Nothing is so exciting like breaking a piece of news to the whole world in journalism. The joy becomes even greater when the impact of the story is seen with empirical evidence especially from the reactions of the masses to that story. All this is dependent on media freedom.
The responsibility of the media in Uganda is to look at all sides of the events leading to the development of the country, given the fact that they are the watchdog of society.
The Red Pepper, a daily tabloid news paper in Uganda, in the recent past ran a series of stories about an alleged love affair between President Muamar el Gaddafi of Libya and Toro Kingdom’s Queen Mother, Ms. Best Kemigisa. On the 18th February 2009, two editors of the paper, Mr. Richard Tusiime and Mr. Francis Mutazindwa were criminalized.
The Uganda Media Development Foundation (UMDF), an organization that advocates for press freedom protested against what they called the continuing criminalization of publication offences. The Foundation’s Coordinator, Mr. John Bosco Mayiga in a press release described it as unconstitutional and a threat to Press Freedom.
“At the start of the proceedings, the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) took over the prosecution of the case from the various law firms that had joined in on the case. The journalists are charged under Section 53 of the Penal Code Act that relates to the offence of publications defamatory of foreign dignitaries, princes and potentates that may disturb the peace and friendship between Uganda and the country where such subject of the defamatory material comes from, in this case Libya.
We believe that commencing criminal proceedings against Ugandan journalists whether through the DPP or private lawyers basing on a repressive law that is only a colonial relic, and whose constitutionality is under interpretation through a petition filed before the Constitutional Court by the East African Media Institute (EAMI) in 2006, is a threat to Uganda’s media freedom as enshrined in the constitution, and does not earn the Libyan President or his agents and their lawyers any respect, comfort or relief. We believe that criminal libel has no place in the post 1995 Uganda which is informed by liberal freedoms that allow citizens or democratic institutions like the media and civil society lobbies to scrutinize the conduct of leaders through the concept of public accountability. The thinking that foreign dignitaries or princes should be protected from critical scrutiny (which informs section 53 of the penal Code Act) was based on the perception of leaders as infallible, omniscient and unaccountable for their actions. In a free, global and democratic society, legitimate actions that may bring discomfort to those who hold power should not be criminalized but should be taken as part of the deal for those who hold power to be publicly accountable to society. The continued use of colonial laws such as criminal libel and sedition to prosecute journalists means that sections of our society have not fully appreciated the various political and social transformations that Uganda has undergone since the colonial era” states the press release".
Whereas the media is globally recognized as the fourth arm of government, the case is not the same in some countries, Uganda inclusive, especially regarding to justice to media practitioners. Mr. John Bosco Mayiga in the press release noted that “we would also like to express our disappointment about the handling of aspects of the hearing of this case on Wednesday 18th February 2009 in the Chief Magistrate’s Court, particularly the handling of the accused journalists’ bail application. Whereas judicial officers have the discretion to determine bail and bond money, the decision by the learned Chief Magistrate, Mr. Vincent Emmy Mugabo, to order the accused journalists to pay Shs 500,000 each for bail and bonding their sureties Shs 15,000,000 each, not cash was grossly unfair.
The decision, especially in light of the fact that in the same court on the same day, the same Chief Magistrate ordered a defilement suspect, Mr. Felix Kwizera, to pay Shs100,000 shs for bail and bonded his sureties 5,000,000 shs not cash, clearly demonstrates the judiciary’s continuous failure to appreciate the role and importance of press freedom and freedom of expression in an evolving democracy like Uganda’s, despite recent interactions between journalists and judicial officers including the Hon. Chief Justice. It would appear to us that the learned chief magistrate equates journalists accused of publication offences with any other criminal suspects.”
The functions of existing media regulation bodies in Uganda were being suffocated prompting the Coordinator to make an appeal by saying that “the world has moved towards better regimes for press freedom and Uganda should not be left behind. We urge the legal fraternity and the judiciary to enable rather than hobble media freedom. We reiterate our commitment to fighting for press freedom; including efforts to have primitive legislation expunged from our law books. We therefore call on the DPP to drop the criminal proceedings against the journalists until the constitutional court has pronounced itself on the constitutionality of the article 53 of the Penal Code Act. In the meantime, recourse can be made to the Independent Media Council which would allow the interpretation of perceived media offences as of a professional nature rather criminal nature".
Report by Gertrude Benderana
The responsibility of the media in Uganda is to look at all sides of the events leading to the development of the country, given the fact that they are the watchdog of society.
The Red Pepper, a daily tabloid news paper in Uganda, in the recent past ran a series of stories about an alleged love affair between President Muamar el Gaddafi of Libya and Toro Kingdom’s Queen Mother, Ms. Best Kemigisa. On the 18th February 2009, two editors of the paper, Mr. Richard Tusiime and Mr. Francis Mutazindwa were criminalized.
The Uganda Media Development Foundation (UMDF), an organization that advocates for press freedom protested against what they called the continuing criminalization of publication offences. The Foundation’s Coordinator, Mr. John Bosco Mayiga in a press release described it as unconstitutional and a threat to Press Freedom.
“At the start of the proceedings, the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) took over the prosecution of the case from the various law firms that had joined in on the case. The journalists are charged under Section 53 of the Penal Code Act that relates to the offence of publications defamatory of foreign dignitaries, princes and potentates that may disturb the peace and friendship between Uganda and the country where such subject of the defamatory material comes from, in this case Libya.
We believe that commencing criminal proceedings against Ugandan journalists whether through the DPP or private lawyers basing on a repressive law that is only a colonial relic, and whose constitutionality is under interpretation through a petition filed before the Constitutional Court by the East African Media Institute (EAMI) in 2006, is a threat to Uganda’s media freedom as enshrined in the constitution, and does not earn the Libyan President or his agents and their lawyers any respect, comfort or relief. We believe that criminal libel has no place in the post 1995 Uganda which is informed by liberal freedoms that allow citizens or democratic institutions like the media and civil society lobbies to scrutinize the conduct of leaders through the concept of public accountability. The thinking that foreign dignitaries or princes should be protected from critical scrutiny (which informs section 53 of the penal Code Act) was based on the perception of leaders as infallible, omniscient and unaccountable for their actions. In a free, global and democratic society, legitimate actions that may bring discomfort to those who hold power should not be criminalized but should be taken as part of the deal for those who hold power to be publicly accountable to society. The continued use of colonial laws such as criminal libel and sedition to prosecute journalists means that sections of our society have not fully appreciated the various political and social transformations that Uganda has undergone since the colonial era” states the press release".
Whereas the media is globally recognized as the fourth arm of government, the case is not the same in some countries, Uganda inclusive, especially regarding to justice to media practitioners. Mr. John Bosco Mayiga in the press release noted that “we would also like to express our disappointment about the handling of aspects of the hearing of this case on Wednesday 18th February 2009 in the Chief Magistrate’s Court, particularly the handling of the accused journalists’ bail application. Whereas judicial officers have the discretion to determine bail and bond money, the decision by the learned Chief Magistrate, Mr. Vincent Emmy Mugabo, to order the accused journalists to pay Shs 500,000 each for bail and bonding their sureties Shs 15,000,000 each, not cash was grossly unfair.
The decision, especially in light of the fact that in the same court on the same day, the same Chief Magistrate ordered a defilement suspect, Mr. Felix Kwizera, to pay Shs100,000 shs for bail and bonded his sureties 5,000,000 shs not cash, clearly demonstrates the judiciary’s continuous failure to appreciate the role and importance of press freedom and freedom of expression in an evolving democracy like Uganda’s, despite recent interactions between journalists and judicial officers including the Hon. Chief Justice. It would appear to us that the learned chief magistrate equates journalists accused of publication offences with any other criminal suspects.”
The functions of existing media regulation bodies in Uganda were being suffocated prompting the Coordinator to make an appeal by saying that “the world has moved towards better regimes for press freedom and Uganda should not be left behind. We urge the legal fraternity and the judiciary to enable rather than hobble media freedom. We reiterate our commitment to fighting for press freedom; including efforts to have primitive legislation expunged from our law books. We therefore call on the DPP to drop the criminal proceedings against the journalists until the constitutional court has pronounced itself on the constitutionality of the article 53 of the Penal Code Act. In the meantime, recourse can be made to the Independent Media Council which would allow the interpretation of perceived media offences as of a professional nature rather criminal nature".
Report by Gertrude Benderana
0 comments:
Post a Comment