Bangladesh and Media

 22 October 2008

Democracies embroiled in wars outside their own territory, such as the United States or Israel, fall further in the ranking every year while several emerging countries, especially in Africa and the Caribbean, give better and better guarantees for media freedom

It is not economic prosperity but peace that guarantees press freedom. That is the main lesson to be drawn from the world press freedom index that Reporters Without Borders compiles every year and from the 2008 edition, released today. Another conclusion from the index - in which the bottom three rungs are again occupied by the “infernal trio” of Turkmenistan (171st), North Korea (172nd) and Eritrea (173rd) - is that the international community’s conduct towards authoritarian regimes such as Cuba (169th) and China (167th) is not effective enough to yield results.

“The post-9/11 world is now clearly drawn,” Reporters Without Borders said. “Destabilised and on the defensive, the leading democracies are gradually eroding the space for freedoms. The economically most powerful dictatorships arrogantly proclaim their authoritarianism, exploiting the international community’s divisions and the ravages of the wars carried out in the name of the fight against terrorism. Religious and political taboos are taking greater hold by the year in countries that used to be advancing down the road of freedom.”

“The world’s closed countries, governed by the worst press freedom predators, continue to muzzle their media at will, with complete impunity, while organisations such as the UN lose all authority over their members,” Reporters Without Borders added. “In contrast with this generalised decline, there are economically weak countries that nonetheless guarantee their population the right to disagree with the government and to say so publicly.”

War and peace

Two aspects stand out in the index, which covers the 12 months to 1 September 2008. One is Europe’s preeminence. Aside from New Zealand and Canada, the first 20 positions are held by European countries. The other is the very respectable ranking achieved by certain Central American and Caribbean countries. Jamaica and Costa Rica are in 21st and 22nd positions, rubbing shoulders with Hungary (23rd). Just a few position below them are Surinam (26th) and Trinidad and Tobago (27th). These small Caribbean countries have done much better than France (35th), which has fallen again this year, this time by four places, and Spain (36th) and Italy (44th), countries held back again by political or mafia violence. Namibia (23rd), a large and now peaceful southern African country that came first in Africa, ahead of Ghana (31st), was just one point short of joining the top 20.

The economic disparities among the top 20 are immense. Iceland’s per capita GDP is 10 times Jamaica’s. What they have in common is a parliamentary democratic system, and not being involved in any war.
This is not the case with the United States (36th domestically and 119th outside its own territory) and Israel (46th domestically and 149th outside its own territory), whose armed forces killed a Palestinian journalist for the first time since 2003. A resumption of fighting also affected Georgia (120th) and Niger, which fell sharply from 95th in 2007 to 130th this year.

Although they have democratic political systems, these countries are embroiled in low or high intensity conflicts and their journalists, exposed to the dangers of combat or repression, are easy prey. The recent provisional release of Moussa Kaka, the Niger correspondent of RFI and Reporters Without Borders, after 384 days in prison in Niamey and cameraman Sami al-Haj’s release after six years in the hell of Guantanamo serve as reminders that wars sweep away not only lives but also, and above all, freedom.

Under fire from belligerents or intrusive governments

Countries that have become embroiled in very violent conflicts after failing to resolve serious political problems, such as Iraq (158th), Pakistan (152nd), Afghanistan (156th) and Somalia (153rd), continue to be highly dangerous “black zones” for the press, places where journalists are targets for murder, kidnapping, arbitrary arrest or death threats every day. They may come under fire from the parties at war. They may be accused of taking sides. Any excuse will do to get rid of “trouble-makers” and “spies.” Such is the case in the Palestinian Territories (163rd), especially the Gaza Strip, where the situation got much worse after Hamas seized power. At the same time, in Sri Lanka (165th), where there is an elected government, the press has to face violence that is only too often organised by the state.

Bringing up the rear are the dictatorships - some disguised, some not - where dissidents and pro-reform journalists manage to open cracks in the walls that enclose them. The year of the Olympics in the new Asian power, China (167th), was the year that Hu Jia and many other dissidents and journalists were jailed. But it also provided opportunities to those liberal media that are trying gradually to free themselves of the country’s still pervasive police control. Being a journalist in Beijing or Shanghai - or in Iran (166th), Uzbekistan (162nd) and Zimbabwe (151st) - is a high risk exercise involving endless frustration and constant police and judicial harassment. In Burma (170th), run by a xenophobic and inflexible junta, journalists and intellectuals, even foreign ones, have for years been viewed as enemies by the regime, and they pay the price.

Unchanging hells

In Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali’s Tunisia (143rd), Muammar Gaddafi’s Libya (160rd), Alexander Lukashenko’s Belarus (154th), Bashar el-Assad’s Syria (159e) and Teodoro Obiang Nguema’s Equatorial Guinea (156th), the leader’s ubiquitous portrait on the streets and front pages of the newspapers is enough to dispel any doubt about the lack of press freedom. Other dictatorships do without a personality cult but are just as suffocating. Nothing is possible in Laos (164th) or Saudi Arabia (161st) if it does not accord with government policy.

Finally, North Korea and Turkmenistan are unchanging hells in which the population is cut off from the world and is subjected to propaganda worthy of a bygone age. And in Eritrea (173rd), which has come last for the second year running, President Issaias Afeworki and his small clan of paranoid nationalists continue to run Africa’s youngest country like a vast open prison.

The international community, including the European Union, endlessly repeats that the only solution continues to be “dialogue.” But dialogue has clearly had little success and even the most authoritarian governments are still able to ignore remonstrations without risking any repercussions other than the inconsequential displeasure of the occasional diplomat.
Dangers of corruption and political hatred

The other disease that eats away at democracies and makes them lose ground in the ranking is corruption. The bad example of Bulgaria (59th), still last in Europe, serves as a reminder that universal suffrage, media pluralism and some constitutional guarantees are not enough to ensure effective press freedom. The climate must also favour the flow of information and expression of opinions. The social and political tensions in Peru (108th) and Kenya (97th), the media politicisation in Madagascar (94th) and Bolivia (115th) and the violence against investigative journalists in Brazil (82nd) are all examples of the kinds of poison that blight emerging democracies. And the existence of people who break the law to get rich and who punish inquisitive journalists with impunity is a scourge that keeps several “great countries” - such as Nigeria (131st), Mexico (140th) and India (118th) - in shameful positions.

Certain would-be “great countries” deliberately behave in a manner that is brutal, unfair or just disturbing. The examples include Venezuela (113th), where President Hugo Chávez’s personality and decrees are often crushing, and the Putin-Medvedev duo’s Russia (141st), where state and opposition media are strictly controlled and journalists such as Anna Politkovskaya are killed each year by “unidentified” gunmen who often turn out to have close links with the Kremlin’s security services.

Resisting the taboos

The ranking’s “soft underbelly” also includes countries that waver between repression and liberalisation, where the taboos are still inviolable and the press laws hark back to another era. In Gabon (110th), Cameroon (129th), Morocco (122nd), Oman (123rd), Cambodia (126th), Jordan (128th) and Malaysia (132nd), for example, it is strictly forbidden to report anything that reflects badly on the president or monarch, or their family and close associates. Journalists are routinely sent to prison in Senegal (86th) and Algeria (121st) under repressive legislation that violates the democratic standards advocated by the UN.

Online repression also exposes these tenacious taboos. In Egypt (146th), demonstrations launched online shook the capital and alarmed the government, which now regards every Internet user as a potential danger. The use of Internet filtering is growing by the year and the most repressive governments do not hesitate to jail bloggers. While China still leads the “Internet black hole” ranking worldwide, deploying considerable technical resources to control Internet users, Syria (159th) is the Middle-East champion in cyber-repression. Internet surveillance is so thorough there that even the least criticism posted online is sooner or later followed by arrest.

Only a few countries have risen significantly in the ranking. Lebanon (66th), for example, has climbed back to a more logical position after the end of the bomb attacks on influential journalists of recent years. Haiti (73rd) continues its slow rise, as do Argentina (68th) and Maldives (104th). But the democratic transition has halted in Mauritania (105th), preventing it from continuing its rise, while the slender gains of the past few years in Chad (133rd) and Sudan (135th) were swept away by the overnight introduction of censorship.

Close-up on… Asia

Asia still has the biggest representation in the 10 countries at the bottom of the ranking. Most of them are dictatorships, but they also for the first time include Sri Lanka (165th), which has an elected government and where the press faces violence that is only too often organised by the state.

At the other end of the spectrum, New Zealand (7th), Australia (28th) and Japan (29th) - countries where democracy is deeply anchored - are in the top 30. New Zealand is one of the only two non-European countries in the top 20, the other being Canada (13th).

Some young democracies have advanced significantly in the past year. Maldives (104th) now has a flourishing independent press. The same goes for Bhutan (74th), where the first privately-owned news media are gradually establishing a distinct identity for themselves.

Afghanistan (156th), on the other hand, has fallen in the ranking because of violence, not only by the Taliban and the warlords’ henchmen but also by government representatives. Burma’s position was already bad and now is worse (170th). The crackdown launched after the September 2007 protests never ended: dozens of journalists have been arrested or threatened, while the military censorship is relentless.

In Southeast Asia, Cambodia (126th) got a bad score as a result of a journalist’s murder that was probably instigated by a police officer, and the fact that control of the media was stepped up for the parliamentary elections. Vietnam (168th) fell six places as a result of a crackdown on the liberal media for being too probing in its reporting on corruption.

Major political changes took place in Pakistan (152nd) and Nepal (138th) but their effects on press freedom have not yet been felt. Gen. Pervez Musharraf’s departure as Pakistan’s president should benefit the press but the war with the Taliban is an even more serious problem for journalists.

The low ranking accorded to the United States outside of its own territory (119th) is due in part to the US military’s abuses in Afghanistan where a fixer for a Canadian TV network was arbitrarily detained for several months without any form of trial.

China (167th) continues to have a low ranking despite the efforts of many news media to elude the straightjacket of censorship and police controls. The number of arrests and cases of news surveillance and control by the political police and Propaganda Department is still very high and prevents the new Asian power from achieving any significant improvement.

Reporters Without Borders today called on the interim government to order an investigation into torture and misuse of power against journalist Noor Ahmed in Sylhet, north-eastern Bangladesh.

The worldwide press freedom organisation was reacting to a just-released investigation report by human rights body Odhikar revealing that the journalist was arrested and tortured in 2007 by members of the Rapid Action Battalion in Sylhet.

The case recalls that of journalists Tasneem Khalil and Jahangir Alam Akash who were also arrested tortured by the security services in 2007.

Noor Ahmed, known as Ahmed Noor, editor of local daily Dainik Sylhet Protidin and general secretary of the Syleth Press Club, was arrested by members of the Rapid Action Battalion (RAB 9), the Bangladesh elite crime force, on 7 April 2007, who blindfolded and bundled him into a truck.

Noor Ahmed told Odhikar that he was tortured several times. First of all he was beaten with a stick from his knees to his feet for 20 minutes. He was then questioned about his implication in a case of extortion and beaten each time he denied it.

After a night of physical and mental torture, he signed a paper which he was unable to read and was then taken to Sylhet police station.
 
“The information made public by Odhikar proves that Ahmed Noor had no involvement in the case against him. It is appalling that local officials, including those responsible for law and order, can attack journalists with complete impunity, Reporters Without Borders said.

“The authorities must not remain silent on this, particularly ahead of elections. The justice system must establish the truth and punish the perpetrators of this unacceptable act.”

Noor Ahmed was arrested at the same time as two other journalists, Sajol Daash, editor of the daily Dainik Khabor, and Apurbo Sharma, reporter on the daily Dainik Jugveri, on the same charges. During his interrogation, Sajol Daash apparently implicated Noor Ahmed.

He had hardly been cleared, when another complaint was made against Ahmed Noor by Jamal Uddin, assistant head of RAB 9, who accused him of fraud, extortion and working on a newspaper at the same time as for a public body. Noor was finally acquitted by the court and released on bail on 3 September 2007.

While he was in prison, RAB officers threatened to imprison him again if he returned to journalism on his release.
 
The editor of Dainik Sylhet Protidin believes he was charged because he was investigating RAB’s illegal activities and an allegation that Sylhet inspector general of police, M. Shahidullah, was taking bribes. He told Odhika that his arrest was intended to intimidate other journalists to dissuade them from publishing similar reports.

When his paper published report by Odhikar that was embarrassing for the authorities on 14 May 2007, RAB agents several times demanded the closure of the paper and threatened to harm Ahmed Noor, while still in prison, unless he shut it down.

Source:  Reporters Without Borders/Reporters sans frontières

Freedom of the press is a much talked about subject, mostly in developing countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America, where democracy is often in short supply and floundering, where freedom of expression is stifled, the press is gagged and censored, where public interest, welfare of people, rule of law and human rights suffer neglect and denial under a despotic rule. Yet, freedom of press, apart from legislature and an independent judiciary, is the most important prerequisite of democracy, which alone can ensure public interest and welfare of people and promote rights, equality and justice in society.

But there is nothing absolute in the exercise of freedom of press which must be tempered by a sense of duty and social responsibility, without which it is bound to degenerate into license for irresponsible behaviour. Both in developed and developing countries, the press and the media, more often than not, are constrained essentially by narrow political, economic and vested interest and the agenda of owners and publishers, in disregard of editorial independence, and are, thus, found wanting in the presentation of news and views without bias and prejudice. The casualty is the larger interest of the people and society.

The record of press freedom in Bangladesh since independence, unfortunately, is not glorious by any account. It received a battering from all governments — during the one party rule till 1975, military and quasi-military rule till the end of 1990 and elected dictatorial rule till end of 2006 — through the banning and cancellation of newspaper publications, and persecution, and court cases against editors, publishers and journalists. Instances of killing and kidnapping of some journalists were not few and far between.

However, it is remarkable that now there is no curb on press freedom in Bangladesh, although the country has been under emergency rule since the present caretaker government assumed power in January last year. It is important to note that it is for the first time in Bangladesh that there has not been a single instance of victimisation, persecution or harassment of journalists. It is unprecedented in a country under emergency rule.

The government has lived up to the assurance given by the Chief Advisor Dr. Fakhruddin Ahmed to the editors and representatives of the media in May last year, that the provision of the emergency power 2007 ordinance providing for restriction or punishment to errant press will not be applied to the media which enjoys full and unfettered freedom. He also wanted to see the national press play the role of a parliament, debating vital national issues in the absence of Jatiyo Sansad.

The press has, since, been critically discussing at will every action, measure and statement of the government, which is least rattled by constructive criticism but seems to accept in good grace any healthy criticism by the press and, not infrequently, amends its decisions in the light of press reaction.

A section of the press, particularly a mainstream English daily in its editorial comments and columns has consistently engaged itself in scurrilous and vituperative attacks on every action and statement of the government in order to hold it up for ridicule, hatred and disrepute to deliberately create disaffection among the public against the government. In this context, the mild government reaction, by way of phone calls and press advice, is considered as government interference. If this is true, as alleged by editors and representatives of journalist associations recently, it can be better appreciated when viewed against the background of the generally continuing liberal attitude of the government towards the media.

Those who complain of government interference had better remember, as a matter of contrast, the widespread and ruthless persecution and repression of the Indian press, let loose by Prime Minister Indira Gandhi under emergency powers.

The present caretaker government is grappling with daunting challenges of salvaging the country from chaos, disorder and anarchy arising out of all-pervasive corruption and institutional cirrhosis caused by crippling politicisation. Its sole aim is to transfer power to truly honest and competent elected popular representatives through a free and fair election at the end of December 2008.

In order to be able to ensure a sustainable and truly functional democracy to take roots after election, it has taken a number of reforms in the area of anti-corruption, administrative reorganisation and governance, separation of judiciary, an independent election commission, an independent public service commission, local government election, independent human rights commission and women emancipation and empowerment.

In order to make the government transparent and accountable by providing access to government information, it has initiated and circulated a draft Information Right 2008 ordinance for adoption after debate and discussion. The measure is an example to show that the government is well-meaning in its intention about press freedom.

Needless to say, the country is passing through a critical time and the government is precariously poised to balance the rising expectation of people with the stark ground realities of facing political and economic challenges. The government is working hard under extremely trying circumstances to restore the derailed engine of administration and governance back on track, and it is our collective and moral responsibility to cooperate with the government with patience so that its declared mission to transfer power to elected representatives at the end of December is successfully accomplished.

The press must play a significant role to contribute to the success of government efforts to achieve smooth transition to democracy without let or hindrance by unfounded insinuations, doubts and misgivings about the motives of the government. If anything, its sincerity of purpose is beyond question. There is good reason to believe that the caretaker government, comprising of technocrats exclusively, has no political affiliations or sympathies and apparently has no axe to grind.

Its performance may not be all perfect, but is certainly better by all accounts than that of all previous governments during the last 37 years. It deserves a chance. It cannot and will not fail our expectation. The alternative is a dismal descending to a disaster. The clamour for press freedom will then remain a far cry and a distant mirage.

Abdul Hannan is a freelance writer.

Source: http://www.thedailystar.net/story.php?nid=37697

Three members of the student wing of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party beat ‘Jugantor’ journalist over seating in university cafeteria

Media Report

May 20, 2008

Activists of Jatiyatabadi Chhatra Dal (JCD), student wing of Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), beat a journalist on the Dhaka University (DU) campus on May 20 over a trifling matter.

Jasim Uddin, DU correspondent of the Jugantor and also a resident of Kabi Jasim Uddin Hall, was rushed to Dhaka Medical College Hospital (DMCH) with serious injuries in his head and hands.

Witnesses said JCD activists Zahid, Shaheed and Rizvi swooped on Jasim at Suryasen Hall cafeteria at noon. The incident was a sequel to an altercation between Jasim and Zahid over taking seats at the cafeteria in order to have lunch, they added.

Dhaka University Journalists’ Association (Duja) submitted a memorandum to the DU Vice Chancellor Prof SMA Faiz demanding punitive actions against those responsible for the incident.

JCD DU unit President Hasan Mamun said they would take organisational actions against the accused soon.

By Kalinga Seneviratne
Dhaka, May 22, 2008 (IPS)

For 15 years the Bangladesh NGOs Network for Radio and Communication (BNNRC) campaigned for the introduction of community radio in the country, only to be turned down by successive, democratically-elected governments.

Ironically, in March, it was a military-installed government that announced readiness to issue community radio licenses under a two-year pilot scheme.

After releasing the guidelines for the establishment and licensing of community radio stations on Mar. 12, the government formed three separate committees to process applications from community radio operators.

By the end of April some 178 applications had been received by the information ministry.

BNNRC’s chief executive officer Bazlur Rahman told IPS: ‘’We are now happy that the government is interested in assisting us to establish community radio here. We set up a help desk in our secretariat to assist those interested in applying for community radio licenses and we received a massive response from different organisations and institutions.’’

Rahman was selected this month as the NGO representative on the Central Monitoring Committee which is headed by the director-general of Bangladesh Betar, the state-owned national radio network. This committee will monitor community radio broadcasters once they go on air to see that they adhere to the rules.

While private FM radio has been functioning alongside the national Betar radio network for a while, none of these radio stations was dedicated to serving the grassroots communities and ethnic groups in the way that community radio can.

Community radio is defined as a radio station owned by a particular community, usually through a trust, foundation or association. Political parties and their affiliated organisations, such as student wings or unions, are not allowed to own community radio licenses, nor are international NGOs or foreign channels.

But the policy guidelines allow government research institutions and NGOs with a proven record of community development work for at least five years to own a community radio license. This has set off some debate and doubts about community control of the radio, especially in the countryside.

‘’Government has failed to manage radio. So how can state-run research institutions operating radio in small villages be independent of governments?’’ asks Shameem Reza, a mass communications lecturer at Dhaka University. ‘’The big question is what level of people’s participation would it entail and should we be encouraging the government to set up community radio?’’

Rahman is not overly worried. ‘’Giving community radio licenses to government research institutes or agencies is not a matter of concern for us,’’ he argues. ‘’Community radio can get a new dimension of quality programmes because if they can fulfill the criteria they will have much technical and managerial expertise to offer.’’

Bangladesh has a large number of NGOs operating in development work, including some large international ones like Grameen Bank and BRAC. Some community radio advocates, especially in the academia, fear that these large NGOs could dominate the community radio sector.

But, Rahman says that such fears are unfounded because, under the policy, NGOs, large or small, could have only one community radio license. ‘’So there is no scope for any NGO to monopolise community radio broadcasts,’’ he argues.

Requests from NGOs for large chunks of the licenses with the funds and capacity to run radio stations have not been entertained by the government.

Rahman, who was one of the two NGO representatives in the committee which drafted the community radio policy guidelines of the government, believes that at least 50 organisations will be able to run community radio in the first phase. To assist in this process, the BNNRC has set up a community radio academy and plans to run technical and production training courses soon.

Reza laments the fact that no media academic was involved in this process even though Bangladesh has a long history of media studies being taught at tertiary level. He believes that funding will be a critical issue when it comes to setting up community radio stations and NGOs with international donor support could end up dominating the sector.

‘’Policies are not clearly articulated on how community radio could be funded,’’ noted Reza. ’’Government has only given the monitoring committee guidelines but nothing on how to run a community radio station.’’

While NGOs have done a lot of good development work in the rural areas, ironically this could become a barrier for community control of community radio. Their access to both licenses and funding sources may help to define the community as their own beneficiaries.

‘’There are hundreds of NGOs in the countryside and the people will not be able to set up community radio independent of them,’’ argues Reza. ‘’NGO involvement will not ensure that community radio is the independent community voice.’’

JULHAS ALAM

DHAKA, Bangladesh (AP) — Senior editors and journalists from more than a dozen leading Bangladesh newspapers and television stations have demanded an end to the country’s state of emergency and called for greater press freedom.

The journalists met in Dhaka on Tuesday to discuss threats to the media, said Ataus Samad, a former BBC Bengali service reporter who chaired the meeting.

In a statement, they called for government agencies to stop interfering in the media’s work.

A state of emergency was declared in Bangladesh on Jan. 11, 2007, after weeks of street violence over electoral reforms. An interim government backed by the influential military currently runs the country.

“The media have been working with limited rights and under pressure of the emergency rules that curtail many rights,” the journalists said.

“Different agencies — military and civilian — have been interfering with media activities,” they said. “Regular interference in day-to-day work of the media is not acceptable.”

Shyamol Dutta, editor of the Bhorer Kagoj newspaper, who attended Tuesday’s meeting, said emergency rule was disrupting normal media activities.

“We want emergency rule to go as it has curtailed media rights,” Dutta said Wednesday.

Bangladesh has a history of intimidation of the media, but there has been growing discontent among journalists about alleged interference by security officials.

Many publications have resorted to self-censorship, according to the journalists.

The editors said they regularly receive telephone calls telling them to stop publishing or broadcasting certain news, while television stations have been asked not to invite some commentators to their talk shows.

“The journalists who are critical of the military-backed government’s activities have been blacklisted for television talk shows,” Iqbal Sobhan Chowdhury, editor of the Bangladesh Observer newspaper, said recently. “I am one of them.”

The journalists decided Tuesday to create a formal committee to deal with the matter, Samad said.

The spokesman for the Ministry of Information could not be reached for comment Wednesday, while a military spokesman declined to comment.

Global rights groups including the New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists and Human Rights Watch have criticized the interim government for failing to protect press freedom.

Journalists in Bangladesh are routinely threatened, assaulted or killed for writing about political violence, corruption or organized crime, according to media rights groups. At least 11 journalists have been killed and dozens maimed since 1997, they say.

The interim government has pledged to hold elections in the third week of December.