Newsletters

December 7, 2005

NEWSLETTER OF THE WORLD PRESS FREEDOM COMMITTEE
FOR ITS AFFILIATES AND CONTRIBUTORS
AND OTHER MEDIA LEADERS

Controversy Mars Tunis Summit on Information Society

While the final documents of the Tunis November 16-18, 2005 WSIS II carried in Paragraph 4 much of the language of Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights for free expression but linked this to less helpful provisions, Tunis plainclothes police and others blocked off-site meetings of the Tunisian Monitoring Group (TMG) of the International Freedom of Expression eXchange (IFEX), of which WPFC is an active member.

The meeting in Tunis, the second of two UN-linked global summits on the information society, was held to consider Internet “governance” and other issues.

WPFC European representative Ronald Koven, who actively participated in all the preparatory conferences and both Summits, witnessed among other mischief meetings blocked by police and saw a television camera seized from the lap of a Belgian cameraman in a private car, and returned a quarter hour later minus its film cassette.

A French journalist was beaten and stabbed in plain sight of police guards, the head of Reporters Without Borders was blocked from entering the country, the speech of Samuel Schmid, President of Switzerland, co-host of the Summit, censored for local Tunisian media broadcast so as not to include criticism of Tunisian leaders, as was the speech of 2003 Nobel Prize Winner Shirin Ebadi from Iran.

Tunisian live coverage of Swiss President Schmid’s prepared speech was cut off just as he was about to say:

“It is not acceptable -- and I say this without beating about the bush -- for the United Nations Organization to continue to include among its members those States which imprison citizens for the sole reason that they have criticized their government or their authorities on the Internet or in the press.

“Any knowledge society respects the independence of its media as it respects human rights. I therefore expect that freedom of expression and freedom of information will constitute central themes over the course of this Summit. For myself, it goes without question that here in Tunis, within its walls and without, anyone can discuss quite freely. For us, it is one of the conditions sine qua non for the success of this international conference.”

Meeting in Tunis the day after the Summit, the Coordinating Committee of Press Freedom Organizations adopted a resolution saying that by President Schmid’s measure:

“[T]he Summit meeting in Tunis failed to live up to its promise. From the start, our groups have been critical of the United Nations’ decision to hold a major summit meeting dealing with communication issues and freedom of information in a country that does not honor its obligations in those fields. Many Tunisian democrats argued that holding the Summit in Tunis would present an opportunity to make their society more open. That hope was dashed by the Tunisian authorities.”

Now, there must be vigilance to insure that the Tunisian government does not follow up the Summit with a crackdown against those Tunisians who openly campaigned for free speech and press freedom.

The United Nations system should learn the lesson that it must not legitimize repressive regimes by holding major gatherings in their borders. It now behooves the United Nations to follow up the WSIS in Tunisia with investigations and actions that lead to observance of Article 19’s freedoms by Tunisia.

The Tunisia Monitoring Group of 14 NGOs, including WPFC, publicly pledged that it will continue its missions and monitoring of abuses against free speech in Tunisia. Since January 2005, it has conducted four missions -- in all of which WPFC Director Mark Bench participated -- and issued three reports on Tunisia, including a new report issued during the Summit, noting that conditions actually became harsher preceding the UN gathering.

*  *  *

Push to ‘Internationalize’ Internet Oversight Deflected

International pressure on the United States to cede its formal oversight of ICANN, (the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers), headquartered in California, had been building since the Information Summit first convened in Geneva two years ago. ICANN manages the network’s addressing mechanism, among other technical tasks.

Despite enormous efforts to “internationalize” control of the Internet during the buildup to the Tunis Summit, the U. S. Government successfully insisted that transferring responsibility for ICANN could jeopardize the stability and security of the global network by politicizing it. The U.S. government as well as a handful of other governments and NGOs argued that to include such restrictive countries as China, Iran and Cuba in governance of the Internet would endanger freedom of expression.

At one point this fall, the European Union stunned the U.S. Delegation to WSIS by also calling publicly for “internationalization” of Internet governance. But the EU dropped that demand. What apparently turned the tide was a detailed Nov. 7 letter, which has just surfaced, from U.S. Commerce Secretary Carlos Guitterez and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw, in his capacity as current ministerial chairman of the EU. It concluded:

The history of the Internet’s extraordinary growth and adaptation, based on private-sector innovation and investment, offers compelling arguments against burdening the network with a new intergovernmental structure for oversight. It also suggests that a new intergovernmental structure would most likely become an obstacle to global Internet access for all our citizens. It is in this spirit that we ask the European Union to reconsider its new position on Internet governance and work together with us to bring the benefits of the Information Society to all.

A new global Internet Governance Forum was created. It is to meet in Athens mid-2006 and to include governments, intergovernmental organizations, industry, and civil society to discuss Internet policy issues. It may make recommendations but will have no oversight role and is supposed not to duplicate work of other organizations.

The U.S. delegation noted that the U.S. Commerce Department has never used its oversight of ICANN to rescind its decisions.

The chief negotiator for Saudi Arabia, Abdullah Al-Darrab, said, “What’s needed are clear policies, and setting them is the right of every government, not just one.” A Saudi official acknowledged that their ultimate aim was to replace U.S. oversight with an intergovernmental body, though the day-to-day Internet operations would remain with ICANN.

Calling the debate a distraction from the Internet’s bigger problems of spam, security and cyberterrorism, Michael Gallagher, Assistant U.S. Secretary of Commerce, said that “the role of government is to allow the private sector to come up with solutions to these problems.”

UN Secretary General Kofi Annan is reliably understood to have told Tunisian President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali that Tunisia had earned a bad image during Summit preparations. When Ben Ali asked Annan how he could correct it, Annan reportedly advised him to release Tunisia’s political prisoners for the Summit. Ben Ali did not follow such advice. A U.S. Government statement regretted that Tunisia had missed the opportunity of the Summit to allow free speech.

Though much of the Internet’s basic infrastructure grew out of the U.S. government and academic research, more than half of Internet users are now outside the United States.

*  *  *

Tunis Text Reaffirms Interest in Restricting Content

While reference is made in the WSIS introductory text, the Tunis Commitment, to “freedom of expression and free flow of information, ideas and knowledge being essential for the Information Society and beneficial to development,” it also specifically reaffirms Paragraphs 4, 5, and 55 of the Geneva Declaration of Principles, adopted two years earlier, without indicating what these sections provide.

Paragraph 4 of the Geneva text properly mentions Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, that everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression, to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers. Paragraph 55 appears to be the first UN conference final document that explicitly supports freedom of the press.

But Paragraph 5 contains mischief. It asserts guidelines for the Internet such as “meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.” For a restrictive government, such broad provisions could send a clear message that the media must support the government and that anything else disrupts public order.

*  *  *

Chile Drops Desacato, with WPFC Help

After more than four years of fighting alongside press freedom forces in Chile, WPFC finally celebrated the end of desacato laws there. On Aug. 31, a law eliminating or reforming all seven desacato (contempt) laws was enacted by President Ricardo Lagos, sponsor of the initiative.

WPFC became involved in 2001 by sponsoring international assistance to TV commentator Eduardo Yáñez, indicted for desacato by the Supreme Court after calling the Chilean justice system “immoral, corrupt and cowardly.”

WPFC involvement was instrumental in introduction of the Aug. 26, 2002 Lagos bill proposing complete elimination of desacato laws. It took three years, a WPFC mission to Santiago and Valparaiso, and countless WPFC letters, emails and phone calls to legislators for the bill to resurface from a parliamentary maze and reach the President’s desk.

Unfortunately, the Lagos bill suffered profound transformations in both chambers of Congress, and the final version kept a Senate provision about “threats” to public officials, whose wording raises some doubts.

*  *  *

Governments Plan Internet ‘News’ Network

According to a recent Associated Press report, governments across Asia, Africa, the Middle East and Latin America agreed to launch their own Internet-based news network to counter what they called prejudiced reporting by Western media.

Plans for the Nonaligned Movement News Network were endorsed by information ministers and top officials of more than 89 mainly developing nations, including Cuba, Iran, Syria, Burma, North Korea and Zimbabwe. Countries will start using the network in early 2006 to supply news on domestic events to each other and to rebut “smear campaigns which developing nations have suffered from biased and distorted Western media reports,” a ministerial statement said after a two-day conference in Malaysia. The Malaysian Information Minister announced that Malaysia’s state news agency, Bernama, will oversee the network.

The plan recalls the Nonaligned News Agencies Pool operated in the 1970s and 1980s through the government Tanjug news agency of Communist Yugoslavia. The difference is that the desired “official” news now be sent via Internet.

*  *  *

UNESCO General Conference Skirts Most Threats

UNESCO’s $33 million Communication Program for 2006-2007 was adopted by the Organization’s General Conference meeting at its Paris headquarters Oct. 3-21. The Program represents less than 5 percent of UNESCO’s total two-year budget of $610 million.

Troubling amendments were offered by the Dominican Republic and Egypt, among others. UNESCO Director General Koichiro Matsuura and his staff moved effectively to head them off in Commission V, the subgroup that reviewed the Communication Program before presentation to the General Conference as a whole.

Among the Dominican code-word amendments were calls for “promoting the social responsibility and ethics of information and media professionals” and “encouraging and supporting the broad-based participation of the community in media operations, so that media promote sustainable and inclusive development, peace and harmony, democratic values and the construction of citizenship, thus strengthening cultural and social identities.”

WPFC’s European Representative Ronald Koven pleaded in Commission debate against an Egyptian attempt to reintroduce into the Communication Program the idea of “responsibility” of the media. Koven recalled, “That was an established code word during the controversial ‘New World Information and Communication Order’ debate here for placing media under government authority. The term was used to legitimize censorship.” The Commission then dropped the Egyptian amendment. Koven also pointed out that proposed use of the term “harmful content,” supposedly to protect children, has been rejected by experienced jurists, who consider it to be “vague and subjective and thus open to abuse.” That term was also subsequently avoided by the Commission.

Speaking of UNESCO’s policies generally, Koven hailed the Organization’s strong press freedom stand throughout the lengthy preparations for the two World Summits on the Information Society, noting that UNESCO was the first intergovernmental body to hold, in 1997, that media using new communication technologies should have the same press freedom protections as traditional media.

In conclusion, Koven said: “I’ve followed UNESCO since 1981, and the Organization has come a very long way in the past 15 years and has become a precious ally of the free press in preserving and furthering its liberty. We look forward to having UNESCO as our collaborator in the struggle to implement the too often unfulfilled promise of Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It is past time to put it into action for everyone everywhere.”

Matsuura was unanimously reelected to a second term of four years. He has served for six; UNESCO rules provide for a maximum of 10.

*  *  *

Dispute Erupts Over Culture Issues

Despite UNESCO Secretariat conciliation efforts, the General Conference was dominated by a dispute between the United States and most other countries over a Cultural Diversity Convention, adopted by 148 to 2 (the United States and Israel) the next to last day of the General Conference. The U.S. Delegation offered 29 amendments, rejected one by one in votes ranging from 130 to 150 against.

Many would have distinctly improved an often ambiguous text. U.S. Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice wrote a strong appeal to UNESCO member states, saying that the Convention “invites abuse by forces opposed to freedom of expression and free trade.” That was rebutted in a paper written by the United Kingdom for the European Union.

There was clearly an anti-American mood. By contrast to the treatment of the U.S.-proposed amendments, a Japanese change was later accepted on the same general lines as the U.S. ones to limit the Convention to purely cultural concerns. The Convention was several years in the making as a pet project of France and Canada.

There had been fears, which did not materialize, that the U.S. isolation might be a harbinger of WSIS a month later in Tunis. WPFC had been pressed by some U.S. officials to say that the Cultural Diversity Convention threatens press freedom. After careful analysis, WPFC concluded that, while the largely symbolic treaty has many flaws, including creation of a complex and potentially costly bureaucracy, it is not a danger to news media. Even though it is primarily aimed against Hollywood domination of world movie markets, Hollywood’s lobbying group, the Motion Picture Association, has said it does not see the Convention as a threat.

*  *  *

Russia’s Press Freedom Groups Among Those in Danger

The Russian Parliament, the Duma, has overwhelmingly passed a government-backed bill to forbid foreign NGOs and foundations from operating in Russia and from funding Russian NGOs. Russia’s lively civil society scene, including press freedom and news media support groups, has been largely financed from abroad, including the European Union, U.S. Government and private foundations as major donors. The Duma passed the bill on the first of three readings. A second reading is imminent. President Putin has said he would consider some amendments, but Russian NGO representatives say he seems unlikely to blunt the bill’s thrust. Meanwhile, his government has allocated 500 million rubles for grants to influence public opinion in the three neighboring Baltic republics, which were the first to proclaim their independence from the former Soviet Union.

*  *  *

Malcolm Mallette, WPFC’s former Director of Project, Dies at 83

Malcolm F. (“Mal”) Mallette, Director of Projects for WPFC from 1987 to 1996, whose work aided journalists in scores of countries, died on Nov. 25th in Durham, N.C.

Serving for 9 years, 1987-1996, Mallette managed WPFC’s global assistance program and became WPFC’s most widely published author, with a ground-breaking handbook in 1990 for newly freed Eastern European journalists.

One of more than 60 WPFC projects to help emerging independent news media of the former Communist bloc, Mallette’s 160-page, 28-chapter “Handbook for Journalists of Central and Eastern Europe” reached a wide audience. It has now been retitled Handbook for Journalists and is now available in 17 languages and distributed worldwide.

* * *

Press NGOs Deplore Restrictions

Members of the global Coordinating Committee of Press Freedom Organizations, meeting in Tunis after the World Summit, deplored widespread new attempts to restrict news media in the name of combating terrorism, both in established democracies and by authoritarian regimes.

In a resolution detailing proposals or actions in Britain, the EU, the Inter-Parliamentary Union, and Russia, the groups stated,

“The current round of calls for restrictions raises anew the question whether political leaders seek to shift blame for difficulties curbing terrorism to the handy backs of the press. Such efforts at skapegoating much be resisted.”

The groups said that success in imposing restrictions could only diminish the ability of citizens of democracies to make the judgments they need to make about the work of their governments, as well as the ability of democratic governments themselves to serve as examples for others.

Organizations joining in the resolution included Inter American Press Association, International Association of Broadcasting, International Press Institute, World Association of Newspaper, and the World Press Freedom Committee.

*  *  *

ON THE SHORT SIDE...Mario Enrique Mayo Hernández, an imprisoned Cuban journalist was released on medical parole December 1, more than two and half years after he was jailed in the government’s massive March 2003 crackdown on the independent press….Noted Indian journalist Cushrow Irani, twice Chairman of IPI, and Vice Chairman of WPFC, died on July 23 in Calcutta. Irani, a strong voice for a free press, at numerous International organizations, was known especially for leading successful attack on press restrictions during the administration in India of Prime Minister Indira Ghandi.

#

ANNEX 1

Inter American Press Association
International Association of Broadcasting
International Press Institute
World Association of Newspapers
World Press Freedom Committee

Statement on Media and Terrorism

Members of the Coordinating Committee of Press Freedom Organizations, meeting in Tunis, 19 Nov. 2003, deplored widespread new attempts to restrict news media in the name of combating terrorism, both in established democracies and in dictatorial countries.

A new wave of efforts to limit freedom of expression and press freedom has elicited defenses of those principles as core values of free societies. But other threats loom.
Amongst recent developments:

• The British Parliament recently rejected a government-sponsored attempt to create a new ill-defined crime of “glorification of terrorism.”
  
  Former British Labor Party Home Office Minister John Denham noted in the debates that such language could be used by authoritarians against their critics. “Is it really our intention to do the dirty work for some of the most oppressive tyrannical regimes in the world?” he asked.
• In equally vague and dangerous terms, the Commission of the European Union recently circulated a memorandum to the European Parliament and to the Council of Ministers calling for a press “code of conduct” against disseminating “propaganda which contributes to violent radicalization.”
  
  The memo said it was specially concerned by “some media” on “radio, satellite television and the Internet.” The European Commission said it plans an early conference on media and terrorism and proposes to write a “guidance document.”
• The Inter-Parliamentary Union recently called on member parliaments to formulate “appropriate guidelines for media personnel” so that their programs “do not incite violence, violate standards of law and order or in any way glorify violence.” The IPU urged news media to “provide a balanced and correct picture of the events in situations of armed conflict.” Freedom of expression in cyberspace and elsewhere, it said, should be upheld -- “subject to reasonable restrictions.”
• Although Russian President Vladimir Putin several years ago vetoed a law sponsored by his own Press Ministry restricting news coverage of violent conflicts, various elements in Russia are renewing calls for rules not only to forbid interviews of terrorists but also to make journalists auxiliaries of police and law enforcement. One such proposed code, by a senior official of the Russian Union of Journalists, goes so far as to suggest that news personnel may legitimately “take arms and enter the fight” against terrorists.

Soon after the Sept. 11, 2001 attack on Manhattan’s twin towers, UNESCO Director General Koichiro Matsuura warned:

My gravest concern is that much freedom of expression and media freedom may be sacrificed hastily, even voluntarily, on the altar of security. Anxieties induced by terrorist threats may lead to laws and regulations which may undermine the very rights and freedoms that the anti-terrorism campaign is supposed to defend.

And, writing in December 2002 to President Putin to hail his veto, James H. Ottaway said as the organizer of the Russian Press Freedom Support Group:

The first journalistic principle in any coverage of conflicts is that the views of all sides must be fairly reflected, no matter how outrageous some of them may be. It is also the job of the news media to place such views into context, analyzing misstatements and contradictions.

The concerns underlying such statements continue unabated. The current round of calls for restrictions raises anew the question whether political leaders seek to shift blame for difficulties in curbing terrorism to the handy backs of the press. Such efforts at scapegoating must be resisted. Their success could only diminish the ability of citizens of democracies to make the judgments they need to make about the work of their governments - as well as the ability of democratic governments themselves to serve as examples for others.

If journalists are seen as handmaidens of authorities, the press cannot keep the general trust it needs to report on conflicts. The Coordinating Committee considers that for their societies to be fully informed, journalists must maintain their unrestricted independence and unqualified credibility with all sides to disputes and conflicts. This requires governments to let the press do its work of informing the public without official hindrance.

#
 

ANNEX 2

IFJ Draft on Safety of Journalists

Text for a suggested resolution of the UN Security Council presented to Kofi Annan by the International Federation of Journalists and endorsed by participants at the World Electronic Media Forum, a parallel event at the Tunis WSIS, November 16th, 2005:

Actions to Improve the Safety and Security of Journalists, Media Staff and Associated Personnel in Situations of Armed Conflict

The Security Council,

Reiterating its responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security and respect for human rights and, in this context, the need to promote and ensure respect for freedom of expression and opinion and the principles and rules of international humanitarian law,

Underlining the need to protect the right of all citizens to reliable information and the right of journalists to provide it without fearing for their security,

Reaffirming its resolutions 1296 (2000), of 19 April 2000, and 1265 (1999), of 17 September 1999, on protection of civilians in armed conflict, and resolution 1460 (2003), of 30 January 2003, on children and armed conflict, and 1502 (2003), on safety and protection of humanitarian workers, as well as other relevant resolutions,

Recalling Article 79 of the Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 regarding the protection of journalists in armed conflict;

Reaffirming the obligation of all civilians and media staff to observe and respect the laws of the country in which they are operating, in accordance with international law and the Charter of the United Nations,

Underlining the core values of free expression as set out in Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as well as the importance of the right of journalists to report freely in the service of the public interest,

Recalling UNESCO resolution 29 “Condemnation of Violence Against Journalists” adopted by the UNESCO General Conference on 12 November 1997 which called on States to remove any statute of limitations on crimes against persons when such crimes are “perpetrated to prevent the exercise of freedom of information and expression or when their purpose is the obstruction of justice” and which urged governments to “refine legislation to make it possible to prosecute and sentence those who instigate the assassination of persons exercising the right to freedom of expression,”

Underlining the importance for journalists, media personnel and media organisations to uphold the principles of neutrality, impartiality and humanity in their professional activities,

Emphasizing that there are existing prohibitions under international law against attacks knowingly and intentionally directed against personnel involved in the legitimate professional activity of newsgathering in situations of armed conflicts which constitute war crimes,

Recalling the need for States to end impunity for such criminal acts,

Aware that the protection of journalists and media personnel and appropriately accredited associated personnel is a concern in situations of armed conflict and otherwise,

Gravely concerned at the increasing evidence of acts of violence in many parts of the world against journalists and media staff and associated personnel, in particular deliberate attacks, which are in violation of international humanitarian law, as well as other international law that may be applicable,

1. Expresses its strong condemnation of all forms of violence, including, inter alia, murder, intimidation, armed robbery, abduction, hostage-taking, kidnapping, harassment and illegal arrest and detention to which those participating in media activities are increasingly exposed, as well as attacks on media organisations and acts of destruction and looting of their property;

2. Urges States to ensure that crimes against journalists, media staff and associated personnel do not remain unpunished;

3. Decides that, where such crimes multiply, remain unpunished and develop into a pattern of violation of international humanitarian law, the Security Council should consider referring such cases to the International Criminal Court;

4. Urges all States to sign and ratify the Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions, and calls on those States that have ratified the Protocol to further strengthen measures to safeguard journalists in areas of armed conflict;

5. Reaffirms also the obligation of all parties involved in an armed conflict to comply fully with the rules and principles of international law applicable to them related to the protection of journalists, media personnel and associated personnel, in particular international humanitarian law and human rights law;

6. Urges all responsible authorities to respect the professional independence and rights of journalists, media staff and associated personnel, to properly investigate all violations of their rights, and to promote their safety, security and freedom of movement;

7. Expresses its determination to take appropriate steps in order to ensure the safety and security of journalists, media staff and associated personnel, including, inter alia, by:

a) Requesting the Secretary-General to recommend that States examine the provisions of Geneva Conventions and other Conventions, particularly related to prevention of attacks of people engaged in humanitarian operations, and to extend such protection provided therein to journalists, media staff and associated personnel and to have the establishment of such attacks as crimes punishable by law and the prosecution or extradition of offenders, in future as well;

b) Encouraging the Secretary-General, in accordance with his prerogatives under the Charter of the United Nations, to bring to the attention of the Security Council situations in which the exercise of journalistic inquiry and media activity is denied as a consequence of violence directed against journalists, media staff and associated personnel;

8. Requests the Secretary-General to address in all his country-specific situation reports, the issue of the safety and security of journalists, media staff and associated personnel including specific acts of violence against such personnel, remedial actions taken to prevent similar incidents and actions taken to identify and hold accountable those who commit such acts, and to explore and propose additional ways and means to enhance the safety and security of such personnel.

[Prepared by
International Federation of Journalists
International News Safety Institute
adopted by the
World Electronic Media Forum Tunis, November 16th 2005]