The people's right to know

In this system it is assumed that the government is infallible. Any criticism of the government and centres of power are not tolerated in this system. If the press criticizes the government, it is throttled, license is cancelled and journalists are sent to jail, and sometimes killed by secret agents. In this state structure, not only domestic press is throttled, foreign press is also not allowed to enter into the country in the name of "state security."

Side by side, the government shows noticeable energy in formulating and applying new laws deterrent to the press. Why are we referring to the theory to the knowledgeable readers of The Daily Star? The reason is that the extreme government attitude toward the newspapers and the journalists reminds us of the theory of press under the authoritarian rule. The question arises whether the government wants to return to the sick relationship that exists between the government and the press in the pre-democratic and authoritarian state structure. Why do ruling party parliamentarians raise demands for new laws to gag journalists when the slogan for free flow of information is gaining momentum in the rest of the world?

Tap here to add The Daily Star as a trusted source

On November 22, several ministers and parliamentarians launched diatribes against newspapers and suggested taking measures against journalists under the Speedy Trial Act. State Minister for Public Works Alamgir Kabir has said that newspapers have been acting against the interests of the country and the people. Therefore, it has become imperative to adopt a new law against journalists and newspapers.

Please take note of these remarks: Wadud Bhuiyan reviled against journalists. He has said that the newspapers with a special assignment are publishing false reports against popular BNP parliamentarians to undermine their image. So, laws are necessary against journalists. The matter does not end here.

Going one step forward, Major (retired) Manzur Kader has said that laws to take actions against journalists must be adopted to save the country. He said that newspapers and journalists should be tried under the Speedy Trial Act and cases should be disposed of within six months to punish them. The Speaker in his ruling has said that a new law is needed to punish them. When members were speaking against the newspapers and the journalists, the ruling party parliamentarians encouraged them with thumping on tables. Unfortunately, the Prime Minister also took part in the thumping.

On the following day, Jamaat MP Shah Md. Ruhul Quddus demanded formulating laws to control newspapers. The honourable Speaker also supported the idea. A few days earlier, Law Minister Moudud Ahmed insultingly said in a seminar that to him "press freedom" amounted to "freedom to lie." Police are being encouraged to harass the journalists with indulgence from the highest level of the government. Without any provocation, police beat up a Channel i reporter and the cameraman mercilessly during the last general strike.

Why are ministers and MPs taking such a position against the newspapers? The track record of the ministers and the parliamentarians will answer the question. A few days earlier, State Minister Alamgir Kabir reportedly physically assaulted a journalist in the secretariat. Wadud Bhuiyan, MP from Khagrachari, often hit the headlines for his negative activities. Ziaul Huq Zia and Manzur Kader are no exception.

It is not surprising that Jamaat MPs are angry with newspaper reports on their involvement in the recent extremist activities. Jamaat's top leader Nizami has already declared "jihad" against the newspapers. Once he said: "Bangla Bhai is the creation of the media and he does not exist in reality." He has now retracted from that position and blames the media for the misdeeds of Bangla Bhai.

After the diatribes against the media in the parliament by the parliamentarians, the annual report of the Bangladesh Press Council for the year 2004 was placed in the parliament. The report suggested formulating a new law amending the existing law. The Chairman of the Press Council mentioned in the annual report that the President, the Prime Minister, and the Information Minister desired amendment of the existing law. He claimed that three top executives of the country favoured amendment of the Press Council Law 1974. He hoped that the Information Ministry would soon take initiatives to formulate a new law. It seems that the government has taken decisions to formulate a new law to stifle the journalists. The Press Council is being used to create public opinion in favour of a new law.

We think that the government's undemocratic reaction against the newspapers is not only regrettable, but also amounts to a backward journey. The CPJ report termed Bangladesh as one of the riskiest places for journalists. The recent government activities against journalists have added fuel to the fire. But people are praising the role being played by the journalists despite severe pressure and death threats. The newspapers have courageously published reports on the ongoing political crisis, extremism, and acts of terrorism. One minister was compelled to resign over Niko scandal. Another minister had to depart due to the mismanagement with Hajj. All these were embarrassing for the government. Does the government want to throttle newspapers with a new law to prevent publication of reports on terrorism and corruption? It is true that the government could avoid embarrassment if information was gagged. Then the entire nation would have to bear the consequences.

Our belief is the newspapers should be allowed to publish more truth and more information when the entire nation is gradually raising its voice against terrorism and corruption. If questions arise to reform laws in this situation, then it should be done in an effort to make more scope for publishing more information and not imposing restrictions on publishing information. We would like to emphasize that if a new law is made, it should be made to ensure public access to information where the government will be obligated to provide information as demanded by the people. All should raise their voices against any undemocratic, unconstitutional and repressive law to impede the free flow of information or to throttle the press. The attempt to curb the freedom of the press by making a new law will amount to an attack on national security and the constitution. We condemn the attempt.

It would be a mistake to forget the indelible role of the newspapers in the making of a democratic society. It is the responsibility of the newspapers to publish facts and to meet the popular demand for information. Therefore, it should be looked into whether a report would embarrass the government or anybody. Instead, it should be considered whether the report would benefit the people and the country. The country is now flooded with corruption, terrorism, and injustice. Journalists must continuously write against these. Who will be the loser if the journalists cannot write freely? We think it would be a loss for the democracy. The idea of putting journalists behind bars by making a law against publication of reports in this age of free flow of information is nothing but regrettable.

Unfortunately, there is no noticeable effort to ensure people's rights to information. The application or practice of the constitutional provision for the freedom of expression has not been established in the country. The state, on one hand, has created obstacles for the issues of national security, contempt of court and privacy of individual while, on the other hand, it has repeatedly curbed the legal rights of the people to know and let others know. We never noticed any positive outlook taken by the state for people's access to information. Article 39 of the constitution reads: "39.(1) freedom of thought and conscience is granted. (2) Subject to any reasonable restrictions imposed by law in the interests of the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign states, public order, decency or morality, or in relation to contempt of court, defamation or incitement to an offence- (a) the right of every citizen to freedom of speech and expression; and (b) freedom of the press, are guaranteed."

The Pakistani constitution of 1962 had an evil influence on our constitutional provisions. Note that the condition of restrictions has been made long unjustifiably. It is unjust to keep information imprisoned with such secretive and ambiguous law because the area that is off limits to journalists is also forbidden for the people. This hampers the people's rights to information, and the journalists' role as representatives of the people are also questioned. Journalists gather information for the people and on behalf of the people. Therefore, when journalists are barred from information, people's rights to information, in fact, is under siege.

Executive branches in all the democratic countries of the world strengthen the press. We see just the opposite in our country. The journalist community should raise their voices on the issue of the freedom of the press and the freedom of expression, and they should resist any legal attempt to deter journalists and demand a comprehensive Freedom of Information Act immediately. The vested interest group does not favour the free flow of information because of its narrow outlook. We, therefore, have to struggle for the establishment of people's rights to information. The struggle is not for the press only; it is for democracy, development and for a society free from corruption and extremism and to make the country habitable for the people.

Robaet Ferdous is Assistant Professor, Department of Mass Communication and Journalism, University of Dhaka, and Abu Naser Rajib is Lecturer, Department of Media and Communication, Independent University, Bangladesh (IUB).