Long way before media uhuru

By Ndafadza Madanha

IN 2008 following a disputed poll Zimbabwe's three major political parties appended their signatures to the Global Political Agreement (GPA).

The deal brokered by former South African president Thabo Mbeki contained several reforms that were to be implemented by the inclusive government.

Amongst the reforms were media reforms and article 19 of the GPA spelt out the agenda for the inclusive government regards the proverbial fourth estate?

During its tenure the inclusive was expected to bring about several changes to the media environment that would have led to greater plurality of opinion accessibility and affordability for the people.

However, taking stock of the inclusive government against article 19 one cannot help but feel shortchanged.

The challenges that faced media practioners and the ordinary citizens in disseminating and receiving information are still entrenched.

One of the major concerns of media practioners was the criminal defamation law and some sections of AIPPA and POSA and expectations were high that the inclusive government would tackle these issues.

Unfortunately the inclusive government failed to deal with these issues and it had to take a constitutional court ruling to strike down the criminal defamation law.

To his credit the new minister of information and broadcasting services Jonathan Moyo had spoken against the law before the constitutional court intervened.

AIPPA still remains a big challenge to the quality of news as it restricts the amount of information journalists can receive and impart to the public.

The law places too much power in ascertaining what can and cannot be released for public consumption.

The African Commission of Human and Peoples Rights Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression have in the past called upon African states to repel criminal defamation laws.

The law is also in contravention of the Model Access to Information Law (MAI) by the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights which seeks to give effect to the right of access to information as guaranteed by the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, to any information held by a public body or relevant private body; and any information held by a private body that may assist in the exercise or protection of any right.
The laws also demands the establishment of voluntary and mandatory mechanisms or procedures to give effect to the right of access to information in a manner which enables persons to obtain access to  information of public bodies, relevant private bodies and private bodies as swiftly, inexpensively and effortlessly as is reasonably possible;
MAI also seeks to promote access to information in public bodies, relevant private bodies and private bodies by obliging the same to keep and maintain information in a form and manner that facilitates the right of access to information.
It is a further objective of this Act, generally, to promote transparency, accountability, effective governance and development by, empowering and educating everyone to understand their rights in terms of this Act.
Indeed in some instances governments are justified in restricting information for security and national interests but this discretion must be used judiciously and ensure it does not unduly curtail the access of vital information.While proponents of the inclusive government point to the several licences issued to the private media as a sign of plurality one has to question whether more papers have meant more opinions and greater space for the marginalized voices.Granted more papers are a barometer for plurality but in a polarized Zimbabwe plurality has been meant for either or that position virtually narrowing voices that can be heard.Zimbabweans have over the past decade been deprived of new opinions our media has been polarized to an extent that anything outside the mainstream is regarded as fringe and not worth reporting on. The plurality in media titles has dismally failed to seek the opinions of the rural folk and statistics indicate the bulk of population resides in the countryside. Even the circulation of the newspapers is confined to urban centers.

According to the Zimbabwe All Media Products Survey (ZAMPS) for the first half of 2013 readership of daily papers continues to decline with a merge 1 percent of the rural pollution having moved from the abject poverty to the cash economy this hampers their ability to purchase newspapers if they are available on the market.The existing newspapers have failed to pay into a levy created to help in the establishment of community owned newspapers owing to the difficult economic environment prevailing in the country.The inaccessibility is not limited to the print media but also the electronic media with indications that only 30-50 percent is able to access the national broadcaster.While the BAZ granted two licenses during the tenure of the inclusive government the accessibility of these stations is largely confined to large cities and their content is skewed in favor of the urbanites.Far flung communities such as Beitbridge, Binga, Mt Darwin fail to receive information from the public broadcaster owing to lack of infrastructure.The formation of BAZ was underpinned by the desire to create an environment to ensure communities could receive and disseminate information.

Unfortunately the authority has failed to issue community licences owing to the restrictive measures, the status quo has effectively ensured communities that have no access to the national broadcaster cannot be part of the national discourse.

Failure by government to relax its stringent licensing requirements has ensured information remains elitist and accessible to small segment of the community largely urban dwellers.

The absence of community radio stations in Africa’s most literate state is at variance with the African Charter on Broadcasting which envisions public, private and community broadcasters.

The use of the internet as a source of news, while growing in Zimbabwe is still largely an urban phenomenon and government has in recent year’s shown propensity to monitor activities.

Going forward there seems to be need for greater accessibility of the country’s media avenues by all citizens. Diverse opinions must be accommodated if the country is to effectively deal with the challenges it faces. Laws that curtail the fundamental right to expression must be struck of all our statues.