How successful was the HK Ministerial?
By Navin Dahal
Decisions in HK indicate that the present negotiations in this area are likely to result in tariff reductions in developing countries and duty-free and quota-free access to Nepalese exports in the developed countries.
The sixth Ministerial of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) recently concluded in Hong Kong in December 2005, drawing mixed reactions. Some admit that it was a success and some argue that it was a failure. The fifth WTO Ministerial held in Cancun in 2003 was dubbed a failure as WTO Members could not reach a consensus and the Ministerial ended without adopting a declaration. Many were apprehensive that Members would not be able to reach a consensus even in Hong Kong and the Ministerial would meet the fate of the Cancun Ministerial. On this account, the Hong Kong Ministerial can be dubbed a success as it adopted a declaration.
However, the success of a Ministerial cannot be and should not be judged solely on the basis of whether or not it was able to agree on a declaration. For a least developed country (LDC) like Nepal, a Ministerial can be termed successful only if the decisions help it to enhance trade opportunities. In the light of this fact, let’s examine whether or not the decisions of the Hong Kong Ministerial in different areas will help countries like Nepal to expand and enhance trade opportunities in the international market.
Agriculture
Agriculture has been the ‘make or break’ issue in WTO negotiations. Huge domestic and export subsidies in the developed countries have distorted international trade in agriculture. At the time of the establishment of the WTO, Members agreed to discipline the agriculture sector by reducing domestic and export subsidies. In the present round of trade negotiations, Members are negotiating on the new reduction commitments and time period. Of all the different areas requiring Members to make reduction commitments, they were able to agree only on the end date for the elimination of export subsidies in the HK Ministerial. Members have agreed to the parallel elimination of all forms of export subsidies and disciplines on all export measures by the end of 2013. Some major decisions were also made in other areas. The modalities will be finalised in the next few months in Geneva.
The end of export subsidies is likely to increase the world prices of agriculture commodities. This could result in a higher food bill for a net food importing country like Nepal. However, increased prices may act as an incentive for farmers to grow more.
LDCs like Nepal are not required to make commitments to reduce domestic support and export subsidies in the present round. However, Nepal will have to be cautious that the modalities for tariff reduction ensure enhanced market access in the developing countries and elimination of tariff peaks and tariff escalation in the developed countries (in case these are not addressed by duty-free quota-free access).
Non Agricultural Market Access (NAMA)
As Nepal has already bound 99.3 percent of its tariff lines and LDCs are not required to make further reduction commitments in this round, the outcome of this round is not going to alter Nepal’s import tariffs. Nepal’s interest in this area is thus market access for its manufactured goods including garments in developing and developed country markets. Decisions in HK indicate that the present negotiations in this area are likely to result in tariff reductions in developing countries and duty-free and quota-free access to Nepalese exports in the developed countries.
Services
The liberalisation of the services sector and particularly in ‘mode 4’, cross border movement of natural persons, can have a huge positive impact in the livelihood options for Nepal. Liberalisation in this mode in developed countries and particularly for ‘low skilled and unskilled’ categories is important for Nepal. This needs to be accompanied by the elimination of employment conditions, economic needs tests, quota restrictions in visa and recognition of qualifications.
The progress in this area is discouraging for Nepal. Annex C of the HK Ministerial declaration mentions that ‘new or improved commitments on the categories of Contractual Services Suppliers and Independent Professionals’. This is a major setback for Nepal and it will be a Herculean task to include low skilled and unskilled labour in this category. It is still not too late as the annex mentions that ‘methods for full and effective implementation of the LDC Modalities including according special priority to sectors and modes of supply of interest to LDCs’.
Intellectual Property Rights
Access and Benefit Sharing (ABS) and Prior Informed Consent (PIC) are two important principles of equity recognised and legitimised in the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), 1992. However, the Agreement on the Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) of the WTO conflicts with CBD and violates the principles of ABS and PIC. It would have been to the advantage of the developing countries to see an explicit negotiating mandate included in the Ministerial Declaration, calling for an amendment to the TRIPS Agreement to require patent applicants to disclose the origin of genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge along with evidence of PIC and benefit-sharing in their application. However, this did not happen and developing countries will have to work hard to achieve this in future negotiations.
Decisions in favour of LDCs
Duty-free quota-free Access
The most significant point of the Ministerial Declaration is the developed countries’ obligation to provide duty and quota-free access for LDC exports as of 2008.
There is, however, an important caveat with regard to product coverage: developed countries that face difficulties in providing full unrestricted access in 2008 will only be required to do so for 97 percent of tariff lines. This 3 percent of tariff lines may essentially deprive them of market access for all their products.
Trade Related Investment Measures (TRIMs)
The HK Ministerial Declaration allows LDCs to maintain on a temporary basis (five years, renewable subject to review) measures that deviate from their obligations under the TRIMs Agreement. This means that Nepal now has the flexibility to implement provisions such as local content requirement on foreign investment. Though Nepal’s investment regime is liberalised and such provisions have been done away with, this provision allows policy space for future industrial policy changes.
Aid for Trade
The emphasis the HK Ministerial text has put on aid to build the trading capacities of LDCs can be termed as another major achievement for the LDCs. The acceptance that aid for trade needs to cover hardware such as infrastructure in addition to software is likely to help the LDCs to improve their infrastructure. Japan has already committed US $ 10 billion in the next three years and the European Union (EU) and the United States (US) have promised to increase their support to Euro 2.7 billion and US $ 2 billion by 2010.
If the government is able to channel these funds to Nepal and improve trade related infrastructure, this is likely to result in an expansion of trade and creation of new employment opportunities.
Policy Space
The WTO is often criticised for putting the LDCs under pressure by imposing conditions that they have difficulty in fulfilling. The HK Ministerial made a breakthrough in this area as the declaration mentions that “LDCs will be required to undertake commitments and concessions to the extent consistent with their individual development, financial and trade needs, and their administrative and institutional capabilities. Should a LDC Member find that it is not in a position to comply with a specific obligation or commitment on these grounds, it shall bring the matter to the attention of the General Council for examination and appropriate action.” This will allow Nepal to forfeit the implementation of any obligation or commitment if it is financially and technically beyond its means.
The Hong Kong Ministerial can thus be termed moderately successful in addressing the issues of interest to Nepal. The litmus test of success however is whether Nepal will be able to address its supply-side constraints and enhance competitiveness to take advantage of the market access opportunities.
(Navin Dahal is the executive director of South Asia Watch on Trade, Economics and Environment, a Kathmandu based regional network of NGOs.)
Tuesday, March 21, 2006
There is no press freedom in Pakistan, says Green Press report
Friday, May 02 2003 @ 12:18 PM Central Daylight Time
Mohammad Shehzad - To limit the press is to insult a nation; to prohibit reading of certain books is to declare the inhabitants to be either fools or slaves?Claude Adrien Helvétius, French philosopher (1715?71).General Pervez Musharraf says the press in Pakistan is free. Journalists? experience and reports by independent sources on this issue suggest there is not much truth in this claim. Green Press? report too ? State of Press in Pakistan ? finds there is no ?press freedom? in Pakistan. Besides attacks against the press, the report has also chronicled all violations against freedom of expression and curbs on entertainment from May 2002 to May 2003. The report documents more than 50 cases that it says amount to ?crimes? against press and other freedoms. Most of these actions were allegedly masterminded by the state to suppress dissenting voices. None was probed or culprits punished. Despite the absence of press freedom and protection of any sort, Pakistani journalists have courageously struggled to expose the ruling elite?s shenanigans. At least one Sindhi journalist, Shahid Soomro, even lost his life doing so. Based in Hyderabad, Shahid, 26, was brazenly gunned down in public on October 20 for reporting rigging in the October 2002 elections in Mehboob Bijarani?s constituency (now member Sindh Assembly). He was killed by Bijarani?s two brothers, Waheed Bijarani and Muhammad Bijarani.
On July 24, ISI picked up Muzaffar Ejaz (editor, Jasarat) and thrashed him for reporting ISI?s link in the massive rigging in the October polls. The alliance of six pro-Taliban religious parties Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA), which now rules the NWFP and is part of a PMLQ-led coalition in Balochistan banned music, performing arts, and cinema houses soon after its landslide victory in the October elections. It accused the media of creating ?negative hype? when the English press likened its acts to Pakistan?s ?Talibanisation?. MMA clerics threatened to suppress the press through their legislative strength. On January 21, some votaries of MMA killed Fazal-e-Wahab. His body was riddled with bullets. He had written a book Mullah ka Kirdar (Character of a Cleric), which had been declared ?blasphemous? by local clerics. They issued an edict that sanctioned his murder. The parliamentarian Rana Sanaullah had to pay a very heavy price for expressing himself in the Punjab Assembly. He was picked up in Faisalabad by plainclothesmen (whom he accuses of being ISI agents). He was thrashed and had his eyebrows and moustache shaven before being thrown by the wayside. Back in the Punjab assembly he said that those who had shaved off his moustache should have shaved off the moustache and beard of Lt-Gen Jagjit Singh Arora (the Indian general who accepted General Niazi?s surrender in Dhaka in December 1971). When he said this, there was a deafening silence from the treasury benches. In November, the government, through an ad, warned Pakistani press of dire consequences if it quoted South Asia Tribune ? a weekly web-based publication edited by Shaheen Sehbai, who is living in exile in the US as a consequence of his bold reporting during his days as editor, The News. On June 25, a freelancer Hyatullah was detained, blindfolded and handcuffed by the US troops in South Waziristan for reporting on American operations in the tribal areas against the suspected al-Qaeda terrorists.
On June 26, some votaries of Benazir Bhutto ransacked the office of Weekly Naqqara (Gilgit) for not printing their leader?s press releases. On July 17, the Sindh government banned two publications ? Evening Special and Morning Special ? for a month. It also arrested their editors on the charge of promoting obscenity. On July 19, police raided and sealed the office of journalist Husain Haqqani. His major clients were forced to cancel his contract. ?Senior government officials told me, I was crossing permissible limits in criticism of government policies. I have written nothing against Pakistan ever?. we just have different ideas of what is best for the country,? Haqqani was quoted as saying. A government spokesman accused Haqqani of ?blackmailing? under the cover of press freedom.
On July 28, Islamabad police opened fire to stop journalists and photographers from taking pictures of a violent encounter between the law enforcement agencies and the villagers of Pind Sangrial and Sri Saral in Sector D-12 in Islamabad. Photographers ? Tanveer Shahzad (Dawn), Waheed Ahmed (Business Recorder), Naveed Akram (The News), Nadeem Ahmed (Geo TV) and Abdul Hamid (Jang) were physically abused. Their cameras were snatched and the films destroyed. On August 27, Aziz Sanghar (The Nation) was beaten up by the staff of Karachi Electrical Supply for filing a story on a protest against power shutdown. On September 9, Amir Mateen (The News) filed a complaint with Islamabad Police and wrote to the president that he was being tailed and harassed by secret agencies. His telephone was bugged. ?I have been warned that if I do not stop writing against the government I would be harmed physically.? On September 16, several journalists were barred from entering a defense exhibition, despite having valid invitations. The president was the chief guest on the occasion.
Complete article from The Friday Times.
Friday, May 02 2003 @ 12:18 PM Central Daylight Time
Mohammad Shehzad - To limit the press is to insult a nation; to prohibit reading of certain books is to declare the inhabitants to be either fools or slaves?Claude Adrien Helvétius, French philosopher (1715?71).General Pervez Musharraf says the press in Pakistan is free. Journalists? experience and reports by independent sources on this issue suggest there is not much truth in this claim. Green Press? report too ? State of Press in Pakistan ? finds there is no ?press freedom? in Pakistan. Besides attacks against the press, the report has also chronicled all violations against freedom of expression and curbs on entertainment from May 2002 to May 2003. The report documents more than 50 cases that it says amount to ?crimes? against press and other freedoms. Most of these actions were allegedly masterminded by the state to suppress dissenting voices. None was probed or culprits punished. Despite the absence of press freedom and protection of any sort, Pakistani journalists have courageously struggled to expose the ruling elite?s shenanigans. At least one Sindhi journalist, Shahid Soomro, even lost his life doing so. Based in Hyderabad, Shahid, 26, was brazenly gunned down in public on October 20 for reporting rigging in the October 2002 elections in Mehboob Bijarani?s constituency (now member Sindh Assembly). He was killed by Bijarani?s two brothers, Waheed Bijarani and Muhammad Bijarani.
On July 24, ISI picked up Muzaffar Ejaz (editor, Jasarat) and thrashed him for reporting ISI?s link in the massive rigging in the October polls. The alliance of six pro-Taliban religious parties Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA), which now rules the NWFP and is part of a PMLQ-led coalition in Balochistan banned music, performing arts, and cinema houses soon after its landslide victory in the October elections. It accused the media of creating ?negative hype? when the English press likened its acts to Pakistan?s ?Talibanisation?. MMA clerics threatened to suppress the press through their legislative strength. On January 21, some votaries of MMA killed Fazal-e-Wahab. His body was riddled with bullets. He had written a book Mullah ka Kirdar (Character of a Cleric), which had been declared ?blasphemous? by local clerics. They issued an edict that sanctioned his murder. The parliamentarian Rana Sanaullah had to pay a very heavy price for expressing himself in the Punjab Assembly. He was picked up in Faisalabad by plainclothesmen (whom he accuses of being ISI agents). He was thrashed and had his eyebrows and moustache shaven before being thrown by the wayside. Back in the Punjab assembly he said that those who had shaved off his moustache should have shaved off the moustache and beard of Lt-Gen Jagjit Singh Arora (the Indian general who accepted General Niazi?s surrender in Dhaka in December 1971). When he said this, there was a deafening silence from the treasury benches. In November, the government, through an ad, warned Pakistani press of dire consequences if it quoted South Asia Tribune ? a weekly web-based publication edited by Shaheen Sehbai, who is living in exile in the US as a consequence of his bold reporting during his days as editor, The News. On June 25, a freelancer Hyatullah was detained, blindfolded and handcuffed by the US troops in South Waziristan for reporting on American operations in the tribal areas against the suspected al-Qaeda terrorists.
On June 26, some votaries of Benazir Bhutto ransacked the office of Weekly Naqqara (Gilgit) for not printing their leader?s press releases. On July 17, the Sindh government banned two publications ? Evening Special and Morning Special ? for a month. It also arrested their editors on the charge of promoting obscenity. On July 19, police raided and sealed the office of journalist Husain Haqqani. His major clients were forced to cancel his contract. ?Senior government officials told me, I was crossing permissible limits in criticism of government policies. I have written nothing against Pakistan ever?. we just have different ideas of what is best for the country,? Haqqani was quoted as saying. A government spokesman accused Haqqani of ?blackmailing? under the cover of press freedom.
On July 28, Islamabad police opened fire to stop journalists and photographers from taking pictures of a violent encounter between the law enforcement agencies and the villagers of Pind Sangrial and Sri Saral in Sector D-12 in Islamabad. Photographers ? Tanveer Shahzad (Dawn), Waheed Ahmed (Business Recorder), Naveed Akram (The News), Nadeem Ahmed (Geo TV) and Abdul Hamid (Jang) were physically abused. Their cameras were snatched and the films destroyed. On August 27, Aziz Sanghar (The Nation) was beaten up by the staff of Karachi Electrical Supply for filing a story on a protest against power shutdown. On September 9, Amir Mateen (The News) filed a complaint with Islamabad Police and wrote to the president that he was being tailed and harassed by secret agencies. His telephone was bugged. ?I have been warned that if I do not stop writing against the government I would be harmed physically.? On September 16, several journalists were barred from entering a defense exhibition, despite having valid invitations. The president was the chief guest on the occasion.
Complete article from The Friday Times.
Press freedom in Pakistan
Is Press Freedom a fact or a farce in Pakistan?
Mohammad Shehzad
IS THERE a free press in Pakistan? Is there any law that entitles its citizens to have access to information? Is the media promoting peace?
These issues were discussed at length at the Friedrich Naumann Stiftung and Liberal Forum Pakistan's two-day media workshop `Promoting Values of Peace in the Age of Media Abundance' on December 29-30.
It was not an amateurish event. It was attended by senior editors, journalists and columnists-like Imtiaz Gul, M Ziauddin, Munoo Bhai, Dr Tariq Rehman and others.
Imtiaz Gul's revelation startled all of us. He works for CNN, Voice of Germany and The Friday Times (TFT)-all very influential media organizations. In 1995, he published a story on oil and gas industry and wrote something that Nawab Akbar Bugti did not appreciate and he sued the TFT.
The story was correct. Imtiaz could have proved it with evidence. The damages claimed ran into millions. No lawyer in Quetta was ready to defend Imtiaz and TFT. No lawyer in Islamabad-even Akram Shaikh-was happy to appear in Quetta.
"I ran from pillar to post-from Khuda-e-Noor to the top slot in the judiciary, but to no avail! I did not want to tender an apology. But I had to swallow the bitter pill. To avoid the litigation, TFT published the apology! It was the most agonising moment of my life!" Imtiaz shared this with a very heavy heart with the participants.
If a powerful journalist and publication like TFT cannot publish the truth and is vulnerable to harassment, how could press be free in Pakistan!
But Mujahid Barelvi had become too optimistic after finding a job with the Indus Television that pays him on time. In terms of press freedom, Pakistan in his `flawless' opinion "had streams and stocks of milk and honey." He went on and on praising it until CR Shamsi, Vice President of Pakistan Federal Union of Journalists interrupted him reminding him of what had happened to Shaheen Sehbai, Editor of SA Tribune. How was he persecuted and forced to leave the country when he published a couple of investigative reports that went against the government.
But instead of countering Shamsi's argument, he started bashing Sehbai saying: "Ask Shaheen to come to Pakistan and write what he is publishing in the South Asia Tribune. He is trying to become a hero in exile, he can say anything!"
Shamsi had to give Barelvi his piece of mind to cool him down. He revealed how he had to change his route several times while returning home from the newspaper office after turning down a Mnistry of Information 'directive' about the headline of a particular story. Musharraf, in his opinion, was a tyrant like General Zia ul Haq. He could have whipped the journalists had he not to show the world that he was a 'liberal'. He did not follow General Ziaul Haq, but ensured sufficient suppression of press through other methods.
Shamsi bluntly condemned the government-newspapers owner nexus, calling it an 'unholy nexus'. "Both use each other for their ulterior motives. The owners get annual ads worth 150 billions rupees from the government. They have no scruples or principles. They were avaricious and had no regard for journalistic ethics and working journalists' sufferings. They were ready to use their workers' strength in time of crisis against the government but not willing to address their genuine problems."
He cited Mir Shakilur Rehman's example when the Jang group came under Senator Saifur Rehman's fire. "Rehman cried and begged for journalists' support to fight his battle with the government under the condition that he would regularise the contract employees. He confessed and regretted that he had been selling his conscience to the government. The journalists fought his war. The Jang-government tussle came to an end but Rehman never regularized the contract employees. When I reminded him his words and the confession, he shamelessly said that yes he had said that he had been selling his conscience but did he ever promise not to sell it again," Shamsi disclosed and his words were endorsed by many who had witnessed the scene.
But M Ziauddin, Resident Editor of Dawn Islamabad, had a different experience to share. In his opinion, the absence of the office of professional editor had caused press freedom an irreparable loss. Everyone agreed, that the institution of professional editor existed only in the Dawn. Ziauddin maintained that through professionalism and courage the scope of freedom could be increased. He recalled that once he was asked to play up with a heading by an information ministry officer. He snubbed the guy and never received such a call again.
During General Zia's regime, his so-called press card was confiscated. Ziauddin started filing exclusive reports on the economy which disturbed the government to such an extent that it had to return his card. Once, one of his reporters was asked by the ministry to cover an event. When the reporter brought it into his notice, he asked the reporter to tell the officer to quit the ministry job and take up his (the reporter's) job.
Former journalist and Friedrich Naumann Stiftung's project coordinator Zafarullah Khan was of the view that the Pakistan print media did not promote peace. It resorted to anti-peace language and slogans. To support it, he compared two recent terrorist attacks on churches took place simultaneously in India and Daska, Pakistan.
Pakistani media used the phrase of `unidentified attackers' for the terrorists whereas, the phrase `Hindu religious extremists' were used by the Indian media, which reflected more objectivity and professionalism. Khan wanted an answer to why media was unable to demonstrate professionalism in terms of framing rights words, phrases and issues while reporting on the events.
Citing Mithi case (a district of Pakistan), Khan termed government's pledge of equal rights to minorities as a farce. Mithi's 98 percent populace is Hindu. Government had recently revoked a cable operator's license because he had put on a few bhajans!
Khan complained that media did not report on people's sufferings. "To have the story of unemployment on the front page, the poor have to climb Minaret Pakistan and commit suicide by jumping down. To have justice, one has to put himself/herself on fire. These are ugly examples in Pakistan's history."
"The newspapers are controlled by the military bureaucracy. Media would start harping on [peace] when General Musharraf would visit Agra. It would start publishing life threats issued by Lashkare Tayyaba to Vajpayee when a civilian government would talk peace with India. Media is thus in the bondage of the state which is basically army," Khan concluded.
At the end of the workshop, participants were convinced that press freedom and right to know was nothing but a farce. All such laws had been enacted with the motive to defend the establishment's skin. Press freedom had never been the issue of the newspapers' owner. It was the 'problem' of the working journalists. The current degree of press freedom owes it contribution to the working journalists. No owner had ever undergone imprisonment for the cause of press freedom. Afflictions and tribulations were born by the journalists. Newspaper owners never bothered to visit the press clubs or attend the meetings of journalists' organizations.
A plethora of recently introduced press freedom laws already exist on statues. They were basically the reincarnation of the notorious Press and Publication Ordinance, which was masterminded by Altaf Gohar during General Ayub's martial law. A few known families monopolized the print media in Pakistan. These families very obediently serve the interests of the government. The latter had come up with such laws that ensured that electronic media too was monopolized by the same families, so that no `entity of conscience' could dare enter this profession.
Government's step of giving license to private channels was a good initiative. However, the laws under which such licenses were given had a number of flaws and cracks that were against the channels. The government was empowered to cancel anybody's license without providing the aggrieved party any right of defence.
The writer is an independent journalist based in Islamabad. Email: rageshri2@yahoo.com
Mohammad Shehzad
IS THERE a free press in Pakistan? Is there any law that entitles its citizens to have access to information? Is the media promoting peace?
These issues were discussed at length at the Friedrich Naumann Stiftung and Liberal Forum Pakistan's two-day media workshop `Promoting Values of Peace in the Age of Media Abundance' on December 29-30.
It was not an amateurish event. It was attended by senior editors, journalists and columnists-like Imtiaz Gul, M Ziauddin, Munoo Bhai, Dr Tariq Rehman and others.
Imtiaz Gul's revelation startled all of us. He works for CNN, Voice of Germany and The Friday Times (TFT)-all very influential media organizations. In 1995, he published a story on oil and gas industry and wrote something that Nawab Akbar Bugti did not appreciate and he sued the TFT.
The story was correct. Imtiaz could have proved it with evidence. The damages claimed ran into millions. No lawyer in Quetta was ready to defend Imtiaz and TFT. No lawyer in Islamabad-even Akram Shaikh-was happy to appear in Quetta.
"I ran from pillar to post-from Khuda-e-Noor to the top slot in the judiciary, but to no avail! I did not want to tender an apology. But I had to swallow the bitter pill. To avoid the litigation, TFT published the apology! It was the most agonising moment of my life!" Imtiaz shared this with a very heavy heart with the participants.
If a powerful journalist and publication like TFT cannot publish the truth and is vulnerable to harassment, how could press be free in Pakistan!
But Mujahid Barelvi had become too optimistic after finding a job with the Indus Television that pays him on time. In terms of press freedom, Pakistan in his `flawless' opinion "had streams and stocks of milk and honey." He went on and on praising it until CR Shamsi, Vice President of Pakistan Federal Union of Journalists interrupted him reminding him of what had happened to Shaheen Sehbai, Editor of SA Tribune. How was he persecuted and forced to leave the country when he published a couple of investigative reports that went against the government.
But instead of countering Shamsi's argument, he started bashing Sehbai saying: "Ask Shaheen to come to Pakistan and write what he is publishing in the South Asia Tribune. He is trying to become a hero in exile, he can say anything!"
Shamsi had to give Barelvi his piece of mind to cool him down. He revealed how he had to change his route several times while returning home from the newspaper office after turning down a Mnistry of Information 'directive' about the headline of a particular story. Musharraf, in his opinion, was a tyrant like General Zia ul Haq. He could have whipped the journalists had he not to show the world that he was a 'liberal'. He did not follow General Ziaul Haq, but ensured sufficient suppression of press through other methods.
Shamsi bluntly condemned the government-newspapers owner nexus, calling it an 'unholy nexus'. "Both use each other for their ulterior motives. The owners get annual ads worth 150 billions rupees from the government. They have no scruples or principles. They were avaricious and had no regard for journalistic ethics and working journalists' sufferings. They were ready to use their workers' strength in time of crisis against the government but not willing to address their genuine problems."
He cited Mir Shakilur Rehman's example when the Jang group came under Senator Saifur Rehman's fire. "Rehman cried and begged for journalists' support to fight his battle with the government under the condition that he would regularise the contract employees. He confessed and regretted that he had been selling his conscience to the government. The journalists fought his war. The Jang-government tussle came to an end but Rehman never regularized the contract employees. When I reminded him his words and the confession, he shamelessly said that yes he had said that he had been selling his conscience but did he ever promise not to sell it again," Shamsi disclosed and his words were endorsed by many who had witnessed the scene.
But M Ziauddin, Resident Editor of Dawn Islamabad, had a different experience to share. In his opinion, the absence of the office of professional editor had caused press freedom an irreparable loss. Everyone agreed, that the institution of professional editor existed only in the Dawn. Ziauddin maintained that through professionalism and courage the scope of freedom could be increased. He recalled that once he was asked to play up with a heading by an information ministry officer. He snubbed the guy and never received such a call again.
During General Zia's regime, his so-called press card was confiscated. Ziauddin started filing exclusive reports on the economy which disturbed the government to such an extent that it had to return his card. Once, one of his reporters was asked by the ministry to cover an event. When the reporter brought it into his notice, he asked the reporter to tell the officer to quit the ministry job and take up his (the reporter's) job.
Former journalist and Friedrich Naumann Stiftung's project coordinator Zafarullah Khan was of the view that the Pakistan print media did not promote peace. It resorted to anti-peace language and slogans. To support it, he compared two recent terrorist attacks on churches took place simultaneously in India and Daska, Pakistan.
Pakistani media used the phrase of `unidentified attackers' for the terrorists whereas, the phrase `Hindu religious extremists' were used by the Indian media, which reflected more objectivity and professionalism. Khan wanted an answer to why media was unable to demonstrate professionalism in terms of framing rights words, phrases and issues while reporting on the events.
Citing Mithi case (a district of Pakistan), Khan termed government's pledge of equal rights to minorities as a farce. Mithi's 98 percent populace is Hindu. Government had recently revoked a cable operator's license because he had put on a few bhajans!
Khan complained that media did not report on people's sufferings. "To have the story of unemployment on the front page, the poor have to climb Minaret Pakistan and commit suicide by jumping down. To have justice, one has to put himself/herself on fire. These are ugly examples in Pakistan's history."
"The newspapers are controlled by the military bureaucracy. Media would start harping on [peace] when General Musharraf would visit Agra. It would start publishing life threats issued by Lashkare Tayyaba to Vajpayee when a civilian government would talk peace with India. Media is thus in the bondage of the state which is basically army," Khan concluded.
At the end of the workshop, participants were convinced that press freedom and right to know was nothing but a farce. All such laws had been enacted with the motive to defend the establishment's skin. Press freedom had never been the issue of the newspapers' owner. It was the 'problem' of the working journalists. The current degree of press freedom owes it contribution to the working journalists. No owner had ever undergone imprisonment for the cause of press freedom. Afflictions and tribulations were born by the journalists. Newspaper owners never bothered to visit the press clubs or attend the meetings of journalists' organizations.
A plethora of recently introduced press freedom laws already exist on statues. They were basically the reincarnation of the notorious Press and Publication Ordinance, which was masterminded by Altaf Gohar during General Ayub's martial law. A few known families monopolized the print media in Pakistan. These families very obediently serve the interests of the government. The latter had come up with such laws that ensured that electronic media too was monopolized by the same families, so that no `entity of conscience' could dare enter this profession.
Government's step of giving license to private channels was a good initiative. However, the laws under which such licenses were given had a number of flaws and cracks that were against the channels. The government was empowered to cancel anybody's license without providing the aggrieved party any right of defence.
The writer is an independent journalist based in Islamabad. Email: rageshri2@yahoo.com
From Newspaper editoraial
Colossal cost
Last Sunday marked the completion of the third year of invasion of Iraq by the United States and its allies. The US invasion of Iraq was a comparatively easy job and Baghdad fell easily to the combined power of the US and its allied forces. Yet the headache in Iraq is far from over. The air-borne US attack, said to be the biggest air-borne assault since the invasion of Iraq in March 2003, indicated how deep the trouble is in Iraq. According to unofficial estimates, about 38,000 Iraqi civilians have lost their lives in the attacks by allied forces and the insurgents. The insurgency in Iraq is getting worse each day and the popularity of US President George W Bush has plummeted with the arrival of soldiers in coffins in the United States. Over 2300 US troops are said to have died in Iraq since the Iraq war began on March 19 2003. The cost is no doubt very high. And this is a scar on the popularity of President Bush and his Republican Party.
A CNN-USA Today-Gallup poll on March 14 said the American dissatisfaction on the way in which their president was running the war in Iraq drove the popularity rating of President Bush down to 36 percent. Most Americans now think that the invasion of Iraq was a "mistake". After the US-led invasion in Iraq, a number of developments have taken place. The most important of them are the referendum on the constitution and parliamentary elections. Yet, what at first glance appear to be democratic exercises are not in reality democratic. The fact is the unfortunate nation has hardly known peace since March 2003 with insurgency ever on the rise and taking a heavy toll on Iraqis. The US led allied forces have been firm in their belief that all will be well soon. One hopes this will happen sooner than later without further loss of lives.
However, the present scenario in Iraq has left no room for optimism. Hardly a day goes by without reports of insurgents killing Iraqi security personnel or civilians. There cannot be any doubt that the senseless loss of lives has to be prevented and sanity brought back to the Iraqi political and social landscape. Some maintain that so long as the invasion forces remain in Iraq, there can be no peace. Time may now have come to give peace more than a chance and for the allied forces to quit the conquered land. This, of course, can only be done when a superpower like the United States is given a chance to save its face to make the withdrawal seem like a victory. The cost of Iraq invasion has been colossal both in terms of human lives and money involved and the need to rectify past mistakes has come.
Last Sunday marked the completion of the third year of invasion of Iraq by the United States and its allies. The US invasion of Iraq was a comparatively easy job and Baghdad fell easily to the combined power of the US and its allied forces. Yet the headache in Iraq is far from over. The air-borne US attack, said to be the biggest air-borne assault since the invasion of Iraq in March 2003, indicated how deep the trouble is in Iraq. According to unofficial estimates, about 38,000 Iraqi civilians have lost their lives in the attacks by allied forces and the insurgents. The insurgency in Iraq is getting worse each day and the popularity of US President George W Bush has plummeted with the arrival of soldiers in coffins in the United States. Over 2300 US troops are said to have died in Iraq since the Iraq war began on March 19 2003. The cost is no doubt very high. And this is a scar on the popularity of President Bush and his Republican Party.
A CNN-USA Today-Gallup poll on March 14 said the American dissatisfaction on the way in which their president was running the war in Iraq drove the popularity rating of President Bush down to 36 percent. Most Americans now think that the invasion of Iraq was a "mistake". After the US-led invasion in Iraq, a number of developments have taken place. The most important of them are the referendum on the constitution and parliamentary elections. Yet, what at first glance appear to be democratic exercises are not in reality democratic. The fact is the unfortunate nation has hardly known peace since March 2003 with insurgency ever on the rise and taking a heavy toll on Iraqis. The US led allied forces have been firm in their belief that all will be well soon. One hopes this will happen sooner than later without further loss of lives.
However, the present scenario in Iraq has left no room for optimism. Hardly a day goes by without reports of insurgents killing Iraqi security personnel or civilians. There cannot be any doubt that the senseless loss of lives has to be prevented and sanity brought back to the Iraqi political and social landscape. Some maintain that so long as the invasion forces remain in Iraq, there can be no peace. Time may now have come to give peace more than a chance and for the allied forces to quit the conquered land. This, of course, can only be done when a superpower like the United States is given a chance to save its face to make the withdrawal seem like a victory. The cost of Iraq invasion has been colossal both in terms of human lives and money involved and the need to rectify past mistakes has come.
From Newspaper editoraial
Colossal cost
Last Sunday marked the completion of the third year of invasion of Iraq by the United States and its allies. The US invasion of Iraq was a comparatively easy job and Baghdad fell easily to the combined power of the US and its allied forces. Yet the headache in Iraq is far from over. The air-borne US attack, said to be the biggest air-borne assault since the invasion of Iraq in March 2003, indicated how deep the trouble is in Iraq. According to unofficial estimates, about 38,000 Iraqi civilians have lost their lives in the attacks by allied forces and the insurgents. The insurgency in Iraq is getting worse each day and the popularity of US President George W Bush has plummeted with the arrival of soldiers in coffins in the United States. Over 2300 US troops are said to have died in Iraq since the Iraq war began on March 19 2003. The cost is no doubt very high. And this is a scar on the popularity of President Bush and his Republican Party.
A CNN-USA Today-Gallup poll on March 14 said the American dissatisfaction on the way in which their president was running the war in Iraq drove the popularity rating of President Bush down to 36 percent. Most Americans now think that the invasion of Iraq was a "mistake". After the US-led invasion in Iraq, a number of developments have taken place. The most important of them are the referendum on the constitution and parliamentary elections. Yet, what at first glance appear to be democratic exercises are not in reality democratic. The fact is the unfortunate nation has hardly known peace since March 2003 with insurgency ever on the rise and taking a heavy toll on Iraqis. The US led allied forces have been firm in their belief that all will be well soon. One hopes this will happen sooner than later without further loss of lives.
However, the present scenario in Iraq has left no room for optimism. Hardly a day goes by without reports of insurgents killing Iraqi security personnel or civilians. There cannot be any doubt that the senseless loss of lives has to be prevented and sanity brought back to the Iraqi political and social landscape. Some maintain that so long as the invasion forces remain in Iraq, there can be no peace. Time may now have come to give peace more than a chance and for the allied forces to quit the conquered land. This, of course, can only be done when a superpower like the United States is given a chance to save its face to make the withdrawal seem like a victory. The cost of Iraq invasion has been colossal both in terms of human lives and money involved and the need to rectify past mistakes has come.
Last Sunday marked the completion of the third year of invasion of Iraq by the United States and its allies. The US invasion of Iraq was a comparatively easy job and Baghdad fell easily to the combined power of the US and its allied forces. Yet the headache in Iraq is far from over. The air-borne US attack, said to be the biggest air-borne assault since the invasion of Iraq in March 2003, indicated how deep the trouble is in Iraq. According to unofficial estimates, about 38,000 Iraqi civilians have lost their lives in the attacks by allied forces and the insurgents. The insurgency in Iraq is getting worse each day and the popularity of US President George W Bush has plummeted with the arrival of soldiers in coffins in the United States. Over 2300 US troops are said to have died in Iraq since the Iraq war began on March 19 2003. The cost is no doubt very high. And this is a scar on the popularity of President Bush and his Republican Party.
A CNN-USA Today-Gallup poll on March 14 said the American dissatisfaction on the way in which their president was running the war in Iraq drove the popularity rating of President Bush down to 36 percent. Most Americans now think that the invasion of Iraq was a "mistake". After the US-led invasion in Iraq, a number of developments have taken place. The most important of them are the referendum on the constitution and parliamentary elections. Yet, what at first glance appear to be democratic exercises are not in reality democratic. The fact is the unfortunate nation has hardly known peace since March 2003 with insurgency ever on the rise and taking a heavy toll on Iraqis. The US led allied forces have been firm in their belief that all will be well soon. One hopes this will happen sooner than later without further loss of lives.
However, the present scenario in Iraq has left no room for optimism. Hardly a day goes by without reports of insurgents killing Iraqi security personnel or civilians. There cannot be any doubt that the senseless loss of lives has to be prevented and sanity brought back to the Iraqi political and social landscape. Some maintain that so long as the invasion forces remain in Iraq, there can be no peace. Time may now have come to give peace more than a chance and for the allied forces to quit the conquered land. This, of course, can only be done when a superpower like the United States is given a chance to save its face to make the withdrawal seem like a victory. The cost of Iraq invasion has been colossal both in terms of human lives and money involved and the need to rectify past mistakes has come.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)