Statutory regulation will hurt government media more
THOSE pushing for the establishment of a statutory regulation mechanism to manage Zambia’s already over-regulated Journalism or media landscape should be wary of the negative impact it will have rather than focus on narrow personal interests.
The recently enacted cyber laws have already done enough damage putting the future of the country’s Journalism practice in real jeopardy.
The intention to add statutory regulation is not only evil but also undemocratic and unconstitutional. Statutory regulation intends not only to define who is a journalist and thus punish those found wanting, but also the proponents of this mechanism want to control the media.
Yet in 1995, the High Court ruled that it would be unconstitutional to regulate Journalism. Last month fellow journalist, lawyer and my former relative Dickson Jere wrote a well-detailed piece on this matter. With his permission I reproduce below the article in full:
You cannot regulate journalism – court
By Dickson Jere
IN 1995 – just a year before the general election, the MMD government of President Chiluba wanted to have a stronghold on the media. It then decided to draft a “Media Council Bill” that was aimed at regulating the media in Zambia through an Act of Parliament. It had obnoxious provisions, including licensing of journalists.
The media protested vehemently with street protests and media statements. However, the government decided to push ahead with the bill as it had necessary numbers in Parliament to pass it. The media, through its mother bodies, decided to take a legal route and filed a case in the High Court. The media argued that the bill was unconstitutional and that journalists were never even consulted.
On the other hand, government argued that journalists needed to be policed in Zambia because they were unprofessional and those found wanting should be stopped from practicing journalism.
After hearing both sides and analysing the bill, the court agreed that the proposed bill was an infringement on the freedom of expression and free press.
“I do not consider in my view the decision to constitute the Media Council of Zambia to be in furtherance of the general objectives and purpose of the constitutional powers, among them to promote democracy and related democratic ideas,” said judge Anthony Nyangulu.
“In light of the above, it cannot be seriously argued that the creation of the Media Association of any other regulatory body by the government would be in furtherance of the ideals embodied in the constitution, vis-a-vis freedom of expression,” the judge added.
He also noted that the proposed bill intended to license journalists with sanctions, including taking away the right to practise as journalists would be a denial of press freedom.
“The decision to create the Media Council of Zambia is no doubt going to have an impact on freedom of expression,” the judge said, and courageously quashed the decision by the government to proceed with the bill.
After the decision , government abandoned the bill and decided to respect the court outcome. Successive governments “threatened to bring back this bill but never did except asking the journalists to come up with a self regulatory mechanism.”
Jere adds critical lecture notes explaining thus:
1.This is a 30-year old landmark case on press freedom that is now widely used in many jurisdictions, including the African Court and African Commission on Human Rights.
2. Regulating of journalism is frowned upon at international level as journalists come in many forms. One does not need to be a journalist to be writing articles for a newspaper or broadcast outlet. In fact, well known “journalists” are trained in other professions like economics and law but opt to write and therefore difficult to police them as such.
3. The world is more concerned with social media and ghost publications and authors. In short, one does not need to be a journalist to set up online newspapers and publish them out of Zambia. How do you regulate such? Impossible.
4. So whatever media bill is being suggested by whomever is ill conceived and flies in the teeth of this world acclaimed case. You can not police journalism. This is a settled debate.
5. We have enough laws to deal with erring journalists. You can use them for defamation in civil claims or indeed criminal libel.
The above detailed judgement simply means that there should be no room for statutory regulation in Zambia. What can work is a democratically acceptable self-regulation one.
In any case in 1995 the government’s target was the now defunct The Post newspaper and other private outlets. Today, the focus could be the same; strangle the private media.
Statutory regulation in the circumstances remains dangerous and a preserve of dictators. When it (the regulation) defines who is a journalist, it will cut away expert contributions from people in other professions. For a long time the Times of Zambia used contributions from outsiders like Kapelwa Musonda, the Observer and others.
Professor Muna Ndulo and the other academician Professor Mwizenge Tembo provided very insightful reviews which pushed the paper’s sales up. Today statutory regulation will cut off people like lawyer Dr Sishuwa Sishuwa whose articles are so revealing and widely read. Statutory regulation will also affect contributions to the letters to the editor column by non-journalist members of the public.
As someone who spent almost 30 years with the Times of Zambia, a government owned newspaper, I can vouch that statutory regulation will hurt government media more than private ones. That will be grossly unfair because the digital communication evolution has almost killed traditional media. Government media are already so weak and empty. Any further regulation will bury them.
It should be noted, however, that the battle for media reforms dates back to 1990 when Zambia reverted to a multiparty democracy. One of the complaints was that in the past the media operated in a single-party state environment and thus served the interests of the few. Hence the requirement to open them up to the public.
One of the major success stories from the reforms is that Zambia boasts of a rich media diversity. We have more newspapers and broadcasting houses now than before 1990. The media also wanted to have anti-media laws repealed while the Constitution needed to guarantee further freedom of the press. Not much has been achieved. But within this realm of reforms it became clear that jornalitsts also needed to become accountable to society. The only way this could be done is through self-regulation.
The battle to attain self-regulation has been largely held back by the lack of unity among journalists. At any one point the government plucks some from the gang who emerge to take a different course. This was something that we overcame when I was president of the Press Association of Zambia (PAZA).
Since PAZA largely constituted most membership from government media we collaborated with colleagues from the Media Institute of of Southern Africa (MISA), whose entire membership then was drawn from the private media, to push for media reforms.
Decades later that unity is absent. What journalists need to do to achieve the self-regulation status is to throw away individual hats and work as a single group of one voice. It does not seem to be the case now.
What every one needs to know is that governments come and go but the profession of Journalism and the people it serves will remain, including children who will come tomorrow. Those in the media today should leave them (media) better by looking at a bigger picture instead of personal interests.
As it has been stated several times the media in Zambia are over-regulated. They do not need further squeezes in the name of statutory regulation. What the country further needs is to build capacity among journalists through continuous training. In any case the the Journalism profession has always been enhanced and guided by ethics that are taught both in college and university. You can never improve quality through legislation.
Hicks Sikazwe is author of Zambia’s Fallback Presidents, Wasted Years and Voters in Shadows. He is also former Deputy Editor-in-Chief of Times of Zambia, now Communications and Media Affairs Advocate based in Ndola. Comments 0955/0966929611 or hpsikazwe@gmail.com
