Media Bill is a threat to media freedom

In many countries the media is a powerful tool for exposing human rights abuses and holding governments to account. As a consequence, media is often severely restricted in countries where governments seek to commit abuses with impunity.

South Africa and Zimbabwe are the only two countries in the SADC region to have enacted access to information legislation. Most countries are party to international treaties that guarantee the right to receive and impart information. Domestic constitutions, with the exception of Swaziland, also provide the right to access information in a cluster of the right to freedom of expression.

Where a constitution does not guarantee the right to access publicly held information is given recognition by a government decree or a policy pronouncement. Despite those wide ranging commitments both at domestic and international levels, most countries have yet to enact access to information legislation.

A common difference in the access to information laws of South Africa and Zimbabwe is that the South African Act includes public interest that requires that withholding of information must be balanced against disclosure in the public interest. This allows information to be released even if harm is shown if the public benefit in knowing the information outweighs the harm that may be caused from disclosure.

While the Zimbabwean law is only aimed at routinely harassin it  and intimidating journalists, the Botswana government has unfortunately decided to launch a draconian media bill that is similar to the Zimbabwean media law instead of emphasising efforts to respect international standards of press freedom. It is important to note that the proposed legislation does not mention anything about the obligations of government departments to release information to the media and members of the public.

It is apparent that when the bill was designed it was purely done along partisan lines; important stakeholders were deliberately left out. The media, the public and the civil society, were all not brought on board during the initial formulation of this bill.

Therefore, it is obvious that its main aim is to crush the media, as it does not defend 'national interests', it basically fails to distinguish national interests from partisan selfish interests. The bill fails to recognise that issues of political governance are not the domain of the political leadership only. 

This bill obviously does not give effect to the right of access to information legislation. As a misnomer about this bill ,is worth mentioning that whilst we are made to believe that the bill is aimed at enhancing international press freedom standards, its provision provides for the opposite. The main thrust of the bill is to give government powers to control the media by requiring the registration of journalists and prohibiting free expression
This proposed legislation also does not recognise that participation in information dissemination is no longer the responsibility of a few through regulated media houses, but that anyone can do so freely - anyone can sell and disseminate information.

Media policy can, therefore, not be developed and administered ruthlessly by a paranoid system that looks at the media as an enemy, and sees and confuses its selfish interests with national interests. Hence, the respectable minister and the pioneer of the bill, Mme Mma Venson-Moitoi, should have the proposed legislation revised in order to ensure that true national interests are protected by broader participation and involvement not through repression and persecution.

This bill needs to be amended in order for it to gain public support because the basis of its formation does not enhance interaction with the private media neither does it enhance amicable resolution of disputes in a non-litigation manner.

In a nutshell, the government must change its irrational restrictive Media Bill and push for a free media system that would be considered as a basic necessity for a democratic society.

Witness Tobaka
Gaborone