Truth is threatened by disinformation and hate speech seeking to blur the lines between fact and fiction, between science and conspiracy. The increased concentration of the media industry into the hands of a few, the financial collapse of scores of independent news organizations, and an increase of national laws and regulations that stifle journalists are further expanding censorship and threatening freedom of expression.
UN Secretary-General on World Press Freedom Day
On the occasion of World’s Press Freedom Day observed last Wednesday under the theme “Shaping a Future of Rights: Freedom of Expression as a Driver for All Other Human Rights”, the Heads of Mission of the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada and the European Union issued a joint statement on press freedom in Guyana. They stated, among others, that:
(a) Media freedom is deeply embedded within the freedom of expression and all other human rights;
(b) The media plays a pivotal role in society by disseminating facts for public consumption and helping citizens in Guyana stay informed, establish opinions, make informed choices, and participate meaningfully in society;
(c) Media freedom allows for transparency and accountability, important components for Guyana’s management of resources during a time of rapid growth;
(d) All stakeholders, including decision-makers such as the Government and the Opposition, must maintain a mutually respectful relationship with the media in its capacity as the fourth estate and as a vital part of democracy in action;
(e) Granting the media access to public officials and to information should be the norm. Requests for public information should be honored;
(f) The Access to Information Act 2011 should be effectively implemented to empower the media to do their job;
(g) Media workers should not be restricted nor have to work under unnecessary duress or risk to their safety in order to have access to information. They should not face abuse, threats, intimidation or personal attacks in the execution of their duties, nor should they be expected to align with any specific idea, person, entity or political party, whether directly or anonymously;
(h) The media’s role is to provide objective and impartial reporting, which is essential to maintaining a healthy democracy and ensuring that all voices are heard;
(i) All employees of the media should be protected and be able to carry out their duties without fear;
(j) The practice of selectiveness in granting access to information or to public officials under the guise of media bias, should be discouraged;
(k) The media, Government, Opposition, and all stakeholders must recognise the roles and responsibilities of the media and its benefits to the people of Guyana; and
(l) All stakeholders are urged to continue supporting media freedom and promoting a culture of open and honest communications in Guyana.
Also last week, Reporters without Borders issued its report on the 2023 World Press Freedom Index in which Guyana is shown as having dropped 26 points from 34 to 60 in its ranking from among 180 countries surveyed. This is not good news as this latest assessment on Guyana must have been influenced by recent events, especially where journalists and other media employees have been the targets of vicious attacks. The report noted that journalists in Guyana continue to encounter pushback in their work from the Government and supporters of the ruling party, including exclusion from routine press briefings by the administration as well as intimidation tactics. It cited a recent incident where journalists were forced to sit among the public and be verbally intimidated while asking questions. The crowd was largely composed of vocal supporters of the President, and the meeting was more like a rally. The report further stated:
Whether directly attacking the media or encouraging supporters to do so with a wink and a nod, President Ali is putting journalists at risk for simply doing their jobs. President Ali’s administration must take action to ensure all journalists are safe to do their jobs. This includes holding to account party supporters who intimidate members of the press…
This exemplifies a larger issue that the government controls many of the media outlets in the small country and tries to silence those who criticise the administration. There have been no cabinet press briefings since August 2020.
The Guyana Press Association, for its part, had the following to say:
Today, we see renewed efforts by the sitting government to use its leverage in the State Media and its aligned privately-owned media to violate the inalienable right to freedom of association as enshrined in the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Constitution of Guyana. The sitting government is evidently coercing those workers to engage in practices that are inimical to the Guyana Press Association at the altar of political expediency, hence the collective well-being of their organised body. There had been failed attempts in the past to do so through the partisan Union of Guyanese Journalists (UGJ).
In today’s article, we conclude our discussion of the key provisions of the National Intelligence and Security Agency (NISA) Bill 2023. So far, we have discussed the main functions of the Agency which include matters in relation to defence and foreign policies of the State; and the protection against espionage, terrorism and sabotage from the activities of persons within Guyana or agents of foreign powers. We expressed our concern that there is a strong possibility that the latter provision can be used to monitor the activities of ordinary citizens, especially those who are critical of the Government, such as journalists and civil society activists, thereby intruding on their personal privacy and confidentiality of information.
We also discussed the procedures for the appointment of the Director and Deputy Director of the Agency and noted that such appointments are made by the President without consultations with anyone, for example, the Leader of the Opposition and other stakeholders. We also noted that the Agency is to be funded as a direct charge to the Consolidated Fund. However, only constitutional agencies are funded in this manner. NISA is not a constitutional agency. Additionally, although the audited accounts of the Agency are to be redacted to remove sensitive information contained therein, they cannot be published, raising questions about the purpose of the redaction.
Part IV – Operational Powers of the Agency
Section 20 outlines the powers of the Director which include: (i) organizing, approving, and supervising all activities of the Agency; and (ii) directing analytical, technical and administrative partnership cooperations as well as external operations of the Agency.
The Agency may provide the use of undercover intelligence support for its operations and shall have the power to intercept communications within the meaning of the Interception of Communications Act and in the manner consistent with the said Act. Additionally, the Agency may request information from a public body, and that body must comply with the request within 48 hours or such other time stated in the request. This is notwithstanding the provisions of the Access to Information Act. The Agency is also not to be regarded as a public authority within the meaning of the said Act.
All entities within the security sector are required to provide the Agency with relevant and timely information as well as intelligence relating to national security interest. They along with other national stakeholders, engaged in the prevention and detection of crime, may request the Director for intelligence support. Additionally, those entities whose mandates require conducting intelligence gathering, must consult with the Agency for the purpose of coordinating their intelligence programmes and operations.
Section 29 provides for the Agency to engage, communicate and operate with foreign agencies as regards matters of national intelligence and security. However, the President must approve of such arrangement. The Agency is also empowered to use methods and tools at its disposal to provide protection for institutions and facilities of the State as well as for State visits and other events as designated by the Minister.
A controversial aspect of the proposed legislation relates to the assignment of officers of the Agency to serve as liaison officers to embassies abroad, with the approval of the President. Critics have argued that this provision can be used to monitor the activities of Guya-nese living abroad. The Agency is, however, required to ensure that only information necessary for the discharge of its functions is obtained. Security measures are also to be implemented for the protection of personal data.
Part V – Complaints
A complaint may be made in writing to the Director on any aspect of the operations of the Agency. Depending on its magnitude, complexity or importance, such a complaint may be referred to the President who in turn may deal with it to finality, or refer it to the Intelligence and Security Committee. The Committee is to comprise three members appointed by the President – one nominated by the President is his own deliberate judgment; one nominated by the main political party in the National Assembly after consultation with the other opposition parties; and one nominated by organisations representing civil society. It would be preferable if all complaints are referred to this Committee, considering the President’s extensive involvement in the affairs of the Agency.
The main functions of the Intelligence and Security Committee are to: (i) review any matter referred to it by the President, including matters of policy and administration of the Agency; and (ii) investigate complaints by any person regarding any act or omission by the Agency, conduct of senior officials, and complaints referred to it by the President. This suggests that a person can submit complaints directly to the Committee which appears to contradict the requirement for complaints to be made to the Director. As indicated above, all complaints should be addressed to the Committee.
There are certain matters that cannot be dealt with by the Intelligence and Security Committee. These include: (i) those of significant national interest and form part of an on-going operation; and (ii) disclosure of information that is contrary to the public interest or prejudicial to national intelligence and security. Following the review of each matter referred to it, the Committee is required to submit a report to the President, outlining the facts leading to the review and its opinion on the matter along with any recommendations.
Part VI – Miscellaneous
Section 41 deals with immunity from suit. No civil or criminal action or other proceedings can be brought against any person acting in good faith for any breach of confidentiality as regards the provision of information requested by the Agency or the submission of a report to the Agency. Additionally, officers of the Agency cannot be sued in their personal capacity in respect of any lawful act done or omission made in the performance of their duties under the Act, if they act in good faith.
As indicated in last week’s article, the Guyana Bar Association felt that this provision would insulate the Agency and its officers from legal action if they access information provided by clients to their lawyers. This and other concerns have prompted the Government to agree for the Bill to be referred to a Special Select Committee for detailed consideration. We hope that the Committee will act expeditiously, reflect on the concerns raised by various stakeholders and make appropriate amendments for consideration by the Assembly.
