Journalists should abandon their old
adversarial method and fashion modern advocacy/lobby strategies for
media policy reforms.
That
journalists in Cameroon enjoy a considerable dose of freedom of expression is
difficult to totally gainsay. The
Preamble of the Constitution states that freedom of communication, of
expression and of the press – derived from the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights and Freedoms (Article 19) - shall be guaranteed under conditions fixed
by law.
This provision was materialised
by Law No. 90/052 of 19th December 1990 – modified in 1996 - that
allows Cameroonians to practise journalism and mass communication. News outlets
sprout up exponentially in Cameroon with comparative ease as evidenced by the myriad of print and audio-visual media outlets
operating in the country. It is unlike anything Cameroonians have
ever seen before since independence. Article 47 of the 1990 law however
requires that journalists perform their duties objectively and responsibly -
without inflicting any criminal damage on the society.
Naturally, people’s earthly freedoms
or rights are rather qualified (limited) than absolute (unlimited). This is what especially the quacks or
journalistic refugees do not - and can never - understand. The Holy Bible tells
us in the Book of Genesis that after creating the Garden of Eden, the Lord God
placed Adam and Eve to cultivate and enjoy it. God had made all kinds of
beautiful trees to grow in the Garden and bear fruits. In the middle of the Garden stood the
forbidden tree whose fruit God restrained Adam and Eve from eating. When Adam
and Eve violated this instruction, God instantly punished and banished them
from the Garden. However, before doing so He gave them a chance to defend
themselves, asking “why did you eat the forbidden fruit?” This suggests that normally a person should
not be punished by law without being allowed to put forward his/her defence for
the offence imputed against him/her.
In the same light, the Government, which is
said to be a representative authority of God on Earth, allows her citizens to
set up media outfits, broadcast and publish information about the society
EXCEPT information likely to infringe on people’s privacy, promote attitudes
that offend good moral standards or provoke a breach of public peace and
national security. In other words,
journalists MUST write and say things with due respect for the ethics of the
profession and the country’s relevant laws in force. If they do not, the
Government, through competent agencies, will punish and banish them from the
profession as God did to Adam and Eve.
What is however important for the referees or arbitrators to do before
passing any such judgment is for the defaulters to be given the chance to justify
their acts.
In the
exercise of his/her rights, everybody (including journalists or publishers)
shall be subject to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the
purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of
others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the
general welfare in a democratic society (Universal
Declaration of Human Rights, Article 29(2)).
This explains why the freedoms guaranteed by the country’s
Constitution are punctuated, conspicuously, by such phrases as “in accordance with the law,
subject to the respect for the rights of others, in the higher interest of the
State, subject to the statutory provisions concerning public order/security,
subject to the respect for public policy...” - to warn the public (including journalists) against writing
and saying things uncontrollably. According to Montesquieu (1748), the human
being, including the journalist or publisher, if left unchecked, could easily
pursue his/her selfish interests to the disadvantage of the society. On her
part, US Journalism Professor Shirley Biagi holds that if the press
fails to meet its responsibility, the Social Responsibility Theory demands that
Government urge them to comply. Moreover, there is no country
in the world, even in long established democracies, where press freedom obtains
without reasonable limitations. The
framers of the American Constitution opposed censorship. However, in 1931 the US Supreme Court
established the circumstances under which prior restraint could be justified. In Near
v. Minnesota the Court condemned prior restraint but acknowledged that the
Government could limit information about troop movement during war and could
control obscenity. The Court also said
that “the security of community life may be protected against incitements to
acts of violence and the overthrow of an orderly government.” Therefore, if a
journalist uncontrollably diffuses such information he/she could be frowningly
viewed as being unpatriotic or uncouth, however objectively his/her story might
have been presented.
. Ignorance of the Law is No Excuse. The Law
is No Respecter of Personality. No
Person is Above the Law. These legal maxims constitute a sobering
reflection for journalists to master the laws and regulations governing their
noble profession. Naturally, to err is
human but when mistake is pleaded as a defence, the mistake must be one of
fact, not of law. Many journalists have
persistently castigated the 1990 Mass Communication Law as “obnoxious”, hence
not worthy of consistent respect or adherence.
But, no matter how bad a law is it remains enforceable until such a time
that it is repealed. Thanks to the AFRICAphonie NGO, two draft laws – one
on the modification of the 1990/1996 Freedom of Communication Laws and the
other on Access to Public Information and Records in Cameroon - have been
produced and circulated to the competent
administrative, diplomatic and parliamentary offices in Cameroon for
legislation.
Both documents were
launched as part of the activities marking the 2014 World Press Freedom Day in
Buea, South West Region, jointly organised (for the first time ever) by the
Commonwealth Journalists’ Association-Cameroon, Cameroon Union of Journalists,
Cameroon Association of English Speaking Journalists and Cameroon Anglophone
Newspaper Publishers’ Association.
During the launch, AFRICAphonie’s
Executive Director, George Ngwane, fired enthusiasm into the journalists to
rise like one person and explore all advocacy channels for the legislation of
the proposed laws. It is therefore highest time the numerous media associations
in Cameroon fused together under one solid union (like the lawyers in the Bar
or medical doctors in their National Order), to more harmoniously harness their
efforts towards positive media policy change and the fight against journalistic
irresponsibility and charlatanism.
*Jesse KONANG is a journalist with MINCOM,Buea
No comments:
Post a Comment