|
|
 |
 |
 |
| Saturday, 27 March 2004 |
 |
|
 |
Features | |
| News Business Features Editorial Security Politics World Letters Sports Obituaries
|
Losers in the battle for a censor On my watch by Lucien Rajakarunanayake The battle for a censor seems to have ended at last, to judge by what the "Daily Mirror" reported in its issue of last Wednesday. The headline to its story said "Another warning to State media, but CA unlikely". All of us in the field of journalism know very well that a Competent Authority for the media is none other than a censor. We have seen how such Competent Authorities appointed to supervise the media, have played their role of censor on more than one occasion, with the blue pencil always at the ready. But here we have a section of then media itself, and organizations that have often made strong criticism of these Competent Authority/Censors, clamouring for someone to censor the state electronic media. They have all but fallen at the feet of the Commissioner of Elections to appoint a CA for SLRC and SLBC. But it appears that good sense has at last prevailed, and the Commissioner of Elections has himself decided that he will not be bullied by a section of the media or pressurized by the UNF to appoint a Censor for the State SLRC and SLBC. Those who campaigned hard to have this State Media Censor appointed, are curiously silent about what actually took place at last Tuesday's meeting when the Commissioner of Elections met the Heads of both the State and Private media institutions, as well as, representatives of political parties, and the Secretary Ministry of Information & Communications. They are as silent as all the heads of private electronic media were at this meeting. It appears they were all towers of silence, possibly fearing questions being raised about their profane, disgusting and blatantly biased coverage and breach of all media ethics, both in reporting and advertising. When the now hackneyed question of the biased coverage of the elections by the State electronic media was taken up, even the Commissioner of Elections had to explain realities to those complaining of bias against the UNP. He said it was not proper for a party that has decided to boycott the state electronic media, to complain of an imbalance in reporting or coverage. It was made abundantly clear that there cannot be balance in reporting, coverage or features when a main party in the campaign was boycotting a section of the media. Things were made worse for those seeking a Competent Authority when the Chairman of SLRC explained how earlier that same day, an SLRC crew that went to cover a UNP Press Conference was refused permission to cover the event. This was despite them having a written invitation sent to SLRC requesting coverage. Although first allowed in, on realizing they were from SLRC, they were asked to leave. The fact that they had an invitation mattered little. It is now revealed that the invitation had been sent by mistake. The meeting ended with a decision about a Competent Authority apparently in permanent limbo, and the Commissioner asking the UNP to reconsider its decision to boycott the state electronic media. Those who had planned headline news about the appointment of a censor, had to think of new stories to lead with. They had even identified Mr. Ken Balendra as the would-be Competent Authority, and were very glad about it too. So, one hopes, a sad chapter in the history of the media in Sri Lanka has come to a close. The money monitors The presence of monitors both local and foreign became a part of the local electoral scene from 1988. We now have a new phenomenon of huge foreign handouts for two local organizations said to be monitoring the current polls PAFFREL and the CMEV. In the last two general elections the CMEV, was better known as the Centre for Manufacturing Election Violence. Such was their reputation for reporting unsubstantiated instances of alleged election related violence. PAFFREL has done some serious and honest work in the area of polls monitoring. Yet, one is surprised that it needs so much funds to monitor this election, where all observers now admit there is much less violence than earlier.There is talk of 3,000 to 5,000 monitors from a single organization and the use of 500 vehicles for the task. With at least three days of monitoring work, a maximum of 5,000 monitors paid at Rs. 1,000 per day for three days would cost Rs. 15 million. The hire of 500 vehicles for 5 days at Rs. 3,000 per day would cost Rs. 7.5 million. These are at the highest possible rates and charges. And we have the USAID alone giving at least Rs. 20 million approx. to PAFFREL. This and the Japanese donation to PAFFREL would in fact exceed its expenses. If so what of all the rest? The CMEV, as usual is very silent about what they will do. It is the sheer magnitude of the foreign funds coming in for purposes of monitoring a national election that gives cause for concern. When so much of foreign funds are obtained, for what is definitely a public interest purpose, it is best that all these accounts are released to the public through the Elections Commissioner, and not merely tell those interested to come and have a look at our books. There is another US $ 200,000 (Rs. 20 million) given to the Democratic Institute of International Affairs of the US, to provide technical assistance for this monitoring process and other guidance. What this assistance and guidance will be has not been explained. Is all this money, especially from the USA, the first step in taking Sri Lankan experts to "monitor" the coming Presidential Election in the USA? These money guzzling monitors from Sri Lanka, with a few others bleating about transparency, good governance etc. can teach polls fixers in the US, a few good lessons on rigging a poll. The foreign factor Former US Ambassador to Sri Lanka, Mr. Peter Burleigh rightly said the United States took the lead internationally in attempting to isolate and weaken the LTTE. That welcome US action was the result of a major diplomatic offensive by Sri Lanka, led by President Kumaratunga and her Foreign Minister Lakshman Kadirgamar. One must appreciate the US position of having nothing to do with the LTTE as long as it does not abandon terrorism and violence and accepts the sovereignty of Sri Lanka. Apart from India, the US is the only country that does not send any diplomat, whether stationed here or visiting this country, to have any contact with the LTTE and give the Tigers a respect they do not deserve. However, the same cannot be said for other countries said to be helping in the Sri Lankan peace process. They make regular pilgrimages to the Sun God at Kilinochchi. Even the British High Commissioner made his "Pooja" visit to Kilinochchi, while the LTTE remains a banned organization in the UK too. The recent interview given by Yasushi Akashi to the "Daily Mirror" shows his bias about politics in Sri Lanka, and even shows some degree of interference in Sri Lankan politics. Speaking of political cohabitation, Akashi says: "I hope the President and Prime Minister would consult each other although the Premier has carried the burden of formulating policies and initiating talks with the Tigers." Talks of consultation, he forgets that even the Ceasefire Agreement was signed without it being shown to the President. The Prime Minister had to carry what he calls the "burden of formulating policies and initiating talks with the LTTE" only because he completely ignored the importance of the President in the peace process and deliberately kept her out of it. As for initiating talks with the LTTE, Akashi's ignorance that it was the President who first invited the Norwegians as facilitators, having consulted the LTTE in 2000, is indeed surprising. His various statements about the conditions for future aid for Sri Lanka is in perfect sync with the UNP's slogan about electing it to put the country into greater debt. Japan being the biggest donor of aid to Sri Lanka, possibly Akashi believes he has a right to get involved in the politics of Sri Lanka in an underhand way. There is another pro Ranil punch in what Akashi says, with hardly a sign of good diplomacy. "He said both President Kumaratunga and Mr. Wickremesinghe were very important personalities when negotiating peace and added that the 'international community should give every encouragement to the Prime Minister who is sincere, committed and honest in pursuing the peace process'." How much worse can foreign meddling get, especially when a person known to be a highly skilled diplomat from Japan, openly seeks to influence the current election campaign? Domo Arigato Mr. Akashi, you have really shown how green you are in Sri Lankan politics. |
|
News | Business | Features
| Editorial | Security
Produced by Lake House |
