Normal
0
false
false
false
EN-US
X-NONE
X-NONE
MicrosoftInternetExplorer4
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:”Table Normal”;
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-qformat:yes;
mso-style-parent:””;
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin-top:0in;
mso-para-margin-right:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt;
mso-para-margin-left:0in;
line-height:115%;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:”Calibri”,”sans-serif”;
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-font-family:”Times New Roman”;
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;}
An
urgent call for media freedom in Zimbabwe.
urgent call for media freedom in Zimbabwe.
By Takura Zhangazha.
The Zimbabwean government has an obligation to listen to the
concerns of its citizens. In order for it to listen, the people of Zimbabwe must
be allowed to speak. And this they do in various ways but the most important
platform for speaking truth to power in Zimbabwe remains our media.
concerns of its citizens. In order for it to listen, the people of Zimbabwe must
be allowed to speak. And this they do in various ways but the most important
platform for speaking truth to power in Zimbabwe remains our media.
Regrettably in the three years since the formation of the
inclusive government, our media has remained under siege by the state via
repressive legislation. And it is this repressive legislation that has
led to the generation of an unfortunate culture of impunity against media
professionals, where it is a general habit by politicians and others to seek to
have journalists arrested. This is a
point that government ministers, particularly the Ministry of Media,
Information and Publicity will invariably try to deny but it remains an
unfortunate and dismaying truth.
inclusive government, our media has remained under siege by the state via
repressive legislation. And it is this repressive legislation that has
led to the generation of an unfortunate culture of impunity against media
professionals, where it is a general habit by politicians and others to seek to
have journalists arrested. This is a
point that government ministers, particularly the Ministry of Media,
Information and Publicity will invariably try to deny but it remains an
unfortunate and dismaying truth.
Since the formation of the inclusive government, there has
been incremental change to our media landscape. Some elements of this change
include the Zimbabwe Media Commission’s (ZMC) licensing a number of private
print media players, most of whom have gone on to publish. There has however
been no change to the undemocratic practice of criminalizing the media
profession via a number of pieces of legislation that protect public officials,
the police and national security services from media scrutiny. Further still,
there has been the maintenance of a political culture that wrongly views
media freedom as a privilege and not a right. This latter point has been
evidenced by the Minster of Media, information and Publicity, Mr. Webster Shamu
who used the occasion of World Press Freedom Day in 2011 to wrongly insist that
media freedom is a privilege.
been incremental change to our media landscape. Some elements of this change
include the Zimbabwe Media Commission’s (ZMC) licensing a number of private
print media players, most of whom have gone on to publish. There has however
been no change to the undemocratic practice of criminalizing the media
profession via a number of pieces of legislation that protect public officials,
the police and national security services from media scrutiny. Further still,
there has been the maintenance of a political culture that wrongly views
media freedom as a privilege and not a right. This latter point has been
evidenced by the Minster of Media, information and Publicity, Mr. Webster Shamu
who used the occasion of World Press Freedom Day in 2011 to wrongly insist that
media freedom is a privilege.
Most recently, there has been the harassment of the Standard
Newspaper editor, Nevanji Madanhire and journalist Nqaba Matshazi by the
Zimbabwe Republic Police (ZRP) on charges that are related to a raft of notorious
pieces of legislation that permit our courts of law to consider not only
defamation but freedom of expression as criminally punishable offenses.
The majority of criminal defamation charges have been largely resorted to by
persons of influence either by way of politics, business or religion. It is
most unfortunate that those that are personally or politically aggrieved by the
media may believe that the most effective port of call to seek redress is a
police station as opposed to amicable resolution of the grievance in terms of
the Voluntary Media Council of Zimbabwe (VMCZ) Media Code of Conduct.
Newspaper editor, Nevanji Madanhire and journalist Nqaba Matshazi by the
Zimbabwe Republic Police (ZRP) on charges that are related to a raft of notorious
pieces of legislation that permit our courts of law to consider not only
defamation but freedom of expression as criminally punishable offenses.
The majority of criminal defamation charges have been largely resorted to by
persons of influence either by way of politics, business or religion. It is
most unfortunate that those that are personally or politically aggrieved by the
media may believe that the most effective port of call to seek redress is a
police station as opposed to amicable resolution of the grievance in terms of
the Voluntary Media Council of Zimbabwe (VMCZ) Media Code of Conduct.
Resorting to the ZRP in order to seek media redress is
patently undemocratic and inimical to media freedom and freedom of expression,
whichever way one looks at it. It not only connotes detention for
expressing one’s self but also carries with it the fear of what happens in
holding cells to those that are deemed to be undermining government or
government related authority. This is not to say journalists are above the law,
but no one should be imprisoned or physically harassed for expressing an
opinion or writing a story that some may consider unfair or inaccurate. There
are mechanisms available for redress, such as the VMCZ or the civil courts in
addressing issues related to grievances over media stories.
patently undemocratic and inimical to media freedom and freedom of expression,
whichever way one looks at it. It not only connotes detention for
expressing one’s self but also carries with it the fear of what happens in
holding cells to those that are deemed to be undermining government or
government related authority. This is not to say journalists are above the law,
but no one should be imprisoned or physically harassed for expressing an
opinion or writing a story that some may consider unfair or inaccurate. There
are mechanisms available for redress, such as the VMCZ or the civil courts in
addressing issues related to grievances over media stories.
Where our politicians have retained laws that criminalize
freedom of expression, they have been the main actors in the continuation of a
culture of arrests that the media profession is now confronted with. The
three parties in the inclusive government, against better advice, decided to
amend and not repeal the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act
(AIPPA) in 2008. In doing so they did not remove the clauses that continue to
target journalists for criminal charges if they write a ‘false’ story. The same
political leaders also retained the Public Order and Security Act together with
the notorious and now law of first resort for the police when charging
journalists, the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act. The former
has undemocratic clauses that punish anyone, and in particular the media, for
undermining the authority of the President and the state security services.
freedom of expression, they have been the main actors in the continuation of a
culture of arrests that the media profession is now confronted with. The
three parties in the inclusive government, against better advice, decided to
amend and not repeal the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act
(AIPPA) in 2008. In doing so they did not remove the clauses that continue to
target journalists for criminal charges if they write a ‘false’ story. The same
political leaders also retained the Public Order and Security Act together with
the notorious and now law of first resort for the police when charging
journalists, the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act. The former
has undemocratic clauses that punish anyone, and in particular the media, for
undermining the authority of the President and the state security services.
When members of the inclusive government or parliament
get arrested on charges stemming from these laws, they expect the media to make
a lot of noise about the injustice of it all, yet when media professionals
insist that these laws are causing the undemocratic harassment, arrest and
detention of journalists, the politicians turn a blind eye and start talking
about ‘necessary compromises’ or citing similar legislation from other
jurisdictions. In one instance, at a media stakeholders conference called
for by the Ministry of Media, Information and Publicity in Kariba in 2009,
unconfirmed but reliable information indicates that the MDCs and Zanu Pf,
together with media stakeholders present, discussed the clauses in POSA that
criminalize insulting the President. The end result of that particular debate
was that the law must include criminal charges against those that also insult
the Prime Minister!
get arrested on charges stemming from these laws, they expect the media to make
a lot of noise about the injustice of it all, yet when media professionals
insist that these laws are causing the undemocratic harassment, arrest and
detention of journalists, the politicians turn a blind eye and start talking
about ‘necessary compromises’ or citing similar legislation from other
jurisdictions. In one instance, at a media stakeholders conference called
for by the Ministry of Media, Information and Publicity in Kariba in 2009,
unconfirmed but reliable information indicates that the MDCs and Zanu Pf,
together with media stakeholders present, discussed the clauses in POSA that
criminalize insulting the President. The end result of that particular debate
was that the law must include criminal charges against those that also insult
the Prime Minister!
This limited understanding of the importance of freedom of
expression and media freedom by the inclusive government is not only
disappointing but has dire consequences for the collective national quest to
make our society a democratic one. It also essentially points to the necessity
of a new urgency by all media stakeholders in fighting for media freedom and
freedom of expression in Zimbabwe. No single Zimbabwean must express
gratitude to the government for licensing more newspapers because the
government should not be doing so anyway. Neither must media stakeholders
continue to be saddled with the burden of accepting incremental and minimal
media reforms simply because the government has asked them to do so. Those that
are in power or positions of influence consistently seek to posit that media
freedom is a privilege that can be taken at any time, an assumption that is not
only wrong but one that violates Section 20 of Zimbabwe’s Constitution.
expression and media freedom by the inclusive government is not only
disappointing but has dire consequences for the collective national quest to
make our society a democratic one. It also essentially points to the necessity
of a new urgency by all media stakeholders in fighting for media freedom and
freedom of expression in Zimbabwe. No single Zimbabwean must express
gratitude to the government for licensing more newspapers because the
government should not be doing so anyway. Neither must media stakeholders
continue to be saddled with the burden of accepting incremental and minimal
media reforms simply because the government has asked them to do so. Those that
are in power or positions of influence consistently seek to posit that media
freedom is a privilege that can be taken at any time, an assumption that is not
only wrong but one that violates Section 20 of Zimbabwe’s Constitution.
Leave a Reply