An affront to tolerance

Opposition Leader Ranil Wickremesinghe’s remarks thrown at the Editor and a columnist of the Daily Mirror mirrors an intolerance of the right to independent views and opinion by a mainstream political party which claims to uphold democratic values.

It is all the more strange since it is Wickremesinghe himself who has been waxing eloquent about the lack of media freedom and intimidation of journalists. Media freedom has been a happy hobby horse of the UNP leader albeit when in the Opposition.

It was Wickremesinghe who as Opposition Leader presented a document to Parliament in 1999 which contained changes for dismantling existing barriers to media freedom. He was a proponent of doing away with the criminal defamation law allowing for more leeway for journalists to ply their trade without let or hindrance.

It is in this context that one finds Wickremesinghe’s conduct inexplicable. What has apparently riled the opposition leader was a comment made by the columnist questioning his leadership qualities.

But the UNP leader who can claim proud roots to Sri Lanka’s pioneer newspaper establishment should not be unaware of the well known journalistic axiom ‘facts are sacred and comment is free’. Besides it is strange that the leader of the UNP which prides itself on its liberal ethos should take cudgels with a journalist over an article critical of his leadership.

Newspaper readers will be ware that this is a mundane comment which is applied to all political party leaders some time or other by journalists. The whole thing is relative depending which party one supports.

A leader worth his salt should be capable of taking such comment without flying off the handle. It also betrays a sense of duplicity and doublespeak and reveals the party’s true intentions vis-a-vis media freedom and human rights.

His comments threatening the young woman editor of the paper by innuendo too should be condemned since it amounts to raw intimidation. Above all it smacks of intolerance of the right to criticism and free airing of views, concepts the party never tires of espousing.

It is a pity that a party which claims to be in tune with the modern world and developments and flaunts an elitist air, polish and sophistication should react in the manner in which the leader did at Monday’s news briefing. It is bound to show the UNP leader in poor light and is sure to come to haunt him during the rest of his political career.

The opposition leader’s conduct smacks of incidents in the early nineties when the then all powerful Deputy Defence Minister who was also the Cabinet spokesman used to intimidate journalists, on one instance even threatening to imprison a scribe. True, no journalist is a puritan nor are they infallible. Some among our scribes are certainly known to work to set agendas.

Still they are entitled to their views and opinions provided they don’t exceed the boundaries of defamation laws. Describing a political party chief as a weak leader in our view is well within the remit. Worse things have been said about politicians and if one followed the recent US election campaign certain networks were exceedingly harsh on President Elect Barack Obama.

According to our knowledge no journalist or columnist were blackguarded or intimidated by either candidate. The UNP which follows closely in the footsteps of Uncle Sam in all respects would do well to take a leaf from them.

The truth is that newspapers and politicians need each other. Politicians cannot always expect the newspapers and the electronic media to always sing their praises and journalists also know that they cannot expect rosy comments from politicians.

The media has a responsibility and a right to point out any shortcomings of politicians, be they Government or Opposition as long as such comments are restricted to their public conduct and work as public figures.

There is a debate even in advanced democracies such as the UK on defining press freedom.

Of course, there are occasions when the press gets it wrong. There are mechanisms to deal with such situations, including Courts, and simply denigrading journalists and newspapers will not help matters. In the end, the public - readers and viewers - will decide which side is correct.