A Statutory White Van!

The government has drawn flak from eight media associations including the Newspaper Society of Sri Lanka and the Editors` Guild of Sri Lanka over the re-activation of the draconian Sri Lanka Press Council (SLPC) Law of 1973 in spite of the existence of the Press Complaints Commission of Sri Lanka (PCCSL) to regulate the press. In a letter to President Mahinda Rajapaksa, those associations have accused the government of having reneged on its earlier commitment to the promotion of self-regulation of the media. They point out that the establishment of PCCSL, which came into being as `a fair exchange for the repeal of laws relating to criminal defamation`, had the blessings of all political parties represented in Parliament.

There is no way President Rajapaksa can justify the lifting of SLPC out of a state of suspended animation. Media associations quote him chapter and verse: He as the Opposition Leader waxed eloquent in Parliament defending as he did media freedom to the hilt, when an amendment was moved to repeal laws relating to criminal defamation. The amendment was carried unanimously rendering the Press Council Law inoperative in 2003.

One may wonder why on earth the media should oppose the Press Council law tooth and nail while demanding that the laws of the land apply equally to one and all and that the Head of State be stripped of his legal immunity. Yes, journalists are ordinary citizens who are neither above nor below others and there must be legal mechanisms in place to deal with them when they either err or transgress the law. But, why should a sledgehammer be used to crack a nut or why should an artillery piece be employed where an assault rifle is sufficient? Anyone who feels his or her rights are violated by the media could seek redress either by moving PCCSL or taking recourse to ordinary law. The Press Council with powers to fine and/or sentence journalists and publishers to prison is a detestable anachronism and its reactivation smacks of an ulterior motive on the part of the government.

There have been various allegations and charges against the media. Some journalists have been accused of collaboration with terrorists. The government itself claimed that some journalists were in the pay of the LTTE. There may have been some problems with the system of self-regulation of the press. If that was the case why didn`t the government consider it meet and proper to discuss them with media organisations before taking the genie out of the bottle? After all, the government had discussions even with the LTTE, didn`t it?

The government is damaging its democratic credentials irreparably. None of the assassins or assailants of journalists has yet been nabbed. Attacks on media continue. To cap it all, the government has brought back the Press Council, which we reckon, is nothing but a statutory white van to tackle the media.

Suppression of the press is a self-defeating exercise for any regime. President Rajapaksa, a one time champion of media freedom who is au fait with the disastrous consequences of such repressive measures, must desist from reviving the czarist Press Council.

http://www.lankanewspapers.com/news/2009/6/45168.html

Defence Secretary Vs Leader Publications

Defence Secretary Gotabhaya Rajapaksa, in conversation with his Senior Counsel Ali Sabry at the Mount Lavinia Court yesterday. Picture by Mahinda Vithanachchi

Contempt of court:Noticed to show cause

Defence Counsel withdraws from case

Mount Lavinia Additional District Judge Macki Mohamed yesterday issued notice on the Leader Publications and two others, Lal Wickrematunga and journalist Fredrica Jansz, to appear in Court on July 9 and to show cause why they should not be dealt for contempt of Court.

At the commencement of the two cases where, Defence Secretary Rajapaksa had filed against the Leader Publications, the Counsel for Leader Publications informed the Judge they are not appearing for the respondents, the Leader Publications, and withdrew from the two cases.

Defence Secretary Gotabhaya Rajapaksa, in conversation with his Senior Counsel Ali Sabry at the Mount Lavinia Court yesterday. Picture by Mahinda Vithanachchi

In this case, Defence Secretary Gotabhaya Rajapaksa sought Rs. 1 billion as compensation from the Leader Publications and Sunday Leader newspaper for publishing an article defamatory of him. The Court issued an injunction order on the defendants on December 14, 2008 prohibiting them to publish articles defamatory of the petitioner Defence Secretary Gotabhaya Rajapaksa.

Subsequently on May 14, 2009, the date on which they were required to file objections, the defendants came to Court and pledged not to publish anything defamatory to the petitioner and agreed to face punishment for contempt of Court if the pledge was not honoured.

Judge Mohamed issued notice on the respondents after lengthy submissions made by Senior Attorney M.U.M. Ali Sabry, Senior Counsel for the Defence Secretary. Senior Counsel Ali Sabry submitted that the counsel who appeared for late journalist Lasantha Wickrematunga and the Leader Publications on the last hearing date, gave an undertaking to Court that they will not publish any articles or any statements defamatory to Defence Secretary Rajapaksa in the future.

Violating the undertaking given to Court on the last hearing date, the Leader Publication had published an article on May 25, 2009 defamatory to the Defence Secretary.

In that article the writer had compared the Defence Secretary with the LTTE leader.

The writer’s name was also not mentioned in that article. This is gross violation of human rights, Senior Counsel Sabry said.

The Defence Secretary and an Officer of the Navy came to Court yesterday to give evidence and informed the public about the correct picture of the “Mig Transaction,” As the Counsel for the respondents were not present in Court, we had to move for a date, the Senior Counsel Sabry said.

Earlier, Senior Counsel Sabry emphasised that if the Leader publications violate the conditions agreed in Court, they will file action against them in Court.

Senior Counsel Sabry with Samith Fernando, Laksith Jayawardena and Rajitha Dissanayake instructed by Sanath Wijewardena appeared for the Defence Secretary. The case will be called again on July 9, 2009

http://www.dailynews.lk/2009/06/24/news01.asp

Northern polls: Tamil parties want foreign monitors

By Sandun A Jayasekera

A leading polls-monitoring group in Sri Lanka said yesterday it was looking at the possibility of bringing in foreign observers for the elections to the Jaffna Municipal Council and the Vavuniya Urban Council, an official of the group said.

“We will have about 700 local observers for the Uva Provincial Council polls and about 100 for the Jaffna and Vavuniya polls. But Tamil political parties are calling for foreign observers to monitor the polls in Jaffna and Vavuniya,” PAFFREL Executive Director Rohan Hettiarachchi told Daily Mirror.

The Peoples Action for Free and Fair Elections said it would have to obtain the permission of the Elections Commissioner and the Defense Ministry if PAFFREL was to deploy foreign observers and added that this matter would be discussed with the EC and the Ministry soon after the closing date for receiving nominations.

Handing in of nominations for the Uva PC polls ends at 12:00 noon today while for Jaffna and Vavuniya polls ends at 12:00 noon tomorrow.

Meanwhile Moneragala Assistant Elections Commissioner K.J.S. Madawa said that by yesterday the Eksath Samajawadee Pakshaya and the Jathika Nidahas Peramuna had handed in their nominations while three Independent Groups paid their deposits for the Moneragala District.

Badulla Assistant Elections Commissioner T.A.C.N. Talangama said one Independent Group had handed in nominations while another such group had paid its deposit for the Badulla District by yesterday.

Jaffna Assistant Elections Commissioner said the UNP had handed in its nominations for the Jaffna MC polls on Monday, while three Independent Groups had paid their deposits for the Vavuniya UC polls by yesterday.

A total of 875,456 voters are eligible to cast their votes at 814 polling stations in the two districts while Jaffna has 100,417 registered voters and Vavuniya 24,626 with voters of both areas voting in 85 polling stations.

Uva PC consists of 32 members with Jaffna 23 and Vavuniya 11.

- http://www.dailymirror.lk/DM_BLOG/Sections/frmNewsDetailView.aspx?ARTID=52805

Media groups appeal to President not to reactive Press Council

Media organisations and representatives appealed to the President yesterday to reconsider the decision made by the Government to re-activate the Sri Lanka Press Council Law No. 5 of 1973 which has the power to fine and/or sentence journalists and publishers to terms of imprisonment.
“A media culture cannot be based on slapping charges against journalists, fining them or sending them to jail. Instead the modern world has accepted a self-regulatory mechanism by media persons themselves, as the way forward,” the letter stated.

The signatories to the letter appealing to the President included Sri Lanka Working Journalists Association, Sri Lanka Tamil Media Alliance, Sri Lanka Muslim Media Forum, Federation of Media Employees Trade Unions, South Asian Free Media Association (Sri Lanka Chapter), Free Media Movement, Newspaper Society of Sri Lanka and The Editors’ Guild of Sri Lanka. While stating that the Sri Lanka Press Council Law which has a controversial history was meant to have a ‘chilling effect’ on media freedom, the signatories appealed to the President to remember that in 1994, he gave his consent to establish a self-regulatory system in place of the Statutory Press Council as he believed that the Press Council which could impose penal punishment on journalists was ‘archaic’.

The Press Council Law was made inoperative in 2003 after an amendment was unanimously passed in Parliament in exchange for which the media associations agreed to appoint a ‘self-regulatory’ mechanism which resulted in the establishment of the Press Complaints Commission of Sri Lanka, an independent body that was not a financial burden to the State or the complainant.

However, the signatories conveyed their regret that the Government ‘reneged on its earlier commitment to support self-regulation’ also stating that the Government did not consider it ‘useful’ or ‘prudent’ to consult the media fraternity before implementing the decision. They called on the Government to have a dialogue with the stakeholders to promote self regulation as part of the media culture in the interest of democracy and a responsible and free press in Sri Lanka.

http://www.thebottomline.lk/2009/06/24/news12.html