What was styled as the World Press Freedom Day 2022 National Conference and Symposium helped at least to bring to the public’s attention what is required for the media to operate without interference and to hold decision-makers to account.
The government spared no effort over the two days and boasted during the proceedings that this was the largest ever conference of its type held here. It may have been so but there was a fair bit of muddling of messages and purposes. Refreshingly, children from secondary schools were invited for both days and the government must be commended for this initiative. However, the majority of the attendees appeared to be employees of ministries, state agencies, departments and regions and their role – purely information – is entirely different from that of the free and independent media. Nonetheless, it would have been beneficial to them to have listened to the concerns raised by the free and independent media and particularly about their watchdog function.
The theme of the symposium itself was dubious: ‘Journalism under Surveillance – Partnerships in Communication for Development –C4D’ and may have inspired a direct question by the President of the Guyana Press Association, Nazima Raghubir to President Ali about whether his government was in possession of spyware and/or planned to acquire and use it especially on journalists. The President was emphatic in his response: “This Government has no intention whatsoever – it is not in [contemplation] in my mind to move in any direction to have any spyware or anything to spy on anyone. I am not even [imagining] something like that. So take it, take it out of your imagination now”.
It is not an unimportant question as the Pegasus spyware devised by Israeli cyber-arms company, the NSO group has been employed in various parts of the world for malign purposes. Moreover, there are unanswered questions for the PPP/C under the Jagdeo administration over how exactly convicted drug trafficker Roger Khan was able to acquire sophisticated spying equipment to prosecute his campaign against “criminals” and the then government’s role in the debacle.
The other pillar of the theme `Partnerships in Communication for Development –C4D’, a concept much promoted historically by the UN System comes with the unfortunate connotation of all media being orchestrated towards some grand national project. The partnership that is really needed for press freedom to thrive is government transparency and the institutional means to achieve this.
At an elemental level, what the press in this country requires is for the government to be fully transparent and accountable. President Ali has asserted that his government has been the most accessible to the media. It isn’t much to boast about with a ruling party that has been historically averse to openness and to the media. It is unacceptable that approaching the second anniversary of his accession to the presidency that President Ali is yet hold regular press conferences. These should he held ideally once per month. Openness and accommodation of the media cannot be defined by journalists buttonholing the President on the sidelines of official events and certainly not by the snubbing that occurred during the visit of the Brazilian President on Friday.
Second, there should be regular briefings on Cabinet decisions and the opportunity for the media to ask questions about these. This should however be shorn of Luncheonesque circumlocution which was a feature of the Jagdeo administration. There is also the related matter of press conferences by Vice President Jagdeo. These cannot be considered as a substitute for presidential briefings as only President Ali can speak definitively on behalf of the government.
President Ali’s government also has to deliver on a functional Access to Information architecture and ancillary bodies such as the Integrity Commission which has a crucial role in combatting corruption among public servants but which continues to be inexplicably kept in abeyance.
Perhaps the most potent signal to the government about the importance of press freedom and the role of independent journalists came in the joint statement by the envoys of the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada and the European Union, the same conclave that played a vital role in the upholding of democratic elections here in 2020.
Their statement, issued under the more appropriate international World Press Freedom theme of `Journalism under Digital Siege’ made the irrefutable point that “Press attention to accountability has never been more important in Guyana with a historically large revenue stream entering government coffers and a regularly stated intent to use those resources for a development agenda that cuts across all regions and races. There is also a larger principle at stake that strong democracies require free information flow in the public marketplace of opinions and ideas. As inconvenient as criticism can be to government officials and other leaders, it is an essential part of the democratic cacophony”.
There is much for the government to contemplate in that statement particularly in the context of the burgeoning oil and gas sector and the inscrutability of decision-making in areas such as environmental permits for ExxonMobil’s operations, marketing of Guyana’s crude oil and the proposed gas to shore to energy scheme which would be the largest public sector project in the country’s history and one replete with grave risks and pitfalls.
On World Press Freedom Day, the International Press Institute (IPI) offered 10 recommendations on what democratic governments must do to better protect press freedom at home and around the world. Some of these can be taken up by the government here.
Number Six on the IPI list is: Show zero tolerance for attacks on the press.
“Attacks on journalists and media workers are the most serious form of censorship — and are an attack on democracy itself. Democratic governments should therefore demonstrate their commitment to protecting the work of the press by vigorously defending journalists from verbal harassment, online and offline, and from physical threats, assaults, and harm. This includes ensuring that public authorities thoroughly and swiftly investigate all attacks on journalists, in line with international commitments on the safety of journalists. Democratic governments should also demonstrate their commitment to ensuring the safety of journalists and media workers by establishing national mechanisms aimed at advancing journalists’ safety, such as the PersVeilig (Press Safe) Mechanism adopted by the Netherlands”.
Number 10 on the IPI list is particularly relevant: Create an enabling environment for press freedom.
“A free and pluralistic media is an essential ingredient of democratic societies. Democracies should take concrete steps to create an environment that enables the development of pluralistic, independent, and sustainable media ecosystems.
* “Build trust. Democratic governments must commit to strengthening trust in the media and the essential role watchdog journalism plays in holding the powerful to account and making our democracies stronger. Political elites and elected officials should refrain from verbal attacks on the press, as such rhetoric sows distrust in the media, and puts journalists at risk of harassment and physical harm.
* “Prevent media capture. Democracies must work harder to ensure fair market conditions that enable the development of diverse and pluralistic media markets and protect independent media from political influence. This includes enacting and applying strong ownership and competition rules to prevent market monopolies, guard against state takeover, and ensure the diversity of news and information.
* “Support independent journalism as a public good including through public funding of independent journalism — including local journalism — channelled through independent mechanisms”.
