Blog

At CPJ Debrief, Gettleman cites Somalia danger, reward

2012-05-24T21:57:25Z

Jeffrey Gettleman, the Pulitzer Prize-winning New York Times correspondent, says he travels with "a small militia" whenever he reports from Somalia, the East African country afflicted by armed insurgency, poverty, and hunger. As intrusive as the security detail might be, he feels far more fortunate than the local reporters who face sustained and often deadly risks, or the freelance journalists who don't have the extensive support system the Times can provide.

Gettleman spoke to a crowd of about 100 at the Half King pub in Manhattan on Tuesday in the first event in the new CPJ discussion series, "CPJ Debrief." Gettleman, the East Africa bureau chief for the Times, has worked in the region for six years. With East Africa's needs so acute, and the volume of international reporting on the decline, the assignment has given him a chance to have a profound impact.

]]> The stories affect him as well. On Tuesday, Gettleman read from a November 2011 Times piece in which he tells the story of a Somali man whose daughter died at age 3. "Somalis are not somehow wired differently from the rest of us. They are not numb to suffering. They are not grief-proof. I'll never forget the expression on Mr. Kufow's face as he stumbled out of Benadir Hospital into the penetrating sunshine with his lifeless little girl in his arms. He may not have been weeping openly. But he looked as if he could barely breathe."

Gettleman said accounts of Somalis' struggles consistently hit a chord with his readers. He said he receives hundreds of emails from readers so moved by these stories that they want to help in some way. In some respects, Gettleman said, he sees himself as a conduit between readers who want to get involved and aid agencies who are trying to help Somalis.

As important as the story is, though, it is intensely dangerous. On Tuesday, when an aspiring freelance journalist sought advice on going to work in a place like Somalia, Gettleman was blunt: "Don't go."

Even for experienced international journalists, both freelance and staff, security issues are significant. Gettleman said colleagues often contact him for advice in planning a reporting trip to the region. In one case, he recalled, an international journalist was held captive for more than a month in Somalia, in part because a local support worker was insufficiently vetted.

Yet the risks facing international journalists pale in comparison to those that local journalists endure every day. CPJ research shows that four local journalists have been murdered in Somalia in 2012 alone, and 29 have been killed in the last two decades, one of the highest tolls in the world.

Gettleman said he's impressed by the solidarity of the Somali press corps, and inspired by the way these local reporters share information and look out for each other. They work in a country without a long tradition of a free press, often among forces hostile to the free flow of information.

"It's inspiring," he said. "You get a sense it's a real community."

Even by Pakistani standards, a terrible month for press

2012-05-24T20:02:36Z

May has been a terrible month for journalists in Pakistan, a country that has ranked as the world's deadliest place for the press for two consecutive years. Two journalists have been killed, two more shot and wounded, and one attacked while in police custody, all in less than a month, according to news reports.

]]> The body of Tariq Kamal, 35, a crime reporter for a local Sindhi-language paper, was found on May 9 with multiple gunshot wounds and what local papers said were signs of torture. Kamal's body was found with that of his friend, Fawad Sheikh, a small-business owner, in Pak Colony, a part of the city of Karachi that is often the scene of shootings and turf warfare between political and criminal gangs.

Kamal's family had reported him missing after he returned from the area around the town of Vinder in the restive province of Baluchistan on May 6. The English-language daily Dawn reported that both men's families said they had been contacted by the abductors, who used Kamal's phone to tell them the men would be killed because they were police informants. There were no requests for ransom, and police have made no arrests in the case, according to local news reports. The murders were part of six violent deaths that day in Karachi, according to Pakistani press--none of those have been pursued either.

On May 19, the body of Razzaq Gul was found in Turbat, a city in southwest Baluchistan. News accounts said that Gul, a 10-year correspondent for Express News TV, had been shot in the head and chest at least 15 times. The Pakistan Federal Union of Journalists reported that the journalist had been abducted near his home, but his body was dumped in another part of the city. The union also said the family mentioned no recent threats and that Gul's colleagues were unaware of any threats against him as well.

The All Baluchistan Press Club announced it would begin a series of protests on June 1 if Gul's killers had not been apprehended. Police have not announced any developments in the case and--given the near-perfect record of impunity for the journalist killings in Pakistan--it does not look likely that they will.

The violence and political chaos in Baluchistan has gotten so bad that Supreme Court Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry said on Wednesday that if the prime minister didn't take steps to improve law and order in the country, the court would declare a state of emergency. Chaudhry said he would do that to head off the military, which could declare a state of emergency to try and quell the rising violence by separatist insurgents in the region.

In Karachi, two journalists were wounded on May 22 while covering a political rally. Aslam Khan, a correspondent for Dunya News TV, and Muhammad Khalil Adil, a station cameraman, were hit by stray bullets from groups firing on the crowd from rooftops. Demonstrators from various political parties were protesting graffiti that called for the ethnic division of the Sindh province. No group claimed responsibility for the attack. Police arrived two hours after the shooting that day, and have made no arrests yet, according to news reports.

On May 18, members of the government's paramilitary Frontier Constabulary attacked a correspondent for the Online News Agency, the journalist's colleagues said. Roshan Wazir was reporting on a tribal jirga--a meeting of tribal elders--when the officials took him to their office and detained him for two hours, beating him with sticks the whole time, his colleagues said. The Karachi-based media support organization Pakistan Press Foundation reported that Wazir's abductors were angered by his reporting and warned him not to report the attack to the authorities or they would retaliate.

In the midst of all this mayhem and murder, it will be difficult to determine who killed Tariq Kamal and Razzaq Gul--and why. Were they killed because of their work as journalists? Was there some other reason that would compel their murderers to pump so many rounds into their bodies? With no police investigations that go beyond entering the journalists' deaths into a logbook, it is difficult to determine. And who were the rooftop gunmen who opened fire on a street filled with demonstrators and journalists? Despite calls for the killers to be brought to justice, the attacks will soon be all but forgotten--except, of course, for the family and friends of the journalists who died.

Nations urge Ecuador to guarantee freedom of expression

2012-05-24T16:11:18Z

Stressing concerns of human rights groups about the deterioration of press conditions under the administration of President Rafael Correa, 17 members of the United Nations submitted recommendations to Ecuador on freedom of expression issues before the U.N. Human Rights Council this week. While Ecuador tried to pass off the criticism as resulting from ignorance, the states' observations made clear that the international community is fully aware of Correa's repressive tactics against the local media.

]]> Using a mechanism known as the Universal Periodic Review, established by the U.N. Human Rights Council in 2006, U.N. member states assess the degree to which countries are fulfilling their international human rights obligations. Under this procedure, states have the right to raise questions and make recommendations to the government of the country under review; each state is reviewed every four years. The process provides the opportunity to redress human rights violations, and requires governments to publicly state which recommendations they will implement. Non-governmental organizations can submit their own reports and recommendations, which are compiled by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and can be utilized by member states.

Germany, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Estonia, the United States, Slovakia, Latvia, Luxemburg, Norway, France, India, Sweden, Switzerland, Costa Rica, and the United Kingdom all introduced recommendations Monday before the Council, most of them related to Ecuadoran legislation that criminalizes speech.

Most of the recommendations, 12 out of 17, came from European states. Belgium was the first one to speak out: "We have reports on freedom of expression abuses, the improper use of criminal law, persecution of journalists..., we expect the compliance with international law on freedom of expression and that the visit of the rapporteur on freedom of expression will be accepted." Correa likely paid close attention; he studied economics in Belgium, and his wife is a Belgian native.

The U.S. and Europe expressed concern about the use of criminal defamation laws against government critics; Switzerland said the Ecuadoran press is working in a climate of censorship; and Sweden expressed alarm over the conviction of three executives and the former opinion editor of the leading national daily El Universo.

The Ecuadoran delegation to Geneva was made up of more than 100 officials, including Vice-President Lenin Moreno Garcés and Foreign Affairs Minister Ricardo Patiño. The latter said "ignorance" was the reason behind international criticism. "Those who travel to Ecuador will realize how freedom of expression is respected and promoted," Patiño said, according to press reports.

Ecuador has until September to identify which recommendations the government will accept or reject -- the Human Rights Council will officially adopt an "outcome statement" at that time. But Ecuadoran officials said they anticipate responding as soon as Friday.

CPJ research shows that Correa's administration has led Ecuador into an era of widespread repression by systematically filing defamation lawsuits and smearing critics.

CPJ, together with PEN International and Fundamedios, an Ecuadoran press freedom organization, submitted a report for consideration before the U.N. Human Rights Council. Among our joint recommendations, we called on Ecuadoran authorities to stop the use of outdated criminal defamation laws to silence critical journalists, editors, and media executives; repeal criminal defamation laws or enact superseding defamation laws that meet international standards of freedom of expression; and halt the use of retaliatory civil defamation lawsuits that silence critical journalists and have a chilling effect on expression by demanding disproportionate damages.

Last week, together with CPJ Senior Adviser Jean-Paul Marthoz, Fundamedios Executive Director César Ricaurte, and the group's project director, Mauricio Alarcón, I traveled to Geneva, the headquarters of the U.N. Human Rights Council, to meet with diplomats prior to Ecuador's review. We also stopped in Brussels to visit European deputies and members of the EU Commission responsible for relations with Andean countries. During these meetings, we expressed our concern about the grave damage done to free expression in Ecuador by the government's pattern of subjecting critical journalists to long and debilitating legal reprisals.

Latin American diplomats in Geneva are fully aware of the situation, yet no countries from the region except Costa Rica presented observations before the Council. While disappointing, the decision by Latin America to keep silent about the official repression against the Ecuadoran press came as no surprise. As CPJ's executive director noted in his introductory essay to CPJ's Attacks on the Press in 2010, the Organization of American States, "which has been paralyzed by ideological battles in Latin America, rarely speaks out on press freedom violations."

El Mañana cedes battle to report on Mexican violence

2012-05-23T19:13:38Z

They would tell you that the killers haven't let them cover real news for several years--if you call news serious information that's important to the public, like why the police didn't investigate so many murders or kidnappings or extortions. Or why drugs were sold so openly. Or that three former governors are being investigated for laundering money for the organized crime cartel that runs much of the state of Tamaulipas.

]]> If you promised not to reveal their names, the staff of the major newspaper in Nuevo Laredo would tell you that a couple of years ago, for a while, the death threats from the gang in charge of the town were so demanding that the paper had to stop covering murders of any kind. People were murdered and that was it. Maybe the police would investigate, probably not. Either way, it wouldn't be in the paper.

The newspaper is El Mañana of Nuevo Laredo, a family-run publication founded by the grandfather of the generation in charge today. It's part of a chain of three papers that run down the Mexican side of the border with Texas from Nuevo Laredo to the Gulf of Mexico. None of them can really cover important news anymore. But it's much worse in Nuevo Laredo, where on May 13 the paper officially gave up and told its readers not to count on it to tell them anything about the ghastly war between two cartels that has suddenly exploded in the region. It won't even report about conflict between organized crime groups anywhere in the country. In an editorial, the paper asked for the public's understanding. "The newspaper will abstain for as long as necessary from publishing any information about the violent disputes that our city and other regions of the country are suffering," the editorial stated. "The administrative and editorial councils of this company have reached this regrettable decision, which was caused by the circumstances we all know about, due to the lack of conditions for the free exercise of journalism."

The immediate circumstances are that on May 11 the staff ducked for cover when the newspaper was attacked by gunmen who set off an explosive device outside, then shot up the façade and the parking lot. Damage was small, but the message was giant, staff told CPJ. El Mañana's staff took the attack as a warning from the Sinaloa Cartel that it wants news coverage of its move to take over the area from the Zeta Cartel. (It makes Sinaloa look tough.) There's been no contact from anyone before or since the attack, said an editor. None needed. The message was clear. The problem, the lethal danger, is that journalists say they believe that the Zetas don't want what Sinaloa is doing to be covered (it makes the Zetas look weak) and will attack the paper or its journalists if stories appear. In other words, one side threatens if there isn't coverage and the other side threatens if there is coverage. The paper was attacked in 2006 by gunmen who shot a reporter five times and threw a hand grenade into the newsroom. The reporter is in a wheelchair and the case is unsolved.

Actually, many news organizations up and down Mexico have decided not to cover the news--not important news about how organized crime groups have taken charge in their areas. But El Mañana may be the first to stop covering all stories about all conflicts between the groups, and make the decision public.

The Zetas ruthlessly made sure for some time that nothing was reported about its activities in Nuevo Laredo. Its control was so complete that nearly a year ago the city police force was disbanded on the grounds that it was hopelessly corrupted and the army and federal police were brought in. But, as they are in many areas around the country, the Zeta and the Sinaloa cartels are now in a terrific death match in Nuevo Laredo, according to Mexican federal officials.

The city is a battleground as the cartels tear at each other and the authorities who, like the citizens, seem powerless. On April 17, 14 bodies were found in a van. On April 24, a car bomb exploded in front of the main police station, with one injury. The morning of May 5 nine bodies were hanging from an overpass, and in the afternoon 14 human heads were left near city hall. Those stories were in the paper, but the day that the editorial ran, 49 mutilated bodies were left along a highway from Monterrey, Mexico's third largest city, to the United States. A message left with the bodies said the Sinaloa Cartel did it, according to news stories. The scene was less than 120 miles from Nuevo Laredo, but people there didn't read about it in El Mañana.

No joke: Moves to squelch Pakistani media, again

2012-05-23T16:07:48Z

With general elections approaching, the landscape is again bearing eerie resemblance to the final days of General Pervez Musharraf's reign. In November 2007 he banned selected TV channels for 88 days to stifle what he saw as "irresponsible journalism." Now, Pakistani electronic media might be chained again, this time for violating cultural and ethical values by airing satirical programming and interviewing political leaders the government does not like seeing on air.

]]> This month, the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA) sent broadcasters a media advisory with the names of 40 banned organizations. The TV stations were not to give them any coverage, including conducting interviews with their leaders. It is an indicator of the strength and impact of the broadcast industry that no such message was sent to print media. At least not yet.

Pressure from PEMRA is nothing new; it was a favorite tool of the Musharraf government, as well as that of President Asif Ali Zardari. PEMRA's members are a hand-picked group approved by the government, and its chairman is appointed by the president. Not exactly a fun loving crowd, they regularly act more like a loyal court for a king, with little tolerance for court jesters. In addition to blacklisting political groups, they have also asked channels to stop airing political satires and parodies of political leaders.

On May 9, the latest edict--"Final Notice - Telecast of Derogatory Programs"--was issued by PEMRA's director general of operations, about the same time the "banned groups" directive was handed down.

The Derogatory Programs notice did not name specific channels. PEMRA was apparently angered because in October 2011 it had issued official advice to all channels asking them to be prudent when airing satirical programs. The shows should not name specific people or organizations, that notice said. It was most worried about programs that humiliated or carried out character assassination of what it called high profile dignitaries and national institutions.

Broadcasters were apparently not prudent enough for PEMRA. Political satire and parodies aimed at various leaders in both the government and the opposition are very popular among viewers. And in the past two weeks notices have been issued to at least six news channels for airing interviews of rival groups of Zardari's Pakistan People's Party (PPP). One TV anchor told me that her management would not air her recorded interview with the leader of the People's Aman Committee, Uzair Baloch. His group is pressing for a larger role in Lyari, the most impoverished section of Karachi, rife with drugs, weapons and violence, and a PPP stronghold.

As Pakistan swings into political campaign mode -- general elections are scheduled for February 18, 2013 -- political satires and parodies have become a staple for broadcasters. The Election Commission lists 97 registered parties. If the elections do come off, it would be the first time since Pakistan came into being in 1947 that there will have been a constitutionally legitimate change in government. The government still has time to learn how elections are conducted, but so far it is headed down the wrong track.

Members of Congress urge Meles to end repression

2012-05-22T19:22:24Z

Two members of the U.S. Congress, a Republican and a Democrat, have publicly voiced indignation at Ethiopia's persecution of journalists under the leadership of Prime Minister Meles Zenawi, with both declaring that stability and security are enhanced by press freedom.

]]> Sen. Mark Begich, an Alaska Democrat, published a statement Monday in the Congressional Record, the official daily journal of the U.S Congress, following the Camp David G8 Summit last weekend during which President Barack Obama convened four African leaders, including Meles of Ethiopia, for talks on food security in Africa.

In a letter to Obama, CPJ urged the president to engage Meles on ending Ethiopian censorship practices--such as suppressing independent reporting and denying media access to sensitive areas--that undermine international responses to food crises.

"I want to take this opportunity to address the necessity for the United States to help foster stable and democratic nations as partners as we build multilateral coalitions to tackle global issues," Begich said in his statement. Ethiopia is a key partner of the United States in counterterrorism and regional stability and a major recipient of U.S. humanitarian assistance. Recalling Obama's 2011 commitment to a G8 declaration on democracy, Begich declared that "as the events in North Africa and the Middle East have shown, supporting reliable autocrats who are helpful on matters of security and economics at the expense of human dignity, basic democratic rights, and access to economic opportunity is more perilous than ever to long-term U.S. national security interests."

Begich called for the end of the persecution of independent journalists and dissidents rounded up in Ethiopia in the wake of the Arab Spring. "To foster the benefits of a diverse citizenry, the many political prisoners and journalists should be released," he said. The senator urged colleagues in the U.S. Congress to join him in helping the citizens and government of the Horn of Africa country achieve a national consensus on the value of the free flow of information and make press freedom, as outlined in Ethiopia's constitution, a reality. "Such are hallmarks of inclusive and sustainable economic growth, and they provide a return of accountability and transparency to both American taxpayers and Ethiopian citizens," he added.

On Friday, Rep. Edward Royce sent a public letter to Meles in which he expressed "deep concern with the Republic of Ethiopia's disregard for press freedom." Royce, a California Republican who chairs a House subcommittee on terrorism, said "national security must not cripple press freedom." Expressing concern over the prosecution of 11 journalists on terror charges, Royce said that "the judicial process clearly fails to meet international standards," citing as an example the government's use of national public media to pressure the courts.

Over the weekend, hundreds of Ethiopian expats gathered near Camp David to protest the country's slide into authoritarianism, according to news reports. Washington is home to one of the largest Ethiopian diaspora communities in the world, a population that includes three Ethiopian journalists charged in absentia with terrorism in relation to their work, according to CPJ research. A fourth journalist, now languishing in a prison in the Ethiopian capital, Addis Ababa, was educated in the Washington area before returning to Ethiopia and launching one of the country's first independent newspapers. The former editor of another independent Ethiopian paper also lives in Washington after fleeing his homeland in the face of government intimidation.

As Eurovision starts, partnership cites Baku repression

2012-05-22T16:15:53Z

As the Eurovision song contest gets under way in Baku, Azerbaijani authorities continue to suppress freedom of expression, detaining 10 protesters on Monday, Reuters reported. The International Partnership Group for Azerbaijan, a coalition of free expression organizations that includes the Committee to Protect Journalists, has launched a website, Facebook and Twitter pages to highlight the country's long record of repression.

]]> The website and social media platforms detail the partnership's efforts to promote freedom of expression in the Caspian Sea nation, where over the past decade authorities have jailed and harassed dozens of journalists and fostered a climate of impunity in anti-press violence.

The launch follows a May 2 workshop in Geneva on press conditions in Azerbaijan that was hosted by the European Broadcasting Union (EBU), which oversees the organization of the Eurovision contest. Following the workshop, CPJ and other IPGA members urged the EBU to publicly condemn media freedom violations in the country, abandon its policy of neutrality, and demand concrete steps from the Azerbaijani government to improve its human rights record.

The partnership is coordinated by the UK-based free-expression organization Article 19.

Sudan's press under siege

2012-05-21T20:19:54Z

Press freedom in Sudan is rapidly deteriorating, with confiscation of newspapers by the security agency becoming a norm. The scope of violations committed against publications and journalists by the Sudanese National Intelligence and Security Services (NISS) is widening by the day.

]]> Since early May, the NISS has confiscated more than 14 editions of different newspapers in Sudan, suspended more than 13 journalists from writing in newspapers, and identified about 20 taboo topics not to be tackled by the press.

Newspapers confiscated by the NISS since early May:

On May 1 and 2, the NISS confiscated Al-Jarida from the printing press.
On May 3, World Press Freedom Day, the NISS confiscated Al-Midan after printing was completed.
On May 6, the NISS confiscated Al-Midan and Al-Jarida after printing was completed.
On May 7, the NISS confiscated Al-Tayar after printing was completed.
On May 8, 10, 13, and 15, the NISS confiscated Al-Midan after printing was completed.
On May 17, the NISS halted printing of Al-Midan.
On May 11, 12, and 14, the NISS confiscated Al-Jarida after printing was completed.
On May 18, the NISS confiscated Akhir Lahza from the printing press.

Every confiscated newspaper results in losses of between 10,000 and 15,000 Sudanese pounds (equivalent to US$330 and US$5,000) in printing costs, even without factoring in other operational expenses including rental of premises, wages and salaries, travel expenses, and advertisement costs. In addition, these newspapers suffer a moral blow and lose the confidence of their readership because of their repeated no-shows on newsstands--which they are unable to explain because the government bans newspapers from discussing censorship.

By confiscating newspapers, the security agency aims to cause a significant financial loss and force the newspapers either to go out of business or to comply with its instructions.

Arresting journalists

On May 15, the NISS arrested for the second time this month prominent journalist, university professor of media, and editor-in-chief of the suspended Al-Adwa newspaper Faisal Mohamed Saleh. He was interrogated at the State Security Prosecution several hours after his arrest. A police complaint was issued against him under Article 94 of the Criminal Code on resisting a law enforcement officer.

Saleh was released on bail pending further investigations, with a hearing set for June 11. Conviction under Article 94 is punishable by approximately one month of jail time and a fine.

Between April 25 and May 11, Saleh was told to appear at the security agency daily because of a statement he made on Al-Jazeera TV in which he criticized a speech by President Omar al-Bashir as escalating the language of war.

"The security personnel came to my house and my office more than once during the day and in the evening on Wednesday, April 25. I wasn't at home," Saleh said. "Around 8 p.m., they came to my house again and told me I was wanted by the security agency. I joined them outside and went with them to the premises of the security agency. I was questioned about my comments regarding the president's speech in Al-Abyad City to Al-Jazeera's 6 p.m. newscast of Thursday, April 19. There was not much to say since they already had the news bulletin recorded and I also repeated my comments to them. They told me that such comments were not fit for media and it was better to communicate them to the authorities by other means and that I should be conservative when speaking to foreign media outlets and should not talk about certain issues except to local media. They also told me that I used some inappropriate words. I replied to all that. The interrogation lasted until midnight. I was asked to come back on Thursday morning to continue the interrogation which they insisted on calling a 'dialogue.'"

Saleh continued to report daily to the security agency premises in Khartoum North for 11 days. On the 12th day, however, he decided not to go to the security agency premises and posted his intention on local websites. The next morning, he was arrested and kept in the security agency premises for about nine hours without interrogation.

Journalists banned from writing per NISS orders

In addition to the direct censorship exercised by the NISS on newspapers and other publications, the NISS instructs management boards and editors-in-chief of newspapers to suspend certain journalists from writing. Should a newspaper not comply with NISS orders, it would face confiscation and possible suspension. Editors-in-chief report that they were instructed by the security agency not to publish the work of certain journalists or their news outlets will be closed.

At last count, the following journalists were suspended:

Haidar al-Makashfi, editorial consultant at Al-Sahafa
Zuhair al-Siraj, columnist at Al-Jarida
Abdullah al-Sheikh, former editor-in-chief of multiple papers
Abu Zar Ali al-Amin, writer at the suspended Rai Al-Shaab and at Al-Jarida
Fayez al-Salik, Al-Jarida
Amal Habbani, Al-Jarida
Mujahed Abdullah, Alwan
Essam Jafar, Alwan
Rasha Awad, Al-Jarida
Ashraf Abdul Aziz, Al-Jarida
Al-Tahir Abu Jawhara, Al-Jarida
Mohammad Mahmoud Al-Subhi, Al-Jarida
Abdul Salam al-Qarai, Al-Jarida

Banning journalists from writing is a weapon used by the security agency to deprive journalists of their livelihoods and income in order to coerce them into obedience.

Taboo topics

The security agency sends a daily letter to editors-in-chief in Khartoum containing a list of taboo topics. "The list of red lines is long and renewed on a daily basis," said journalist Idris al-Douma, the managing editor of Al-Jarida. "We usually abide by the directives of the security agency and have never disregarded them. Yet, the security agency still disrupts the printing of the newspaper. We do not know the reason behind such deliberate disruption. We believe that Al-Jarida newspaper is targeted by the security agency but we do not know why," Al-Douma said.

Security agency censorship takes different forms, including orders communicated to the editor-in-chief or the managing editor over the phone not to publish about certain topics that the agency considers taboo.

"I received an evening phone call from the Intelligence and Security Services on Saturday, May 5," said Madiha Abdullah, editor-in-chief of the critical Al-Midan. "They told me over the phone that the newspaper must not contain articles that criticize the performance of the security agency, the armed forces, or the police, and must not criticize the president, and that the newspaper must not discuss the situation of civil liberties and press freedoms, problems in the government of the state of Gedaref [in Eastern Sudan] or the dismissal of the governor," she said. "Previously, they had warned against criticizing the performance of the army and the violations committed at the hands of the police, uniformed forces, and the security agency, along with a list of taboo subjects. However, we usually do not abide by these directives, as they are too numerous and restrictive and violate our right to publish and the people's right to access information."

Anti-foreign attitudes bode ill for China correspondents

2012-05-21T17:34:37Z

The story of Al-Jazeera English correspondent Melissa Chan's expulsion from China has a disturbing coda.

]]> "We kicked out that foreign bitch and closed Al-Jazeera's Beijing bureau. We should shut up those who demonize China and send them packing," CCTV talk-show host Yang Rui posted to his personal Weibo account last week. The post was translated late Friday by The Wall Street Journal.

It is troubling enough that the English-speaking figurehead of a show titled "Dialogue" should launch an offensive personal attack against an international colleague. What's even more concerning is that, as the employee of a state media outlet, his comments are apparently sanctioned.

Beijing announced a 100-day crackdown on illegal foreigners--those living or working without visas--last Tuesday, according to the BBC. (Chan and other Al-Jazeera English correspondents were repeatedly denied journalist visas this year, resulting in her departure and the closure of the English bureau; the Arabic bureau remains open.) Yang Rui's comments about Chan appeared the next day, in the context of an unusually extreme rant against "foreign snake heads" coming to China to "grab our money, engage in human trafficking, and spread deceitful lies to encourage emigration."

Vitriol directed at foreign journalists in China is nothing new; before the 2008 Beijing Olympics, hostility against the overseas press corps ran particularly high. At the time, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs took care to describe the aggression--which included death threats against some correspondents--as "spontaneous" and beyond official control. "This could by no means be instigated by the government," a spokesperson said.

This situation is quite different: A foreign journalist can only be denied work permission by the Ministry, a fact which left the latest spokesman tongue-tied when Chan's colleagues in the press corps demanded an explanation for her exit. When the Public Security Bureau tightens visa controls, it is acting for the government, not the people. When Yang Rui offers advice on how best to "clean out the foreign trash," he is addressing law enforcement, not the rabble.

Need further evidence that Yang's bile has high-level approval? In a land where Weibo posts are subject to continuous, often immediate censorship, his "foreign bitch" comment remains available for all to see. In case that doesn't reach a wide enough audience, the state-run English-language Global Times also ran the comment in a section titled "Celebrity Voices," rendering the description of Melissa Chan as the fractionally less offensive "crazy foreign journalist."

In the wake of Chan's departure, Chinese official voices are openly instigating anti-foreign sentiment against journalists and others. The climate for international reporters is already challenging, and likely to worsen amid preparations for a sensitive leadership handoff. If it does continue to deteriorate, the safety of foreign journalists may come under threat. The fault will lie with Chinese Communist Party leaders.

Sorting out sanctions, censorship, sincerity in Burma

2012-05-18T22:59:39Z

On Thursday, the United States rolled back prohibitions against American companies doing business in Burma. The announcement marked the latest diplomatic reward given to President Thein Sein's quasi-civilian government for initiating reforms in what has historically been a military-run country. In making the announcement, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the democratic changes initiated so far were "irreversible," but that is a characterization few of the country's journalists would share.

]]> The government has flip-flopped on media regulations in the past few days, a troubling indicator that there might be no media policy at all in place. First, the official version: The government-owned newspaper and website published by the Ministry of Information, New Light of Myanmar, reported that Information Minister Kyaw Hsan met with several journalists and writers' groups earlier in the week, pledging to "cooperate fully" with all the associations as the ministry drafts a "print media law, gradually but systematically releasing the grip over press in order that journalists can practice in harmony with that law after its ratification." The government has also said it plans to get a new media law through parliament in the coming months. But that doesn't mean there will be no censorship. After the government forms a press council, publications will be allowed to go to press under what it calls a check-after-publish system, New Light of Myanmar reported. Under current conditions, all copy must be submitted to censors first, and then be printed and distributed.

The minister said the press council would eventually replace the government's current censorship arm, the Press Scrutiny and Registration Division (PSRD), but the council would remain under his ministry's control. The proposed regulations stipulated that the press council must ensure that journalists abide by the 1962 Printer and Publisher Registration Act and the Ministry of Information's still-standing 12-point censorship policy.

That did not sit well with Burma's press corps. The exile-run Irrawaddy news site reported on Thursday that three Burmese media groups--the Myanmar Journalists Association, the Myanmar Journalists Network and the Myanmar Journalists Union--objected to the proposed rules for the soon-to-be-created press council.

Then today, Friday, PSRD Deputy Director Tint Swe told journalists that they could "forget about" the three-page proposal for press council regulations that Kyaw Hsan had handed out earlier in the week, journalists who took part in that meeting told Irawaddy. The PSRD will not insist that the journalists and writers groups follow the proposed regulations, they said.

That sort of U-turn raises questions about whether the government has thought out its approach to media, or if it is just dishing out edicts to see how they play in the eyes of the public and of the diplomats who control Burma's integration into the global community.

During the transition from military to quasi-civilian rule, censorship has eased informally, especially over economic matters and the opposition led by pro-democracy icon Aung San Suu Kyi, but there are still no-go areas for local reporters. Newspapers do not report on the ongoing conflict with ethnic Kachin rebels in the country's northern frontier. More recently, the PSRD banned reporting on the resignation of hard-line Vice President Tin Aung Myint Oo for apparent health reasons. And no local paper has dared to push boundaries by investigating and reporting on past abuses under the previous Than Shwe-led regime.

All the while, journalists remain under threat of the Printer and Publisher Registration Act that was implemented after military takeover and that allows for imprisonment for "harming the ideology and views" of the government. The vague and arbitrary Ministry of Informaton's 12-point censorship policy still broadly bars any reporting on matters considered a threat to national unity or security.

Zaw Thet Htwe, a formerly jailed journalist and current organizing committee member of the Myanmar Journalists Union, told Irrawaddy that his group would not join the press council under the rules that, until today, had been the standing proposal. "Our union aims to protect freedom of expression and journalists' rights, but based on the minister's description of the Press Council's role, we are reluctant to participate in it," he told Irrawaddy. "I don't think that the press council will be different from the old censorship board if it includes former members of the PSRD."

Whether Friday's U-turn was a genuine response to journalists' concerns; or there is conflict between government officials or departments; or the left hand simply doesn't know what the right hand is doing, the situation appears closer to chaos than to an earnest and measurable process of media reform. In announcing the removal of restrictions on U.S. companies investing in Burma, the White House acknowledged in a statement that Burma's reforms are still "nascent" and that certain sanctions would remain in place as an "insurance policy." That policy may yet come due.

Signs of change in North Korea

2012-05-17T21:56:55Z

CPJ may have raised some eyebrows with this year's list of the world's 10 most censored countries. North Korea was relegated to the number two slot, behind Eritrea. In our last ranking, in 2006, we ranked North Korea as the worst, and many other organizations continue to do that.

]]> But in justifying our decision for 2012, we noted that cracks in the North's information wall are beginning to appear:

Ruling elites have access to the World Wide Web, but the public is limited to a heavily monitored and censored network with no connections to the outside world. While The Associated Press opened a Pyongyang bureau in January 2012 staffed with North Koreans, the AP wasn't granted its own Internet connection and the correspondents have no secure line of communication. A Japan-based media support group, Asiapress, has been giving North Korean volunteers journalism training and video cameras to record daily life in the North. Downloaded onto DVDs or memory sticks, the images are smuggled across the porous border with China and then sent to Japan for broader distribution.

A lengthy study released on May 11, "A Quiet Opening," by Nat Kretchun, associate director of InterMedia in Washington, and Jane Kim, Korea projects coordinator of the East West Coalition in Beijing, takes a deep look at conditions in the countryside, not just in and around Pyongyang's leadership compounds. They found that at the grassroots level, North Koreans have unprecedented access to external media, via bootlegged foreign TV and radio signals and smuggled foreign DVDs. Add to that smuggled mobile phones and you have an increasingly dynamic media mix that has become irreversible. Yes, the report says, North Korea remains incredibly isolated, but, "despite the incredibly low starting point, important changes in the information environment in North Korean society are underway," it says.

A personal note: With a growing stream of asylum seekers in South Korea and economic immigrants flowing into China, there is a steadily growing amount of reporting on North Korea. One of my favorites is a 2009 book by Barbara Demick, a former Los Angeles Times reporter who was based in Seoul, called "Nothing to Envy --- Ordinary lives in North Korea." It tapped those sorts of sources to paint a very different picture of North Korea than the one that usually makes it into print.

UK set for historic libel reform

2012-05-17T19:20:03Z

New libel legislation proposed by the British government has been met with general approval by reform campaigners, who will now train their sights on further strengthening some aspects of the bill during the parliamentary process.

]]> The Libel Reform Campaign hailed the draft bill--published by the Ministry of Justice on Friday--for its likelihood of "ending libel tourism and protecting free expression for journalists, writers, bloggers, and scientists around the world." The campaign is a coalition of Index on Censorship, English PEN, and Sense About Science and has been calling for new legislation to reform libel laws since 2009.

"It is a major and historic piece of legislation, the first opportunity to overhaul libel laws in 20 years, so we are very excited by the potential for reform," Robert Sharp, head of campaigns and communications at English PEN, told CPJ.

In recent years, London has been the libel capital of the world, with repressive governments and wealthy tycoons giving rise to "libel tourism" by filing suit there because current regulations favor claimants. The defendant is forced to demonstrate that the information published is true, unlike, for example, in the U.S., where the burden of proof lies on the claimant. And under the U.K.'s current regulations, a person suing for defamation does not have to prove that the material has caused them actual damage; it is often enough for the courts that it might. Under the new bill, future claimants would have to show that the material has caused them "serious harm."

Critics say the high costs involved in defending a libel claim in the U.K. under current laws have often forced publications to settle out of court, even when the information under litigation was accurate.

Furthermore, journalists will now be protected by a statutory defense if they can show that their material is based on "honest opinion" or is "in the public interest," according to the draft bill. The reform thus enshrines the principle of responsible publication in lieu of the so-called Reynolds defense, a historical common law privilege that protects publication of defamatory material if the information is in the public interest and the publisher has acted responsibly in checking its veracity. The reach of the Reynolds defense was restricted to precedents set by the courts, and media companies have traditionally complained about the inadequacy of such a framework.

However, several journalists have expressed concern about the limitations of the proposed reform. "The draft bill merely describes a modified version" of the Reynolds defense, "which is known to be unreliable, expensive, and confusing," wrote Simon Singh, a scientific journalist and author, in the Guardian.

The bill aims to restrict libel tourism by excluding people who do not live in the U.K. or the European Union from being sued for libel in English or Welsh courts unless "England and Wales is clearly the most appropriate place in which to bring an action." (England and Wales share one legal system, while Scotland and Northern Ireland have separate laws and courts). Libel tourism is of particular concern for press freedom groups, after cases such as that of Rachel Ehrenfeld, an Israeli-American journalist who published a book in New York in 2003 arguing that money from drug trafficking and wealthy Arab businessmen was funding terrorism. Ehrenfeld was sued in London by Sheikh Khalid bin Mahfouz, a Saudi businessman, according to the Libel Reform Campaign. Ehrenfeld's case pushed the U.S. to pass a bill in 2010 to shield journalists and publishers from libel tourism by making such foreign court decisions unenforceable in the U.S.

"Libel tourism refers to a number of failings in the current law and represents a huge chill on reporting around the world, with many investigative journalists self-censoring for fear of libel prosecution in English courts," Sharp said.

Campaigners in the U.K. have welcomed the new bill's presumption that defamation trials held with a jury will be abolished, and that website operators will receive extra protection, with a special defense if they can prove they did not post the statement in question. However, Web hosts could lose protection if a claimant can show that it is impossible to identify the person who posted the material and the operator fails to respond to a notice of complaint. Also, critics have asked the government to further limit the ability of corporations to defend themselves using libel laws, an issue that will most likely emerge during upcoming discussions in Parliament.

"The new bill will ensure the threat of libel proceedings is not used to frustrate robust scientific and academic debate," the Ministry of Justice stated.

The legislation will now be debated in the House of Commons and the House of Lords. The bill already includes recommendations from a joint committee of members of both chambers, published in October, and reform is supported by all parties, so it is expected to be adopted in the fall once the House of Lords has given its final reading.

Sri Lanka Supreme Court slams door on websites

2012-05-17T15:52:12Z

On Wednesday, Sri Lanka's Supreme Court slammed the door on a case about the shutdown of four websites that had failed to register with the government. In handing down its decision, the Court appeared to rule that freedom of expression in Sri Lanka is not an absolute right and can be restricted--and you don't need to pass a law to do so. The three-judge panel told the petitioners who brought the case--Sunil Jayasekara, convener of the Free Media Movement, and Udaya Kalupathirana, a member of the movement's executive committee--that they saw no reason for the court to hear any further arguments.

]]> In 2011, Jayasekara and Kalupathirana brought the suit on behalf of themselves, the Free Media Movement, and the general public, after five opposition websites were blocked by the government. The five websites cited in the petition are Srilankamirror, Sri Lanka Guardian, Lanka Way News, Lanka News Web, and Paparasi News. One, Srilankamirror, registered after the petition was filed.

As he explained in an email to CPJ, J. C. Weliamuna, the well-known human rights lawyer, made this argument in front of the court:

The fact that some 41 web[site] owners have registered does not create a law or regulation. There is no law requiring the web owners to register. In fact the law and the judicial precedents in Sri Lanka [are] clearly that fundamental rights can be restricted but that can only be done by way of a law. Here there is no such law. The entire case is built on the basis that in the absence of a law or regulation, the Ministry of Media and the Telecommunication Regulatory Commission can arbitrarily block the websites.

Bringing into question issues of freedom of expression and the press made this a case of "fundamental rights." The Supreme Court could have allowed the case to proceed and--after more hearings, the presentation of proof, and the testimony of witnesses and experts, with opening and closing arguments from both sides--the court would have determined whether a fundamental right has been violated or not. But with Wednesday's decision, none of that will happen. There is no other legal recourse in Sri Lanka. Case closed.

As we said in our alert, "Sri Lankan government blocks websites," in November 2011, "Blocking online media is another step in the Sri Lankan government's plan to silence any media critical of its policies or personnel." We weren't wrong. On March 9, 2012, in a blog, "Sri Lanka media restrictions come amid rise in abductions," we reported that military authorities told all media organizations that they would have to get prior approval before releasing text or SMS news alerts containing any news about the military or police. (Weliamuna pointed out that no regulations to that effect have ever been formally published.) But a regulation was already in place which required mobile phone service companies to obtain prior approval of news stories with regard to national security. Wednesday's decision only adds more media restrictions, tightening the space for public discourse in Sri Lanka.

With no recourse at home, the next step might be for the Free Media Movement to take its case to the U.N. Human Rights Committee. Caution would be wise. The government has become hostile to those who, having failed to get justice at home, internationalize their grievances. In March, we noted an ugly government backlash after the U.N. Human Rights Council passed a resolution calling for an investigation into Sri Lanka's alleged abuses of international humanitarian law during its war with Tamil separatists. The government threatened violence outright against journalists who returned home after taking part in the Geneva discussions. A prime target, one among several, was Sandhya Eknelygoda, who has been trying to obtain information about the whereabouts of her husband, Prageeth, who disappeared on January 24, 2010 (see an update on that below). She came under harsh, intentionally intimidating questioning from government lawyers about her presence at the UNHRC. Before she returned home from Switzerland, her name had been denounced in the government-controlled media as one of the government's critics--several of whom have been denounced as "traitors."

In deciding not to hear the case of the blocked sites, Sri Lanka's Supreme Court might well have handed down a landmark decision that reaches well beyond whether or not the government can demand that websites register. The court's justices have paved the way for more of the anti-media policies streaming from the authoritarian Rajapaksa government. That stream has become a steady flow and looks to become worse.

...

And, in another legal matter not unrelated, there has been a development in the ongoing hearings about the disappearance of Prageeth Eknelygoda. The magistrate's court hearing the complaint, brought by his wife Sandhya, decided it would call former Attorney General and current adviser to the cabinet Mohan Peiris to the court. He has come under scrutiny for remarks to the U.N. Committee Against Torture in Geneva, in November 2011, that Prageeth was alive and overseas. Given his stature within the government, it's a long shot that Peiris will ever have to appear. The case will go to the Appeals Court on May 31, where Eknelygoda's legal team expects further delays. Prageeth Ekenelyoda was a columnist and cartoonist for Lanka enews, a website which now operates out of England after its Sri Lanka offices were set on fire and some staff arrested.

CPJ calls for release of jailed reporters in Central Asia

2012-05-15T17:30:00Z

World leaders must hold Central Asian regimes responsible for denying global access to information by throwing critical reporters behind bars, CPJ Eurasia researcher Muzaffar Suleymanov told the U.S. Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe at a briefing Tuesday on political prisoners in Central Asia.

]]> Speaking before the agency, also known as the U.S. Helsinki Commission, Suleymanov highlighted the cases of journalists imprisoned in Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan.

Among those imprisoned in Uzbekistan are Muhammad Bekjanov and Yusuf Ruzimuradov of the opposition newspaper Erk, who have been in jail longer than any other journalist worldwide. Authorities jailed both reporters in 1999 on fabricated anti-state charges, and handed another five-year prison term to Bekjanov earlier this year, just days before his expected release.

Independent journalist Salidzhon Abdurakhmanov was sent to prison for 10 years in 2008, just as Uzbek government officials were successfully persuading the European Union to recognize their commitment to human rights by lifting sanctions. Dilmurod Saiid, a reporter from Tashkent, was sentenced to 12 and one-half years in jail in 2009, even though prosecution witnesses told the court they were forced to give statements.

In Kyrgyzstan, which did not appear on CPJ's annual prison census for a decade, journalist Azimjon Askarov is serving a life sentence handed to him in September 2010. Askarov's investigative reporting on fabricated criminal cases, and on detainees' rape, torture, and killing while in custody, ended the careers of several regional prosecutors and police officers. He was jailed amid then-ravaging ethnic conflict on a set of charges based on the thinnest evidence--accusations by local police and a mayor who had long threatened to silence Askarov in retaliation for his work.

Reflecting on President Barack Obama's statement on May 3, World Press Freedom Day, Suleymanov urged the commission and U.S. government officials to secure the journalists' release. His full testimony can be read here.

Audio slideshow: Supporting family of Anton Hammerl

2012-05-14T21:05:33Z

Freelance photographer Anton Hammerl was killed in Libya on April 5, 2011. Friends of Hammerl are holding an auction May 15 to raise funds for his three children. James Foley elaborates.