Parliament And Media: A lost opportunity

AN opportunity for the Namibian parliament to create a media friendly environment with the aim of furthering democratic processes and keeping the broad public informed about how those processes work, or should work, has been squandered to the detriment of public interest and involvement in those processes.

In addition, as a consequence, the potential for the media to promote public participation in parliamentary affairs has also been lost. This situation has not been helped by sections of the Namibian media not carrying out the parliamentary news- gathering role as diligently and efficiently as they should and especially the duty of calling parliamentarians to account.It is now 14 years since the first Namibian parliament was constituted.During that period many hopes were raised that parliament would create an enabling legislative environment which would ensure that information about parliamentary activities and democratic processes would be widely spread among the Namibian people.Everyone had hoped that the new parliament would actively assist in erasing the memories of a repressive apartheid system that eroded the rights of citizens to enjoy all forms of freedom.In retrospect, little has been achieved in making parliament a bastion of protection of human and peoples’ rights and of democratic principles.Most of the draconian laws of the past that severely restrict the free flow of information and in some instances the freedoms of individuals are still on our statute books.Instead of hastening their removal, parliament has compounded them by passing new laws which have in no way advanced protections of freedoms or human rights.The perception of parliament and its activities in the eyes of the Namibian people is extremely low.The public has noted how parliamentarians are to be seen everywhere as they campaign during an election period – and then disappear immediately after victory.The result is that ordinary people have little, if any, recollection of the names and faces of those who occupy seats in the honourable and august parliament.The question that arises is whom do they represent if they never go back to their constituencies to listen to the people who voted them into power expressing their views on what they as parliamentarians do or don’t do? Inevitably, the major sufferer has been the media which has been extremely disappointed by parliament and the role its members should have played in promoting the rights and freedoms of media in the country.When it was inaugurated, parliament was conspicuously active and voluble in enacting the constitutional principles, such as Article 21 (1), that protect and entrench media freedom.However, in stark contrast, since then, over all these years, parliamentarians have been mute in the face of media freedom violations in the country.Indeed, during this critical early period of its existence, parliament has passed laws that negate media freedom and it has failed signally to listen to the cries of outrage by society at large and media practitioners, in particular.Among the significant restrictive legislation parliament has passed in this period has been the Namibia Defence Act, the Namibian Broadcasting Act and the Namibia Communication Act of 1996.The Defence Act prohibits the media from reporting on military activities despite the fact that the army is also bankrolled by the tax-payer and, accordingly, is accountable to its funders.The media is highly conscious of issues of national security but to have a blanket ban on publication of information about the conduct of the military is unacceptable.The Namibian Broadcasting Act places the national broadcasting corporation under direct government control.Government appoints the board of directors and the broadcast corporation falls directly under the ministry of information and broadcasting.Media practitioners as well as civil society believe government interference in broadcasting must be eliminated and that it is imperative that the public broadcaster should be regulated by a really independent broadcasting authority.It is imperative for the new parliament constituted after the general election to urgently adopt legislation providing for a general public right of access to information held by the government and its agencies and in certain instances by private business.The overriding importance of freedom of access to, and publication of, information cannot be stressed sufficiently.In 1995 the UN Commission on Human Rights stated that freedom is bereft of all effectiveness if the people have no access to information.Access to information is basic to the democratic way of life.The practice of withholding information from the people has to be stopped.Parliament should return to its role as the representative body of the people and that includes according a proper place for the media and its watchdog function.Parliament has to return to a recognition that the people’s involvement in lawmaking through an awareness of the rights and requirements of people in terms of democratic and peaceful values is essential and that public access to information, freedom of expression and freedom of the media together with the associated constitutional freedoms and consultation with people has to be accorded the highest priority.The agenda of civil society rather than that of “ruling elites” has to be adopted.These values and rights are at the forefront of the bill of rights and must be safeguarded and maintained with the full authority of the state in the interests of citizens.* Kaitira Kandjii is MISA’s Regional Program Manager: Free Expression and AdvocacyThis situation has not been helped by sections of the Namibian media not carrying out the parliamentary news- gathering role as diligently and efficiently as they should and especially the duty of calling parliamentarians to account.It is now 14 years since the first Namibian parliament was constituted.During that period many hopes were raised that parliament would create an enabling legislative environment which would ensure that information about parliamentary activities and democratic processes would be widely spread among the Namibian people.Everyone had hoped that the new parliament would actively assist in erasing the memories of a repressive apartheid system that eroded the rights of citizens to enjoy all forms of freedom.In retrospect, little has been achieved in making parliament a bastion of protection of human and peoples’ rights and of democratic principles.Most of the draconian laws of the past that severely restrict the free flow of information and in some instances the freedoms of individuals are still on our statute books.Instead of hastening their removal, parliament has compounded them by passing new laws which have in no way advanced protections of freedoms or human rights.The perception of parliament and its activities in the eyes of the Namibian people is extremely low.The public has noted how parliamentarians are to be seen everywhere as they campaign during an election period – and then disappear immediately after victory.The result is that ordinary people have little, if any, recollection of the names and faces of those who occupy seats in the honourable and august parliament.The question that arises is whom do they represent if they never go back to their constituencies to listen to the people who voted them into power expressing their views on what they as parliamentarians do or don’t do? Inevitably, the major sufferer has been the media which has been extremely disappointed by parliament and the role its members should have played in promoting the rights and freedoms of media in the country.When it was inaugurated, parliament was conspicuously active and voluble in enacting the constitutional principles, such as Article 21 (1), that protect and entrench media freedom.However, in stark contrast, since then, over all these years, parliamentarians have been mute in the face of media freedom violations in the country.Indeed, during this critical early period of its existence, parliament has passed laws that negate media freedom and it has failed
signally to listen to the cries of outrage by society at large and media practitioners, in particular.Among the significant restrictive legislation parliament has passed in this period has been the Namibia Defence Act, the Namibian Broadcasting Act and the Namibia Communication Act of 1996.The Defence Act prohibits the media from reporting on military activities despite the fact that the army is also bankrolled by the tax-payer and, accordingly, is accountable to its funders.The media is highly conscious of issues of national security but to have a blanket ban on publication of information about the conduct of the military is unacceptable.The Namibian Broadcasting Act places the national broadcasting corporation under direct government control.Government appoints the board of directors and the broadcast corporation falls directly under the ministry of information and broadcasting.Media practitioners as well as civil society believe government interference in broadcasting must be eliminated and that it is imperative that the public broadcaster should be regulated by a really independent broadcasting authority.It is imperative for the new parliament constituted after the general election to urgently adopt legislation providing for a general public right of access to information held by the government and its agencies and in certain instances by private business.The overriding importance of freedom of access to, and publication of, information cannot be stressed sufficiently.In 1995 the UN Commission on Human Rights stated that freedom is bereft of all effectiveness if the people have no access to information.Access to information is basic to the democratic way of life.The practice of withholding information from the people has to be stopped.Parliament should return to its role as the representative body of the people and that includes according a proper place for the media and its watchdog function.Parliament has to return to a recognition that the people’s involvement in lawmaking through an awareness of the rights and requirements of people in terms of democratic and peaceful values is essential and that public access to information, freedom of expression and freedom of the media together with the associated constitutional freedoms and consultation with people has to be accorded the highest priority.The agenda of civil society rather than that of “ruling elites” has to be adopted.These values and rights are at the forefront of the bill of rights and must be safeguarded and maintained with the full authority of the state in the interests of citizens. * Kaitira Kandjii is MISA’s Regional Program Manager: Free Expression and Advocacy