State control of the press is hot topic. On Wednesday, Queen Elizabeth signed off a Royal Charter which gives politicians a hand in newspaper regulation. This come after David Cameron criticised the Guardian’s reporting on mass surveillance, saying “If they don’t demonstrate some social responsibility it will be very difficult for government to stand back and not to act”.
But what does state control of the press really look like? Here are 10 countries where the government keeps a tight grip on newspapers.
The tiny gulf kingdom in 2002 passed a very restrictive press law. While it was scaled back somewhat in 2008, it still stipulates that journalists can be imprisoned up to five years for criticising the king or Islam, calling for a change of government and undermining state security. Journalists can be fined heavily for publishing and circulating unlicensed publications, among other things. Newspapers can also be suspended and have their licenses revoked if its ‘policies contravene the national interest.’
In 2009 the country known as Europe’s last dictatorship passed the Law on Mass Media, which placed online media under state regulation. It demanded registration of all online media, as well as re-registration of existing outlets. The state has the power to suspend and close both non-registered and registered media, and media with a foreign capital share of more than a third can’t get a registration at all. Foreign publications require special permits to be distributed, and foreign correspondents need official accreditation.
The country has a General Administration of Press, Publication, Radio, Film and Television and an army official censors dedicated to keeping the media in check. Through vaguely worded regulation, they ensure that the media promotes and toes the party line and stays clear of controversial topics like Tibet. A number of journalists have also been imprisoned under legislation on “revealing state secrets” and “inciting subversion.”
In 2011 President Rafael Correa won a national referendum to, among other things, create a “government controlled media oversight body”. In July this year a law was passed giving the state editorial control and the power to impose sanctions on media, in order to stop the press “smearing people’s names”. It also restricted the number of licences will be given to private media to a third.
All media in the country is state owned, as President Isaias Afwerki has said independent media is incompatible with Eritrean culture. Reporting that challenge the authorities are strictly prohibited. Despite this, the 1996 Press Proclamation Law is still in place. It stipulates that all journalists and newspapers be licensed and subject to pre-publication approval.
Hungary’s restrictive press legislation came into force in 2011. The country’s media outlets are forced to register with the National Media and Infocommunications Authority, which has the power to revoke publication licences. The Media Council, appointed by a parliament dominated by the ruling Fidesz party, can also close media outlets and impose heavy fines.
Britain isn’t the only country to tighten control of the press through royal means. In 2011 King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia amended the media law by royal decree. Any reports deemed to contradict Sharia Law, criticise the government, the grand mufti or the Council of Senior Religious Scholars, or threaten state security, public order or national interest, are banned. Publishing this could lead to fines and closures.
The Law on Mass Media demands any outlet has to receive a registration certificate before being allowed to publish. The media is banned from “forcible changing of the existing constitutional order”, and journalists can be punished for “interference in internal affairs” and “insulting the dignity of citizens”. Foreign journalists have to be accredited with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
The 1999 Law on Media bans journalists from “inciting the people to rebel against the State of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam and damage the unification of the people”. A 2006 decree also put in place fines for journalists that deny “revolutionary achievements” and spread “harmful” information. Journalists can also be forced to pay damages to those “harmed by press articles”, regardless of whether the article in question is accurate or not.
The country’s Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act gives the government direct regulatory power over the press through the Media and Information Council. All media outlets and journalists have to register with an obtain accreditation from the MIC. The country also has a number of privacy and security laws that double up as press regulation, The Official Secrets Act and the Public Order and Security Act.
Beatrice Mtetwa is one of Zimbabwe’s most high profile lawyers. Renowned for her lack of fear she has long been the go-to lawyer for human rights activists, politicians and journalists threatened by the hard hand of Robert Mugabe’s regime.
She has won international awards aplenty — the Index on Censorship Law Award 2006, CPJ’s Press Freedom Award in 2005; Ludovic-Trarieux International Human Rights Prize of the European Bar Human Rights Institute in 2009, and the International Human Rights Award of the American Bar Association in 2010 — but at home, her defence of Mugabe’s opponents has won her few friends among the regime. In 2003, she was arrested on spurious allegations of drunk driving and beaten by police; and in 2007, Ms Mtetwa and three of her colleagues were beaten by police at a protest against police harassment of lawyers in Harare.
Now she has been arrested again — this time for allegedly “obstructing the course of justice”.
Last Sunday, she was arrested, together with three senior MDC officials, at the house of one of Prime Minister Tsvangirai’s advisers — Thabani Mpofu. She had been called to Mpofu’s house in the morning, when he was arrested and his house was being searched. Upon arrival, Ms Mtetwa asked the police officers conducting the search to produce a search warrant, which they refused. When she protested against continuation of the search, the officers tried to take away her cell phone and purse. Upon resisting this attempt, she was placed under arrest for “obstructing the course of justice.”
After the arrest, Mtetwa was taken to Rhodesville police station in Harare. An urgent petition for her release was filed by the human rights group Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights, which was granted just before midnight. However, police have refused to comply with the court order and Ms Mtetwa is still being held in detention. She is reportedly being moved from one police station to the other prevent her lawyers from officially serving the court order and has been denied access to counsel.
The Media Legal Defence Initiative, on whose international advisory board Ms Mtetwa serves, has now filed a formal petition with the African Union and United Nations’ special mandates for the protection of human rights defenders, the independence of lawyers and freedom of expression for their urgent intervention. While Zimbabwean police refuse to comply with court orders, international pressure — including from the African Union — is hoped to have a result.
Beatrice Mtetwa is one of Zimbabwe’s most high profile lawyers. Renowned for her lack of fear she has long been the go-to lawyer for human rights activists, politicians and journalists threatened by the hard hand of Robert Mugabe’s regime.
She has won international awards aplenty — the Index on Censorship Law Award 2006, CPJ’s Press Freedom Award in 2005; Ludovic-Trarieux International Human Rights Prize of the European Bar Human Rights Institute in 2009, and the International Human Rights Award of the American Bar Association in 2010 — but at home, her defence of Mugabe’s opponents has won her few friends among the regime. In 2003, she was arrested on spurious allegations of drunk driving and beaten by police; and in 2007, Ms Mtetwa and three of her colleagues were beaten by police at a protest against police harassment of lawyers in Harare.
Now she has been arrested again — this time for allegedly “obstructing the course of justice”.
Last Sunday, she was arrested, together with three senior MDC officials, at the house of one of Prime Minister Tsvangirai’s advisers — Thabani Mpofu. She had been called to Mpofu’s house in the morning, when he was arrested and his house was being searched. Upon arrival, Ms Mtetwa asked the police officers conducting the search to produce a search warrant, which they refused. When she protested against continuation of the search, the officers tried to take away her cell phone and purse. Upon resisting this attempt, she was placed under arrest for “obstructing the course of justice.”
After the arrest, Mtetwa was taken to Rhodesville police station in Harare. An urgent petition for her release was filed by the human rights group Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights, which was granted just before midnight. However, police have refused to comply with the court order and Ms Mtetwa is still being held in detention. She is reportedly being moved from one police station to the other prevent her lawyers from officially serving the court order and has been denied access to counsel.
The Media Legal Defence Initiative, on whose international advisory board Ms Mtetwa serves, has now filed a formal petition with the African Union and United Nations’ special mandates for the protection of human rights defenders, the independence of lawyers and freedom of expression for their urgent intervention. While Zimbabwean police refuse to comply with court orders, international pressure — including from the African Union — is hoped to have a result.
Freedomfone by Kubatana accept the Innovation Award, which recognises innovation and original use of new technology to circumvent censorship and foster debate, argument or dissent
Accepting the award FreedomFone activist Upenyu Makoni-Muchemwa said:
Repressive governments deliberately hinder people’s access to information to entrench control and minimise dissent. New media technologies, and the innovative uses of old media, challenge this control. The Kubatana Trust of Zimbabwe’s primary objective is to make human rights and civic information accessible from a centralised, electronic source. We use the Internet, email, blogging, SMS, Freedom Fone, DVDs and print publications to share this information with Zimbabweans living in urban and rural locations.
Our technical director, Brenda Burrell had a vision to enable activists and NGOs to create short form audio programmes, which people could call-in to listen to using their phones. Thus Freedom Fone was conceptualised.
Information can be shared and received at anytime in any language wherever there is mobile coverage. Traditional roadblocks of licensing, regulation and literacy are bypassed, and freedom of expression is broadened. However, it is not surprising that a regime which so thoroughly seeks to suppress dissent and suffocate opportunities for free expression and debate, should be threatened by a service which broadens access to information and encourages the open exchange of opinion.
The Broadcasting Authority of Zimbabwe, an entity generally acknowledged to have been set up to control, rather than to expand the access to information, advised Kubatana that we were operating an “unlicensed broadcasting service” and that we were in violation of the law by making these audio dramas accessible over phones.
We have sought advice from both local and regional legal practitioners, and the opinion is that the Freedom Fone services provided by Kubatana are not in violation of any broadcasting laws. Currently Kubatana is seeking support to challenge the Broadcasting Authority of Zimbabwe in court. Kubatana’s Freedom Fone and services like it provide new opportunities for communication, mobilisation and activism.
In repressive environments, this will be met with resistance. However, it is important not to buckle under this pressure or constrain one’s own creative use of technology. Rather, we must use innovative technologies to expand access to information and broaden discussions of censorship, repression and control of the media environment. We are honoured to receive this award and would like to take this opportunity to thank our various donors and supporters for enabling our work. Most importantly we would like to thank the people who make up the Kubatana Community in Zimbabwe.
CLICK HERE TO SEE THE FULL SHORTLIST FOR THE INNOVATION AWARD, SPONSORED BY GOOGLE
