|
Meeting on draft media bill aborts
2007-02-24 07:38:43
By Judica Tarimo
Media stakeholders have openly differed on the modalities of reviewing the controversial draft information bill, their meeting in Dar es Salaam yesterday called off shortly after it was opened.
Information, Culture and Sports minister Muhammed Seif Khatib opened the meeting but most participants soon said they had not gone through the document and were therefore unable to discuss it meaningfully.
The participants included media owners and practitioners, politicians, civil society representatives and were mainly divided on exactly how and where to start deliberating on the government-prepared draft.
While some wanted the meeting to proceed as planned, others pushed for a rescheduling of the discussions to give them time to read the document before contributing to follow-up debate.
`We cannot proceed with discussions on something we have not read. Let us get the document and discuss it with our colleagues first so that we can add our input to it before we come again for discussions,` IPP Executive Chairman Reginald Mengi said.
A number of other participants, among them opposition politicians Dr. Wilbroad Slaa from Chadema
and Dr. Sengondo Mvungi from NCCR-Mageuzi, concurred.
As the exchange of words among the delegates continued, meeting chairman Judge Joseph Warioba stood up to declare that he supported the idea of postponing the planned deliberations.
`Stakeholders should be allowed enough time to digest the document before submitting their recommendations. I have gone through it and spotted some shortfalls and that is why I am saying that instead of discussing it today, stakeholders should be given time to study it and then submit their comments later on,` he added, then called off the meeting.
Earlier, there was short-lived disagreement over who were genuine information sector stakeholders and who were not, one idea being that only the former had the right to discuss the draft.
Many media practitioners present stressed that discussion on the subject should go on until it was concluded, describing those opposing the move as non-professionals.
Judge Warioba intervened, saying: `We should not confuse these things.
It is absolutely wrong to confine these discussions on the draft bill to media practitioners and the government. When we talk of information stakeholders, everybody in fact qualifies - even members of the public.`
Dr. Slaa told The Guardian in an exclusive interview that information belonged to the public and not only to media houses and public involvement in the debate was therefore inevitable.
`Members of the public are key consumers of information and surely deserve to be given the opportunity to contribute to deliberations on the draft. This debate should not be monopolised by the government and media organisations,` he said.
Talking to journalists shortly after the meeting, Director of Tanzania Information Services (Maelezo) Kassim Mpenda said the government would consult individual stakeholders for their recommendations.
`We agreed to consult individual stakeholders, discuss with them and get their views. If their concerns differ widely, we will have to convene another forum to discuss them. But if they are relatively similar, the government will only make the necessary changes to them and proceed with other procedures.`
But Dr. Slaa opposed the one-on-one approach, saying the government might contact only those supporting the draft it had prepared and ignore critical stakeholders.
`The one-on-one strategy is applicable in Europe, where governments are known to have a high degree of credibility and trust. I doubt if it can work in our case,` he noted.
The Chadema Secretary General added: `If we do that, the government would have to call yet another stakeholders’ meeting to discuss the changes made on the draft before it is tabled in Parliament.`
Both Dr Slaa and Warioba challenged sections of the draft bill, noting that they sought to make changes to some articles of the country’s Constitution – which they said would be professionally and legally wrong.
`The Constitution is the mother law; it cannot be changed just because changes are made to other laws like this one.
It is the Constitution that could change other laws and not the other way round,` explained the judge.
Meanwhile, Dr Slaa observed: `The draft bill incorporates changes that seek to amend Article 18 of the Constitution, which provides for freedom of expression. I buy the spirit and contents of the changes but the procedures are wrong because media laws just cannot change the Constitution.`
|
