Category: press freedom

  • By Kelvin Anthony, RNZ Pacific lead digital and social media journalist

    The Fiji government has announced it will repeal the controversial Media Industry Development Act 2010.

    Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka said cabinet had approved the tabling of a bill to repeal the Act “as a whole.”

    “The decision is pursuant to the People’s Coalition Government’s commitment to the growth and development of a strong and independent news media in the country,” said Rabuka in his post-cabinet meeting update.

    “It has been said that ‘media freedom and freedom of expression is the oxygen of democracy’,” he said.

    “These fundamental freedoms are integral to enable the people to hold their government accountable.

    “I am proud to stand here today to make this announcement, which was key to our electoral platform, and a demand that I heard echoed in all parts of the country that I visited,” he added.

    The announcement comes just days after Rabuka’s government introduced a new draft legislation to replace the act.

    Strongly opposed
    The move to replace the 2010 media law with a new one was strongly opposed during public consultations by local journalists and media organisations.

    They said there was no need for new legislation to control the media and called for a “total repeal” of the existing regulation.

    The country’s Deputy Prime Minister, Manoa Kamikamica, told RNZ Pacific last Friday that there were areas of concern that local stakeholders had raised during the consultation session of the proposed new bill.

    “We hear what the industry is saying, we will make some assessments and then make a final decision,” he said.

    But Rabuka’s announcement today means that the decision has been made.

    RNZ Pacific has contacted the Fijian Media Association for comment.

    ‘Good decision’ but investment needed
    University of the South Pacific head of journalism programme Associate Professor Shailendra Singh said the announcement was expected.

    Dr Singh said repealing the punitive legislation was a core election platform promise of the three challenger parties which are now in power.

    “This is a good decision because the Fijian media and other stakeholders were not sufficiently consulted when the decree was promulgated in June 2010.”

    But he said while getting rid of the media act was welcomed, the coalition was working on a new legislation and “we have to wait and see what that looks like”.

    “The media act was dead in the water or redundant before the change in government. The new government could not have implemented it after coming to power, having criticised it and campaigned against it in their election campaign,” he said.

    “Repealing the act removes the fear factor prevalent in the sector for nearly 13 years now.”

    Dr Singh said the government had committed to the growth and development of a strong news media.

    Public good investment
    But that, he said, would require more than the repeal of the act.

    “[Improving standards] will require some financial investments by the state since media organisations are struggling financially due to the digital disruption followed by covid.”

    He said among the many challenges, the media industry was struggling to retain staff.

    “So incentives like government scholarships specifically in the media sector could be one way of helping out.

    “Media is a public good and like any public good government should invest in it for the benefit of the public.”

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • By Kelvin Anthony, RNZ Pacific lead digital and social media journalist

    The Fiji government is signalling that it will not completely tear down the country’s controversial media law which, according to local newsrooms and journalism commentators, has stunted press freedom and development for more than a decade.

    Ahead of the 2022 general elections last December, all major opposition parties campaigned to get rid of the Media Industry Development Act (MIDA) 2010 — brought in by the Bainimarama administration — if they got into power.

    The change in government after 16 years following the polls brought a renewed sense of hope for journalists and media outlets.

    But now almost 100 days in charge it appears Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka’s coalition is backtracking on its promise to get rid of the punitive law, a move that has been condemned by the industry stakeholders.

    “The government is totally committed to allowing people the freedom of the press that will include the review of the Media Act,” Rabuka said during a parliamentary session last month.

    “I believe we cannot have a proper democracy without a free press which has been described as the oxygen of democracy,” he said.

    Rabuka has denied that his government is backtracking on an election promise.

    “Reviewing could mean eventually repealing it,” he told RNZ Pacific in February.

    “We have to understand how it [media act] is faring in this modern day of media freedom. How have other administrations advance their own association with the media,” he said.

    He said he intended to change it which means “review and make amendments to it”.

    “The coalition has given an assurance that we will end that era of media oppression. We are discussing new legislation that reflects more democratic values.”

    And last week, that discussion happened for the first time when consultations on a refreshed version of a draft regulation began in Suva as the government introduced the Media Ownership and Registration Bill 2023.

    The bill is expected to “address issues that are undemocratic, threatens freedom of expression, and hinders the growth and development of a strong and independent news media in Fiji.”

    The proposed law will amend the MIDA Act by removing the punitive clauses on content regulation that threatens journalists with heavy fines and jail terms.

    “The bill is not intended as a complete reform of Fiji’s media law landscape,” according to the explanations provided by the government.

    No need for government involvement
    But the six-page proposed regulation is not what the media industry needs, according to the University of the South Pacific’s head of journalism programme Associate Professor Shailendra Singh.

    Dr Shailendra Singh
    Associate Professor Shailendra Singh . . . “We have argued there is no need for legislation.” Image: RNZ Pacific

    “We have argued there is no need for legislation,” he said during the public consultation on the bill last Thursday.

    “The existing laws are sufficient but if there has to be a legislation there should be minimum or no government involvement at all,” he said.

    The Fijian Media Association (FMA) has also expressed strong opposition against the bill and is calling for the MIDA Act to be repealed.

    “If there is a need for another legislation, then government can convene fresh consultation with stakeholders if these issues are not adequately addressed in other current legislation,” the FMA, which represents almost 150 working journalists in Fiji, stated.

    Speaking on behalf of his colleagues, FMA executive member and Communications Fiji Limited news director Vijay Narayan said “we want a total repeal” of the Media Act.

    “We believe that it was brought about without consultation at all…it was shoved down our throats,” Narayan said.

    “We have worked with it for 16 years. We have been staring at the pointy end of the spear and we continue to work hard to build our industry despite the challenges we face.”

    ‘Restrictions stunts growth’
    He said the Fiji’s media industry “needs investment” to improve its standards.

    Narayan said the FMA acknowledged that the issue of content regulation was addressed in the new law.

    But “with the restrictions in investment that also stunts our growth as media workers,” he added.

    “The fact that it will be controlled by politicians there is a real fear. What if we have reporting on something and the politician feels that the organisation that is registered should be reregistered.”

    The FMA has also raised concerns about the provisions in relation to cross-media ownership and foreign ownership as key issues that impacts on media development and creates an unequal playing field.

    Sections 38 and 39 of the Media Act impose restrictions on foreign ownership on local local media organisations and cross-media ownership.

    According to a recent analysis of the Act co-authored by Dr Singh, they are a major impediment to media development and need to be re-examined.

    “It would be prudent to review the media ownership situation and reforms periodically, every four-five years, to gauge the impact, and address any issues, that may have arisen,” the report recommends.

    Fijian media stakeholders
    Fijian media stakeholders at the public consultation on the Media Ownership and Regulation Bill 2023 in Suva on 23 March 2023. Image: Fijian Media Association/RNZ Pacific

    But Suva lawyer and coalition government adviser Richard Naidu is of the view that all issues in respect to the news media should be opened up.

    Naidu, who has helped draft the proposed new legislation, said it “has preserved the status quo” and the rules of cross-ownership and foreign media ownership were left as they were in the Media Act.

    “Is that right? That is a question of opinion…because before the [MIDA Act] there were no rules on cross-media ownership, there were no rules on foreign media ownership.”

    Naidu said the MIDA Act was initially introduced as a bill and media had two hours to to offer its views on it before its implementation.

    “So, which status quo ought to be preserved; the one before the [MIDA Act] was imposed or the one as it stands right now. Those are legitimate questions.”

    “There is a whole range of things which need to be reviewed and which will probably take a bit of time.”

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Twelve-year sentences for the women condemned as president’s ‘revenge’ while UN report accuses country of possible crimes against humanity

    Belarus has handed long jail terms to senior staff at the country’s largest independent news site, which was forced to close after historic demonstrations against strongman Alexander Lukashenko over two years ago.

    The verdicts are the latest in a crackdown on journalists, opposition figures and activists who challenged Lukashenko’s claim that he won a sixth presidential term in 2020.

    Continue reading…

  • Asia Pacific Media Network’s chair Dr Heather Devere, deputy chair Dr David Robie and Pacific Journalism Review editor Dr Philip Cass last month made a submission on Papua New Guinea’s draft national media development policy in response to PNG journalists’ requests for comment. Here is part of their February 19 submission before the stakeholders consultation earlier this month.  

    ANALYSIS: By Heather Devere, David Robie and Philip Cass

    An urgent rethink is needed on several aspects of the Draft National Media Development Policy. In summary, we agree with the statement made by the Community Coalition Against Corruption (CCAC) on 16 February 2023 criticising the extraordinary “haste” of the Ministry’s timeframe for public consultation over such a critical and vitally important national policy.

    However, while the ministry granted an extra week from 20 February 2023 for public submissions this was still manifestly inadequate and rather contemptuous of the public interest.

    In our view, the ministry is misguided in seeking to legislate for a codified PNG Media Council which flies in the face of global norms for self-regulatory media councils and this development would have the potential to dangerously undermine media freedom in Papua New Guinea.

    The draft policy appears to have confused the purpose of a “media council” representing the “public interest” with the objectives of a government department working in the “national interest”.

    If the ministry pushes ahead with this policy without changes it risks Papua New Guinea sliding even further down the RSF World Press Freedom Index. Already it is a lowly 62nd out of 180 countries after falling 15 places in 2021.

    Some key points:

    • Article 42 of the Papua New Guinea Constitution states that “Every person has the right to freedom of expression and the right to receive and impart ideas and information without interference, including the freedom to seek, receive and impart information and opinions of any kind in any form.” (Our emphasis)

    • Article 43 of the Constitution further states that “Every person has the right to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion, including the freedom to manifest and propagate their religion or belief in worship, teaching, practice and observance.”

    • These provisions in the Constitution reflect the importance of media freedom in Papua New Guinea and the commitment to a free, diverse, and independent media environment. There are existing laws in PNG that support these principles.

    • In September 2005, Pacific Journalism Review published a complete edition devoted to “media ethics and accountability” which is available online here. In the Introduction, the late Professor Claude-Jean Bertrand, a global expert in M*A*S (Media Accountability Systems) and media councils and free press in democracies, wrote: “Accountability implies being accountable, accountable to whom? To the public, obviously. [i.e. Not to governments]. While regulation involves only political leaders and while self-regulation involves only the media industry, media accountability involves press, profession and public.” The PJR edition cited published templates and guidelines for public accountability systems.

    • On World Press Freedom Day 2019, António Guterres, United Nations Secretary-General, declared: “No democracy is complete without access to transparent and reliable information. It is the cornerstone for building fair and impartial institutions, holding leaders accountable and speaking truth to power.”

    • On 12 November 2019, the Melanesia Media Freedom Forum (MMFF) was established and it declared: “A better understanding is needed of the role of journalism in Melanesian democracies. Awareness of the accountability role played by journalists and the need for them to be able to exercise their professional skills without fear is critical to the functioning of our democracies.”

    • The Forum also noted: “The range of threats to media freedom is increasing. These include restrictive legislation, intimidation, political threats, legal threats and prosecutions, assaults and police and military brutality, illegal detention, online abuse, racism between ethnic groups and the ever-present threats facing particularly younger and female reporters who may face violence both on the job and within their own homes.” The full declaration is here.

    • Media academics who were also present at this inaugural Forum made a declaration of their own in support of the journalists, saying that they “expressed strong concerns about issues of human rights, violence, and freedom of expression. They also expressed concerns about the effect of stifling legislation that had the power to impose heavy fines and prison sentences on journalists.” (Our emphasis). The full statement is here.

    APMN proposals regarding PNG’s Draft Media Policy:

    • That the Ministry immediately discard the proposed policy of legislating the PNG media Council and regulating journalists and media which would seriously undermine media freedom in Papua New Guinea;

    • That the Ministry extend the public consultation timeframe with a realistic deadline to engage Papua New Guinean public interest and stakeholders in a meaningful dialogue;

    • That the Ministry ensures a process of serious consultation with stakeholders such as the existing PNG Media Council, which do not appear to have had much opportunity to respond, journalists, media organisations and many other NGOs that need to be heard; and

    • That the Ministry consult a wider range of media research and publications and take guidance from media freedom organisations, journalism schools at universities, and an existing body of knowledge about media councils and systems.

    • Essentially journalism is not a crime, but a fundamental pillar of democracy as espoused through the notion of a Fourth Estate and media must be free to speak truth to power in the public interest not the politicians’ interest.

    Dr Heather Devere, formerly Director of Practice for the National Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies; Dr David Robie, founding Professor of Pacific Journalism and director of the Pacific Media Centre, convenor of Pacific Media Watch and a former Head of Journalism at the University of Papua New Guinea; and Dr Philip Cass, a PNG-born researcher and journalist who was chief subeditor of the Times of Papua New Guinea and worked on Wantok, and who is currently editor of Pacific Journalism Review.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • The National in Port Moresby

    Senior Papua New Guinean television journalist and columnist Scott Waide has challenged the government on what it actually wants to “regulate” in the draft national media development policy.

    During a policy consultation workshop with media stakeholders in Port Moresby last Thursday, he said “in the media ecosystem, there are many professions”.

    “There are radio broadcasters, directors, editors, producers, camera operators, photographers, engineers, who have to be licensed, ICT professionals, public relation professionals, bloggers, podcasters, video content producers, social media influencers and a whole heap of them.

    What do you want to regulate?” he asked.

    “And there’s the problematic niche of news media and journalism. That’s the part politicians and legislators don’t really like.”

    He said as a journalist, he was expected to follow rules which were enforced by the editor and the organisation.

    “I am not supposed to lie, defame, slander, be disrespectful, harm, show nudity on the platform that I operate on. Those are the rules,” he said.

    “And I disagree with the presenter from National Information and Communications Technology Authority (NICTA) who says self-regulation does not work. This is my self-regulation right here.

    “I am supposed to be honest, have integrity, accuracy, provide contextual truth, transparency, have respect and fairness, and be independent.

    Independent journalist Scott Waide at the media policy consultation
    Independent journalist Scott Waide and a former EMTV deputy news editor … “There’s the problematic niche of news media and journalism. That’s the part politicians and legislators don’t really like.” Image: Belinda Kora/ABC

    “All these are already self-regulation in the industry.”

    Ideas ‘will form basis of draft policy’
    The media stakeholders have been told that their comments, sentiments and ideas shared during the workshop on the draft policy would form the basis of the next draft version.

    Minister for Information and Communications Technology Timothy Masiu told the workshop that consultation was “ongoing”.

    He denied that the proposed policy was an attempt by the government to regulate, restrict, censor or control the exercising of the freedom of expression or speech enshrined in the Constitution.

    “Your comments, sentiments and ideas have been captured and will form the basis of the next version [of the draft policy],” he said.

    PNG's Information and Communication Technology Minister Timothy Masiu
    PNG’s Information and Communication Technology Minister Timothy Masiu . . . “For those who are saying it’s a rushed thing, we had to start from somewhere.” Image: PNG govt

    “For those who are saying it’s a rushed thing, we had to start from somewhere.”

    He added that the proposed policy was to outline “objectives and strategies for the use of media as a tool for development, such as the promotion of democracy, good governance, human rights, and social and economic development”.

    Call for ‘meaningful’ consultation
    Transparency International chairman Peter Aitsi called for proper, genuine and meaningful consultation, saying that it should not be a “three-week process”.

    The first version of the draft policy was released on February 5 with 12 days allowed for review, the second was released with six days for review, and the most recent one was on Wednesday — a day before the workshop.

    Department of Information and Communications Technology Deputy Secretary (Policy) Flierl Shongol said his team had noted all the comments.

    “We’ve got some comments in written form. We’ve also taken notes of comments presented in this workshop. So, we will respond to those comments,” he said.

    “You can also respond to tell us if our response actually reflects your views. [It] will form the basis of the next policy that will come out.”

    Republished from The National with permission.

    Four of PNG's media industry stalwarts at the media policy consultation
    Four of PNG’s media industry stalwarts at the media policy consultation . . . Harlyne Joku (from left), Priscilla Raepom, Tahura Gabi and Sincha Dimara. Image: Belinda Kora/ABC

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • By Gorethy Kenneth in Port Moresby

    The Papua New Guinean government has been bluntly and frankly reminded to leave mainstream media alone as a long awaited consultative workshop on the recently introduced National Media Development Policy took place in Port Moresby.

    Media stakeholders stood in unity with the PNG Media Council yesterday to express their concerns on the alleged threat it would pose if the government enforced control over the media in PNG.

    Transparency International-PNG chair Peter Aitsi reminded the government that a “free and independent media deters corruption and underpins justice”.

    “If we take some more independence away from the media, we [are] only adding more fuel to the flames of corruption,” Aitsi said.

    TIPNG’s response to the policy was that licensing through a government-enforced process would be a threat to the media professionals and that there were already existing laws that the media was abiding by.

    Also the draft policy did not explain why this was not sufficient to ensure accountability.

    Before Aitsi spoke, PNG Media Council president Neville Choi said the purported policy was not encouraged and that the national government’s push to control narrative was not supported.

    He stressed that every media house in PNG had its own complaints mechanism, own media code of ethics, code of conducts as guides and that there were laws that the media abided by. He saw no reason, based on the draft policy, for it to be progressed.

    ‘Lack of government support’
    “We remind government, that the current level and standard of journalism performers is largely a result of lack of government support to the journalism schools and institutions in our country,” Choi said.

    “And we remind government that before this policy was announced, the Media Council had already begun a reform process to address many of the concerns contained in this draft policy.

    “We ask that this process be respected, and supported if there is a will to contribute to improving the work of the media.

    “We call for full transparency and clarity on the purpose of this policy, and reject it in its current v2 form.

    “And I say this on the record, so that this continues throughout the rest of this consultation process.

    “We acknowledge that there are areas of concern from which solutions can be found in existing legislation and currently available avenues for legal redress.

    ‘Too much at stake’
    “There is too much at stake for this to be rushed.

    “There are too many media stakeholders, both within our country, the region, and internationally, who are watching closely the process of this policy formation.

    “We all owe it to our future generations, to do this right.”

    Prominent PNG journalist Scott Waide was also also highly critical of the government’s draft policy and warned against it going a step further.

    Pacific Media Watch reports that last month Waide wrote a scathing critique of the policy on the Canberra-based DevPolicy blog at the Australian National University.

    Gorethy Kenneth is a senior PNG Post-Courier journalist. Republished with permission.

  • EDITORIAL: PNG Post-Courier

    The discussions on Papua New Guinea’s new draft media development policy will come to the fore today when the media industry presents its response to the government.

    It is expected the PNG Media Council, which we are a member of, will present the position of the industry in response to the draft policy and members of the media fraternity, and other concerned institutions will also present their views to the Department of Information that is handling this exercise.

    The policy paper outlines the government’s strategies to use the media as a tool for development, however the consultation progresses amidst a growing fear in the industry that legislation is ready to go before Parliament and the consultation process is only an academic exercise.

    PNG Post-Courier
    PNG POST-COURIER

    Included in the proposed policy is the proposal to legislate the PNG Media Council and laws to impose penalties against journalists and media houses that are accused [of] bad reporting.

    The industry is of the view that the proposed changes will erode the independence of the media and the journalists and ultimately the freedoms relating to free speech that are enshrined in the national constitution.

    One cannot blame the industry and its practitioners for their concern considering the latest version to the policy document 2.1 contains 31 mentions of the word “regulation” in various instances among other things.

    In the entire document its transparency on penalties also goes as far as 6 words alone without any more being uttered in its delivery mechanisms.

    The PNG Media Council, for the record, is not a journalist organisation. It is an industry body and it functions to protect the interest of the industry.

    Today the council is in existence, with its executive members operating from their homes, while the media industry is operating with its newsroom managers dealing daily with challenges like the growing concerns of a country with many issues on top of the self-regulation of unethical journalism, poor presentation and story selections and accountability, among many that are a daily task at hand.

    On the other side, the government and its agencies are working in isolation, with no clear, honest and transparent media and communication strategies and allocate a budget to work with the mainstream media.

    At Independence, PNG inherited an information and communication apparatus that comprised the Office of Information, the National Broadcasting Commission, the Public Library, the National Archives and the National Museum, all with networks spread throughout the provinces.

    These institutions coordinate and disseminate government information to the masses, most of them illiterate at that time.

    Today a new generation of people live in PNG, the Department of Communication replaces the Office of Information, the NBC had moved into television, competing with more radio and TV networks, but the public libraries, archives and museums are either run down or closed.

    And the communication landscape has changed drastically with the advancement in information technology, including social media.

    All state agencies have media and communication units that are operating on ad hoc basis, sending invitations out only for groundbreaking ceremonies, report presentations and a few random press releases, hoping that the mainstream media will “educate, inform and communicate” to the masses and mobilise their support behind the state.

    Communication and stakeholder engagement is the least funded activity in government. This is a fact, and yet the government expects the mainstream media to be proactive and promote its work.

    How can the media, as an independent industry do that when its role is not encompassed into the entire government planning?

    The media is an important pillar of our democracy and is a useful tool for development. We just have to build an honest, transparent and workable partnership for the mutual benefit of everyone. This must happen.

    But it cannot work with a stick, sword, or even a gun to the head of any pillar of our governance and society.

    We look forward to the discussions today with the proponents of this policy document, and we hope to see more transparency on what is the end game that is mutually beneficial where we have to plot a new course in media-government relationship.

  • By Kelvin Anthony, RNZ Pacific digital and social media journalist, and Koroi Hawkins, RNZ Pacific journalist and Pacific Waves presenter

    A Pacific journalism academic has warned proposed amendments to media laws in Papua New Guinea, if “ill-defined”, could mirror the harsh restrictions in Fiji.

    Prime Minister James Marape’s government is facing fierce opposition from local and regional journalists for attempting to fasttrack a new media development policy.

    The draft law has been described by media freedom advocates as “the thin edge of the web of state control”.

    PNG’s Information and Communications Technology (ICT) Department released the Draft Media Development Policy publicly on February 5. It aims “to outline the objectives and strategies for the use of media as a tool for development”.

    The department gave stakeholders less than two weeks to make submissions on the 15-page document, but after a backlash the ICT chief extended the consultation period by another week.

    “I recognise the sensitivity and importance of this reform exercise,” ICT Minister Timothy Masiu said after giving in to public criticism and extending the consultation period until February 24.

    Timothy Masiu
    ICT Minister Timothy Masiu . . . “I recognise the sensitivity and importance of this reform exercise” Photo: PNG govt/RNZ Pacific

    Masiu said he instructed the Information Department to “facilitate a workshop in partnership with key stakeholders”, adding that the Information Ministry “supports and encourages open dialogue” on the matter.

    “I reaffirm to the public that the government is committed to ensuring that this draft bill will serve its ultimate purpose,” he said.

    The new policy includes provisions on regulating the media industry and raising journalism standards in PNG, which has struggled for years due to lack of investment in the sector.

    But media leaders in PNG have expressed concerns, noting that while there are areas where government support is needed, the proposed regulation is not the solution.

    “The situation in PNG is a bit worrying if you see what happened in Fiji, even though the PNG Information Department has denied any ulterior motives,” University of the South Pacific head of journalism, Associate Professor Shailendra Singh, told RNZ Pacific.

    “There are concerns in PNG. Prominent journalists are worried that the proposed act could be the thin edge of the wedge of state media control, as in Fiji,” Dr Singh said, in reaction to Masiu’s guarantee that the policy is for the benefit of media organisations and journalists.

    “If you look at the Fiji situation, the Media Act was implemented in the name of democratising the media, ironically, and also improving professional standards.”

    Dr Singh said this is what is also being said by the PNG government but “in Fiji the Media Act has been a disaster for media rights”.

    Shailendra Singh
    USP’s Associate Professor Shailendra Singh . . . “In Fiji the Media Act has been a disaster for media rights.” Image: RNZ Pacific

    “Various reports blame the Fiji Media Act for a chilling effect on journalism and they also hold the Act responsible for instilling self-censorship in the Fiji media sector,” he said.

    “If the PNG media policy provisions are ill-defined, as the Fiji Media Act was, and if it has harsh punitive measures, it could also result in a chilling effect on journalism and this in turn could have major implications for democracy and freedom of speech in PNG.”

    The Media Industry Development Act (MIDA) 2010 and its implementation meant that Fiji was ranked 102nd out of 180 countries by Reporters without Borders in 2022.

    Earlier this month Fiji’s Attorney-General Siromi Turaga publicly apologised to journalists for the harassment and abuse they endured during the Bainimarama government’s reign.

    But Dr Singh said PNG appeared to have been “emboldened” by the Fijian experience.

    Media freedom a Pacific-wide issue
    He said other Pacific leaders had also threatened to introduce similar legislation and “this is a major concern”.

    “Fiji and PNG are the two biggest countries in the Pacific [which] often set trends in the region, for better or for worse. The question that comes to mind is whether countries like Solomon Islands or Vanuatu will follow suit? [Because] over the years and even recently, the leaders of these two countries have also threatened the news media.”

    A major study co-authored by the USP academic, which surveyed more than 200 journalists in nine countries and was published in Pacific Journalism Review in 2021, revealed that “Pacific journalists are among the youngest, most inexperienced and least qualified in the world”.

    Dr Singh warned the research showed that legislation alone would not result in any significant improvements to journalism standards in Pacific countries, which is why committing money in training and development was crucial.

    “Training and development are an important component of the Fiji Media Act. However, our analysis found zero dollars was invested by the Fiji government in training and development,” he said.

    “If we are to take any lessons from Fiji, and if the PNG government is serious about standards, it needs to invest at least some of its own money in this venture of improving journalism.”

    This is a sentiment shared by Media Council of PNG president, Neville Choi, who said: “If the concern is poor journalism, then the solution is more investment in schools of journalism at tertiary institutions, this will also improve diversity and pluralism in the quality of journalism.

    “We need newsrooms with access to training in media ethics and legal protection from harassment,” Choi added.

    Dr Singh said that without proper financial backing in the media sector “there is unlikely to be any improvement in standards, [but] just a cowered down or subdued media [which] is not in PNG’s public interest, or the national interest, given the levels of corruption in the country.”

    APMN calls for ‘urgent rethink’
    The publisher of the Pacific Journalism Review, the Asia Pacific Media Network, has also condemned the move, calling for an “urgent rethink” of the draft media policy.

    The group is proposing for the communications ministry to “immediately discard the proposed policy of legislating the PNG Media Council and regulating journalists and media which would seriously undermine media freedom in Papua New Guinea”.

    The network also cited the 1999 Melanesian Media Declaration as a guideline for Pacific media councils and said the draft PNG policy was ignoring “established norms” for media freedom.

    The statement was co-signed by the APMN chair Dr Heather Devere; deputy chair Dr David Robie, a retired professor of Pacific journalism and author, and founding director of the Pacific Media Centre; and Pacific Journalism Review editor Dr Philip Cass, who was born in PNG and worked on the Times of Papua New Guinea and Wantok newspapers.

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

  • ANALYSIS: By Mong Palatino

    Various stakeholders have warned that the draft National Media Development Policy released by Papua New Guinea’s Department of Information and Communications Technology (DICT) on February 5 could undermine media freedom if approved by the government.

    The DICT asked stakeholders to share their input within 12 days, but this was extended for another week after Papua New Guinea’s Community Coalition Against Corruption (CCAC) criticised the short period for the consultation process.

    The draft policy lays the framework “for the use of media as a tool for development.” The state emphasised that “it includes provisions for the regulation of media, ensuring press freedom and the protection of journalists, and promoting media literacy among the population.”

    A controversial proposal in the draft is to transform the PNG Media Council into a body “that will have legal mandate that covers an effective and enforceable regulatory framework.”

    According to the draft policy, the new PNG Media Council “will ensure press freedom, protect journalists, and promote ethical standards in the media sector”.

    At present, the council is a nonprofit group promoting media freedom and the welfare of journalists. The draft recognises that “its primary role has been to promote ethical journalism and to support journalists in the pursuit of their professional duties.

    The Media Council of PNG working with Transparency International PNG in 2021.
    The Media Council of PNG working with Transparency International PNG in 2021 . . . community collaboration. Image: TI-PNG/FB

    Journalist Scott Waide underscored that “over three decades, its role has shifted to being a representative body for media professionals and a voice for media freedom.” He pointed out the implications of re-establishing the council with a broad mandate as defined in the draft policy, suggesting that the government hopes to gain control over the media sphere:

    The government’s intention to impose greater control over aspects of the media, including the MCPNG [Media Council], is ringing alarm bells through the region. This is to be done by re-establishing the council through the enactment of legislation. The policy envisages the council as a regulatory agency with licensing authority over journalists.

    The regulatory framework proposed for the new media council includes licensing for journalists. Licensing is one of the biggest red flags that screams of government control.

    The draft policy proposes to grant the media council powers to offer licences and accreditation to journalists and media outlets, handle complaints and sanctions, among other powers:

    Licensing and Accreditation: Requirements for media outlets and journalists to be licensed or accredited, including provisions for renewing licenses and for revoking licenses in cases of violations.

    Complaints and Sanctions: Mechanisms for the resolution of complaints against the media, including procedures for investigations and sanctions for breaches of ethical standards.

    Media Council PNG president Neville Choi, who is also co-chair of CCAC, reminded authorities of another way to improve journalism in the country:

    If the concern is poor journalism, then the solution is more investment in schools of journalism at tertiary institutions, this will also increase diversity and pluralism in the quality of journalism.

    We need newsrooms with access to trainings on media ethics and legal protection from harassment.

    Writer Fraser Liu rejected the proposed state regulation and urged authorities to review current legal options that can be used to deal with media reporting that violates the country’s laws.

    My view is the government should stay away from the fourth estate completely. This is a sinister move with obvious intentions.

    Government should not be regulating the media in any form as it infringes on rights to free speech. It can run media organisations to bring its own message out, but it should never exert control over the entire industry.

    Media agencies and agents must be left alone to their own ends, being free from cohesion of any sort, and if media reporting does in fact raise any legal issues like defamation, then the courts are the avenue for resolution. There is no shortage in Common law of such case precedent.

    Transparency International PNG chair Peter Aitsi added that disinformation on social media should be addressed without undermining free speech.

    While the abuse of social media platforms is a new issue that is given as justification for the media policy, there are already existing laws that address the issue without undermining media freedom.

    News about the draft policy also alarmed media groups in the region. The New Zealand-based Asia Pacific Media Network Inc. said that “media must be free to speak truth to power in the public interest not the politicians’ interest.” Adding:

    In our view, the ministry is misguided in seeking to legislate for a codified PNG Media Council which flies in the face of global norms for self-regulatory media councils and this development would have the potential to dangerously undermine media freedom in Papua New Guinea.

    Australia’s media union also tweeted their concern:

    The International Federation of Journalists and Reporters Without Borders asked the government to withdraw regulations that restrict independent journalism. Susan Merrell, a lecturer at Sydney University on cultural studies and communication, commented that “instead of the media being the government’s watchdog, the government is trying to become the media’s watchdog.”

    Reporters Without Borders on PNG media
    Reporters Without Borders on PNG . . . “The policy’s most alarming measures concern the Media Council, which is currently a non-governmental entity representing media professionals.” Image: RSF screenshot APR

    The government insisted that it is committed to upholding media freedom.

    Scott Waide sums up the state of media in the country:

    While the PNG media has been resilient in the face of many challenges, journalists who have chosen to cover issues of national importance have been targeted with pressure coming directly from within government circles.

    Global Voices has previously reported about the suspension of a journalist in Papua New Guinea’s EMTV news, the new rule prohibiting reporters to directly contact the prime minister, and a stricter regulation for foreign correspondents. Mong Palatino is regional editor for Southeast Asia of Global Voices, an activist and former two-term member of the Philippine House of Representatives. Republished under a Creative Commons licence.

  • By Rebecca Kuku in Port Moresby

    Enga Governor Sir Peter Ipatas has told the Papua New Guinean government and national leaders to allow the media to carry out its role “unfettered” and accept public criticism.

    “You are in a public office. As leaders, we must be prepared for anything. If they write negative reports, let’s learn to build on criticisms,” Sir Peter said.

    He was responding to a government statement last week saying that a proposed national media development policy circulated to all stakeholders for comment was not meant to control the media or the freedom of expression.

    Sir Peter said: “The government needs to understand that the office we hold is a public office, and we are answerable to the people. The media’s job is to hold us accountable.”

    He questioned why the government was wasting money and time on a draft media policy when it had bigger issues to worry about.

    Detrimental for democracy
    Sir Peter warned that the Constitution provided for a free media and any attempt to put restrictions on that crucial role would be detrimental to a democratic society.

    “Do not look at today only. Look at the future too because you will not be in office forever,” he said.

    “There are also avenues provided for in the Constitution to address issues.

    “If you have an issue with a news report, take it to court and get it sorted out there.

    “I’ve been a politician for over 20 years. I don’t care what the media reports — positive news or negative news so long as it’s not [lies],” he said.

    “It is the media’s job to report facts as it is. Let the media do its job and let’s do our job.”

    Rebecca Kuku is a reporter with The National. Republished with permission.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • The Paris-based media freedom watchdog said in a statement that “in what may be an example of the road to hell being paved with good intentions, the government has produced a ‘Draft National Media Development Policy’ with the declared aim of turning the media into “a tool for development” including “the promotion of democracy, good governance, human rights, and social and economic development.”

    Daniel Bastard, head of RSF’s Asia-Pacific desk, said: “It is entirely commendable for a democracy to want to encourage the development of a healthy and dynamic news and information environment.

    “But, as it stands, the policy proposed by Port Moresby clearly endangers the independence of the media by establishing government control over their work.

    “We call on Information and Communication Technology Minister Timothy Masiu to abandon this proposal and start again from scratch by organising a real consultation and by providing proper safeguards for journalistic independence.”

    The policy’s most alarming measures concern the Media Council of PNG, which is currently a non-governmental entity representing media professionals, said RSF.

    It would be turned into a judicial commission with the power to determine who should or should not be regarded as a journalist, to issue a code of ethics and to impose sanctions on journalists who stray from it.

    ‘Regulatory government body’
    “These are disproportionate powers, especially as there is no provision for ensuring the independence of those appointed as the new Media Council’s members,” the RSF statement said.

    “There is also no provision for journalists and media outlets to challenge or appeal against its decisions.”

    RSF also quoted from a recent DevPolicy article by Scott Waide, a blogger, media producer and analyst who was formerly a deputy regional head of news at EMTV News based at Lae:

    “The policy envisages the media council as a regulatory and licensing body for journalists, which means, hypothetically, that it could penalise journalists if they present a narrative that is not in favour of the government.”

    “The re-invented media council would be nothing more than a regulatory government body.”

    The government’s new policy seemed all the more ill-considered, said RSF, given that, in the event of disputes with the media, there were already avenues for redress through the courts under the 1962 Defamation Act and 2016 Cybercrime Code Act.

    Several journalists have been subjected to covert pressure from the government in recent years.

    They include Waide himself, who was suspended from his EMTV News job in November 2018 over a story suggesting that the government had misused public funds by purchasing luxury cars.

    EMTV’s then news chief Sincha Dimara suffered the same fate in February 2022 after three news stories annoyed a government minister.

  • ANALYSIS: By Scott Waide in Port Moresby

    The new media development policy being proposed by the Papua New Guinea Communications Minister, Timothy Masiu, could lead to more government control over the country’s relatively free media.

    The new policy suggests a series of changes including legislative amendments. But media and stakeholders are not being given enough time to examine the details and study the long-term implications of the policy.

    The initial deadline for feedback has been extended by another seven days from today. However, the Media Council of PNG (MCPNG) has requested a consultation forum with the government, as it seeks wider input from research organisations, academia and regional partners.

    The government’s intention to impose greater control over aspects of the media, including the MCPNG, is ringing alarm bells through the region. This is to be done by re-establishing the council through the enactment of legislation.

    The policy envisages the council as a regulatory agency with licensing authority over journalists.

    The MCPNG was established in 1989 as a non-profit organisation representing the interests of media organisations. Apart from a brief period in the earlier part of its existence, it has largely been unfunded.

    Over three decades, its role has shifted to being a representative body for media professionals and a voice for media freedom.

    The president of the council, Neville Choi, says there are aspects of the media that need government support. These include protection and training of journalists. However, the media is best left as a self-regulating industry.

    According to Choi:

    “Media self-regulation is when media professionals set up voluntary editorial guidelines and abide by them in a learning process open to the public. By doing this, independent media accept their share of responsibility for the quality of public discourse in the country, while preserving their editorial autonomy in shaping it. The MCPNG was set up with this sole intent.

    “It is not censorship, and not even self-censorship. It is about establishing minimum principles on ethics, accuracy, personal rights while preserving editorial freedom on what to report, and what opinions to express.

    The regulatory framework proposed for the new media council includes licensing for journalists. Licensing is one of the biggest red flags that screams of government control.

    Communications Minister Timothy Masiu
    Communications Minister Timothy Masiu . . . Licensing is one of the biggest red flags that screams of government control. Image: PNG govt

    While the PNG media has been resilient in the face of many challenges, journalists who have chosen to cover issues of national importance have been targeted with pressure coming directly from within government circles.

    In 2004, the National Broadcasting Corporation’s head of news and current affairs, Joseph Ealedona, was suspended for a series of stories on the military and the government. The managing director of the government broadcaster issued the notice of suspension.

    In 2019, Neville Choi, then head of news for EMTV, was sacked for disobeying orders not to run a story of a military protest outside the Prime Minister’s office in Port Moresby. Choi was later reinstated following intense public pressure and a strike by all EMTV journalists and news production staff.

    Two years later, a similar scenario played out when 24 staff and EMTV’s head of news were sacked for protesting against political interference in the newsroom.

    For many within the industry, licensing just gives the government better tools to penalise journalists who present an unfavourable narrative.

    On paper, the government appears to be trying to remedy the desperately ailing journalism standards in PNG. But the attempt is not convincing enough for many.

    Fraser Liu, an accountant by profession and an outspoken observer of national issues, says the courts provide enough of an avenue for redress if there are grievances and that an additional layer of control is not needed.

    Liu said: “Media agencies and agents must be left alone to their own ends, being free from coercion of any sort, and if media reporting does in fact raise any legal issues like defamation, then the courts are the avenue for resolution. There is no shortage in common law of such case precedent. This is clearly an act by government to control media and effectively free speech.

    “Government cannot self-appoint itself as a referee for free speech. Free speech is covered under our Constitution and the courts protect this basic right. The policy talks about protection of reporters’ rights. Again, what is this? They already have rights guaranteed by the Constitution.

    Coming back to poor journalism standards, Minister Masiu, a former broadcast journalist himself, has been challenged on many occasions to increase investment into PNG’s journalism schools. It is a challenge he has not yet taken up despite the abundant rhetoric about the need for improvement.

    The energy of government should be put into fixing the root problem contributing to the poor quality of the media: poor standards of university education.

    Scott Waide is a journalist based in Lae, Papua New Guinea. He is the former deputy regional head of news for EMTV and has worked in the media for 24 years. This article was first published on the DevPolicy Blog and is republished here under a Creative Commons licence.

  • PNG Post-Courier

    An anti-corruption NGO in Papua New Guinea has criticised the haste with which the government is conducting consultation on a draft National Media Development Policy that could undermine media freedom.

    The Community Coalition Against Corruption (CCAC) has called on the Department of Information and Communication Technologies to extend the time and breadth of consultation on this proposed national policy.

    “Extended and broader consultation is required for this as media freedoms are vital to our democracy,” the coalition said in a statement.

    Minister for Information and Communication Technology Timothy Masiu responded quickly and extended the deadline by one week from February 20.

    In his capacity as co-chair of the coalition, Transparency International PNG chair Peter Aitsi said: “The two weeks given for consultation is not sufficient to consider the national and societal impact of this media policy and whether it is actually required.

    “For instance, while the abuse of social media platforms is a new issue that is given as justification for the media policy, there are already existing laws that address the issue without undermining media freedom.

    “This month, when we commemorate the legacy of the Grand Chief Sir Michael Thomas Somare, we recall his personal stance when Prime Minister opposing the regulation of PNG’s media when a similar bill was proposed in 2003.”

    Editorial independence ‘cornerstone’
    Another senior media spokesperson also said the government had failed to provide adequate time and conduct meaningful consultation over the draft National Media Development Policy 2023.

    The draft PNG media policy
    The draft PNG National Media Development Policy 2023.

    Media Council PNG president Neville Choi said in his capacity as co-chair of the coalition: “The editorial independence of newsrooms is a cornerstone of a functional democracy.

    “Undermining media freedom, diminishes the role of the media as the mouthpiece of the people, holding those in power to account.

    “Failure by the government to provide adequate time and conduct meaningful consultation, will ultimately undermine confidence in the government and the country, both domestically and abroad.

    “If the concern is poor journalism, then the solution is more investment in schools of journalism at tertiary institutions, this will also increase diversity and pluralism in the quality of journalism.

    “We need newsrooms with access to trainings on media ethics and legal protection from harassment.”

    The media policy was initially released by the Department of ICT on February 5 and the public was only given 12 days to comment on the document, with the original deadline for feedback being February 17.

    The policy includes provisions for the regulation of media and establishment of a Government Information Risk Management (GIRM) Division within the Department of ICT to implement measures to prevent the unauthorised access to “sensitive information”.

    The coalition is a network of organisations that come together to discuss and make recommendations on national governance issues. It is currently co-chaired by Transparency International PNG and the Media Council.

    Republished with permission.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • The National in Port Moresby

    Papua New Guinea’s new media draft policy would put a stop to reporting news not regarded as “positive” for the country’s image, says former PNG Media Council director Bob Howarth.

    Howarth, who was director from 2001-2005, said that the national government needed to seriously look at the way the media scene in Timor-Leste had thrived from next to nothing in 1999 when its violent emergence from foreign occupation became full democracy.

    “The small nation has the highest press freedom ranking in the region and has a very active press council supported by the UNDP [United Nations Development Programme] and several foreign NGOs,” said Howarth, who as well as advising Timor-Leste media has helped editorial staff on several newspapers.

    “[The Timor-Leste Press Council] has a staff of 35 and runs professional training for local journalists in close co-operation with university journalism schools.”

    “Visiting foreign reporters don’t need special visas in case they write about ‘non-positive’ issues like witchcraft murders, tribal warfare corruption or unsold Maseratis.”

    The National Media Development Policy has been public since February 5 and already it has been soundly criticised for “hasty” consultations on the draft law and a tight deadlne for submissions.

    University input
    Howarth said that with easier online meetings, thanks to Zoom PNG’s new look, the media council could include input from the University of Papua New Guinea (UPNG) and Divine Word journalism schools plus a voice from critical regions such as Bougainville, Western Highlands and Goroka.

    “And Timorese journalists can easily contact their President, José Ramos-Horta, a staunch defender of press freedom and media diversity, without going through government spin doctors,” he said.

    Howarth said the PNG government could look into the media scene in Timor-Leste to do their media policy.

    Meanwhile, in Brisbane the Media Entertainment and Arts Alliance (MEAA) — Australia’s main union representing journalists — has passed a resolution endorsing support for the PNG Media Council.

    “MEAA supports the [MCPNG] concerns about the possible impact of the government’s draft National Media Development Policy on media freedom; regulation of access to information; and the restructuring of the national broadcaster, including proposed reduction in government funding,” said the MEAA resolution.

    Republished with permission.

    The MEAA resolution supporting the PNG Media Council over the draft policy
    The MEAA resolution supporting the PNG Media Council over the draft policy. Image: MEAA/Twitter
  • By Rebecca Kuku

    Media is not a tool of government to promote its agenda — however altruistic that agenda may be, says media academic Dr Susan Merrell of Sydney University.

    Dr Merrell said this in response to the Papua New Guinea government’s new draft national media development policy.

    The deadline for submissions has been pushed back a week from 20 February 2023 after protests that the consultation on such an important policy has been “too rushed”.

    Dr Merrell said the first two paragraphs (under “purpose”) of the media policy draft dated 5 February 2023 which stated, “the purpose of this policy is to outline the objectives and strategies for the use of media as a tool for development, such as the promotion of democracy, good governance, human rights, and social and economic development,” said it all.

    “The only media doing that, should be their own (government) public relations department.

    “Newspapers are not to be mixed with public relations departments.

    “In fact, the role of media, acting as the Fourth Estate is to keep the government honest,” she said.

    Dr Merrell said that according to the draft, if approved, mainstream media would not be able to publish anything regarded as “anti-government” or anything “detrimental” to the country’s good image.

    “Instead of the media being the government’s watchdog, the government is trying to become the media’s watchdog,” she said.

    “What the policy maker must understand is that the media is concerned with the ‘public’ interest not the ‘national’ interest.

    “It’s not the same thing. For example: the Australian media reported on the Australian government spying on Timor-Leste and Indonesia although this story and revelation was embarrassing and not in the national interest.

    “It was in the public’s interest to know this was how their government had conducted itself.”

    Rebecca Kuku is a reporter for The National. Republished with permission.

  • By Lice Movono in Suva

    Veteran Fijian journalist Netani Rika and his wife were resting in their living room when he was suddenly woken, startled by the sound of smashed glass. “I got up, I slipped on the wet surface,” he recalls.

    He turned on the lights and a bottle and wick were spread across the floor. It was one of the many acts of violence and intimidation he endured after the 2006 military coup.

    Back then, Rika was the manager of news and current affairs at Fiji Television.

    No news at 6pm, no news at 10pm
    Back then, Rika was the manager of news and current affairs at Fiji Television.

    He vividly remembers the time his car was smashed with golf clubs by two unknown men — one he would later identify as a member of the military — and the day he was locked up at a military camp.

    “We were monitoring the situation . . .  once the takeover happened, there was a knock at the door and we had some soldiers present themselves,” he said.

    “We were told they were there for our protection but our CEO at the time, Ken Clark, said ‘well if you’re here to protect us, then you can stand at the gate’.

    “They said, ‘no, we are here to be in the newsroom, and we want to see what goes to air. We also have a list of people you cannot speak to … ministers, detectives’.”

    Rika remembered denying their request and publishing a notice on behalf of Fiji TV News that said it would “not broadcast tonight due to censorship”, promising to return to air when they were able to “broadcast the news in a manner which is free and fair”.

    “There was no news at six, there was no news at 10, it was a decision made by the newsroom.”

    Organisations like Human Rights Watch have repeatedly criticised Voreqe Bainimarama, who installed himself as prime minister during the 2006 coup, for his attacks on government critics, the press and the freedom of its citizens.

    Pacific Beat media freedom in Fiji
    Fiji’s media veterans recount intimidation under the former FijiFirst government . . . they hope the new leaders will reinstall press freedom. Image: ABC screenshot

    Fear and intimidation
    Rika reported incidents of violence to Fiji police, but he said detectives told him his complaints would not go far.

    “There was a series of letters to the editor which I suppose you could say were anti-government. Shortly after … the now-honourable leader of the opposition (Voreqe Bainimarama) called, he swore at me in the Fijian iTaukei language … a short time later I saw a vehicle come into our street,” he said.

    “The next time (the attackers) came over the fence, broke a wooden louvre and threw one (explosive) inside the house.”

    The ABC contacted Bainimarama’s Fiji First party and Fiji police for comment, but has not received a response.

    The following year, Rika left his job to become the editor-in-chief at The Fiji Times, the country’s leading independent newspaper. With the publication relying on the government’s advertising to remain viable, Rika said the government put pressure on the paper’s owners.

    “The government took away Fiji Times’ advertising, did all sorts of things in order to bring it into line with its propaganda that Fiji was OK, there was no more corruption.”

    Rika said the government also sought to remove the employment rights of News Limited, which owned The Fiji Times.

    “The media laws were changed so that you could not have more than 5 percent overseas ownership,” Rika said.

    Rika, and his deputy Sophie Foster — now an Australian national — lost their jobs after the Media Act 2011 was passed, banning foreign ownership of Fijian media organisations.

    ‘A chilling law’
    The new law put in place several regulations over journalists’ work, including restrictions on reporting of government activities.

    In May last year, Fijian Media Association secretary Stanley Simpson called for a review of the “harsh penalties” that can be imposed by the authority that enforces the act.

    Penalties include up to F$100,000 (NZ$75,00) in fines or two years’ imprisonment for news organisations for publishing content that is considered a breach of public or national interest. Simpson said some sections were “too excessive and designed to be vindictive and punish the media rather that encourage better reporting standards and be corrective”.

    Media veterans hope the controversial act will be changed, or removed entirely, to protect press freedom.

    Retired journalism professor Dr David Robie, now editor of Asia Pacific Report, taught many of the Pacific journalists who head up Fijian newsrooms today, but some of his earlier research focused on the impact of the Media Act.

    Dr Robie said from the outset, the legislation was widely condemned by media freedom organisations around the world for being “very punitive and draconian”.

    “It is a chilling law, making restrictions to media and making it extremely difficult for journalists to act because … the journalists in Fiji constantly have that shadow hanging over them.”

    In the years after Fijian independence in 1970, Dr Robie said Fiji’s “vigorous” media sector “was a shining light in the whole of the Pacific and in developing countries”.

    “That was lost … under that particular law and many of the younger journalists have never known what it is to be in a country with a truly free media.”

    ‘We’re so rich in stories’
    Last month, the newly-elected government said work was underway to change media laws.

    “We’re going to ensure (journalists) have freedom to broadcast and to impart knowledge and information to members of the public,” Fiji’s new Attorney-General Siromi Turaga said.

    “The coalition government is going to provide a different approach, a truly democratic way of dealing with media freedom.” But Dr Robie said he believed the only way forward was to remove the Media Act altogether.

    “I’m a bit sceptical about this notion that we can replace it with friendly legislation. That’s sounds like a slippery slope to me,” he said.

    “I’d have to say that self-regulation is pretty much the best way to go.”

    Reporters Without Borders ranked Fiji at 102 out of 180 countries in terms of press freedom, falling by 47 places compared to its 2021 rankings.

    Samantha Magick was the news director at Fiji radio station FM96, but left after the 2000 coup and returned three years ago to edit Islands Business International, a regional news magazine.

    “When I came back, there wasn’t the same robustness of discussion and debate, we (previously) had powerful panel programs and talkback and there wasn’t a lot of that happening,” she said.

    “Part of that was a reflection of the legislation and its impact on the way people worked but it was often very difficult to get both sides of a story because of the way newsmakers tried to control their messaging … which I thought was really unfortunate.”

    Magick said less restrictive media laws might encourage journalists to push the boundaries, while mid-career reporters would be more creative and more courageous.

    “I also hope it will mean more people stay in the profession because we have this enormous problem with people coming, doing a couple of years and then going … for mainly financial reasons.”

    She lamented the fact that “resource intensive” investigative journalism had fallen by the wayside but hoped to see “a sort of reinvigoration of the profession in general.”

    “We’re so rich in stories … I’d love to see more collaboration across news organisations or among journalists and freelancers,” she said.

    Lice Movono is a Fijian reporter for the ABC based in Suva. An earlier audio report from her on the Fiji media is here. Republished with permission.

  • Airstrikes ordered against civilian targets, destruction of thousands of buildings, millions displaced, nearly 3000 civilians murdered, more than 13,000 jailed, the country’s independent media banished, and the country locked in a deadly nationwide civil war. Myanmar civilians now ask what else must happen before they receive international support in line with Ukraine, writes Phil Thornton.

    SPECIAL REPORT: By Phil Thornton

    In the two years since Myanmar’s military seized power from the country’s elected lawmakers it has waged a war of terror against its citizens — members of the Civil Disobedience Movement, artists, poets, actors, politicians, health workers, student leaders, public servants, workers, and journalists.

    The military-appointed State Administration Council amended laws to punish anyone critical of its illegal coup or the military. International standards of freedoms — speech, expression, assembly, and association were “criminalised”.

    The Assistance Association for Political Prisoners (Burma), reported as of 30 January 2023, the military killed 2901 people and arrested another 17,492 (of which 282 were children), with 13,719 people still in detention.

    One hundred and forty three people have been sentenced to death and four have been executed since the military’s coup on 1 February 2021. Of those arrested, 176 were journalists and as many as 62 are still in jail or police detention.

    The Committee to Protect Journalists ranks Myanmar as the world’s second-highest jailers of journalists. Fear of attacks, harassment, intimidation, censorship, detainment, and threats of assassination for their reporting has driven journalists and media workers underground or to try to reach safety in neighbouring countries.

    Journalist Ye Htun Oo has been arrested, tortured, received death threats, and is now forced to seek safety outside of Myanmar. Ye Htun spoke to the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) of his torture, jailing and why he felt he had no choice, but to leave Myanmar for the insecurity of a journalist in exile.

    They came for me in the morning
    “I started as a journalist in 2007 but quit after two years because of the difficulty of working under the military. I continued to work, writing stories and poetry. In 2009 I restarted work as a freelance video and documentary maker.”

    Ye Htu said making money from journalism in Myanmar had never been easy.

    “I was lucky if I made 300,000 kyat a month (about NZ$460) — it was a lot of work, writing, editing, interviewing and filming.”

    Ye Htun’s hands, fingers and thin frame twist and turn as he takes time to return to the darkness of the early morning when woken by police and military knocking on his front door.

    “It was 2 am, the morning of 9 October 2021. We were all asleep. The knocking on the door was firm but gentle. I opened the door. Men from the police and the military’s special media investigation unit stood there — no uniforms. They’d come to arrest me.”

    Ye Htun links the visit of the police and army to his friend’s arrest the day before.

    “He had my number on his phone and when questioned told them I was a journalist. I hadn’t written anything for a while. The only reason they arrested me was because I was identified as a journalist — it was enough for them. The military unit has a list of journalists who they want to control, arrest, jail or contain.”

    Ye Htun explains how easy it is for journalists to be arrested.

    “When they arrest people…if they find a reference to a journalist or a phone number it’s enough to put you on their list.”

    After the coup, Ye Htun continued to report.

    “I was not being paid, moving around, staying in different places, following the protests. I was taking photos. I took a photo of citizens arresting police and it was published. This causes problems for the people in the photo. It also caused some people to regard me and journalists as informers — we were now in a hard place, not knowing what or who we could photograph. I decided to stop reporting and made the decision to move home. That’s when they came and arrested me.”

    In the early morning before sunrise, the police and military removed Ye Htun from his home and family and took him to a detention cell inside a military barracks.

    “They took all my equipment — computer, cameras, phone, and hard disks. The men who arrested and took me to the barracks left and others took over. Their tone changed. I was accused of being a PDF (People’s Defence Force militia).

    “Ye Htun describes how the ‘politeness’ of his captors soon evaporated, and the danger soon became a brutal reality. They started to beat me with kicks, fists, sticks and rubber batons. They just kept beating me, no questions. I was put in foot chains — ankle braces.”

    The beating of Ye Htun would continue for 25 days and the uncertainty and hurt still shows in his eyes, as he drags up the details he’s now determined to share.

    “I was interrogated by an army captain who ordered me to show all my articles — there was little to show. They made me kneel on small stones and beat me on the body — never the head as they said, ‘they needed it intact for me to answer their questions’”.

    Ye Htun explained it wasn’t just his assigned interrogators who beat or tortured him.

    “Drunk soldiers came regularly to spit, insult or threaten me with their guns or knives.”

    Scared, feared for his life
    Ye Htun is quick to acknowledge he was scared and feared for his life.

    “I was terrified. No one knew where I was. I knew my family would be worried. Everyone knows of people being arrested and then their dead, broken bodies, missing vital organs, being returned to grieving families.”

    After 25 days of torture, Ye Htun was transferred to a police jail.

    “They accused me of sending messages they had ‘faked’ and placed on my phone. I was sentenced to two years jail on 3rd November — I had no lawyer, no representative.”

    Ye Htun spoke to political prisoners during his time in jail and concluded many were behind bars on false charges.

    “Most political prisoners are there because of fake accusations. There’s no proper rule of law — the military has turned the whole country into a prison.”

    Ye Htun served over a year and five months of his sentence and was one of six journalists released in an amnesty from Pyay Jail on 4 January 2023.

    Not finished torturing
    Any respite Ye Htun or his family received from his release was short-lived, as it became apparent the military was not yet finished torturing him. He was forced to sign a declaration that if he was rearrested he would be expected to serve his existing sentence plus any new ones, and he received death threats.

    Soon after his release, the threats to his family were made.

    “I was messaged on Facebook and on other social media apps. The messages said, ‘don’t go out alone…keep your family and wife away from us…’ their treats continued every two or three days.”

    Ye Htun and his family have good cause to be concerned about the threats made against them. Several pro-military militias have openly declared on social media their intention against those opposed to the military’s control of the country.

    A pro-military militia, Thwe Thauk Apwe (Blood Brothers), specialise in violent killings designed to terrorise.

    Frontier Magazine reported in May 2022 that Thwe Thauk Apwe had murdered 14 members of the National League of Democracy political party in two weeks. The militia uses social media to boast of its gruesome killings and to threaten its targets — those opposed to military rule — PDF units, members of political parties, CDM members, independent media outlets and journalists.

    Ye Htun said fears for his wife and children’s safety forced him to leave Myanmar.

    “I couldn’t keep putting them at risk because I’m a journalist. I will continue to work, but I know I can’t do it in Myanmar until this military regime is removed.”

    Air strikes target civilians – where’s the UN?
    Award-winning documentary maker and artist, Sai Kyaw Khaing, dismayed at the lack of coverage by international and regional media on the impacts of Myanmar’s military aerial strikes on civilian targets, decided to make the arduous trip to the country’s northwest to find out.

    In the two years since the military regime took illegal control of the country’s political infrastructure, Myanmar is now engaged in a brutal, countrywide civil war.

    Civilian and political opposition to the military coup saw the formation of People Defence Force units under the banner of the National Unity Government established in April 2021 by members of Parliament elected at the 2020 elections and outlawed by the military after its coup.

    Thousands of young people took up arms and joined PDF units, trained by Ethnic Armed Organisations, to defend villages and civilians and fight the military regime. The regime vastly outnumbered and outmuscled the PDFs and EAOs with its military hardware — tanks, heavy artillery, helicopter gunships and fighter jets.

    Sai Kyaw contacted a number of international media outlets with his plans to travel deep inside the conflict zone to document how displaced people were coping with the airstrikes and burning of their villages and crops.

    Sai Kyaw said it was telling that he has yet to receive a single response of interest from any of the media he approached.

    “What’s happening in Myanmar is being ignored, unlike the conflict in Ukraine. Most of the international media, if they do report on Myanmar, want an ‘expert’ to front their stories, even better if it’s one of their own, a Westerner.”

    Deadly strike impact
    Sai Kyaw explains why what is happening on the ground needs to be explained — the impacts of the deadly airstrikes on the lives of unarmed villagers.

    “My objective is to talk to local people. How can they plant or harvest their crops during the intense fighting? How can they educate their kids or get medical help?

    “Thousands of houses, schools, hospitals, churches, temples, and mosques have been targeted and destroyed — how are the people managing to live?”

    Sai Kyaw put up his own money to finance his trip to a neighbouring country where he then made contact with people prepared to help him get to northwestern Myanmar, which was under intense attacks from the military regime.

    “It took four days by motorbike on unlit mountain dirt tracks that turned to deep mud when it rained. We also had to avoid numerous military checkpoints, military informers, and spies.”

    Sai Kyaw said that after reaching his destination, meeting with villagers, and witnessing their response to the constant artillery and aerial bombardments, their resilience astounded him.

    “These people rely on each other, when they’re bombed from their homes, people who still have a house rally around and offer shelter. They don’t have weapons to fight back, but they organise checkpoints managed by men and women.”

    Sai Kyaw said being unable to predict when an airstrike would happen took its toll on villagers.

    Clinics, schools bombed
    “You don’t know when they’re going to attack — day or night — clinics, schools, places of worship — are bombed. These are not military targets — they don’t care who they kill.”

    Sai Kyaw witnessed an aerial bombing and has the before and after film footage that shows the destruction. Rows of neat houses, complete with walls intact before the air strike are left after the attack with holes a car could drive through.

    “The unpredictable and indiscriminate attacks mean villagers are unable to harvest their crops or plant next season’s rice paddies.”

    Sai Kyaw is concerned that the lack of aid getting to the people in need of shelter, clothing, food, and medicine will cause a large-scale humanitarian crisis.

    “There’s no sign of international aid getting to the people. If there’s a genuine desire to help the people, international aid groups can do it by making contact with local community groups. It seems some of these big international aid donors are reluctant to move from their city bases in case they upset the military’s SAC [State Administration Council].”

    At the time of writing Sai Kyaw Khaing has yet to receive a reply from any of the international media he contacted.

    It’s the economy stupid
    A veteran Myanmar journalist, Kyaw Kyaw*, covered a wide range of stories for more than 15 years, including business, investment, and trade. He told IFJ he was concerned the ban on independent media, arrests of journalists, gags and access restrictions on sources meant many important stories went unreported.

    “The military banning of independent media is a serious threat to our freedom of speech. The military-controlled state media can’t be relied on. It’s well documented, it’s mainly no news or fake news overseen by the military’s Department of Propaganda.”

    Kyaw lists the stories that he explains are in critical need of being reported — the cost of consumer goods, the collapse of the local currency, impact on wages, lack of education and health care, brain drain as people flee the country, crops destroyed and unharvested and impact on next year’s yield.

    Kyaw is quick to add details to his list.

    “People can’t leave the country fast enough. There are more sellers than buyers of cars and houses. Crime is on the rise as workers’ real wages fall below the poverty line. Garment workers earned 4800 kyat, the minimum daily rate before the military’s coup. The kyat was around 1200 to the US dollar — about four dollars. Two years after the coup the kyat is around 2800 — workers’ daily wage has dropped to half, about US$2 a day.”

    Kyaw Kyaw’s critique is compelling as he explains the cost of everyday consumer goods and the impact on households.

    “Before the coup in 2021, rice cost a household, 32,000 kyat for around 45kg. It is now selling at 65,000 kyat and rising. Cooking oil sold at 3,000 kyat for 1.6kg now sells for over double, 8,000kyat.

    “It’s the same with fish, chicken, fuel, and medicine – family planning implants have almost doubled in cost from 25,000 kyat to now selling at 45,000 kyat.”

    Humanitarian crisis potential
    Kyaw is dismayed that the media outside the country are not covering stories that have a huge impact on people’s daily struggle to feed and care for their families and have the real potential for a massive humanitarian crisis in the near future.

    “The focus is on the revolution, tallies of dead soldiers, politics — all important, but journalists and local and international media need to report on the hidden costs of the military’s coup. Local media outlets need to find solutions to better cover these issues.”

    Kyaw stresses international governments and institutions — ASEAN, UK, US, China, and India — need to stop talking and take real steps to remove and curb the military’s destruction of the country.

    “In two years, they displaced over a million people, destroyed thousands of houses and religious buildings, attacked schools and hospitals — killing students and civilians — what is the UNSC waiting for?”

    An independent think tank, the Institute for Strategy and Policy – Myanmar, and the UN agency for refugees confirm Kyaws Kyaw’s claims.The Institute for Strategy and Policy reports “at least 28,419 homes and buildings were torched or destroyed…in the aftermath of the coup between 1 February 2021, and 15 July 2022.”

    The UN agency responsible for refugees, the UNHCR, estimates the number of displaced people in Myanmar is a staggering 1,574,400. Since the military coup and up to January 23, the number was 1,244,000 people displaced.

    While the world’s media and governments focus their attention and military aid on Ukraine, Myanmar’s people continue to ask why their plight continues to be ignored.

    Phil Thornton is a journalist and senior adviser to the International Federation of Journalists in Southeast Asia. This article was first published by the IFJ Asia-Pacific blog and is republished with the author’s permission. Thornton is also a contributor to Asia Pacific Report.

    *Name has been changed as requested for security concerns.

  • By Repeka Nasiko in Lautoka

    Fiji’s Media Industry Development Act will soon be reviewed over the next few weeks.

    Speaking to The Fiji Times in Lautoka on Monday, Minister for Communications Manoa Kamikamica said the review was one of the main objectives of the coalition government when it came to freedom of the press.

    “The Media Decree is going to be reviewed,” he said.

    “It is no secret that it is one of the priorities of the coalition government, so hopefully in the next few weeks we will be making some progress on that.”

    He said that since the change in government media freedom had been felt among the industry.

    “You can see there is already freedom of the press that you can feel when there is a change in leadership.

    “So that is a positive for the media industry and I can assure you that the Media Decree review is happening and it will be happening over the coming weeks.”

    More communication plans
    He added that there were more plans to develop Fiji’s communication sector.

    “There are a lot of things to do in communication,” he said.

    “There are still a lot of people that have not been reached yet in terms of service delivery so that is a priority of government as well.

    “There are also a lot of technological industries that are starting to come to Fiji for example the BPO (business process outsourcing) sector.

    “This is one so need to make sure that the government supports and there are a few things we are going to be doing there.

    “So there’s a lot to do and we have a plan and we will take it forward.”

    Repeka Nasiko is a Fiji Times reporter. Republished with permission.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Rights groups raise doubts over road accident in which police say outspoken editor John Williams Ntwali was killed

    Amnesty International and the Committee to Protect Journalists, an independent NGO based in New York, are among media and rights organisations calling for an independent investigation into the death of the Rwandan journalist John Williams Ntwali.

    Ntwali, a regular critic of the Rwandan authorities, was found dead on 18 January. According to reported police accounts, he was killed in a motorcycle accident in the capital, Kigali.

    Continue reading…

    This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.

  • By Dandy Koswaraputra and Pizaro Gozali Idrus

    A veteran journalist known for covering rights abuses in Indonesia’s militarised Papua region says a bomb exploded outside his home yesterday and a journalists group has called it an act of “intimidation” threatening press freedom.

    No one was injured in the blast near his home in the provincial capital Jayapura, said Victor Mambor, editor of Papua’s leading news website Jubi, who visited New Zealand in 2014.

    Police said they were investigating the explosion and that no one had yet claimed responsibility.

    “Yes, someone threw a bomb,” Papua Police spokesperson Ignatius Benny told Benar News. “The motive and perpetrators are unknown.”

    The Jayapura branch of the Alliance of Independent Journalists (AJI) condemned the explosion as a “terrorist bombing”.

    In Sydney, the Australia West Papua Association (AWPA) and Pacific Media Watch in New Zealand protested over the incident and called for a full investigation.

    Mambor said he heard the sound of a motorcycle at about 4 am and then an explosion about a minute later.

    ‘Shook like earthquake’
    “It was so loud that my house shook like there was an earthquake,” he told Benar News as reported by Radio Free Asia.

    “I also checked the source of the explosion and smelt sulfur coming from the side of the house.”

    The explosion left a hole in the road, he said.

    The incident was not the first to occur outside Mambor’s home. In April 2021, windows were smashed and paint sprayed on his car in the middle of the night.

    Tabloid Jubi editor Victor Mambor
    Tabloid Jubi editor Victor Mambor being interviewed by Pacific Media Watch’s Anna Majavu during the first visit by a Papuan journalist to New Zealand in 2014. Image: Del Abcede/PMW

    Mambor is also an advocate for press freedom in Papua. In that role, he has criticised Jakarta’s restrictions on the media in Papua, as well as its other policies in his troubled home province.

    The AJI awarded Mambor its press freedom award in August 2022, saying that through Jubi, “Victor brings more voices from Papua, amid domination of information that is biased, one-sided and discriminatory.”

    “AJI in Jayapura strongly condemns the terrorist bombing and considers this an act of intimidation that threatens press freedom in Papua,” it said in a statement.

    ‘Voice the truth’ call
    “AJI Jayapura calls on all journalists in the land of Papua to continue to voice the truth despite obstacles. Justice should be upheld even though the sky is falling,” said AJI chair Lucky Ireeuw.

    Amnesty International Indonesia urged the police to find those responsible.

    “The police must thoroughly investigate this incident, because this is not the first time … meaning there was an omission that made the perpetrators feel free to do it again, to intimidate and threaten journalists,” Amnesty’s campaign manager in Indonesia, Nurina Savitri, told BenarNews.

    The Papua region, located at the eastern end of the Indonesian archipelago, has been the site of a decades-old pro-independence insurgency where both government security forces and rebels have been accused of committing atrocities against civilians.

    Foreign journalists have been largely barred from the area, with the government insisting it could not guarantee their safety. Indonesian journalists allege that officials make their work difficult by refusing to provide information.

    The armed elements of the independence movement have stepped up lethal attacks on Indonesian security forces, civilians and targets such as construction of a trans-Papua highway that would make the Papuan highlands more accessible.

    Human Rights Watch, meanwhile, has accused Indonesian security forces of intimidation, arbitrary arrests, torture, extrajudicial killings and mass forced displacement in Papua.

    Security forces kill 36
    Last month, Indonesian activist group KontraS said 36 people were killed by security forces and pro-independence rebels in the Papua and West Papua provinces in 2022, an increase from 28 in 2021.

    In Sydney, Joe Collins of the AWPA said in a statement: “These acts of intimidation against local journalists in West Papua  threaten freedom of the press.

    “It is the local media in West Papua that first report on human rights abuses and local journalists are crucial in reporting information on what is happening in West Papua”.

    Collins said Canberra remained silent on the issue — ‘the Australian government is very selective in who it criticises over their human rights record.”

    There was no problem raising concerns about China or Russia over their record, “but Canberra seems to have great difficulty in raising the human rights abuses in West Papua with Jakarta.”

    Republished from Free Radio Asia with additional reporting by Pacific Media Watch.

    Victor Mambor as an advocate for media freedom in West Papua
    Victor Mambor as an advocate for media freedom in West Papua. Image: AWPA

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Pentagon Papers whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg joined other leading journalists, attorneys and human rights defenders to call on the Biden administration to drop its extradition request and indictment against journalist and WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange, citing the grave threat Assange’s prosecution would pose to journalism worldwide. “Every empire requires secrecy to cloak its acts of…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • ANALYSIS: By Brett Wilkins

    As Julian Assange awaits the final appeal of his looming extradition to the United States while languishing behind bars in London’s notorious Belmarsh Prison, leading left luminaries and free press advocates gathered in Washington, DC, on Friday for the fourth sitting of the Belmarsh Tribunal, where they called on US President Joe Biden to drop all charges against the WikiLeaks publisher.

    “From Ankara to Manila to Budapest to right here in the United States, state actors are cracking down on journalists, their sources, and their publishers in a globally coordinated campaign to disrupt the public’s access to information,” co-chair and Democracy Now! host Amy Goodman said during her opening remarks at the National Press Club.

    “The Belmarsh Tribunal… pursues justice for journalists who are imprisoned or persecuted [and] publishers and whistleblowers who dare to reveal the crimes of our governments,” she said.

    “Assange’s case is the first time in history that a publisher has been indicted under the Espionage Act,” Goodman added.

    “Recently, it was revealed that the CIA had been spying illegally on Julian, his lawyers, and some members of this very tribunal. The CIA even plotted his assassination at the Ecuadorean Embassy under [former US President Donald] Trump.”

    Assange — who suffers from physical and mental health problems, including heart and respiratory issues — could be imprisoned for 175 years if fully convicted of Espionage Act violations.

    Among the classified materials published by WikiLeaks — many provided by whistleblower Chelsea Manning — are the infamous “Collateral Murder” video showing a US Army helicopter crew killing a group of Iraqi civilians, the Afghan War Diary, and the Iraq War Logs, which revealed American and allied war crimes.

    Arbitrary detention
    According to the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, Assange has been arbitrarily deprived of his freedom since he was arrested on December 7, 2010. Since then he has been held under house arrest, confined for seven years in the Ecuadorean Embassy in London while he was protected by the administration of former Ecuadorean President Rafael Correa, and jailed in Belmarsh Prison, for which the tribunal is named.

    Human rights, journalism, peace, and other groups have condemned Assange’s impending extradition and the US government’s targeting of an Australian journalist who exposed American war crimes.

    In a statement ahead of Friday’s tribunal, co-chair and Croatian philosopher Srećko Horvat said:

    The First Amendment, freedom of the press, and the life of Julian Assange are at stake. That’s why the Belmarsh Tribunal is landing literally just two blocks away from the White House.

    As long as the Biden administration continues to deploy tools like the Espionage Act to imprison those who dare to expose war crimes, no publisher and no journalist will be safe.

    Our tribunal is gathering courageous voices of dissent to demand justice for those crimes and to demand President Biden to drop the charges against Assange immediately.

    Belmarsh Tribunal participants include Pentagon Papers whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg, US academic Noam Chomsky, British parliamentarian Jeremy Corbyn, former Assange lawyer Renata Ávila, human rights attorney Steven Donziger, and WikiLeaks editor-in-chief Kristinn Hrafnsson.


    The Belmarsh Tribunal hearing in Washington DC on January 20, 2023. Video: Democracy Now!

    Assange’s father, John Shipton, and the whistleblower’s wife and lawyer Stella Assange, are also members, as are Shadowproof editor Kevin Gosztola, Chip Gibbons of Defending Rights, Selay Ghaffar of the Solidarity Party of Afghanistan, investigative journalist Stefania Maurizi, The Nation publisher Katrina vanden Heuvel, and ACLU attorney Ben Wizner.

    First Amendment foundation
    “One of the foundation stones of our form of government here in the United States . . . is our First Amendment to the Constitution,” Ellsberg — whom the Richard Nixon administration tried to jail for up to 115 years under the Espionage Act, but due to government misconduct was never imprisoned — said in a recorded message played at the tribunal.

    “Up until Assange’s indictment, the act had never been used… against a journalist like Assange,” Ellsberg added. “If you’re going to use the act against a journalist in a blatant violation of the First Amendment… the First Amendment is essentially gone.”

    Ávila said before Thursday’s event that “the Espionage Act is one of the most dangerous pieces of legislation in the world: an existential threat against international investigative journalism.”

    “If applied, it will deprive us of one of our must powerful tools towards de-escalation of conflicts, diplomacy, and peace,” she added.

    “The Belmarsh Tribunal convened in Washington to present evidence of this chilling threat, and to unite lawmakers next door to dismantle the legal architecture that undermines the basic right of all peoples to know what their governments do in their name.”

    The Belmarsh Tribunal, first convened in London in 2021, is inspired by the Russell Tribunal, a 1966 event organised by philosophers Bertrand Russell and Jean-Paul Sartre to hold the US accountable for its escalating war crimes in Vietnam.

    Brett Wilkins is a staff writer for Common Dreams. Republished under a Creative Commons licence.

  • By Lian Buan in Manila

    The Philippines’ Court of Tax Appeals has acquitted Nobel laureate Maria Ressa and Rappler Holdings Corporation (RHC) of four charges of tax evasion that were filed in 2018 by the previous Duterte government.

    The CTA 1st Division decided yesterday to acquit Ressa and RHC, Rappler’s holding company, in the Duterte government’s charge that it evaded tax payments when it raised capital through its partnership with foreign investors North Base Media (NBM) and Omidyar Network (ON).

    This involved the issuance to the two entities of Philippine Depositary Receipts or PDRs, financial instruments commonly used even among media companies like ABS-CBN and GMA Network.

    In an 80-page decision, the court ordered the acquittal of Ressa and RHC for “failure of the prosecution to prove their guilt beyond reasonable doubt’.

    The decision was signed by Associate Justices Catherine Manahan, Jean Marie Bacorro-Villena, and Marian Ivy Reyes-Fajardo. Presiding Justice Roman del Rosario inhibited from the proceedings but certified the decision.

    The victory ends more than four years of trial of a case filed in March 2018, two months after the Philippines’ Securities and Exchange Commission issued a closure order against Rappler on the basis of the Duterte government’s charge that it broke the law by being foreign-owned.

    Rappler is a 100 percent Filipino company, a point asserted by the company in its appeal of the SEC order at the Court of Appeals (CA).

    An emotional Ressa said after the verdict: “Today, facts win, truth wins, justice wins,” calling for freedom of detained former senator Leila de Lima and jailed journalists like Frenchie Mae Cumpio.

    De Lima will begin her seventh year in prison in February, while Cumpio will begin her fourth year also in February.


    Rappler CEO Maria Ressa talks to the media.                                        Video: Rappler

    The CTA voted 3-0 to decide the “non-taxability of the issuance of PDRs to North Base Media and Omidyar Network.” The court added, “No gain or income was realised by accused in the subject transactions.

    “Since accused is not required to pay the income tax and VAT on the PDR transactions for the taxable year 2015, the elements of Sections 254 and 255 of the 1977 NIRC as amended, are rendered nugatory and without legal support. The plaintiff therefore failed to prove the guilt of accused beyond reasonable doubt,” said the CTA decision.

    The CTA also said, “There is nothing in the wordings of the PDR instruments and the PDR subscription agreements that would show the foreign entities NBM and ON will become owners of the shares of stock of Rappler.”

    Ressa’s lawyer Francis Lim, the former president of the Philippine Stock Exchange, said that if PDRs were declared to be taxable income just to convict Ressa and Rappler, every business seeking to raise capital would be affected.

    “At the end of the day, it’s our economy, it’s our people through job generation that will benefit. Imagine if Maria was convicted, the repercussions,” said Lim.

    ‘Keep the faith’
    Lim also said: “We had no doubt this day would come. I told them keep the faith, because in our hearts we knew an acquittal would come. We trust our judiciary, everybody knew where this case came from.”

    It was former Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) commissioner Caesar Dulay, a Duterte appointee, who initiated the lightning tax probe into Rappler on January 24, 2018; he filed the criminal complaints two months later, in March, before the justice department then headed by Menardo Guevarra, another Duterte appointee.

    Guevarra charged Ressa and RHC at the CTA in November 2018.

    The CTA’s acquittal of RHC and Ressa is expected to affect a related case that was filed by the Duterte government against the two before the Pasig City Regional Trial Court, which handles tax cases involving less than P1 million (about NZ$28,500).

    Rappler is about to wrap up its presentation of evidence for that case; the facts are identical to the four charges that the CTA junked yesterday.

    In general, an acquittal cannot be appealed against because of the right against double jeopardy.

    Three cases left
    With the junking of the four CTA cases, there remain only three active court cases against Rappler and Ressa: the appeal of Ressa and former researcher Reynaldo Santos Jr. in their conviction for cyber libel pending at the Supreme Court, the lone tax case at the Pasig City RTC, and the appeal on the closure of Rappler pending at the CA.

    The mother case, the SEC’s closure order that is pending at the appeals court, accuses Rappler of violating the constitutional requirement that Filipino media companies must be 100 percent Filipino-owned. The alleged violation was supposedly committed when it issued PDRs to foreign investor ON.

    The court previously said that Rappler was entitled to a curing period, and that ON’s donation of the PDRs to Filipino managers had removed the problem. But the SEC in the last two days of the Duterte term in June 2022, stood firm on its order to close down Rappler — triggering another round of litigation at the appellate court which is still ongoing.

    In the CTA cases, Rappler’s lawyers said that in the last 20 years, the BIR has treated PDRs as derivatives of stock for which only documentary stamp tax was due to be paid.

    “This case exemplifies how the power of taxation can be used as a tool to cause a thousand cuts to our democracy. Rappler Inc., which has been at the forefront of providing independent journalism in the Philippines, caught the ire of the Duterte Government,” Rappler and Ressa said in a final memorandum submitted to the CTA before yesterday’s judgment.

    “As a result, and for the first time in Philippine history, the BIR classified a holding company that issued PDRs as a dealer in securities and required the payment of income tax and VAT.

    “The government’s targeted attack and investigations against Rappler Inc.’s parent company, accused Rappler Holdings Corporation and RHC’s president Maria Ressa, presents a clear example of how the law can be bent to the point that it is broken,” said Rappler’s memorandum.

    Lian Buan is a senior Rappler journalist. Republished with permission.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • By Arieta Vakasukawaqa in Suva

    Fiji’s much-anticipated Media Industry Development Authority (MIDA) Act review is now being drafted and expected to be tabled at the next cabinet meeting on January 17.

    Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka confirmed this to journalists during an interview in Suva last Friday when he was questioned about the government’s actions to repeal the Act that was imposed by the FijiFirst government.

    “It is currently being drafted by our legal team at the Office of the Attorney-General in conjunction with input from the Ministry of Information,” Rabuka said.

    Fiji Times editor-in-chief Fred Wesley welcomed the statement by Rabuka.

    “It has been long overdue, and this is something we had been hoping to see happen,” Wesley said.

    Meanwhile, Rabuka reminded journalists they could do their work without fear as long their reporting was balanced.

    Arieta Vakasukawaqa is a Fiji Times reporter. Republished with permission.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • By John Mitchell in Suva

    In any true democracy, the role of journalists and the media outlets they represent is to inform the people so that they can make educated and well-informed choices.

    The role of politicians is to represent those who elected them.

    They are to make decisions that best serve the public interest and to ensure that the concerns of citizens are heard, considered, and, where appropriate, acted upon.

    In such a political system, the journalist and the politician must both serve the people but in peculiarly differing ways.

    Journalists act on behalf of citizens by exploring and covering issues that concern the people and in doing so they include a diversity of voices and political opinions that offer different viewpoints and opinions.

    The bottom line of their job is ensuring that politicians do their job transparently, with accountability and through better public service delivery.

    In the end, journalism enhances, encourages meaningful dialogue and debate in society.

    On the other hand, politicians use the media to reach the masses, make them understand their policies and through this — get acceptance and approval from the public.

    Politicians love media spotlight
    Politicians naturally love the media spotlight for without reporters nobody knows their policies and their good deeds, no matter how grand they may be.

    Politicians love talking to reporters so they can get publicity.

    Reporters like politicians too because they provide them with stories — there goes the long story of the symbiotic relationship between the press and powerful members of the legislature.

    What a perfect relationship.

    Absolutely wrong!

    Some say the relationship is one of “love and hate” and always hangs in the balance.

    This liaison of sorts is more than meets the eye and the truth is simple.

    Like the legislature, the media has a prominent and permanent place in national leadership and governance (known as the Fourth Estate).

    Critical components of democracy
    Both are critical components of a democracy.

    Because of their democratic mandate, the media and politicians cannot be fulltime bedfellows.

    And as the saying goes, they will have their moments.

    However, in past years The Fiji Times has always been seen as the “enemy of the state”.

    This had nothing to do with the media’s work as a watchdog of society or the Fourth Estate, but rather with the way in which the former government muzzled the media and created an environment of fear through draconian media laws that stifled freedom of expression and constricted media freedom.

    Simply put, a newspaper and any truly independent media outlet must be fair and in being fair, its content must reflect the rich diversity of views and opinions that exists in the public sphere, as well as the aspirations, fears and concerns of the varied groups that exist in the community.

    Experts, academics or anyone outside of government is welcomed to use this forum of information exchange, dissemination and sharing.

    Politicians, if they have nothing to hide, can use it too, provided what they have to say is honest, sincere and accurate.

    Listening to pluralistic ‘voices’
    A responsible government deliberately chooses to listen attentively to pluralistic “voices” in the media although these expressions may put it in an uncomfortable position.

    A responsible government also explores avenues in which valid ideas could be propagated to improve its own practices and achieve its intended outcome.

    In other words, a newspaper exists to, among other reasons, communicate and amplify issues of concern faced by citizens.

    This includes voicing citizens’ complaints over any laxity in government’s service delivery, especially people in rural areas who often do not enjoy the public services that we so often take for granted in towns and cities.

    So whenever, people use the mainstream media to raise concerns over poor roads, water, garbage disposal, education and inferior health services, the public does so with the genuine yearning for assistance and intervention from government.

    And in providing this platform for exchange, the media achieves its democratic goal of getting authorities to effectively respond to taxpayers’ needs, keep their development promises and deliver according to their election manifestos.

    Remember, a responsible newspaper or media does not exist to act as government’s mouthpiece.

    Retaining media independence
    If media outlets give up their independence and allow themselves to be used by politicians for political parties’ own political agenda and gains, then citizens who rely on the media as an instrument for meaningful dialogue, discussion and discourse will be denied their participatory space and expressive rights.

    A responsible and autonomous newspaper like The Fiji Times does not exist to make government feel good.

    For if this ever occurs, this newspaper will compromise its ability to provide the necessary oversight on government powers and actions, without which, abuse of power and corruption thrive to the detriment of ordinary citizens.

    If media organisations and journalists who work for them operate in the way they should, then for obvious reasons, all politicians in government will “sometimes” find the media “upsetting” and “meddlesome”.

    Copping the flak from ministers and those in positions of authority is part and parcel of the media’s work.

    It is a healthy sign that democracy works.

    This newspaper was instrumental in calling on the SVT (Soqosoqo Vakavulewa ni Taukei) government and its then prime minister, Sitiveni Rabuka, (now Fiji’s Prime Minister again under the People’s Alliance Party-PAP/National Federation Party (NFP) and Sodelpa coalition) to account for the enormous financial loss which caused the collapse of the National Bank of Fiji in the 1990s.

    Our pages can prove that.

    This newspaper also scrutinised many of the policies of the coalition government under the leadership of Mahendra Chaudhry and Laisenia Qarase, during whose time, this newspaper was the common foe.

    Our pages can prove that.

    Last government ‘vindictive, authoritarian’
    But no government was as vindictive and authoritarian as the last government.

    Today, early in the days of the PAP/NFP and Sodelpa coalition government, we are seeing the good old days of media freedom slowly coming back.

    We can now doorstop the Prime Minister and call the Attorney-General at 9pm for a comment and get an answer.

    The openness with which ministers talk to the press is encouraging.

    We hope things stay that way and the government accepts that we will sometimes put out stories that it finds positive and there will be times when we will make its life difficult and uneasy.

    At the end of the day, it is the people that we both work hard to serve.

    Sometimes we will step on some people’s toes, be blamed for provoking disquiet and seem unpopular among powerful politicians.

    That is to be expected and embraced.

    Safeguarding press freedom
    But we will continue to play a prominent role in safeguarding the freedom of the press so that all Fijians can enjoy their own rights and freedoms.

    With the best intentions, our journalists will continue to forge forward with their pursuit of truth and human dignity, regardless of the political party in power.

    As we rebuild Fiji and regain what many people think we’ve lost in 16 years, this newspaper will play a pivotal role in allowing government to reach the people so that they make informed choices about their lives.

    We must face it — Fiji is heavily in debt, many families are struggling, the health system is in a poor state, thousands are trapped in poverty and the most vulnerable members of society are hanging in the balance, taking one day at a time.

    It is in this environment of uncertainty that the media and politicians must operate in for the common good.

    And as a responsible newspaper, we will listen to all Fijians and provide a safe space to express their voices.

    That is our mandate and our promise.

    John Mitchell is a senior Fiji Times feature writer who writes a weekly column, “Behind The News”. Republished with permission.

  • By Pauliasi Mateboto in Suva

    Fiji Deputy Prime Minister Viliame Gavoka says the Media Industry Development Act will be replaced soon.

    Speaking to members of the media after the coalition agreement signing for Fiji’s new government on Friday, he said the three leaders were in harmony in terms of repealing the Act.

    “Absolutely free, we want to remove any kind of prohibitions and restrictions,” Gavoka said.

    He said it was the wish of the coalition government for the media to be free and for the people of Fiji to live in a free society.

    “We want you to be totally free to act and that is also the part of understanding — we live in a totally free country,” he said.

    Pacific Media Watch reports that Associate Professor Shailendra Singh, head of the University of the South Pacific regional journalism programme, commented on Twitter:

    “Fiji’s much-criticised punitive Media Act to be replaced — question is replaced with what? Since its implementation 13 yrs ago no one has been charged under the Act underscoring its redundancy.

    “But it was like a noose [around the] media’s neck and blamed for self-censorship/chilling effect.”

    Pauliasi Mateboto is a Fiji Times reporter. Republished with permission.

  • Pacific Media Watch

    With murders, contract killings, ambushes, war zone deaths and fatal injuries, a staggering total of 1668 journalists have been killed worldwide in connection with their work in the last two decades (2003-2022), according to the tallies by the Paris-based global media watchdog Reporters Without Borders (RSF) based on its annual round-ups.

    This gives an average of more than 80 journalists killed every year. The total killed since 2000 is 1787.

    RSF secretary-general Christophe Deloire said:

    “Behind the figures, there are the faces, personalities, talent and commitment of those who have paid with their lives for their information gathering, their search for the truth and their passion for journalism.

    In each of its annual round-ups, RSF has continued to document the unjustifiable violence that has specifically targeted media workers.

    This year’s end is an appropriate time to pay tribute to them and to appeal for full respect for the safety of journalists wherever they work and bear witness to the world’s realities.

    Darkest years
    The annual death tolls peaked in 2012 and 2013 with 144 and 142 journalists killed, respectively. These peaks, due in large measure to the war in Syria, were followed by a gradual fall and then historically low figures from 2019 onwards.

    Sadly, the number of journalists killed in connection with their work in 2022 — 58 according to RSF’s Press Freedom Barometer on December 28 — was the highest in the past four years and was 13.7 percent higher than in 2021, when 51 journalists were killed.

    15 most dangerous countries
    During the past two decades, 80 percent of the media fatalities have occurred in 15 countries. The two countries with the highest death tolls are Iraq and Syria, with a combined total of 578 journalists killed in the past 20 years, or more than a third of the worldwide total.

    They are followed by Afghanistan, Yemen and Palestine. Africa has not been spared, with Somalia coming next.

    With 47.4 percent of the journalists killed in 2022, America is nowadays clearly the world’s most dangerous continent for the media, which justifies the implementation of specific protection policies.

    Four countries – Mexico, Brazil, Colombia and Honduras – are among the world’s 15 most dangerous countries.

    Asia also has many countries on this tragic list, including the Philippines, with more than 100 journalists killed since the start of 2003, Pakistan with 93, and India with 58.

    Women journalists also victims
    Finally, while many more male journalists (more than 95 percent) have been killed in war zones or in other circumstances than their female counterparts, the latter have not been spared.

    A total of 81 women journalists have been killed in the past 20 years — 4.86 percent of the total media fatalities.

    Since 2012, 52 have been killed, in many cases after investigating women’s rights. Some years have seen spikes in the number of women journalists killed, and some of the spikes have been particularly alarming.

    In 2017, ten women journalists were killed (as against 64 male journalists) — a record 13.5 percent of that year’s total media fatalities.

    Pacific Media Watch collaborates with Reporters Without Borders.

  • By Veronica Koman in Sydney

    As an Indonesian lawyer living in exile in Australia, I find it deeply troubling that the changes to the Indonesian Criminal Code are seen through the lens that touchy tourists will be denied their freedom to fornicate on holiday in Bali.

    What the far-reaching amendments will actually mean is that hundreds of millions of Indonesians will not be able to criticise any government officials, including the president, police and military.

    You can be assured that the implementation of the Criminal Code will not affect the lucrative tourism industry which the Indonesian government depends on – it will affect ordinary people in what is the world’s third largest democracy.

    With just 18 out of 575 parliamentarians physically attending the plenary session, Indonesia passed the problematic revised Criminal Code last week. It’s a death knell to democracy in Indonesia.

    I live here as an exile because of my work on the armed conflict in West Papua. The United Nations has repeatedly asked Indonesia to drop the politicised charges against me. One of the six laws used against me, about “distributing fake news”, is now incorporated into the Criminal Code.

    In West Papua, any other version of events that are different to the statement of police and military, are often labelled “fake news”. In 2019, a piece from independent news agency Reuters was called a hoax by the Indonesian armed forces.

    Now, the authors of that article can be charged under the new Criminal Code which will effectively silence journalists and human rights defenders.

    Same-sex couples marginalised
    Moreover, the ban on sex outside marriage is heteronormative and effectively further marginalises same-sex couples because they can’t marry under Indonesian law.

    The law requires as little as a complaint from a relative of someone in a same sex relationship to be enforced, meaning LGBTQIA+ people would live in fear of their disapproving family members weaponising their identity against them.

    Meanwhile, technically speaking, the heteronormative cohabitation clause exempts same-sex couples. However, based on existing practice, LGBTQIA+ people would be disproportionately targeted now that people have the moral licence to do it.

    The criminal code has predictably sparked Islamophobic commentary from the international community but, for us, this is about the continued erosion of democracy under President Joko Widodo. This is about consolidated power of the oligarchs including the conservatives shrinking the civic space.

    Back when I was still able to live in my home country, it was acceptable to notify the police a day prior, or even on the day of a protest. About six years ago, police started to treat the notification as if it was a permit and made the requirements much stricter.

    The new Criminal Code makes snap protests illegal, violating international human rights law.

    Under the new code, any discussion about Marxism and Communism is illegal. Indonesia is still trapped in the past without any truth-telling about the crimes against humanity that occurred in 1965-66. At least 500,000 Communists and people accused of being communists were killed.

    Justice never served
    Justice has never been served despite time running out because the remaining survivors are getting older.

    It will be West Papuans rather than frisky Australian tourists who bear the brunt of the updated criminal code. The repression there, which I have seen first hand, is beyond anything I’ve seen anywhere else in the country.

    Treason charges which normally carry life imprisonment are often abused to silence West Papuans. Just last week, three West Papuans were charged with treason for peacefully flying the symbol of West Papuan independence — the Morning Star flag. The new treason law comes with the death penalty.

    It’s shameful that Australia just awarded the chief of Indonesian armed forces the Order of Australia, given that his institution is the main perpetrator of human rights abuses in West Papua.

    The new Criminal Code will take effect in three years. There is a window open for the international community, including Australia, to help safeguard the world’s third largest democracy.

    Indonesians need you to raise your voice and not just because you’re worried about your trip to Bali.

    Veronica Koman is an Indonesian human rights lawyer in exile and a campaigner at Amnesty International Australia. This article was first published by The Sydney Morning Herald and is republished by Asia Pacific Report with the author’s permission.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Readers respond to David Davis’s article about Slapps – strategic lawsuits against public participation – and their threat to freedom of expression

    David Davis MP is of course right to highlight the threat to free speech and democracy posed by so-called Slapp actions – strategic lawsuits against public participation – brought by oligarchs in British courts (Democracy is at risk. We can’t let oligarchs exploit British courts to silence their critics, 29 November).

    Sadly, attacks on freedom of speech and speaking truth to power in the UK are not the exclusive preserve of rich and powerful foreigners seeking to exploit an advantageous legal trade that successive UK governments have done little to discourage.

    Continue reading…

    This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.

  • RNZ Pacific

    Murder charges have been reinstated against the man suspected of killing French Polynesian journalist Jean-Pascal Couraud, known as “JPK” — his byline, who vanished in 1997.

    Francis Stein, a former head of the territory’s archive service, was first charged in 2019 but France’s highest court accepted his appeal last year that investigative magistrates had breached rules during his questioning.

    The investigative magistrates have now revived their probe against Stein and Miri Tatarata, who was JPK’s partner.

    The pair are both accused of killing JPK, an investigative journalist who was editor-in-chief of the French-language newspaper Les Nouvelles de Tahiti, whose body has never been found.

    An investigation was first opened in 2004 after a former spy claimed that JPK had been abducted and killed by the government’s GIP militia, which allegedly dumped him at sea between Moorea and Tahiti.

    Murder charges against two members of the now disbanded GIP were dismissed eight years ago, but kidnapping charges have been upheld.

    French Polynesian journalist Jean-Pascal Couraud
    French Polynesian journalist Jean-Pascal Couraud, who disappeared in 1997. Image: RNZ Pacific/AFP

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.