That National Assembly's Standing Committee on Information has recommended the incorporation of a military ruler's anti-media laws into PEMRA Ordinance comes as a shocking surprise. It is shocking indeed because the additions are Draconian in nature, and surprising because they strongly militate against Information Minister Kaira's promise made early last month that the government would wait for the recommendations of a committee headed by Justice Fakhruddin G (retd).
Ebrahim before finalising a code of conduct in their light. The PPP and PML-N opposed both the laws being incorporated when a beleaguered Musharraf first introduced these during the 2007 emergency. These were subsequently repealed by the PPP government in April 2008. Repressive and retrogressive laws aimed at curbing media freedom are generally enacted when a ruling party begins to realise that its rating has gone down and starts over-reacting to public criticism.
It is ominous, however, that the members of opposition parties in the Standing Committee have also unanimously supported the move. All the more unexpected is the support extended by the PML-N representatives to these laws because the party claims that it supports a free media. The recommendations will now go to the Parliament where members would hopefully realise the dangers inherent in the reintroduction of the old PEMRA laws and shoot them down.
Pakistani media has struggled hard to gain the independence it currently enjoys. For this both the working journalists and media establishments have made untold sacrifices. The fight started in early Ayub era and has gone on since then. The journalist community have not only defied abnormal curbs imposed by administrations from time to time but also resisted pressure from powerful lobbies and threats from violence prone outfits.
In the process, journalists suffered incarceration, lashes, loss of jobs and quite a few even laid down their lives in pursuit of independent reporting. Similarly, the newspapers critical of government policies have been denied their rightful share in government ads, pressurised on newsprint quota and sometime forcibly shut down.
Similarly, administrations of independent private TV channels and newspapers have been harassed and their offices attacked, resulting in considerable financial losses to them. One thing, however, remains certain: the media is not going to surrender the freedom it has gained through a great sacrifice. Its penchant for objective reporting and expression of dissent is in fact a part and parcel of the overall struggle for democracy.
A democratic system cannot in fact function in the absence of a free and vibrant media, which reflects what is happening in the country thus providing an occasion to the government to improve upon its working. It is a bad policy to shoot the messenger. Political parties, both in power and in opposition, have to realise that any attempt to impose curbs on media would weaken democracy and encourage forces that might be waiting in the wings to wrap up the system.
Governments in Pakistan are not used to listening to criticism patiently but they have to bear with it to ensure that democracy is able to take roots. One would readily agree that terrorists and their acts must not be glamorised and gory scenes that cause revulsion or are not suitable for children not publicised in newspapers or shown on the TV screen.
Pakistani media on the whole is mature and responsible. The best way to ensure that there are no lapses is to let the media organisations evolve a comprehensive and voluntary code of conduct. Pakistan Broadcasters' Association had in fact submitted its recommendations in this regard in April. Organisations of working journalists and representatives of telecom industry have also made known their views in this regard.
There is, therefore, an urgent need to hold talks with media administrations and bodies of working journalists to finalise the code. Laws already exist that debar any attempt to compromise Pakistan's sovereignty and security, propagation of violence or hatred, and acts prejudicial to the maintenance of law and order. Other laws on the statute book prohibit slander, defamation and discussion of matters sub judice.
What is required is to enforce these laws in an effective and meaningful manner rather than make changes in the PEMRA Ordinance. Any recourse to a new set of harsh laws aimed at muzzling the press is bound to be perceived as an attempt at manufacturing consent.
Comments
Comments are closed.