Government
defends its draconian law
Prime Minister Mizengo Pinda of Tanzania defended
a draconian media law in parliament this morning.
He was responding to opposition leader Freeman
Mbowe who queried the government habit of using the law that contravened the
constitution, to suppress freedom of information in the country.
Specifically, the opposition leader wanted to know
why the government banned MwanaHALISI weekly without giving the concerned an
opportunity to be heard.
The paper was banned indefinitely effective 30 July
instant for alleged sedition in its three consecutive issues that dug deep into
the abduction and torture of Dr. Steven Ulimboka, leader of the doctors
association of Tanzania.
As if to put a finger in the government’s eye, Mr.
Mbowe asked why the government didn’t go to court, as it has done in two
previous cases – with doctors and teachers – and instead chose to ban the paper
indefinitely and without its owners and editors being heard.
He also wanted to know, in his follow up question,
when the government will abandon the draconian Newspaper Act (1976) which it
applies to ban media outlets.
The prime minister answered coolly, that his
government will continue to apply and employ the draconian media law because it
was legislated “by this house.”
Exhibiting unfamiliarity with the law itself, the
prime minister said the government has taken action and it was upon the aggrieved
to appeal to authority (minister) concerned.
The legislation, a legal asphyxia, besides giving powers
to the minister concerned with information to ban and, or deregister a
newspaper without prior notice and without giving any reason, it does not
provide space for appeal.
Newspaper publishers and editors in Tanzania are
left with very limited options. To challenge, in a court of law, the modality
under which the order was given; to challenge the legislation as being
unconstitutional and, or stand with local and international civil societies and
media fraternity to put pressure on government, with the hope that at one good moment,
sense will prevail on the part of authority (!)
This
is the second time the government is interfering with the publication
of MwanaHALISI. It suspended publication of the weekly for 90 days
in 2008. This time, the government has banned the paper indefinitely.
Find hereunder, details on the three issues of the
paper in question on what would have possibly irked the government. It was issued
by MwanaHALISI.
What could have been the reason
behind the ban of MwanaHALISI?
In
its statement announcing the ban on MwanaHALISI, the government cited three
most recent issues of the weekly which it said had carried news and feature
articles which “…created and spread fear in society;” and that they were
seditious and did not measure to “ethical standards.”
The
three successive issues are No. 302 (July 11 – 17), No. 303 (July 18 – 24) and
No. 304 July 25 – 31).
Content
(i) Issue No. 302: The major story was
about the deputy national security chief, one Mr. Jack Zoka, allegedly being
behind a plot “to eliminate critics of government.”
The
story which links Zoka to the abduction and torture of Dr. Steven Ulimboka –
leader of doctors on strike against government insensitivity in public
hospitals – carries a picture of president Jakaya Kikwete in a rather tired or
resigned or sorrowful mood; and well below, a picture of Dk. Ulimboka in bed at
an intensive care unit (ICU) of Muhimbili National Hospital in Dar es Salaam.
The
paper still holds its source of story but also quotes leaders of leading
opposition Chadema party as alleging the same at an august press conference in
Dar es Salaam.
It
also reports that Dr. Ulimboka still insists that a man, who arranged a meeting
to where he was abducted, was working with the “state house” – office of the
president under which operate the intelligence services (TISS).
Admittedly,
this issue was really packed. It contained a two-page article on the doctors’
demands and rationale for their strike; three pages of analysis of Dk.
Ulimboka’s abduction and torture; and an authoritative editorial comment on the
need for an independent commission to investigate the matter.
(ii) Issue No.
303: The major story was about Dr. Ulimboka; quoted as insisting that
those who abducted and tortured him were from the state house.
Photographs
accompanying the major story included that of the president – looking inwardly
and kind of perplexed; chief of police in Dar es Salaam, Suleiman Kova; and in
between a picture of Dr. Ulimboka at ICU.
Besides
a front page story, there were four other pages devoted to analysis on what
befell Dr. Ulimboka.
(iii) Issue No.
304: This is the most recent issue that must have not only
irritated, but also embarrassed government and forced it to flex its muscle –
banning the weekly indefinitely.
The
major story was about one Ramadhan Ighondu (alias Rama; alias Abeid);
identified as an official at the intelligence unit (TISS) and one who had been
communicating with Dr. Ulimboka until his abduction and torture. It carries details
about Rama and reveals telephone numbers to which Rama called before and well
after the abduction.
A
message from a regular reader of MwanaHALISI said a day after the clampdown,
“You sort of went too far. You threatened to link the revealed phone numbers
reporting to authority at TISS or the executive. When you reach such point,
they necessarily must be shocked and block or ban you…”
Pictures
on the front page included that of Dr. Ulimboka at the ICU, President Jakaya
Kikwete and chief of intelligence, Rashid Othman. Inside pages carrying the
same story were accompanied by pictures: Minister of State (Good Governance)
George Mkuchika and Deputy chief of TISS, Jack Zoka.
Besides
the report, the issue carried among others, one analysis on Dr. Ulimboka; a
report on emerging scandal at the ministry of energy; and part of a speech by
opposition member of parliament – on the ministry of internal affairs – which,
the speaker had ordered not to be read in the house.
Since
the ban of the weekly, voice has been heard from over 30 civil societies in the
country, condemning government action and calling for immediate withdrawal of
the order.
This
is because there are no grounds for the clamp-down. The stories are neither
seditious nor ethically questionable. They are, if you want, very revealing,
true and correct – which is all about ethics. They have not been challenged by
any individual or authority. To defeat them you need to apply a draconian law
in the form of Newspaper Act (1976), which gives the minister responsible for
information powers to ban and even deregister any outlet without prior notice
and without giving any reason.
Some
media houses, institutions and other fora, conscious of their rights and
freedoms in this particular area, have held government by the neck, demanding immediate
lift of the indefinite ban.
A
good number of members of parliament, religious leaders and individual
citizens, have expressed disgust at the government action. Their voices have
been read in independent print media and heard on local and international radio
and TV stations.
The
voices are not without cause. To many of its readers, MwanaHALISI has been a
fountain of information, education and knowledge. They are now missing the
same.
Your
voice matters. Join us in the fight for our right to communicate and the
people’s right to know.
Ends.
