Afghanistan’s Parliament is on the brink of passing a law that could damage the independence of the country’s media. Under the new proposals, private and state media will come under greater government control. Proposed changes include an oversight committee that will scrutinise media content.
Under a new mass media law journalists could be forbidden from criticising the state or discussing the relationship between religion and the state. Mohammad Mohaqiq, the head of the parliamentary committee for culture and religion, told a recent international media conference in Kabul there should be no insult to Islam or the state by the media.
Journalists at the conference argued for more protection. They demanded that a phrase be inserted in the new law saying ”there can be no restrictions in the constitutional right of the Afghan people to be informed, and inform.” But the requests were ignored.
The proposed law comes at a critical juncture in the rebuilding of the Afghan media. The international community is cutting aid amid a bout of donor fatigue. At the Intercontinental Hotel, journalists gave details of how they are threatened daily by a variety of pressure groups — whether it be officials, warlords, rich investors or influential personalities — who demand they toe a certain line.
There are more than 300 publications, 152 FM radio stations and 84 TV stations across the country. Almost all, however, are controlled by pressure groups. Three or four official newspapers are almost identical, reporting only on meetings of officials. One title belongs to the former mujahideen president, Burhan ud-Din Rabbani; another to the speaker of Parliament, Yunis Qanooni; a third supports the minister of culture and information. General Rashid Dustom owns one TV station; General Ata another.
The one or two relatively independent voices are near bankruptcy. Take Pazhwak news agency, one of the most successful since its inception in 2004. Its director, Danish Karokhel, says if he does not receive funds by July he will have to drastically reduce the agency’s size or close it. Pazhwak provides great insight into the turbulent southern provinces, but many of the international news agencies that use its stories daily for their reports refuse to increase their subscriptions.
The other relatively independent publication, Kabul Weekly, is also near to breaking point. Fahim Dashti, its director, says that by June he will go bankrupt if he does not get support. He says many Afghan donors have offered funds but only if he does their bidding.
Even if a media outlet is solvent it could still face political pressure. Take the example of Arman Radio and Tulu TV, both funded by USAid. Their director, Saad Mohseni, recruited a well-known, if controversial, Afghan journalist, Razaq Mamoon, to run an investigative show. Razaq says it was the first of its kind in Afghanistan, challenging top officials and warlords with facts and figures about mismanagement, corruption, embezzlement and other crimes. Soon after launch, according to Razaq, pressure began to mount on him and on Sa’ad Mohseni, who supported his programme. Eventually, Razaq was asked to leave.
Funding shortages, political pressure and lack of experience in managing news outlets make it hard to sustain the media in Afghanistan. While outside bodies have been active in training journalists, little training has been provided for news managers.
However, the final declaration of the Kabul conference, signed by the attending journalists, draws a direct link between development and the media. ”There can be no democracy or development unless the voices of all sectors are reported,” it states. In other words, the international community can not be sincere about Afghan reconstruction, building democracy and civil society, if it is leaving Afghan media in such dire straits at such a crucial time. — Â