Iran, Burma most Dangerous
Place for Journalists, Major Democracies not behind in curtailing
press freedom
Arrests of journalists (489, up 50 per
cent), threats and attacks (716, up 40 per cent) and incidents
of censorship (378, up 28 per cent). More and more journalists
went to jail for denouncing embezzlement, criticising officials
or simply expressing concern of any kind. Many governments, like the communist regimes, keep absolute
control of the flow of information. They include one-party regimes
(Syria and Iraq), military dictatorships (Burma) and monarchies
such as Saudi Arabia.
Annual report 2002
Hard times for press freedom
Press freedom had a rough time in 2001, the
first year of the third millennium. On every continent, this
basic right (a key to democracy in any society) was harshly attacked,
along with those who exercised it. The attacks were either physical
(threats, blows, injuries and murders), done through repressive
laws (censorship, bannings, arrests and prison sentences) or
else targeted media equipment itself (broadcasting aerials, printing
works and offices). The picture was a sad one. Press freedom
in the world sharply declined during the year.
Some "good" news
A few victories were notched up however. Some
of those persecuted - symbols of repression by regimes that tolerate
only the information they decree shall be known - were released.
One was journalist Nizar Nayyouf, who emerged from a Syrian prison
in May after nine years. Another was Burmese woman journalist
and writer San San Nwe, released in July after seven years in
Rangoon's Insein prison. They are now free but the physical effects
of imprisonment during which everything was done to break their
bodies and minds - through total isolation, humiliation, refusal
of medical attention, ill-treatment and torture - will stay with
them for the rest of their lives. They are free, yet at the end
of 2001, the Burmese rulers still held the dubious honour of
being, along with Iran, the country in the world with the most
journalists in prison (18 each). There are no longer any journalists
in Syria's jails, but the authorities there have not relaxed
their tight control over information. A particularly harsh measure
against the media came into force in September and the family
of the released Nizar Nayyouf was subjected to constant pressure
in a bid to make the journalist, from his European exile, stop
criticising the regime.
The situation for journalists improved in
several countries, though in too few of them. In Chile, the notorious
Article 6b of the 1958 internal state security law, which called
for up to five years in jail for "insulting" or "defaming"
top state officials, was finally repealed. In Peru, the page
seemed to have finally turned on the "Fujimori era"
and, free of pressure from secret police and obedient judges,
the media could resume its role of criticising the authorities
without fear of reprisals. In Serbia, freedom of information
naturally accompanied the arrival of democracy after the fall
of the Milosevic regime in October 2000. But hopes for speedy
reform of the media and press laws were disappointed. Will the
same thing happen in Afghanistan now the Taliban are gone ? The
first statements of the new rulers there were promising, but
will these good intentions last ? In Africa, quite a few journalists
were released from jail. In Ethiopia, four held since 1997 were
freed for "lack of evidence" and in Togo and the Democratic
Republic of the Congo, journalists in prison for several months
were pardoned by the president and released. Pressure on the
media by the authorities in these countries is still very strong
however and includes frequent arrests and indictments that can
be taken further at any time.
The fact that the number of journalists killed
did not rise (31 against 32 in 2000) and was far lower than the
record reached in the 1990s could, at a pinch, be counted as
positive. We must also distinguish between those killed in war
zones who were not singled out for being journalists and those
who were deliberately murdered because of their investigations
and articles about sensitive matters and for having denounced
arbitrary behaviour, embezzlement, injustice, crime and racketeering.
New kinds of wars, not between the regular
armies of old but between ethnic, ideological, religious or plain
criminal interests, have made reporting increasingly dangerous.
But death or injury of journalists in these conflicts is not
always purely accidental. Sometimes the combatants, even from
regular armies, deliberately target inconvenient witnesses to
their deeds. In the Palestinian Occupied Territories, where several
dozen journalists have been wounded by gunfire since the start
of the Intifada, some have been deliberately shot at by Israeli
soldiers. Reporters Without Borders had well-documented cases
that leave no doubt about who was responsible, but the organisation's
demand for their punishment went unanswered. This is the eternal
and harrowing problem of the impunity enjoyed nearly all over
the world by those who kill or attack journalists.
That is the extent of the meagre "good"
news, that we are well aware is very relative. We have dealt
with it first so as not to discourage readers of the report right
away. Also to show that even in the darkest times in a world
scarred at all levels by fierce fighting, bloody struggles for
power and for control of people's activities, minds and land,
defenders of human rights, especially the right to free information,
can still make headway.
Repression spreads
There was plenty of cause for concern and
alarm. Except for the number of journalists killed during the
year, all the figures were sharply up on 2000. They included
arrests of journalists (489, up 50 per cent), threats and attacks
(716, up 40 per cent) and incidents of censorship (378, up 28
per cent). More and more journalists went to jail for denouncing
embezzlement, criticising officials or simply expressing concern
of any kind - in other words, for doing their job, which was
enough for even the most cautious journalist to be sued for harming
the reputation of a leader or even national morale. The number
of journalists in prison at the end of 2001 was 110, compared
with 74 a year earlier, an increase of almost 50 per cent.
Nearly a third of the world's people still
live in countries where press freedom is simply not allowed,
notably the last-remaining communist countries where the only
permitted political party, that supposedly incarnates the aspirations
of the entire population, dictates by itself what is to be written,
said and shown. China, with 1.3 billion inhabitants, is far and
away top of the list here. Economic liberalisation has led to
media proliferation and growth, but while the press has gained
some freedom, especially economically, it remains strictly under
the ferrule of the party leaders where political and social matters
are concerned.
Buoyed by its new membership of the World
Trade Organisation, by winning its bid to hold the 2008 Olympic
Games and by its support for US President George W. Bush's crusade
against terrorism in the wake of the 11 September attacks in
New York, the government in Beijing has a freer hand than ever
to continue its occupation of Tibet and clamp down on religious
groups, opposition movements and protesting ethnic minorities.
It has tightened its control of the media, especially in the
provinces, and closely monitors the Internet to try to ensure
that web-surfers in China only read "correct line"
information. Sixteen "cyber-dissidents" were jailed
in 2001, joining 12 journalists in prison.
Other governments, like the communist regimes,
also keep absolute control of the flow of information. They include
one-party regimes (Syria and Iraq), military dictatorships (Burma)
and monarchies such as Saudi Arabia.
Cardboard imitations
and repressive laws
All other governments in the world solemnly
proclaim their belief in freedom of expression, especially freedom
of the press. But very few are as good as their word. Many countries
in every continent have all the appearances of democracy, but
often that is just a cardboard imitation to fool genuinely democratic
countries and major international institutions that politely
take the pretence at face value. This is the case in Tunisia,
where President Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali's police state keeps
an iron grip on private and state-owned media, imposes wholesale
repression and poses as a victim whenever it is accused.
To save face, political leaders "legalise"
their repression by getting tough laws passed that are implemented
by obedient police and judges. In Panama, the law allows imprisonment
for defamation or harming someone's reputation and state officials
filed more than 70 complaints in 2001. In Guatemala, a law to
force journalists to be members of an official institute came
into effect in December, decreeing that those who were "morally
lacking" as journalists be dismissed from the institute
and thus banned from working. In Africa, many governments armed
themselves with press laws to punish with stiff prison terms
offences such as "putting out false news … harming
the morale of the army" or "insulting the head of State."
When criticised for this, such leaders say they have merely copied
the French press law of 1881, which is true, except that the
prison terms provided under this law have not been handed down
by French courts for many years. In 2001, Reporters Without Borders
got the 1881 law amended to remove the imprisonment clauses,
thus destroying the excuse of the African dictators, who did
not follow suit.
Recourse to "legal" repression does
not stop recourse to violence. In Colombia, where three more
journalists were murdered, the guerrillas on one side and the
paramilitary forces on the other want to silence inconvenient
voices. Many journalists, threatened with death, chose exile.
In Colombia too, the killers enjoy impunity.
Degrees of censorship, violence and media
control vary greatly from country to country and situations change.
After several years of real progress, repression has returned
with a vengeance in many countries such as Bangladesh, Eritrea,
Haiti, Nepal and Zimbabwe. Very few countries have moved in the
opposite direction.
In the major democracies
too…
Things are getting rocky also in major democratic
countries in North America, Asia and Europe. Even within the
European Union, with its good record on human rights and freedom
of expression, threats to pluralism and freedom of information
arose or worsened in several large countries. Among them was
Italy, where prime minister Silvio Berlusconi controls most of
the country's private and public TV and radio stations and where
repression of anti-globalisation demonstrations during the G8
summit in Genoa killed one person and injured many others, including
19 journalists. Murders by armed groups in Spain (the Basque
conflict) and the United Kingdom (in Northern Ireland), indictments
and convictions in France and Germany, narrowing of media ownership
and political interference in Austrian TV and radio all showed
that the "Old Continent" too was getting dragged down
in a disquieting way.
Things are likely to get worse. The fallout
from the 11 September attacks in New York is not over. Several
of the laws passed to fight terrorism have raised concern and
undermine the basic principal of a free flow of information.
In Canada and the United States, steps have been taken to strengthen
monitoring of the Internet and weaken a journalist's right not
to reveal sources. In its war against what it calls "the
evil-doers," the Bush Administration is little bothered
by the means that are used. The news media are pressed to take
sides and propaganda takes precedence over the truth. The enemy
must be defeated and media that disagree must be crushed. Such
black-and-white attitudes are worrying.
Bahrain annual Report
2002
Like other Gulf countries, Bahrain enjoys
some press freedom. Yet self-censorship is still practised widely.
A noteworthy event during the year : a journalist lodged a complaint
against the information minister.
In February 2001 a "National Charter"
providing for democratic reforms was adopted by referendum. It
specifies that freedom of expression "should be guaranteed
by the constitution". Despite noteworthy improvements in
human rights in recent years, a lot still needs to be done as
far as freedom of expression is concerned. For the first time
ever, late in the year a journalist lodged a complaint against
the information minister. The minister had previously banned
the journalist from practising his profession after he had been
charged for "betrayal of national unity".
Like other Gulf countries, the emirate enjoys
some press freedom, even if self-censorship is still widespread.
This tiny country has four dailies, two in Arabic, Al Ayyam and
Akhbar al Khaleej, and two in English, Gulf Daily News and Bahrain
Tribune.
Pressure and obstruction
On 11 November 2001 charges were laid against
Hafez El Sheikh Saleh, journalist with the daily Akhbar al Khaleej
and contributor to the Arabic newspapers Ach Charq and Al Quds
el Arabi. The journalist's writings were "incompatible with
the spirit of the National Charter and the constitution",
according to the justice minister who accused him of "betrayal
of national unity". The journalist believes that the real
reason was an article published in the Lebanese newspaper The
Daily Star in which he wrote that the emir's recent visit to
the United States "had cause much consternation" in
Bahrain and the Gulf countries. The journalist is known for his
particularly critical articles regarding the Shiite majority
in the country.
On 4 December Hafez El Sheikh Saleh counter-attacked
by lodging a complaint against the information minister, Nabil
al-Hamer, for prohibiting him from practising his profession.
The minister had also banned the journalist from travelling abroad.
In late November the authorities prohibited the Arabic daily
Azzaman, published in London, from being printed in the country
because it had violated the press and publications law. The newspaper
was accused of publishing a series of articles criticising the
emir of Qatar, Sheikh Hamed bin Khalifa Al Thani.
-
The World's Largest Prison for Journalists - Annual report
Asia 2002
"The crime of blasphemy, punished
by the death penalty, has become a sword of Damocles hanging
above the media" Indian Reporters banned in Pakistan.
Pakistan annual media freedom report 2002
Source: Reporters Without Fronters Annual
Report on Media Freedom.
