exercise

Freedom of the Press-a difficult exercise

By Patrick Decloitre

In 1994, Vanuatu (along with Tonga and Fiji) was rated “partly free” in a survey published by Freedom House, a New York-based research organisation, which classified 10 other countries of the region as “free”.

But since it came to power last December 1991, the Vanuatu government led by Maxime Carlot has on regular occasions indicated it promoted freedom of expression and freedom of Press. There have been attempts, indeed, but also some

disappointed hopes.

Newcomer on the Vanuatu media scene this year is the young. French-fund ed TV blong Vanuatu, which runs four hours of programmes daily - alternatively in English and French.

From their newly built studios, adja cent to Radio Vanuatu, they have their new anchormen and new stars of the screen.

Their bulletins, 15 minutes every sec ond day, still mainly consist of foreign news and footage. But they also carry Vanuatu news - in brief so far, with some footage now and then.

If they really start touching local news, they may experience some kind of pres sure.

Their colleagues, the Government controlled Radio Vanuatu and Vanuatu Weekly newspaper, know the feeling.

Radio Vanuatu, which broadcasts in AM, has an FM sister, Nambawan FM 98, which solely broadcasts in the capital, Port Vila, and the other town, Luganville (Santo Island), mostly music and small news bulletins picked up from overseas radios and Radio Vanuatu.

In the printed Press, the rest of the non government local media spectrum consists mainly of the Trading Post newspaper and another weekly newcomer, Le Fenua Times, published in Bislama (the local

pidgin) only.

On a more regional basis, in 1993, the Pacific News Service agency, Pacnews, moved from Solomon Islands to Vanuatu, where it centralises stories from member media organisations in the region to put out a news bulletin of Pacific news twice daily.

Other foreign media agencies are rep resented in the capital through correspon

dents. There have been in the past some bans on specific matters which couldn’t be mentioned on the national radio and week ly. Two years ago, when the UMP-NUP coalition split, it was not allowed to carry Press releases from the NUP “Lini fac tion”. It was recommended to talk about the “Regenvanu faction”.

But this was a long time ago.

Earlier this year, with a constitutional crisis involving two factions of the ruling Union of Moderate Parties (UMP) - more personally PM Maxime Carlot and quick ly deposed former PM and UMP president Serge Vohor - in a fight for leadership both in parliament and at party level, the pressure came down again on govern ment-controlled media.

The old argument came back: The pub lic must not be “misled” or “confused”.

Hence, the need for a clear, legible and simple message, possibly not too conflict

ing and preferably favouring the stronger

version, usually the one holding the reins of power. So much for the weaker or the

opposition.

Between November last year and February, the government of Vanuatu changed three times.

Each time, when it was not happy about the news carried by the local and sometimes foreign Press, it exerted pres sure.

For the Trading Post, which has gone

bi-weekly since last year, the number of threats is now a record in Vanuatu: • Last year, its publisher, Briton Mark Neil-Jones, was close to being deported under a Carlot-Regenvanu gov ernment; • last January, under the Vohor/Lini partnership for reporting the

post-election sacking of public servants

for political reasons; and • under a new Carlot-Kalpokas government for reporting on the National Bank of Vanuatu.

Neil-Jones once said he was “sur prised” at the accusations made against him by the Vanuatu government.

“As publisher and investor in Vanuatu, I am concerned about receiving constant threats every time a story is printed that people in power do not like,” he said, adding on another occasion that he was walking through a “political minefield”.

The past 12 months saw a news ban on the judicial row between British Chief Justice Charles Vaudin d’lmecourt and Australian Justice Robert Kent.

In June last year, the government media could no longer report any news related to the French nuclear tests in the Pacific.

Recently again, while TV was recruit ing for journalists to present, an applicant the TV management wanted to select was vetoed by the PM’s office.

No reason was given, except political affiliation.

The accusations are various but con stant: They can be “irresponsible report ing” (assorted with reminders of earlier threats such as deportation or the “locali sation programme”); “damaging the the country’s image”; “misleading the pub lic”; or “abusing the privilege of freedom of expression”.

A popular item on the threat list is the cancellation of business licences, much prized by finance ministers, who are responsible for issuing (and therefore revoking) them.

Donald Kalpokas, when he was oppo sition leader, once expressed concern that then Finance Minister Willie Jimmy had threatened to use his licensing powers against a newspaper.

“It’s time the government acts like a grown-up and accepts criticism from them media,” Kalpokas said in parliament.

When overseas media carry news not favourable to Vanuatu, they often get blamed for their “outrageous attack” (Kent case) or the much-used “interfer ence in Vanuatu’s internal affairs” (most politically sensitive news).

Because Radio Vanuatu relays every morning news bulletins from Radio Australia and Radio New Zealand International, it is sometimes only through these channels that Vanuatu people have

access to some news regarding Vanuatu.

Even the president, Jean-Marie Leye, has spoken on the issue. Last year, he asked parliament to “control newspapers which talk about people’s private lives or carry untrue stories”.

The official speech, however, is that the Carlot government has contributed a lot to improve freedom of Press since it came to power in December 1991.

And in all party platforms, during the last general elections campaign, no party forgot to mention their commitment to freedom of Press.

Laws have been passed to turn the pre vious government-owned “media ser vices” into the Vanuatu Broadcasting and Television Corporation (VBTC) under an Act passed in 1992.

Theoretically, opposition and govern ment alike have access to government-run media.

In practice, the discriminating factor is the degree of sensitivity of the news. The more it hurts, the more likely it won’t get through to the official media.

And when it does, local journalists know what it means if they haven’t asked first.

They usually get reminded of who pays them. Although VBTC was created in' 1992, it still relies heavily on the govern ment, which pays all the salaries and

expenses. This implies a de facto control on the national govern ment-run radio and weekly. Officially, this is not control. The prime minister’s first secretary, Yvette Sam, has said in the past: “Journalists in the region call this government control on media, but I don’t agree.

“The government simply wants to make sure that its views are carried in any story which talks about government mat ters.

“This is not control. We think all jour nalists should do this. This is their respon sibility to check they have both sides of the story.

“Unfortunately, some of them don’t do this of their own initiative, so what we’re doing is to remind them of their responsi bility. That’s all we ask.”

Practically, on a day-to-day basis, she is informed of the radio’s headlines to see if any news concerns the government.

“If there is news about us, then we make sure our view is carried too.

“That’s what some journalists see as control. But sometimes I get the impres sion that some journalists here are printing or airing news which is rumour and has not been checked.”

She said the procedure applied to all

local journalists.

“The government wants freedom of Press, but at the same time, it has to ensure

that our journalists do their job properly.

You can’t change things overnight. As long as we don’t have really well-trained journalists, we’ll have to do this.

“We are responsible for liberalisation of the Press, but we also have to be responsible for the impact this can have,”

Sam told Pacific Islands Monthly.

In July, when the Ombudswoman made a report public, revealing the issue of letters of guarantee worth some SUSIOO million and signed by PM Carlot, Finance Minister Barak Sope, Reserve Bank governor Samson Ngwele and

Sope’s first secretary, George Borugu,

Carlot accused the Press ( and the ombudswoman) of “destabilising” the government (See Page 23).

To make a “balanced” story ( a princi ple often reminded), it wouldn’t be fair not to mention that the principle known in the past as “green letters” (deportation orders for foreigners, including journalists) real ly seems to be a thing of the past, and that although there is still much room for improvement, the situation seems to have improved in Vanuatu. There are now more newspapers than ever since independence.

And even if freedom of Press is not yet at its peak, there is at least debate over the issue. Even writing such a story about Vanuatu from Vanuatu would have been quite incredible only a few years ago. ■