Twenty years after the Windhoek Declaration on press freedom

siege, <strong>the</strong> MFWA worked with <strong>the</strong>
IMS, Misa-Zimbabwe and o<strong>the</strong>r local
rights groups to push for freedoms.
Similarly, in <strong>the</strong> early 2000s <strong>the</strong>re
was collaboration with <strong>the</strong> IMS to
support Somali media groups to organise
<strong>the</strong>mselves to survive a nearimpossible
situation of endless civil
war.
Because <strong>the</strong> MFWA came into being
at a time of widespread conflict
and political turmoil in <strong>the</strong> region,
<strong>the</strong>re has been no alternative but
to find ways to support media and
journalists caught up as victims in
<strong>the</strong> violence or as instruments of
whipping up <strong>the</strong> problems. One of
<strong>the</strong> key activities prompted by <strong>the</strong>
wars in Sierra Leone and Liberia
was establishing a safe haven for
journalists fleeing <strong>the</strong> brutalities,
as well as for those fleeing <strong>the</strong>
persecution of tyrants.
One of <strong>the</strong> dramatic interventions in
Liberia was to rescue, by airlifting,
a journalist torture victim who had
gone blind and crippled from violent
physical and psychological abuse.
Throbble Suah was in 2001-2002
rehabilitated by a group of doctors
in Ghana, regaining his sight and
<strong>the</strong> use of his limbs. The safe-haven
programme has hosted persecuted
journalists from <strong>the</strong> DRC, Cameroon,
Sierra Leone, The Gambia, and
Somalia. The MFWA has worked, in
this instance, with <strong>the</strong> UNHCR and
some foreign embassies, notably <strong>the</strong>
US embassy in Accra, to seek refuge
in foreign countries.
In Africa today, a human rights
promoter’s work is never done.
When <strong>the</strong>re appears a sign of
progress on <strong>the</strong> horizon, it soon
fades into a mirage of hopes. What
seemed to be <strong>the</strong> attainment of
some progress in media freedom in
<strong>the</strong> late 1990s, began to be reversed
come <strong>the</strong> beginning of <strong>the</strong> 2000s.
The enactment of new laws, such
as “publication of false news”, or
<strong>the</strong> digging up and use of dormant
colonial-era legislation, <strong>the</strong> wielding
of <strong>the</strong> big repressive stick by state
controlled authoritarian regulatory
agencies and a spate of media
bans and closures, represented
<strong>the</strong> new threats that <strong>the</strong> media
confronted. This trend emerged just
when <strong>the</strong> media were beginning to
consolidate <strong>the</strong>ir existence and it
signaled a new era of state policies
to close <strong>the</strong> space forced open by
civil society in <strong>the</strong> late 1980s and
early 1990s.
For <strong>the</strong> majority of governments
seeking ways to bridle <strong>the</strong> growing
space of <strong>the</strong> media, <strong>the</strong>y found
self-serving justification from <strong>the</strong>
recklessness of many media, <strong>the</strong>
result of a widespread low standard
of professional practice among
<strong>the</strong> media. This state of affairs rendered
<strong>the</strong> media easy prey to <strong>the</strong>
control and influence of politicians
and political factions. The political
partisanship and sectarianism
resulting from this situation, especially
in relation to elections, made
many media complicit in fomenting
and supporting conflicts when and
where <strong>the</strong>y occurred. In <strong>the</strong>se circumstances,
and in an atmosphere
of growing intolerance, mobilising
public opinion and sympathy to defend
and protect media freedoms
has been made more demanding in
many countries in <strong>the</strong> region.
Meanwhile, elections and electionsrelated
politics continue to be a
significant source of danger to <strong>the</strong>
media’s independence and freedom
in <strong>the</strong> coming <strong>years</strong>. The polarisation
of <strong>the</strong> societies along political
partisan, ethnic and o<strong>the</strong>r sectarian
lines, seeps into <strong>the</strong> media very
much. It may get worse as politicians
from country to country invest
in or buy into media ownership
and buy media influence, especially
in relation to elections.
Will <strong>the</strong> MFWA survive <strong>the</strong>
galloping intolerance and
Section 3: Independence
seeming consensus among political
forces against reforms of inimical
media legislation? The organisation
can, to a large extent, survive
<strong>the</strong> political situation for as long
as <strong>the</strong>re is a country with some
favourable space to operate from.
The real threat is <strong>the</strong> question of its
long-term sustenance. An organisation
totally dependent on <strong>the</strong> charity
of philanthropic and donor institutions
survives or dies according to
<strong>the</strong> programmatic agenda of <strong>the</strong>se
same organisations. Current trends,
according to documented research,
indicate a systematic reallocation of
funding support away from media
rights and media development advocacy
programmes.
The MFWA has existed for approaching
15 <strong>years</strong>, based on <strong>the</strong> generosity
of philanthropic organisations.
It started with assistance from <strong>the</strong>
Ford Foundation and quickly attracted
<strong>the</strong> support of many organisations
including <strong>the</strong> institutions of
<strong>the</strong> Open Society Foundation, Danida
and o<strong>the</strong>rs. It keeps attracting
<strong>the</strong> interest of some o<strong>the</strong>r organisations.
However, <strong>the</strong>re is no record
of any rights advocacy organisation
in Africa surviving for more than
20 <strong>years</strong> on <strong>the</strong> benevolence of any
funding agency. The signs of “fatigue”
are beginning to show. How
a non-profit rights advocacy makes
“income” to sustain it and pursue its
ideals is <strong>the</strong> greatest challenge of
promoting and consolidating human
rights in Africa to day. All <strong>the</strong>
organisations confront this imponderable
puzzle.
Media in Africa - 2011 | 145