MEDIA CENSORSHIP
The Daily Monitor newspaper withered yet another storm that
lasted 11 days for telling the truth every day. The DM is not only a respected
independent newspaper; it is also the paper that many Ugandans identify with as
a fair platform where all voices can find a home, unlike in the New Vision
where all views must be sympathetic to NRM warped “ideals”. The media platform
provided by the DM is a unique one which exemplifies cardinal principles of tolerance,
equity and justice. At the bottom of it all, we realize that increased media censorship is the litmust test of a fully blown dictatorship.
The trade in truth telling is one which has unambiguous challenges.
One of those is in the relative nature of the truth itself. What may appear to
be the truth to one person may not be for the other. In that case, objective
truth becomes the only means by which a franchise like the DM can survive in
murky and corrupted country like Uganda where even the right hand of one person
often doubts its left compatriot despite being on the same body and worked by
the same brain.
Further, it is only rational that objective truth must be
told at any cost every day even when this might rub some people in the wrong
part of the shoulder. This lesson was learnt in the weeks that the DM was
occupied by the Uganda Police and military personnel who claimed they were
searching for a letter which was written by Gen Sejusa aka Tinyefuza. This
letter claimed that there is a plan to assassinate senior military officers
opposed to a Muhoozi project. Apparently, there is a grand plan to have Brig
Muhoozi, the President’s son anointed heir apparent to the throne.
So, if we all agree that the truth must be told, where does
a newspaper like DM go wrong in reporting what Gen Sejusa believed was the
truth considering his portfolio as coordinator of national security? How on
earth would DM or Redpepper verify such a claim other than believe it from the
mouth of the horse itself? Gen Sejusa was the coordinator of security agencies
in Uganda and therefore an authority and an impeccable source of information on
the inside workings of security issues in Uganda.
The fact that the DM was bullied into apologizing for doing
their work well does not eliminate the problem that Gen Sejusa wrote about. It
only escalates the problem because we have learnt something new about the
regime’s intolerance and fear of the truth. Little wonder then that most times,
when public relations officers from any government institution address an
issue, the first obvious lines expected are outright denial of basic facts,
foolery and then loads of zingers.
Take for example the current military spokesman, Paddy Ankunda.
He was not ashamed to deny the basic truth that some military officers are
barred from retiring from the army. We all know that Kiiza Besigye was
initially refused from leaving the army when he disagreed with the system.
Tinyefuza was actually dragged back into the army using the most atrocious of means
and in the news, the former army commander Gen Nyakairima was also refused a
request to retire from the army.
The government should only be fair and stop compelling
professionals to compromise on their ethics and performances. For instance,
Ofwono Opondo is a journalist and he knows that the very umbilicus of
journalism is tied to the code of confidentiality. A journalist is only one,
when s/he can keep the integrity of his/her sources unexposed and can actually
go to jail or loose life over revealing their sources.
Further, it is sad to know that the biggest impediment to
verifying “truth” in a story is with the inability of government agencies to
yield credible information or compel journalists to reveal their sources. If government
could strengthen its data or information gathering and sharing mechanisms with
the journalist, there would never be a problem of “untruth” arising. Very often,
any truth, when reported by the media, is considered security threat. The
dilemma is that the media does not have any benchmark to determine what portion
of “truth” comprises security risk. For instance, would reporting graft
involving a military officer, Cabinet Ministers or Prime Minister constitute
national security threat?
Given the challenge that the DM and Redpepper newspapers
endured, the media fraternity must take the opportunity to demand for respect, transparency
and a mechanism through which objective truth can be reported without drawing
acrimony from the state. It is unfortunate that the Uganda Police conducted
itself in such a manner contemptuous to the rule of law when they refused to
respect court orders to vacate the occupation of DM and Redpepper.
The role of responsible journalism in a young democracy like
Uganda is no doubt situated at the very pinnacles of its evolution.
Nonetheless, objective and responsible journalism does not mean arm twisting,
one-sided censorship like what we expect the DM to oblige to, after making the
apologies for no wrongs committed. The onus is on the state to improve on its
commitment to constitutionalism and rule of law.
END
No comments:
Post a Comment