the media, when supported by a courageous and determined civil society, can play a vanguard role in fighting for basic rights and freedom.
A prerequisite for the media to play a meaningful role in the process of campaigning for political change in any society is the guarantee by a government of free public press for its citizens and their associations, extended to members of news gathering organizations, and their published reporting.
Such guarantee is often non-existent and the primary task of the media in such cases has been to campaign, in the first instance, for the establishment of a media climate that is conducive to a free flow of information.
Authoritarian governments customarily formulate strategies to establish total control over the print press and the electronic media, including more recently the Internet, while they seek to entrench themselves permanently in positions of uncontested supremacy. While ordinary citizens have been denied free access to information, as is their democratic right, the safety and security of journalists have thus been undermined.
It is ironical that journalists in such countries, including those who work for small newspapers, are exposed to the greatest risk and often assume professional responsibilities far exceeding those of their counterparts on more celebrated publications in freer societies. The role and function of the latter category are inherently appreciated and respected by both government and the public. In the absence of effective political opposition parties under authoritarian government, independent publications often become the de facto opposition. They are thus targeted for reprisal by reactionary of intransigent regimes.
T
he emergence of the Post newspaper in Zambia in 1990 precipitated a series of events that culminated in the replacement of founding President Dr Kenneth Kaunda's United National Independence Party (UNIP), in power since 1964. But wherever media, especially the independent press, play a critical role as watchdog over government it is inevitably at great risk. The Post was no exception. The newspaper's editor and journalists were repeatedly arrested on spurious charges. At one point more than 100 cases of defamation were pending in the law courts against the newspaper, most of them at the instigation of government ministers.
Across the border in Malawi, for almost the entire duration of former dictator Dr Hastings Kamuzu Banda's rule the citizens enjoyed limited access to information. Two newspapers circulated, both owned by the President himself, while the Malawi Broadcasting Corporation, the only public broadcaster, was owned by government.
By the time Banda's dictatorship collapsed in 1994 a total of 19 new newspapers competed for readers on the streets, all privately owned and fiercely independent. With the backing of a courageous civil society they successfully campaigned for political transformation, bringing the Life-President's fierce grip on power to a premature end after 30 years in office.
My own country, Zimbabwe, is currently a nation in turmoil. The ruling party, President Robert Mugabe's Zanu-PF has been in office for a total of 26 years. While general elections have been held regularly President Mugabe's unrelenting hold on the reins of power has resulted, not from the popular appeal of Zanu-PF, but partly from intimidation and violence and partly from the party's tight control of major newspapers and radio and television.
A popular and critical independent daily newspaper, the Daily News, of which I was founding editor in 1999, was banned by government in 2003. During the paper's four years of existence the Daily News effectively demonstrated how an independent and widely circulating publication can be a strategic catalyst for political and social change when it highlights the failures of the ruling elite, while ventilating the concerns and aspirations of a subjugated populace.
Zanu-PF suffered a decisive defeat in a referendum on proposed constitutional change in February 2000 and, immediately thereafter, almost lost a general election to a fledgling political opposition party, the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC), amid much government-sponsored political violence and amid accusations of election-rigging. Zanu-PF had previously secured easy victories - and by an overwhelming majority - in every election since Zimbabwe's independence in 1980.
Political pundits attributed the change in the political fortunes of the ruling party to the general disenchantment of the populace with a government that had become enmeshed in violence, corruption, the abuse of basic human rights and a chronic mismanagement of the economy. The simultaneous emergence of a vibrant and well-coordinated opposition party, the MDC, as well as a fiercely independent and mass-circulating daily newspaper also had a tremendous impact on the political transformation in Zimbabwe in what became a watershed year, 2000.
With the demise of the Daily News in 2003 the political situation has essentially reverted to the status quo prior to 1999 - that of government's unchallenged monopoly of the media sector and near-total control over the dissemination of information.
The few existing independent newspapers are limited in circulation and priced beyond the means of the ordinary worker. Zimbabweans are therefore forced to rely, once again, on the government's vast media empire as a regular source of essential information. Citizens are therefore rendered incapable of making informed decisions on issues that affect their lives on the basis of information disseminated from a diversity of sources, as should be the case in a democracy.
The outcome of parliamentary elections held in March 2005 reflected the skewed nature of Zimbabwe's media, aggravated by the total absence of a serious challenge to government's unmitigated daily propaganda. Also reflected were the consequences of government's regime of draconian media laws that have rendered the practice of journalism in that country a hazardous occupation. Not only have independent media been denied free access to official information, as a result, but journalists and other media workers have been harassed, arrested and tortured, while media establishments have been subjected to physical attacks, including with bombs. Four independent newspapers have been banned. Hundreds of journalists and other media workers have been deprived of employment.
The management of the Voice of the People (VOP) were arrested in January and charged with operating a radio station without a licence. They are due to appear in court on June 15. This is one of three radio stations now broadcasting to Zimbabwe from abroad. The Broadcasting Services Act does not permit the operation of radio stations inside the country, except my government.
In the absence of assistance from the international community, there is obviously a limit to what privately owned media organizations can achieve while trying to hold a powerful and authoritarian regime accountable to the people.
In Zimbabwe, for instance, most independent media organizations operate on a shoe-string budget in a situation of ever-increasing operating costs and spiralling inflation. International funding organizations could help organizations such as the Media Institute of Southern Africa (MISA) in its crusade for media diversity and the dismantling of draconian media laws, while, at the same time, organizing much needed training programs for media personnel and setting up structures for initiatives such as community radio, to be owned and operated by local communities.
Above all, there is specific need for the outside world to maintain an interest in and keep debate alive on the plight of journalists in Zimbabwe and other countries where governments trample on press freedom. Only powerful media organizations can force any governments to fight for the eradication or alleviation of grinding poverty.
(Geoffrey Nyarota is a Visiting Professor of Political Studies at Bard College, Annandale-on-Hudson, Upper New York State)
Press release>>
Video of the panel discussion>>
|
|
