Opinion
Free the media
The draft constitution should be amended to promote self-regulation in the media, not government interventionKamal Dev Bhattarai
From the 1920s to the 1940s, American newspapers faced widespread criticism for their sensational, politically imbalanced and commercially motivated news content. So a private commission of inquiry was set up under the chairmanship of Robert Hutchins to “look into the failure of the media to meet the needs of society and the possibilities for reform” in 1942. The report pointed out several flaws in the media and recommended ways to improve it. The vital outcome of the commission was the creation of these ideals: the notion of social responsibility and journalistic standards that the media should maintain in its daily performances.
The commission’s central suggestion was that priority should be given to self-control, not government intervention, while formulating constitutional provisions and laws. Several countries followed the suggestions made by the Hutchins Commission while formulating their media laws and policies.
Attempts to control
In the Nepali context, the 1990 Constitution provided full-fledged press freedom and the freedom of expression. Due to such constitutional provisions, Nepal’s media witnessed both qualitative and quantitative growth in the 1990s. However, in 2005, king Gyanendra sought to curtail the freedom of the media, a step which was overturned by the Supreme Court. The Interim Constitution of 2007 further cemented provisions of press freedom and the freedom of expression, taking a lesson from Gyanendra’s regime.
The latest attempt by the government to clamp down on the media is through a number of additional restrictive provisions in the preliminary draft of the constitution and some provisions in the government’s policy and programmes. The political parties and bureaucrats seem to be keen on instituting constitutional and legal measures to control the media.
To be fair to the government, the Nepali media has its share of faults. It has often been heavily criticised for its sensational, inaccurate and, in many cases, false content. Some newspapers, radio and television stations and online news portals have indeed crossed their boundaries and offended people or even encouraged crime in addition to violating the privacy of the people. Yet, it is no excuse to seek to curtail the media. This is a wrong and flawed approach because instead of controlling the media, as the Hutchins Commission proposed, we should direct our attention to promoting self-regulation and self-control.
The current provisions of press freedom in the draft constitution provide plenty of room for any future government to formulate laws to control the media. Going a step further, in its annual policy unveiled on July 8, the government announced that it would amend the journalistic code of conduct.
Not your call
It is not the duty of the government to either issue or amend the code of conduct for journalists; it is the duty of autonomous bodies like Press Council Nepal and professional organisations like the Federation of Nepali Journalists.
Though the Council is an autonomous body, there have been attempts by the Ministry of Information and Communication to influence its function with the purpose of controlling the media. The crux of the problem is that the ministry has always seen the Council as one of its departments.
Similarly, the government announced that it would formulate a separate law to regulate online news portals. No doubt, there is a need to regulate the mushroom growth of online portals. To do so, the government could formulate an Online Media Act along the lines of the Press and Publication Act and Broadcasting Act. But the government’s intention to formulate a common law to control online media is objectionable. Government agencies have been misusing some provisions in the Electronic Transaction Act to arrest and detain journalists in the name of formulating new laws.
Furthermore, the government registered a bill concerning contempt of court with the Parliament Secretariat last year. After criticism from the media, the bill has been put on hold for now. Under the influence of the judiciary, Law Minister Narahari Acharya inserted many provisions which would have curtailed press freedom and the freedom of expression.
Still, there is a need to endorse the Contempt of Court Bill without any delay inrestricting the current unlimited and arbitrary rights being enjoyed by the Supreme Court to charge any journalist who is critical of the judiciary with contempt of court. The Contempt of Court Bill should be passed by Parliament, but some objectionable provisions in it should be removed. If the law is not enacted, the Supreme Court will continue to enjoy arbitrary rights which are often used against the media and media persons.
Help self-regulate
As per recent international trends, the media should be free from the control of the government and other powers and it should have the freedom to report events, express its views and operate independently. At the same time, the media should respect individual rights and do no harm to society or individuals.
To ensure that these rules are not violated, it is necessary that we restructure and strengthen Press Council Nepal. The government should not control its activities but rather, provide sufficient infrastructure to monitor the implementation of the journalistic code of conduct. If the Council were to be decentralised evenat the district level, it could play a vital role in ensuring self-regulation and self-control of the media. There is a need to form a broadcasting authority to regulate the broadcasting sector and a separate authority to deal with the content of newspapers. While some press laws were formulated after 1990, there is no mechanism to promote the idea of self-regulation and self-control.
Ministers and bureaucrats have always concentrated their efforts on finding ways to control the media instead of regulating and managing it through an independent mechanism. As we are in the process of finalising the draft of the constitution, it would be apt to mention the First Amendment to the US Constitution made in 1791 which states, “Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.”
So what the Nepali government can do instead is encourage media houses and journalists to maintain high standards through self-regulation. Except for some internationally-accepted norms, there should be no restrictions on the media. And to ensure that, some provisions in the preliminary draft of the constitution must be amended.
Bhattarai is with the political desk at the Post