21 Jan 13 | Uncategorized
Two journalists have been killed in Syria while reporting on the front line. French journalist Yves Debay was shot twice while covering the conflict between the Syrian regime’s army and rebel forces on 17 January, reportedly killed by a regime sniper. Al Jazeera correspondent Mohamed Al-Massalma was shot with three bullets the following day during fights in the town of Busra Al-Harir in the southern province of Deraa. The Syrian journalist for Al Jazeera, who used the pseudonym Mohamed Al-Horani, was an activist in the revolt against President Bashar al-Assad before he joined the news network. More than 60,000 people have died since the Syrian conflict began in March 2011.
Lupe Fiasco – ejected at Obama’s reelection event
On 17 January, a Cameroonian man who text his friend saying “I’m very much in love with you” had a three year jail sentence upheld. Jean-Claude Roger Mbédé had already served a year and a half in prison for homosexual conduct when he was released on bail for medical reasons in July 2012 — he was malnourished and injured after being assaulted. Cameroon is considered the worst place in Africa for persecution of homosexuals. Last year, 14 people were arrested for homosexuality, 12 of whom were prosecuted.
On 19 January, a journalist in Somalia was killed whilst walking to work. Abdihared Osman Aden, a veteran producer for Shabelle Media Network was shot by unidentified assailants, becoming the fifth Shabelle worker to be murdered in 13 months. Twelve journalists were killed in Somalia in 2012, the highest rate of murders in Africa that year. All the deaths from last year remain unsolved, accoring to Committee to Protect Journalists’ research. President Hassan Sheikh Mohamoud had vowed to establish a task force to investigate the deaths of media workers in November, but has failed to take action so far, according to local journalists.
Google will decline personal information requests from authoritarian governments in Africa, it announced on 17 January. In a press conference in Nairobi, Google Executive Chairman Eric Schmidt said Google are careful where they place servers and staff, as refusing frequent information requests from the government could lead to arrests and harassment.
Rapper Lupe Fiasco was removed from the stage during an event to celebrate Barack Obama’s inauguration. Headlining the StartUp RockOn concert, Fiasco took to the stage at The Hamilton in Washington, saying that he didn’t vote for Obama during a 30-minute anti-war performance. The performance ended with security eventually moving him along for the next performer, after the rapper refused to leave the stage. Co-founders of the festival Hypervocal later released a statement putting the removal of the star down to a “bizarrely repetitive, jarring performance”, as opposed to his opinions. Lupe Fiasco has previously voiced opposition to the Obama administration, when discussing the President ordering drone attacks.
18 Jan 13 | Asia and Pacific, Opinion, Uncategorized
Kazakh prosecutors last month achieved international notoriety, as they sought to close eight newspapers and 23 web sites, and sued Google, Facebook, Twitter, and LiveJournal.
Journalists in the country fear that this latest crackdown will destroy the limited amount of pluralism that still exists there.
On 4 December, a Kazakh court banned the online news channel Stan, accusing it of violating country’s laws on extremism and national security. Only a week earlier, on 27 November, the court ordered the suspension of publication and distribution of opposition newspaper Vzglyad. Two other papers, Respublika and its affiliated weekly, Golos Respubliki, have also been suspended pending verdicts in their cases.
They are all accused of spreading extremist views and inciting civil strife through their coverage of December 2011 violence in Zhanaozen. Months of protests by striking oil workers in this western town ended with police gunning down unarmed civilians, leaving 16 dead.
In another case, the court ordered publication of the independent news website Guljan to be suspended and the access to it blocked.
Extremism charges levelled against media outlets are worrying. The ruling could have dangerous implications for their staff — if authprites decide to move against individuals — as this is a serious crime that can lead to substantial penalties. Previously, the authorities’ traditional method of muzzling media was dragging them into libel cases.
The latest move against more than 30 media outlets will effectively put an end to independent reporting from inside the country. Kazakhstan is beginning to look more and more like neighbouring Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan.
Independent media is non-existent in all three countries, which were listed amongst the bottom nine performers for political rights and civil liberties in 2012 report by the US-based rights watchdog Freedom House.
In the first nine months of last year, the only data available so far, there were 16 criminal prosecutions under criminal law including ten libel cases, according to monitoring by Kazakh media advocacy group Adil Soz. There were also 15 attacks on reporters; 34 cases when journalists were prevented from doing their job and access to more than 100 websites was either temporarily restricted or blocked.
Over the last three years authorities have toughened legislation regulating various parts of media. Last year, the broadcast law was adopted resulting in TV and radio being completely monopolised by the state. In 2009, Kazakhstan’s media law was changed to make internet content subject to the same controls that apply to conventional print and broadcast media. In addition, despite a decade long lobbying by media activists defamation still exists as a criminal offence.
Kazakhstan’s poor rights record was reflected in 2012 Press Freedom Index by the Paris-based Reporters Without Borders where the country ranked at 154th place out of 179.
In the face of multiple challenges — including failure to stabilise the economy, a rise in protests linked to industrial disputes, and power struggles within the Kazakh elite — the country’s leadership is in a vulnerable place, and this is likely to contribute to a downward spiral in media freedom, as the country is now focused on survival, rather than keeping up the appearance of a commitment to democracy.
18 Jan 13 | Brazil
One of Brazil’s largest daily newspapers claims that it has now faced censorship for 1,200 days, due to a court ruling prohibiting it from publishing news about a police operation that could incriminate a media tycoon — who is also the son of a former President of the country.
In 2009, daily newspaper O Estado de. S.Paulo had access to information and tape recordings related to a Federal Police investigation the previous year in the northeastern state of Maranhão, one of Brazil’s poorest areas. The newspaper alleged that business people from the region were involved in various crimes, including money laundering, tax evasion, and corruption. One of the individuals investigated was Fernando Sarney, who was head of a media conglomerate at the time, as well as the son of former President José Sarney — one of Brazil’s most influential politicians, who currently serves as president of Brazil’s Senate.
Brazilian daily newspaper O Estado de. S.Paulo claims that it has been censored
Fernando Sarney was indicted by federal police on 15 July 2009, and accused of favouring private businesses in contracts firmed with state companies. He was accused of being behind the scheme, but he denies all allegations. On 31 July 2009, a Federal District judge forbid Estado from publishing any more news about the police operation, because of a lawsuit filed by Sarney against the newspaper. His lawyers claimed that Estado committed a crime and damaged Sarney’s family reputation by publishing their taped conversations, even if they were made with the consent of the Judiciary.
The ruling drew harsh criticism from other newspapers and media-related organisations including Associação Brasileira de Imprensa (Brazilian Press Association), with most of them claiming that the ruling violated Brazil’s constitution.
At the same time, Sarney issued a statement where he claimed that publishing news about an ongoing police investigation was an “injustice” and “a violent act” against him and his family. He also denied that the press was censored, and claimed to be defending his rights as guaranteed by the constitution.
In December 2009, Sarney said he would drop the lawsuit. However, the newspaper decided not to accept desistance, and requested that Sarney also relinquished his right to represent the complaint — meaning that the lawsuit would go on even without him as the suing party. Estado also expressed its preference to have the case judged by the Supreme Court, in order to generate a legal precedent that would apply to all similar cases in the future. However, the case was sent back to the Federal District state court, which has yet to set a date for the trial. Since a final verdict has yet to be reached in the suit, Estado is barred to this day from publishing any news about the police investigation in Maranhão, or its consequences.
Roberto Gazzi, the newspaper’s director of Editorial Development says that this is a clear-cut case of censorship.
The information published by the newspaper at the time — and that have been prevented to be published ever since — were not of a private sort. These were facts involving public money and public agents, inside the limits of which we consider to be the right of the free press to publish, standing for society’s interest.
Estado had its 138th anniversary on 4 January last year, and has an average daily circulation of 260,000.
Sarney could not be reached for comment, and his lawyers had no comment on the case.
Rafael Spuldar is a journalist based in São Paulo
Mike Harris explains how modern authoritarian regimes censor their citizens