Freedom of press under attack in Uganda

A new bill tabled before parliament threatens the freedom of the press in Uganda. The country's journalists need the world to speak out against it.


Adopted from the Guardian.co.uk
Like many soldiers who seized power with the gun, promising clean leadership in post-colonial Africa, the Ugandan president, Yoweri Museveni, has had problems putting earlier patriotic rhetoric into action.

In the early years, after his National Resistance Army captured Kampala in 1986, Museveni sounded too good to be true. He promised a fundamental change to the way the country was governed, not a mere change of guard. He wondered why an African president would fly in a private jet when his people were suffering. He abhorred corruption. He said Africa's problem was leaders who did not want to leave power.

It now seems Museveni was too good to be true. Over the last decade, some of the actions of his government have been compared to those from the days of bare-knuckled dictators, like his predecessor Idi Amin – actions such as open persecution of political opponents, torture by army intelligence and military desecration of the high court. Today Museveni flies in a $50m presidential jet, which last year replaced an older one that was once used to fly his daughter to Germany to have a baby. All this, while a third of his people survive on barely $1 a day. Corruption is now making a strong case to be appended on to the name Uganda. And next year Museveni will seek to extend his reign to 30 years, having erased presidential term-limits from the country's constitution.
Press freedoms

One of the reasons why Museveni was originally labelled one of a new breed of African leaders was because of media freedoms. Magazines and newspapers thrived under the new "visionary" leader and broadcast media were liberalised, leading to the creation, over the years, of more than 150 private radio and television stations.

There have always been cracks in this relationship between state and the fourth estate, but they have become ever more glaring over the last 10 years, characterised by harassment of journalists critical of the government and the closure of media houses. In Uganda today, radio stations, especially those upcountry, in more rural areas where most Ugandans live, are considered very brave to host senior opposition figures, like Kizza Besigye of the Forum for Democratic Change. Some stations have denied him paid-for airtime, citing "orders from above" or for fear of being blacklisted by the Intelligence and the Broadcasting Council.

But the latest assault on the media, which has sent chills down the spines of independent newspaper editors, is the press and journalists (amendment) bill 2010. Reports indicate it has been tabled in Cabinet, although a minister recently said it is yet to be discussed.

One of the provisions in the proposed law requires newspapers to apply for annual licences to operate from the Media Council, whose chairman will be appointed by the minister for information. Until now newspapers only had to register with the General Post Office and pay for a trading licence like any other business. As Dr George Lugalambi, head of the mass communication department at Makerere University and chairman of the media activist group Article 29 Coalition, put it in a recent statement, by bringing this clause, the government is giving itself powers to legally shut down newspapers by simply revoking or refusing to renew its licence.

"Contrary to the provisions of Article 29 of our Constitution, licensing of newspapers will amount to licensing the very fundamental freedom of expression that is guaranteed in the constitution," the statement said. "Licensing of newspapers is an archaic control mechanism which has been used by regimes that do not appreciate the role of the media in enhancing the public good."

A newspaper could also lose its licence if it published material that the Media Council deems to be harmful to national security, stability, unity, the relationship with friendly countries or material that amounts to "economic sabotage". Given the contested nature of what constitutes "national interest" in a country where leaders live in politically financed extravagance while children die of malaria, and where top army ranks appear reserved for those from the president's ethnic group, the criminalisation of critical reporting on such public issues is, clearly, a veiled attack on freedom of expression.

The Article 29 Coalition, which has previously engaged Uganda's information minister, Kabakumba Masiko, over these matters, calls for support of the media's efforts at self-regulation, including the formation of an Independent Media Council. But a close scrutiny of government actions and statements against independent media houses shows ministers are not interested in professionalising the media, rather in controlling it.
Controlling opinion

In a recent interview with the Daily Monitor newspaper, Masiko said the law was needed to enforce responsibility in the media and control media that incite people. Asked who defines national interest, the minister replied "us Ugandans". And how do the media commit the crime of economic sabotage? By reporting about corruption scandals and environmental concerns on a contentious new electricity dam.

But last October, while speaking in the western Ugandan town of Hoima, Masiko inadvertently gave away what she, and the bill, really meant by saying that her government would not tolerate media and clergy that incite people. "All media content falls under my mandate, therefore make sure that your content promotes government programmes," she said at a Catholic church-founded radio station. "Stick to your mission and vision and do not incite the public against their government and leaders. Religious leaders, reserve your political comments and sentiments; if you make a political statement, be prepared for the consequences. Leave politics to politicians, or be ready to bear the consequences."

So there it is. Don't be critical, or expect "consequences" from the government; make sure that religious leaders – more than 90% of Ugandans profess to being practising Christians or Muslims - do not talk politics unless they are praising the government. That way you can rule without any significant interruption. That is how you get a Mugabe-style regime.

The Swedish government and US secretary of state Hilary Clinton are among the latest diplomats to speak out against Museveni's attempts to muzzle the press. Indeed, Clinton's latest report on Uganda was remarkably terse in its language, an indication of the west's changing tone towards Uganda's new breed leader. But how much can the west do to move a man they have so long helped to entrench himself in power? And what stance will the UK's new government take on the issue?

The world's outrage over Uganda's anti-gay bill looks like it has had an impact. It has not been thrown out yet, but could be quietly dropped. Perhaps too, with concerted pressure – especially from the EU countries and US – we can get Museveni to back down on this draconian bill. We have to try.