Download - Media Institute of Southern Africa

State of the media in Southern Africa 2002
Pall Mall,
London SW1Y 5HX
Dear Sir,
The Media Institute of Southern Africa (MISA), notes that the Commonwealth
Ministerial Action Group (CMAG) decided to include discussions on the situation
in Zimbabwe at its next meeting on January 30, 2002. It is our hope that the
CMAG will seek concrete ways of ensuring that the promises given by the
Zimbabwe Government to the Commonwealth are realised. The Commonwealth
should seek ways of verifying the veracity of official reports given by the government
as our experience indicates that the situation on the ground is worsening
as we draw closer to the March 2002 Presidential elections.
MISA wishes to restate its earlier appeal, outlined in a letter to your office dated
January 18, 2002. MISA then expressed its concern over the crises in Zimbabwe
and appealed for urgent intervention in halting the rapidly deteriorating
socio-political situation in Zimbabwe, which is a member of the Commonwealth.
In our appeal, we made special reference to the passage of the infamous Public
Order and Security Bill on January 10, 2002, and the imminent passage of the
repressive Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Bill.
The Zimbabwean Government has since seemingly given in to international
pressure by introducing 36 amendments to the Access to Information and Protection
of Privacy Bill which were released on January 22. As we write, consideration
of the bill has been delayed to allow the Parliamentary Legal Committee
more time to assess it.
However, further analysis of the amendments show that they are purely cosmetic.
Despite the amendments, journalists are still required to obtain licences
and face a possible 2 years’ imprisonment for spreading ‘false news’. Extensive
powers over the media and journalists continue to be wielded by the proposed
Media and Information Commission, a body firmly under government control.
Despite its title, the Bill does little to guarantee the public’s right to access
information held by public authorities. The Bill does formally establish a right
to access information held by public bodies, but this right is so limited by exclusions
and exceptions that its practical impact is likely to be extremely limited.
Most of the provisions in the Bill have nothing to do with access to information
but instead impose a range of harsh restrictions on media freedom. Although
the amendments do slightly mitigate these criticisms, our main concerns with
the Bill remain and, in its current form, the Bill still represents a very serious
breach of the right to freedom of expression and opinion.
The seemingly government recapitulation on the Access to Information and
So This Is Democracy? 255