Media Rights: Reports
IAMCR contribution on Convention on the Protection of Cultural Contents and Artistic Expressions
Date: 22/02/2005
IAMCR’s contribution to the UNESCO debate on the preliminary draft of the Convention on the Protection of Cultural Contents and Artistic Expressions
IAMCR contribution to UNESCO debate on Protection of Cultural Contents and Artistic Expressions
Dear colleagues,
Please find attached, in French and in English, the text of IAMCR’s contribution to the UNESCO debate on the preliminary draft of the Convention on the Protection of Cultural Contents and Artistic Expressions.
We all owe our gratitude to Divina Frau-Meigs for volunteering her time and hard work in representing IAMCR, in this forum, which she did in consultation with the IAMCR Executive Board.
Regards,
Andrew Calabrese
_________________________________________
School of Journalism and Mass Communication
University of Colorado
http://spot.colorado.edu/~calabres/
Zimbabwe
Report
July 30, 2001
Government has announced plans to table an Access to Information Bill soon after parliament begins its session. The Civic Alliance for Social and Economic Progress (CASEP) recognizes the need for genuine public rights of access to information, but also cautions against the possible misuse of such laws for narrow
political purposes.
To promote and sustain a democratic dispensation in which there is a free flow and access to information in the public interest, Zimbabwe requires a Freedom of Information Act, which rests on three pillars:
- Free flow of information in the public interest
- Access to information necessary for citizens as individuals and as organized civic groups to know, exercise and defend their rights
- Constitutional rights to freedom of expression and to privacy
These basic principles should apply across public and private sectors, including in relation to information held by public bodies such as the Executive, the Legislature and the State.
The groups demand that given the fundamental importance of this law to all sections of society, Parliament through its portfolio committee on information must put in place a mechanism allowing for extensive and inclusive public hearings that must include all stakeholders, the public through representative organs in civil
society and the media, including journalists. This Bill must thus be handled through normal parliamentary channels and not through any *fast track* method.
The Civic Alliance for Social and Economic Progress (CASEP) covers employment, education, health, local government, media and legal sectors of the economy, through workers in both the private and public sector (PSA, ZIMTA, ZCTU); students (ZINASU); the Human Rights Forum; the National Constitutional Assembly, health groups (CWGH); Media Monitoring Project Zimbabwe (MMPZ) and residents associations (ZURA).
For further details contact the CASEP Secretariat, 47 Van Praagh,
Milton Park, Harare, Tel. 705108, or
MMPZ, 221 Fife Avenue, Harare, Tel/fax: 263 4 734207, 733486, E-
mail: monitors@mweb.co.zw
African Charter on Broadcasting
African Charter on Broadcasting launched on World Press Freedom Day May 3rd
The African Charter on Broadcasting will be launched as an official activity of the Africa Commission on Human and People’s Rights Sessions to be held in Pretoria between May 2nd a May 9th 2002. The launch will be a gala dinner event held on World Press Freedom Day, May 3rd, the eleventh anniversary of the penning of the Windhoek Declaration. Representatives from a majority of African States will be in attendance.
The SADC was the birthplace of the Windhoek Declaration on Promoting an Independent and Pluralistic African Press in 1991. Despite this, the region remains an international centre of media violations, and the right to communicate is almost non-existent for the majority population. Since the adoption of the Declaration, though, there have been gains in media freedom in Africa and in some nation states, the media has begun to take up its role as a cornerstone of democracy and
source of balanced information for citizens. The Windhoek Declaration has served as a beacon that highlights the extent to which governments throughout the world and the region honour their commitments towards upholding and promoting media freedom, independence and diversity.
However, the Windhoek Declaration focussed on promoting independent print media, and was silent on issues such as broadcasting liberalisation and the globalisation of the communications industry which have increasingly come into play in the last decade. Globalisation and liberalisation have serious social and economic implications for media freedom and development, not least because they threaten to jeopardise the ability of Africans to produce media
that is both relevant to audiences throughout Africa, and reflects the continent’s rich cultural diversity.
Media practitioners and freedom of expression advocates from throughout Africa sought to address these concerns at the UNESCO-supported conference called to celebrate the 10th anniversary of the Windhoek Declaration in Namibia in May 2001. The conference responded by adopting the African Charter on Broadcasting, which serves as a modern blueprint for policies and laws determining the future of broadcasting and information technology in Africa.
A growing partnership of media advocacy organisations across Africa will present the African Charter on Broadcasting as an African policy platform at the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) to be held in Geneva in December 2003. In the lead up, the Charter will be strengthened through an advocacy process that is underway and which will strengthen and deepen ownership of the Charter by African media organisations and practitioners. The development of regional strengthening strategies is being led by a coalition of media organisations based in southern Africa. Through the process, media agencies across Africa will discuss and mobilise around the Charter. At the end of 2003, when the Charter is presented to WSIS, there will be no doubt that this is a document for which
African civil society seeks international endorsement.
For further information / interviews contact:
African Charter on Broadcasting:
Tracey Naughton
Regional Broadcast Program Manager
Media Institute of Southern Africa (MISA)
(+27) 082 726 7431
Or
John Barker
Head of Africa Programme, ARTICLE 19
(+27) 082 890 4204
World Press Freedom Day and regional media issues:
Luckson Chipare
Director
Media Institute of Southern Africa (MISA)
(+27) 082 706 2360
AFRICAN CHARTER ON BROADCASTING 2001
Acknowledging the enduring relevance and importance of the Windhoek Declaration to the protection and promotion of freedom of expression and of the media;
Noting that freedom of expression includes the right to communicate and access to means of communication;
Mindful of the fact that the Windhoek Declaration focuses on the print media and recalling Paragraph 17 of the Windhoek Declaration, which recommended that a similar seminar be convened to address the need for independence and pluralism in radio and television broadcasting;
Recognising that the political, economic and technological environment in which the Windhoek Declaration was adopted has changed significantly and that there is a need to complement and expand upon the original Declaration;
Aware of the existence of serious barriers to free, independent and pluralistic broadcasting and to the right to communicate through broadcasting in Africa;
Cognisant of the fact that for the vast majority of the peoples of Africa, the broadcast media remains the main source of public communication and information;
Recalling the fact that the frequency spectrum is a public resource which must be managed in the public interest;
We the Participants of Windhoek + 10 Declare that:
PART I: GENERAL REGULATORY ISSUES
1. The legal framework for broadcasting should include a clear statement of the principles underpinning broadcast regulation, including promoting respect for freedom of expression, diversity, and the free flow of information and ideas, as well as a three-tier system for broadcasting: public service, commercial and community.
2. All formal powers in the areas of broadcast and telecommunications regulation should be exercised by public authorities which are protected against interference, particularly of a political or economic nature, by, among other things, an appointments process for members which is open, transparent, involves the participation of
civil society, and is not controlled by any particular political party.
3. Decision-making processes about the overall allocation of the frequency spectrum should be open and participatory, and ensure that a fair proportion of the spectrum is allocated to broadcasting uses.
4. The frequencies allocated to broadcasting should be shared equitably among the three tiers of broadcasting.
5. Licensing processes for the allocation of specific frequencies to individual broadcasters should be fair and transparent, and based on clear criteria which include promoting media diversity in ownership and content.
6. Broadcasters should be required to promote and develop local content, which should be defined to include African content, including through the introduction of minimum quotas.
7. States should promote an economic environment that facilitates the development of independent production and diversity in broadcasting.
8. The development of appropriate technology for the reception of broadcasting signals should be promoted.
PART II: PUBLIC SERVICE BROADCASTING
1. All State and government controlled broadcasters should be transformed into public service broadcasters, that are accountable to all strata of the people as represented by an independent board, and that serve the overall public interest, avoiding one-sided reporting and programming in regard to religion, political belief, culture, race and gender.
2. Public service broadcasters should, like broadcasting and telecommunications regulators, be governed by bodies which are protected against interference.
3. The public service mandate of public service broadcasters should clearly defined.
4. The editorial independence of public service broadcasters should be guaranteed.
5. Public service broadcasters should be adequately funded in a manner that protects them from arbitrary interference with their budgets.
6. Without detracting from editorial control over news and current affairs content and in order to promote the development of independent productions and to enhance diversity in programming, public service broadcasters should be required to broadcast minimum quotas of material by independent producers.
7. The transmission infrastructure used by public service broadcasters should be made accessible to all broadcasters under reasonable and non-discriminatory terms.
PART III: COMMUNITY BROADCASTING
1. Community broadcasting is broadcasting which is for, by and about the community, whose ownership and management is representative of the community, which pursues a social development agenda, and which is non-profit.
2. There should be a clear recognition, including by the international community, of the difference between decentralised public broadcasting and community broadcasting.
3. The right of community broadcasters to have access to the Internet, for the benefit of their respective communities, should be promoted.
PART IV: TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND CONVERGENCE
1. The right to communicate includes access to telephones, email, Internet and other telecommunications systems, including through the promotion of community-controlled information communication technology centres.
2. Telecommunications law and policy should promote the goal of universal service and access, including through access clauses in privatisation and liberalisation processes, and proactive measures by the State.
3. The international community and African governments should mobilise resources for funding research to keep abreast of the rapidly changing media and technology landscape in Africa.
4. African governments should promote the development of online media and African content, including through the formulation of non-restrictive policies on new information and communications technologies.
5. Training of media practitioners in electronic communication, research and publishing skills needs to be supported and expanded, in order to promote access to, and dissemination of, global information.
PART V: IMPLEMENTATION
1. UNESCO should distribute the African Charter on Broadcasting 2001 as broadly as possible, including to stakeholders and the general public, both in Africa and worldwide.
2. Media organizations and civil society in Africa are encouraged to use the Charter as a lobbying tool and as their starting point in the development of national and regional broadcasting policies. To this end media organisations and civil society are encouraged to initiate public awareness campaigns, to form coalitions on broadcasting reform, to formulate broadcasting policies, to develop specific models for regulatory bodies and public service broadcasting, and to
lobby relevant official actors.
3. All debates about broadcasting should take into account the needs of the commercial broadcasting sector.
4. UNESCO should undertake an audit of the Charter every five years, given the pace of development in the broadcasting field.
5. UNESCO should raise with member governments the importance of broadcast productions being given special status and recognised as cultural goods under the World Trade Organization rules.
6. UNESCO should take measures to promote the inclusion of the theme of media, communications and development in an appropriate manner during the UN Summit on the Information Society in 2003.
SADC Organisations Associated with the African Charter on Broadcasting:
The Media Institute of Southern Africa
Tracey Naughton
broadcasting@misa.org.na
www.misa.org
+27 (082)
The Media Institute of Southern Africa (MISA) is a non-governmental organisation with members in 11 of the Southern Africa Development Community (SADC) countries. Officially launched in September 1992, MISA focuses primarily on the need to promote free, independent and pluralistic media, as envisaged in the 1991 Windhoek Declaration and African Charter on Broadcasting.
MISA seeks ways in which to promote the free flow of information and co-operation between media workers, as a principal means of nurturing democracy and human rights in Africa The role of the MISA is primarily one of a co-ordinator, facilitator and communicator, and for this reason MISA aims to work together with all like-minded organisations and individuals to achieve a genuinely free and pluralistic media in southern Africa.
ARTICLE 19
John Barker
+27 (082)
Info@article19.org.za
www.article19.org
Named after Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the organisation works world wide to combat censorship by promoting freedom of expression and access to official information.
With partners in over 30 countries, ARTICLE 19 works to strengthen local capacity to monitor and protest institutional and informal censorship.
ARTICLE 19 activities includes monitoring, research, publishing, lobbying, campaigning and litigation on behalf of freedom of expression wherever it is threatened. Standards are developed to advance media freedom and assist individuals to speak out and campaign for the free flow of information.
SACOD
Chris K
sacod@icon.co.za
www.sacod.co.za
SACOD is a coalition of Southern Africa filmmakers and organisations in related services whose primary focus is the production and distribution of social responsibility films and videos. It was founded in 1987 by independent institutions from Zimbabwe, South Africa and Mozambique, and Canada to support the growth of independent video movement, and to support the process of democratisation in Southern Africa via the audiovisual medium. SACOD
now has members in eight SADC countries. South Africa (Regional Office, Zimbabwe, Swaziland, Angola, Lesotho, Zambia, Mozambique and Namibia with its regional co-operation office in Johannesburg.
AMARC
Michelle Ntab
regc@global.co.za
www.amarc.org
AMARC is an international non-governmental organisation serving the community radio movement, with almost 3,000 members and associates in 106 countries.Its goal is to support and contribute to the development of community and participatory radio along the principals of solidarity and international co-operation.
Ends
————————–
Information distributed by:
Zoe Titus
MISA Researcher and Information Officer
Media Institute of Southern Africa (MISA)
Private Bag 13386
Windhoek, Namibia
Tel. +264 61 232975, Fax. 248016
e-mail: research@misa.org.na
web: http://www.misa.org
MEDIA INSTITUTE OF SOUTHERN AFRICA
PROMOTING MEDIA DIVERSITY, PLURALISM, SELF-SUFFICIENCY AND INDEPENDENCE
_______________________________________________
Misa-press mailing list
Misa-press@lists.sn.apc.org
http://lists.sn.apc.org/mailman/listinfo/misa-press
The Platform for Communication Rights & the World Summit on the Information Society
http://www.wacc.org.uk/our_work/events/reports/wsis/london.html
Report from the Working Group in “Freedom of Expression”
NAP Workshop on Civil and Political Rights
South African Human Rights Council
University of Durban-Westville, July 29-30, 1998
Keyan Tomaselli, Ron Krabill* and Dumisani Bhengu
University of Natal, Durban
This report is provides an overview of some of the discussions which took place in the working group on Freedom of Expression at the NAP Workshop on Civil and Political Rights. The report covers both the discussions and the policy suggestions which arose out of those discussions.
The issues of top importance in terms of both practicality and civil and political rights were:
adapting and adopting The People’s Communication Charter; encouraging the payment of television licenses to protect and support the autonomy of the public service broadcaster; introducing critical media education at all schools; and removing the ad valorem luxury tax from the Freeplay radio (run by clock work and designed for remote populations) to provide the freedom of access to information, especially in rural areas and areas without electricity.
Discussion began by considering the current state of media freedom in South Africa. Professor Tomaselli provided detailed background on the post-Cold War globalization of capital, media and markets and their impact on South African media. He distributed a copy of the Cultural Environmental Movement’s (CEM) The Viewers’ Declaration of Independence which includes a copy of The Peoples Communication Charter (see attached). A second article on journalism and the new liberalised political orders of Southern Africa was also circulated. The points highlighted by Tomaselli from the Declaration were:
that all persons are endowed with the right to live in a cultural environment that is respectful of their humanity and supportive of their potentials
that all children are endowed with the right to grow up in a cultural environment that fosters responsibility, trust and mutuality rather than irresponsibility, fear and violence
that when a media system drifts out of democratic reach and becomes destructive of these rights, it is the duty of the people to alter it.
Another key point emphasised from the Declaration by Tomaselli related to:
issues of regulation and privatisation of the electronic media, with reference to public access and accountability. How to develop policy which protects the public sphere from market economics as the only legitimate form of regulation. The Declaration holds that market economics has declared war on journalism.
It was pointed out that the two documents have been discussed and developed with numerous other agreements on human rights across the world (see statement after Article 18 of the Charter).
The policy imperative becomes all the more urgent when one realises that the exercise of power in the Information Age takes place directly between private enterprise, special interest groups, political parties and the state bureaucracy. The public is included only sporadically in this circuit of power, and then usually only to affirm their own exclusion.
The group responded positively to the Declaration and the Charter and their overall policy concerns. The group’s attention was told of the Children’s Broadcast Charter which, although not available, also sounded constructive and helpful. Professor Tomaselli also contextualized the group’s discussions in light of the concept of the “public sphere” as a fundamental element of democracy. He argued that the public sphere, where political and social debate occurs, is fundamental to freedom of expression. Three levels of public sphere were identified: the micro (community), meso (regional), and macro (national/international). The micro and meso public spheres were argued to be the most at risk in the post-Cold War era. It is at these community and regional levels that communities talk to and amongst themselves most effectively. The larger publics’ voices are otherwise drowned out at the macro level. It is necessary to strengthen these micro and meso levels of discussion as far as the broader polity is concerned.
Freedom of expression (as far as political debate is concerned) is the content of the public sphere. Critical debate is the basis of democracy. However, expressions like pornography, were considered to be “commercial speech,” and therefore qualitatively distinct from political expression. However, sometimes the boundaries were blurred as in the political comment offered by Hustler, and in the erotic child `art’ displayed by Mark Hipper in Grahamstown. These are commercial products claiming freedom of expression. Child pornography was considered to be abhorrent under any circumstances. The problem here concerned pictures of real children, and child models in relation to doctored, air bushed, and especially computer enhanced images which look like children. It was felt that where an actual child is involved that all concerned with the production, distribution and reception of such images should be subject to prosecution.
The minutes below amplify on the above summary. Points of principle accepted by the working group are highlighted in bold print.
The group agreed that The People’s Communication Charter should be used as a template, for the NAP document’s section on freedom of expression. The Charter could be modified where appropriate for the South African situation.
It was pointed out that the one significant weakness of the Viewers’ Declaration of Independence is its assumption that viewers are passive consumers of media messages rather than active agents in meaning-making. Research on audience reception suggests that viewers make sense of media in relation to their own frames of reference, and not necessarily only in terms of those put there by the producers. Audiences should be therefore much more involved in programming decisions as far as the public service broadcaster especially is concerned . This means that the SABC should get to know its audiences beyond All Media Products Survey and audience ratings data. Reception research on why and how people watch certain programmes, what sense they make of them, how they make sense of them, how they use them, under what conditions, and so on, are crucial to securing the rights listed in both the Declaration and the Charter. This approach will treat audiences as people with agency and as critical citizens rather than merely as passive consumers. (Such research has been carried out by the SABC and university researchers, but this approach needs greater legitimacy, infrastructural and funding support.)
As far as commercial broadcasters are concerned, it was argued that the airwaves through which radio and TV signals are broadcast is a public resource. This resource should not be free of charge to commercial broadcasters unless they adhere strictly to the conditions of their licencing which entails developmental services such as local content production and programming, assisting educational institutions, educating audiences via investigative journalism, and so on.
The lack of children’s ability to “read” television in a sophisticated way was also discussed, and the presence of some media training in Curriculum 2005 was mentioned.
It was agreed that future research on mass media (for example, research conducted by the SABC) should focus as much on ethnographic reception studies as with “ratings,” which are less detailed and less useful in explaining how people actually use and interpret the media. Audiences should be conceived of as `critical citizens’, and as active participants in the public sphere, rather than only as `consumers’, or `markets’. Public service broadcasting especially is crucial to maintaining spaces for the conception of audiences as crucial parts of the three interrelated levels of the public sphere.
It was agreed that critical media education, already developed in South Africa and other countries, should be adapted and incorporated into the school curriculum nationally. While such courses should retain their aesthetic dimensions of study, it is crucial that children also be taught how to critically interpret media messages (advertising, sitcoms, drama, films, the news etc.) in terms of life skills programmes and pressing social issues.
The SABC purchases much of its programming from abroad, and as such has significant choice in the specific programming it purchases. This should be taken into consideration particularly when dealing with gratuitous violence on television and its alleged effect on children. It was suggested that consideration of children’s experiences with television be strategically linked to Mandela’s interest in children and his campaign with regard to childrens’ rights.
Extensive discussion took place regarding the difference between publicly-owned and state-owned broadcasting systems. The distinctions and implications were made clear. The SABC is a publicly owned facility, paid for by licence fees and advertising revenue. This principle was accepted by the first democratically selected SABC board. However, the distinction between `public’ and ‘state’ has been blurred under the regime of the current Minister who seems to think that the SABC is state-owned. This assumption seriously undermines the SABC’s political autonomy and the rights of the public to ensuring a public sphere beyond party political interferences. (The proceeds of the sale of the SABC’s five regional stations should have gone to the SABC, not the fiscus, for example.) The group also discussed the importance of viewers paying television licenses for maintaining the autonomy and integrity of a publicly-owned and politically independent system. The relationship between licences and the civil right of freedom to information and discussion needs much more emphasis than the SABC has given it. This right finds its outlet in both the meso sphere (via regional broadcasting) and the macro sphere (via national broadcasting). The micro sphere is served by non-SABC community broadcasting initiatives, but should link with the Corporation where possible in debate.
It was agreed that care should be taken to maintain SABC’s current status as a publicly-owned broadcasting system. It was also agreed that an education campaign linking the payment of television licenses to the right of freedom to information should be launched. Additionally, it was agreed that part of the process for private broadcast companies applying for broadcasting licenses should include a commitment to public-interest programming, to working with educational institutions, and that this should be to be monitored and enforced.
Discussion took place around multi-lingual drama programming with an educational objective (such as Soul City) and the great popularity of this series. The success of other programmes such as KZN Tonight , Going Up and other local programming was also discussed in terms of the way that audiences use, apply, and negotiate the (social, cultural, language, education and health) issues debated in these different genres. It was felt that language diversity could be both protected and enhanced through the development of the kinds of multi-lingual TV mentioned above which use the visual to plot the narrative, and captions and various narrative devices to make the programmes comprehensible to viewers speaking a variety of different languages. English News broadcasts should include these kinds of devices in also developing multi-lingualism, especially amongst children..
It was agreed that additional multi-lingual programming should be pursued by the SABC, as well as greater levels of local and regional television programming (as evidenced in the programmes mentioned above).
Extensive discussion took place regarding censorship. Although the group agreed that regulation and a rating system was preferable to banning, etc., the ways in which regulation could be implemented were unclear. It was recognized that a certain paradox exists between political expression and other forms of expression. In other words, it was recognized that one often opens the door to political censorship by trying to censor consumer products such as pornography. While political freedom of expression was held to be unambiguously positive, other forms of expression (child pornography in particular) were recognized as abusive. The particular complications of Internet-based pornography were also discussed – specific laws taking into account the nature of the Internet would be required. NAP should liaise with international research groups with regard to child pornography especially.
It was agreed that political expression must be protected, and that regulation rather than censorship must be upheld as the way to deal with pornography. It was agreed that laws should be in place by which those who involve children in pornography (production, transmission, duplication and reception) can be prosecuted. Zoning restrictions on location of sex shops should restrict such outlets to city centres and industrial areas where children rarely go.
Extensive discussion also took place surrounding Section 205 of the Constitution, which allows journalists to be summonsed to appear before a magistrate or judge to disclose confidential information. Positions regarding this Section were somewhat split amongst the group, with some maintaining that full press freedom was essential while others saw certain situations involving state security (e.g., the development of chemical weapons) as requiring a provision such as Section 205. The SA National editors’ Forum argues that Section 205 conflicts with the Bill of Rights, a position rejected by the Constitutional Court. However, Section 205 does contradict Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It was felt that if Section 205 could not be cancelled, then that only a Judge (not a magistrate) should have the power to impose it.
It was agreed that Section 205 must be revised in such a way that it can be invoked only by a judge and only in situations of state security. These revisions must also codify a process by which those in office are not able to abuse this power. It was agreed that the proper use of this Section must rely on more than the benevolence of those in power and that further discussion with the SA National Editors Forum on the matter be pursued.
A very extensive discussion took place surrounding the corporatisation and syndication of newspapers, and the general decline of investigative reporting in South Africa. This was viewed as a serious infringement on the right of access to accurate and socially relevant information, and various solutions were proposed and discussed.
It was agreed that newspaper monopolies should be viewed as potentially detrimental to the overall diversity of views found in the corporate press, where the market reigns supreme. Mechanisms should be found for facilitating an active alternative media as well as strengthening the skills of investigative journalism within South Africa.
A brief discussion around the Open Democracy Bill took place, but participants had insufficient information to draw many conclusions. Much discussion took place on questions of the role of the press in “nation-building,” but no firm conclusions were reached. It was pointed out that what constituted `negative’ reporting in one context was considered `positive’ in another – eg. The corporate press was totally supportive of free enterprise and the president, while criticising implementation of policy rather than the policy itself. On the balance of things, this is affirmative reporting on government policy, which should not be confused with criticism of party-political issues relating to the ANC itself. Ad hominem attacks by President Mandela on individual black journalists and the corporate press in general was not considered conducive to press freedom, though it was agreed that Mandela had a right to make the criticism. It is important to protect the public sphere in which this kind of criticism and counter-criticism can occur.
It was agreed that the SAHRC should continue to monitor the Open Democracy Bill and ensure its meaningfulness and successful passage into law. It was agreed that the media must remain as critical and independent voices in society, regardless of which party is in power.
Extensive discussion took place around the difficulty of the Urban/Rural split with regards to access to information. It was pointed out that approximately 8 million South Africans can receive a television signal, whereas 36 million South Africans are able to receive radio signals. It was also pointed out that 86% of people in KwaZulu/Natal listen to the radio. Professor Tomaselli brought the Freeplay clockwork powered radio to the attention of the group. This radio can be operated for 45 minutes,, and was developed for developmental and rural conditions, especially where electricity is unavailable, and for listeners who cannot afford batteries. As such, it holds amazing potential for rural dwellers who are unable to afford batteries or are unable to acquire them easily even if they can afford them. At present the government considers these radios a luxury item and taxes them as such, making them far too expensive for poorer listeners, even though they are manufactured in Cape Town. Additionally, employees of the company, who are also its shareholders, are partly drawn from the disabled community, thus making the company a promoter of human rights in the constitution of the company workplace themselves.
It was agreed that the SAHRC should request government to take the Freeplay radio off the list of luxury goods in recognition of its role in providing rural people the right of access to information communicated via the public service broadcaster especially.
With regard to access to the Internet, it was pointed out that this global medium is but a telephone call away. Telkom obviously needs to be a partner in developing access to the Internet. The UN Administrative Committee on Coordination’s Statement on Universal Access to Basic Communication and Information Services notes that the “right to communicate” includes: a) the need to specify this value in operational terms; and b) to analyse current levels of access to basic communications and information services.
As with broadcasting which uses the frequency spectrum as a public resource, Telkom and the cellular phone companies also use the airwaves to transmit their products. These companies should be required to apply their expertise, infrastructures and a percentage of their resources to reducing the gap between those who do, and those who do not, have access to telephones. Telkom appears to be undertaking these kinds of developmental programmes, but the cellphone companies appear to have been exempted these requirements, which are certainly part of the IBA stipulations on the broadcast sector. (This point is made and elaborated here, as time prevented detailed discussion during the workshop.)
Additional Suggestions for the NAP:
To identify local storytellers to help develop multilingual programming and involve children in programme production. (The work of Gcina Mhlope was cited as an excellent example of this genre.)
To promote and assist with funding for the South African coordinator (who is representing Africa) of the UNESCO Summit 2000 on Children and TV in Sydney, Australia.
To develop regional and local monitoring systems for freedom of expression issues, linked to NGOs and other organizations, with regular reports issued for enforcement.
Many of the points made above are reinforced by the Viewers’ Declaration of Independence
and The People’s Communication Charter, which preceded the NAP discussions. These two documents thus have a key role to play in guiding discussions on freedom of expression in South Africa.
Implementing Bodies
It was explained that the government is responsible for the implementation of the National Action Plan. It was therefore suggested that the newly formed SA Government Communication and Information System be tasked with the implementation of the Freedom of Expression recommendations. The following bodies from civil society should be requested to interact with this body in ensuring that the principles are publicly debated, developed, refined and implemented:
SAHRC
SA National Editors Forum
Freedom of Expression Institute
Black Journalists Forum
Independent Producers Organisation
Open Window Network
Independent Broadcasting Authority
National Association of Broadcasters
Print Media Association
Future Workshops
If the freedom of expression item is to be further debated in forthcoming workshops it would be helpful to precirculate copies of the Charter in particular so that it an be discussed item-by-item, in relation to the South African situation. The minutes as provided here should accompany these documents. (As a member of the CEM Board of Directors, Tomaselli would be happy to make himself available again as discussion facilitator of the Declaration and Charter, and so send on additional information relating to the Declaration, The Charter and CEM.).
Note
* Krabill is a visiting scholar at the University of Natal. He is a Ph.D student at the New School for Social Research, New York.
5 August 1998
Centre for Cultural and Media Studies
University of Natal
Durban 4041
Code of Ethics for Environmental Journalists
1. The right to a clean environment and sustainable development is fundamental and is closely connected to the right to life and good health and well being. The environmental journalist should inform the public about the threats to the environment – whether it is at the global, regional, national or local level.
2. Often the media is the only source of information on the environment. The journalist’s duty is to heighten the awareness of the public on environmental issues. The journalist should strive to report a plurality of views on the environment.
3. By informing the public, the journalist plays a vital role in enabling people to resort to action in protecting their environment. The journalist’s duty is not only in alerting people about their endangered environment at the outset, but also in following up such threats and keeping them posted about developments. Journalists should also attempt to write on possible solutions to environmental problems.
4. The journalists should not be influenced on these issues by vested interests – whether they are commercial, political, and government or non-governmental. The journalist ought to keep a distance from such interests and not ally with them. As a rule journalists should report all sides in any environmental controversy.
5. The journalist should as far as possible cite sources of information and avoid alarmist or speculative reportage and tendentious comment. He or she should cross check the authenticity of a source, whether commercial, official or non-governmental.
6. The environmental journalist should foster equity in access to such information and help organizations and individuals to gain it. Electronic retrieval of data can provide a useful and egalitarian tool in this regard.
7. The journalist should respect the right of privacy of individuals who have been affected by environmental catastrophes, natural disasters and the like.
8. The environmental journalist should not hesitate to correct information that he or she previously believed was correct, or to tilt the balance of public opinion by analysis in the light of subsequent developments.
The original draft for this code of ethics was prepared by a committee of three senior International Environmental Journalists,
_Dr Dharman Wickremaratne – Sri Lanka Environmental Journalists Forum
(SLEJF) Chairman,
_Darryl D’monte – Forum of Environmental Journalists of India (FEJI)
Chairman,
_Dr Robert Thomas – Visiting Professor, Loyola University Chair in
Environmental Communications and Member of the Society of Environmental
Journalists, USA.
Media Monitoring Programme in Zimbabwe
Information Minister Jonathan Moyo and other senior government officials have announced that new regulations for the accreditation of journalists will soon be introduced. These as yet unpublished regulations apparently formed the basis for the recent expulsion of two foreign journalists.
Official statements suggest that the new regulations may make radical changes to who is entitled to practice as a journalist. Media Monitoring Project Zimbabwe (MMPZ) has drawn up the following principles on accreditation of journalists, based upon international human rights standards and best practice elsewhere, as well as Zimbabwe’s own experience. We offer these for public discussion.
- Journalism is one of the exercises of the right to freedom of expression, which is protected and guaranteed by the Constitution and by international treaties to which Zimbabwe is party. It is also one the means whereby the public exercises its right to freedom of information. The government may not interfere with the exercise of these constitutional and internationally guaranteed rights.
- Governments have no role to play in deciding who may practice as a journalist. Journalism is not a profession like medicine or law, where the public needs to be protected from unqualified or unscrupulous practitioners. It is rather a trade or craft that requires a variety of different skills, depending on the position occupied.
- Government licensing of journalists – that is, when governments choose who may practice – amounts to giving governments the power to choose who may work for the media rather than the media houses themselves choosing. This is a violation of editorial independence, which is in turn one of the bedrocks of media freedom.
- It may be argued that setting out minimum qualifications for the practice of journalism will protect the public from the consequences of unscrupulous, unprofessional or inaccurate reporting. Yet, there are already numerous remedies and penalties for such behaviour. If someone poses as a journalist for financial gain, then he or she may be guilty of fraud or extortion. If a journalist wilfully and recklessly writes inaccurate reports, he or she may be sued for defamation. Arguably there are already too many laws in this area. It is unclear why more are required.
- The government argues that it wishes to encourage foreign news organizations to recruit Zimbabwean journalists. This is no doubt a desirable end, but it does not justify the means of interfering with the editorial independence of these foreign media houses. It should be recalled that Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which Zimbabwe is party, guarantees the free flow of information “regardless of frontiers”. The creation of job opportunities for Zimbabwean journalists would be better achieved by encouraging foreign investment in the private media sector, for example by liberalizing the conditions currently in force under the Presidential Broadcasting Regulations.
- There is nothing objectionable in principle about the government running some sort of accreditation system. This is necessary for foreign correspondents, since they have to fulfil certain immigration requirements. However, the holding of a temporary employment permit should never depend upon the contents of a journalist’s reports, or indeed upon his or her professional competence.
- Accreditation is essentially a practical device to allow journalists to have some form of generally accepted identification to allow them to go about their work. This is used when covering public events such as elections, rallies, demonstrations or court proceedings. Other public bodies, such as Parliament, may need to limit numbers of journalists from each news organization and may therefore operate their own accreditation system. In neither case, however, should the accrediting authority have any discretion to refuse credentials to a representative of a bona fide media house.
- An official accreditation system is not strictly necessary if there is a generally accepted alternative. In some countries, for example, a press card issued by the journalists’ union is acceptable accreditation for all public events, while bodies such as Parliament, the Electoral Commission e.t.c, may issue specialized accreditation.
- In the absence of a generally accepted alternative method of accreditation, the existing system operated by the former Ministry of Information has worked effectively. In general, it has functioned as a means of giving journalists the identification necessary to allow them to go about their work. Although there have been occasional abuses in relation to foreign journalists, the Ministry has not generally withheld accreditation from those whose writings have displeased the government of the day. Since the system is functioning acceptably and efficiently it is unclear why it needs to be changed.
The 10th Anniversary of the Windhoek Declaration 1991
dealing with the broadcast and telecommunications sectors as follows below:
PREAMBLE
Acknowledging the enduring relevance and importance of the WindhoekDeclaration 1991 to the protection and promotion of freedom of expression and of the media; Noting that freedom of expression includes the right to communicate and access to means of communication; Mindful of the fact that the Windhoek Declaration focuses on the print media and recalling Paragraph 17 of the Windhoek Declaration, which recommended that a similar seminar be convened to address the need for independence and pluralism in radio and television broadcasting; Recognising that the political, economic and technological environment in which the Windhoek Declaration was adopted has changed significantly and that there is a need to complement and expand upon the original Declaration; Aware of the existence of series barriers to free, independent and pluralistic broadcasting and to the right to communicate through broadcasting in Africa;Cognisant of the fact that for the vast majority of the peoples of Africa, the broadcast media remains the main source of public communications and information; Recalling the fact that the frequency spectrum is a public resource which must be managed in the public interest;
We the participants of Windhoek + 10 declare that:
PART I: GENERAL REGULATORY ISSUES
1. The legal framework for broadcasting should include a clear statement of the principles underpinning broadcast regulation, including promoting respect for freedom of expression, diversity, the free flow of information and ideas, as well as a three-tier system of broadcasting: public service, commercial and community.
2. All formal powers in the areas of broadcasting and telecommunications regulation should be exercised by public authorities which are protected against interference, particularly of a political or economic nature, by, among other things, an appointments process for members which is open, transparent, involves
the participation of civil society and is not controlled by any particular political party.
3. Decision-making processes about the overall allocation of the frequency spectrum should be open and participatory, and ensure that a fair proportion of the spectrum is allocated to broadcasting uses.
4. The frequencies allocated to broadcasting should be divided equitably among the three tiers of broadcasting.
5. Licensing processes for the allocation of specific frequencies to individual broadcasters should be fair and transparent, and based on clear criteria which include promoting media diversity in ownership and content.
6. Broadcasters should be encouraged to promote and develop local content, which should be defined to include African content, including through the introduction of minimum quotas.
7. States should promote an economic environment that facilitates the development of independent productions and broadcasting.
8. The development of appropriate technology for the reception of broadcasting signals should be promoted.
PART II: PUBLIC SERVICE BROADCASTING
1. All State and government controlled broadcasters should be transformed into public service broadcasters, that are accountable to all strata of the people as represented by an independent board, and that serve the overall public interest, avoiding one-sided reporting and programming in regard to religion, political belief, culture, race and gender.
2. Public service broadcasters should, like broadcasting and telecommunications regulators, be governed by bodies which are protected against interference.
3. The public service mandate of public service broadcasters should be clearly defined.
4. The editorial independence of public service broadcasters should be guaranteed.
5. Public service broadcasters should be adequately funded in a manner that protects them from arbitrary interference with their budgets.
6. Without detracting from editorial control over news and current affairs content and in order to promote the development of independent productions whilst enhancing diversity of programming, the public service broadcasters should be required to broadcast minimum quotas of productions by independent producers.
7. The transmission infrastructure used by public service broadcasters should be made accessible to all broadcasters under reasonable and non-discriminatory terms.
PART III: COMMUNITY BROADCASTING
1. Community broadcasting is broadcasting for, by and about the community, whose ownership and management is representative of the community, which pursues a social development agenda, and which is non-profit.
2. There should be a clear recognition, including by the international community, of the difference between decentralised public broadcasting and community broadcasting.
3. All community broadcasters should be enabled to have access to internet and to use it in the interest of their respective communities.
PART IV: TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND CONVERGENCE
1. The right to communicate includes access to telephones, email, internet and other telecommunications systems, including the promotion of community-controlled information and communications technology (ICT) centres.
2. Telecommunications law and policy should promote the goal of universal service and access, including access clauses in privatisation and liberalisation processes, and pro-active measures by the State.
3. The international community and African governments should mobilise resources for the funding of research to keep abreast of the rapidly changing media landscape in Africa.
4. African governments should promote the development of online media and African content, through the formulation of non-restrictive policies in new information and communications technologies (NICTs).
5. To promote access to and dissemination of global information, training of media practitioners in electronic communications, research and publishing skills need to be developed and expanded.
RECOMMENDATIONS IN REGARDS TO THE WINDHOEK CHARTER ON BROADCASTING 2001
1. UNESCO to distribute the Windhoek Charter on Broadcasting 2001 as broadly as possible to all stakeholders and the public in general in Africa and worldwide.
2. Media organisations in Africa to use the Charter as their starting point in the development of national and regional broadcasting policies and as a tool for lobbying processes. To this end media organisations in co-operation with civil society groups should initiate public awareness campaigns in their respective countries to
form NGO coalitions on broadcasting reform, formulate broadcasting policies and organise appropriate lobbying processes towards state structures.
3. Media organisations in regions and / or continent-wide should develop specific models for regulatory bodies and public service broadcasting following the principles of the Charter which should serve as a starting point for national debate.
4. In all these debates, recognition should be given to the needs of the commercial broadcasting sector.
5. Given the fast developments in the broadcasting field, the Charter should undergo an audit every five years.
6. UNESCO is asked to make member governments aware of the need that the World Trade Organisation (WTO) should give a special status to broadcast productions recognising them as cultural goods.
7. UNESCO should make sure that the theme of media, communications and development is given appropriate space during the UN Summit on the Information Society in 2003.
Final Report : Ten Years On: Assessment, Challenges and Prospects
A. Keynote Address and First Plenary Session: Obstacles to Media Freedom in Africa
1. In his keynote address, Mr. Abid Hussain, the UN Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression, congratulated UNESCO and MISA for organizing the Windhoek conference “Ten Years On: Assessment, Challenges and Prospects”. He emphasized the need for Africa to reinforce freedom of speech and freedom of the media, without which, no real development progress could be made.
2. Recalling the movement to establish free, independent and pluralistic media in Africa, which started 10 years ago, he noted that achievements made so far have been both exciting and challenging. As a result, Africans do not now need any assistance to speak; they can speak and are speaking for themselves. Mr. Hussain affirmed that democracy could not be defended in silence and secrecy, but only by confronting the challenges could lasting democratic governance be achieved. He warned that authoritarian regimes have not yet come to an end, and the media must therefore continue to give voice to those who struggle to defend democracy. It is extremely important, Mr. Hussain said, that democracy be nurtured because only then can human rights be guaranteed.
3. He noted that certain values, such as the need to preserve national security and national unity, have been used by authoritarian regimes as excuses to curtail freedom of expression and to persecute journalists. In many instances, repressive statutory provisions, such as law and order regulations, have also been used as an excuse to suppress human rights. Yet, even in countries where it has been claimed that national security, unity and the existence of law and order have led to economic gains and development, insecurity has continued to reign in the streets and, invariably, the gains made have been quickly lost. By suppressing public opinion through denial of freedom of the press, such governments did not receive feedback from the people and hence could not get public support for their policies. In addition, many governments use the excuse of preservation of national culture to suppress human rights. Yet, noted Mr. Hussain, the culture being protected is often not the people’s culture, but that of a small middle class elite in such countries.
4. He observed that both the speed and volume of information flow nowadays have helped to defeat those who sought to censor information, with the consequence that governments have been forced to be more accountable to their citizens. He recommended the setting up of more watchdog organizations to safeguard freedom of the media because the media are “too important to be left in the hands of politicians”. He also suggested that increased information flow to deprived rural populations should be addressed as an urgent priority.
Suggested Sources For New Thinking on Human Rights: from Abdullahi An-Na’im’s work
Legitimacy for Human Rights. In Human Rights in Africa: Cross-Cultural
Prespectives, edited by A. A. a. F. M. D. An-Na’im. Washington D.C: The
Brookings Institution
An-Na’im, Abdullahi A., ed. 1992a. Human Rights in Cross-Cultural
Perspectives: Quest for Conensus. Philadelphia, PA: University of
Pennsylvania Press
An-Na’im, Abdullahi A. 1992b. Toward a Cross-Cultural Approach to
Defining International Standards of Human Rights: The Meaning of Cruel,
Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. In Human Rights in
Cross-Cultural Prespectives, edited by A. A. An-Naim. Philadelphia,
PA: University of Pennsylvania Press
An-Na’im, Abdullahi A., Gort, J.D., Jansen, H. and Vroom, H.M.,
ed. 1995. Human Rights and Religious Values. Grand Rapids,
Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company
An-Na’im, Abdullahi A. 1997a. The Contingent Universality of Human
Rights: The Case of Freedom of Expression in African and Islamic
Contexts. Emory International Law Review 10 (3):29-66
An-Na’im, Abdullahi A. 1997b. Cutural Transformation and Human
Rights in Africa: A Preliminary Report. Emory International Law Review 10
(3):287-349
An-Na’im, Abdullahi A. 1998a. Expanding the Limits of
Imagination: Human Rights from a Participatory Approach to New
Multilateralism. In Innovations in Multilateralism, edited by
M. G. Schechter. New York: United Nations University Press
An-Na’im, Abdullahi A. 1998b. Human Rights and the Challenge of
Relevance: The Case of Collective Rights. In The Role of the Nation-State
in the 21st Century: Human Rights, International Organizations and Foreign
Policy, edited by M. Castermans-Holleman, Fried Van Hoof and Jacqueline
Smith. The Hague: Kluwer Law International
An-Na’im, Abdullahi A., ed. 1999. Proselytization and Communal
Self-Determination in Africa. Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis Books
An-Na’im, Abdullahi A. forthcoming. Human Rights. In The Blackwell
Companion to Sociology, edited by J. R. Blau. Oxford: Blackwell
An-Na’im, Abdullahi A. and Francis M. Deng, ed. 1990b. Human
Rights in Africa: Cross-Cultural Perspectives. Washington DC: The
Brookings Institution
An-Na’im, Abdullahi A. et al. 1997 (spring). Cultural
Transformations and Human Rights in Africa: A Preliminary Report. Emory
International Law Review 11 (1):287-349.
THE FINAL PROGRAM FOR THE DURBAN 2000 CONGRESS IS NOW AVAILABLE AT http://web.utk.edu/~rhackett/durban.html
Witness: Using Video and Technology to fight for Human Rights
“using video and technology to fight for human rights”
http://witness.org/
WITNESS is a human rights program that attracts the eyes of the world and inspires those who see – to act.
WITNESS strengthens local activists by giving them video cameras and field training.
Today, WITNESS unleashes an arsenal of computers, imaging and editing software, satellite phones and email in the struggle for justice.
A picture is worth a thousand words. In 1992, a bystander with a video camera captured the Rodney King beating in Los Angeles. The videotape shocked millions and showed that human rights abuses are worse when violators aren’t afraid of detection. The lasting impression of the Rodney King beating and the riots that ensued showed the emotional power of the visual: the videotaped images gave the incident impact and immediacy that words could not.
Today, WITNESS has worked with over 125 WITNESS partner groups from 47 countries to use video to overcome political, economic, and physical barriers, and to expose human rights abuses to the world via television, grassroots advocacy, and internet broadcasting
Made you think
WITNESS partner groups combat injustice across the globe on a wide range of issues — from the atrocities in the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda, to the
abuse of street children in Honduras, to sweatshops in the USA, and women’s rights across Asia.
WITNESS partner groups reveal the truth — to their governments and people, to international tribunals and UN committees, and to TV viewers worldwide via outlets like the BBC, CNN, ABC, Court TV and Worldlink Satellite Television.
WITNESS partners often operate in societies without basic human rights protections, or where poverty, starvation and lack of education create situations where the powerful exploit the weak. Sometimes they put their lives at risk so that the truth can be told. In these conditions, local activists need outside support.
Made you act
WITNESS has two central aims: strengthening grassroots advocacy by making video and technology tools available to human rights defenders so they can
fight for human rights mobilizing public concern and activism so that human rights issues move to the center of political debate
Seeing is believing
WITNESS videos have been used:
as evidence in legal proceedings
to counter-balance the official reports governments make to the UN on theirhuman rights records
for grassroots education
in news broadcasts; and
for web broadcasting via the internet
WITNESS is a project of the Lawyers Committe for Human Rights, a nonprofit, non-governmental organization supported through a combination of foundation
grants, private donations, and pro bono goods and services. We need your support!
Communication as a Human Right in the Information Society
The report summarises a seminar that raised a number of human rights and communication related ssues in the context of the forthcoming World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS).
The seminar brought together about forty representatives from NGOs active in media and communication, public service media, and two key UN agencies involved in the WSIS: the ITU and UNESCO. Participants came from Latin America, North America, Africa, Asia and Europe.
It ran over a day and a half . The first day was designed to introduce the issues and debate them among NGO and media participants, followed by smaller issue-based groups to explore options in more depth. The second morning, at which the ITU and UNESCO were more fully represented, was devoted to presenting the conclusions and initiating a debate between participants. The way forward was also considered.
The event is described in more detail in the report. The agenda, participant list, presentations, and other reports are available on the site.
The seminar took place November 19 and 20, 2001 in Geneva and was jointly organised by the Platform for Communication Rights and the Geneva office of the Friedrich Ebert Stiftung.
New Charter on African Broadcasting and Democracy
Africa.
1. UNESCO sponsored a conference on 3 May 2001 to review the original Declaration, and participants took the opportunity to issue a new document: the Windhoek Charter on Broadcasting in Africa, which recognizes the unique challenges faced in the development of a pluralistic and diverse broadcasting environment on the African continent.
2. The Charter calls for concrete measures to be taken by African states, including all state and government controlled broadcasters to be transformed into public service broadcasters and the introduction of independent regulators. Also addressed is the need to strengthen the independent production sector and introduce local content through minimum quotas.
John Barker, Head of ARTICLE 19’s Africa Programme said:
“Broadcasting is intrinsic to the development of democracy in Africa. This Charter is unique in that it appreciates not only the need for the development and protection of African cultural content, but the importance of developing democratic and localized broadcasting environments. It gives us a solid basis for our work on broadcasting in the region, and we look forward to continuing the awareness-raising begun this year in Windhoek, lobbying with our colleagues to have the
Charter adopted and implemented by African governments.”
The conference participants called on UNESCO to distribute the Charter and for all African media organizations to use it as their starting point in advocacy for the development of national and regional broadcasting policies.
Additional outcomes from the conference included a resolution supporting moves to appoint a Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression within the African Commission for Human and Peoples’ Rights. Calls were also made to amend or repeal all laws inconsistent with the right to freedom of expression, with particular emphasis on the need to repeal criminal laws protecting reputation and, where necessary, to replace them with civil laws.
For further information contact John Barker, Head of ARTICLE 19 Africa
Programme. johnb@article19.org.za; tel. +27114031488; fax +27114031517.
Notes
1. The Windhoek Declaration on the Development of an Independent and
Pluralistic Press.
2. The Charter is a culmination of a number of pre-conference
initiatives, and discussion and lobbying at the conference itself, led
by a partnership between ARTICLE 19, the World Association of Community
Radio Broadcasters Africa Section (AMARC-Africa) and the Southern Africa
Communication for Development (SACOD).
Reply to:
Ilana Cravitz, Communications Co-ordinator
ilana@article19.org
Direct line: +44 20 7239 1199
ARTICLE 19, Global Campaign for Free Expression
Lancaster House, 33 Islington High Street, London N1 9LH, UK
Tel: +44 20 7278 9292, Fax: +44 20 7713 1356, e-mail:
info@article19.org, www.article19.org
