CONTENTS | ANB-BIA HOMEPAGE | WEEKLY NEWS
|
Southern Africa Media freedom |
MEDIA
Press freedom — or rather the lack of Press freedom —
in many African countries
is a constant source of concern.
The author takes us on a birds-eye view
of the situation in southern Africa
The Emperor Napoleon once said that «four newspapers are more to be feared than a thousand bayonets». If the happenings in the Media in southern Africa are anything to go by, then it means the Media is really feared. There has been a total onslaught against the Media. In most instances it would appear, the problem is not with freedom of expression, but freedom after expression. But it must be admitted that while there has been a crackdown on «errant» journalists by governments, there have been one or two instances of journalists behaving badly. So let’s take a look around.
Swaziland: The liberalisation of the airwaves in Swaziland continues to be elusive, as it remains in the hands of the king. As far as the Press is concerned, the only national newspaper, The Swazi Observer, was closed. It is believed the paper carried reports which did not view the government in good light.
Congo RDC: Congo has had its fair share of press problems. Besides the never-ending civil war, there are also on-going problems between the government and the Press. In May this year, the director of La Libre Afrique was sentenced to three years in jail by a military court. Before his sentence, he had been kept in jail for about five months. His crime is vaguely described as that of «provoking the army.» In such cases the army has been known to act as both the complainant and the judge.
Angola: Angola National Radio‘s Domingos Mussauo was finally acquitted after spending about three months in jail. His crime was, that he had made reference to a letter the provincial governor had written to the President. Ironically, the Angolan Constitution guarantees Freedom of the Press, but what is actually practised is somewhat different, as those who dare to criticise the government have quickly found out. The Angolan Journalists Union have accused the police of using repressive measures to extract confessions. All this is reminiscent of what took place during single-party rule.
Zambia: As far back as 1968, Zambia’s President Kenneth Kaunda had said: «The Press is capable of making or destroying governments, given appropriate conditions...» This fear of the Press is still very evident in the corridors of power in Zambia, in spite of the fact that Kaunda is no longer resident. There is no love lost between the Post newspaper and Zambia’s government. Sheikh Chifuwe, a Post journalist was ejected from a news conference because, according to the Minister of Community Development, the Post was always «bad mouthing» the government. Another journalist, Dickson Jere, from the Monitor newspaper, received anonymous threats. This was after he had written an article implicating the head of the Zambian Secret Service in suspicious activities concerning the arms’ trade.
Namibia: In Namibia there was an uproar in Parliament when parliamentarians called for tough action to be meted out to the state-owned paper, New Era. Parliamentarians were incensed with the paper for, «biting the hand which feeds it». This accusation came about because New Era had been reluctant to be used as a government mouthpiece.
Mozambique: In Mozambique, the Attorney General unsuccessfully tried to force the editor of Metical newspaper, Carlos Cardoso, to reveal his sources. The government wanted to know the identity of the person who had sent a letter written by the Assistant Attorney-General to the paper. (ANB-BIA’s update - On 22 November, journalists and politicians were deeply shocked by news of Carlos Cardoso’s murder, killed the same day).
Zimbabwe: In tension filled Zimbabwe, the Supreme Court nullified the Zimbabwe Broadcasting Corporation (ZBC)’s monopoly over broadcasting. The ZBC is state-controlled and enjoyed a monopoly in broadcasting. The Supreme Court declared this monopoly, granted under Section 27 of the Broadcasting Act, to be inconsistent with Section 20 (1) of the Constitution which guarantees freedom of expression. It was hoped that the liberalisation of the airwaves in the country would allow different voices and opinions to be heard. But what happened? In the run-up to the government-sponsored Constitutional Referendum, the National Constitutional Assembly (NCA), a grouping of civil society organisations, had taken the ZBC to court for failing to air its adverts. Despite a court order, the ZBC ignored it and did not run the adverts.In the run-up to the June parliamentary elections, the ZBC refused to allow political party adverts from the opposition Movement for Democratic Change, to be broadcast. Indeed, this was a trying period for journalists.
South Africa: There have been a number of controversies involving the Media in recent months. One such incident involved Dr Barney Pityana who chairs the South African Human Rights Commission. He had tried to justify a ban on media coverage of the National Conference on Racism. His reasoning was: «If a topic like this if badly handled, there might be an inappropriate level of media exposure when people are not ready for it.» Needless to say Pityana was not successful with his ban.
Democracy requires freedom and is sustained by freedom. French author, Albert Camus, once wrote: «A free press may be good or bad, but a repressed press is always bad.» Looking at the southern African situation as a whole, it would appear the region needs a responsible free press which will provide people with an alternative voice. This is the best safeguard against tyranny.
ENGLISH CONTENTS | ANB-BIA HOMEPAGE | WEEKLY NEWS
PeaceLink 2000 - Reproduction authorised, with usual acknowledgement