Freedom of Speech for Uganda's media

“The media today in Uganda is more like public relations reporting. If you stick to real issues, you may not remain in the profession. You’ll be in danger.”

‒Radio journalist in Hoima district, Uganda

May 3^rd marked World Press Freedom Day, and with that, unsurprisingly, brought up the issue of which countries across the world have press freedom. Ironically, given the topic in question, many articles and blogs were written about how in Uganda, despite what the current Press and Journalism Act says, journalists are not free to express themselves or the truth.

In the past year, since I’ve either lived or started to read about Uganda, I’ve seen the media curtailed in its attempts to report on events involving the government. On Sept 11^th last year, the day I flew to Uganda for a visit, the capital, Kampala, experienced a series of riots.

To summarize, the government had banned a representative of the traditional leader, the King of Buganda, from visiting some of his people. The Bugandan youth went out onto the streets of Kampala and rioted against the government for disallowing the king to move freely.

The riots lasted for two days, resulting in the death of 40 civilians. The police began retaliations with tear gas and blank bullets, but once those ran out, they thought it appropriate to use real bullets that subsequently killed people. Throughout this all, several Ugandan journalists reported on the riots – or at least tried – however those that aimed to criticize the government were beaten and detained, frightened into keeping their stories out of the public arena.

Incidences such as these threaten to terminally undermine the Ugandan media. Detaining and beating journalists are just some of the means deployed to deter ‘bad press’. Threats are also made on the safety of writers’ families, and people are threatened with criminal charges. And in Uganda, the government has ultimate control of all public services. They are the police, the courts; they have manipulation of the entire justice system.

Along with the newspapers, many of the radio stations were usurped during the riots. Nine months on, many are still off air. The consequences of this were, and still are, far reaching. Outside of bustling Kampala, the majority of the population lives in rural towns. Few televisions exist and with high illiteracy rates, radio shows are the only way for people to regularly access information outside of their Districts. Without this form of media, people are unable to hear about news events from varying perspectives, inhibiting them from making informed decisions. With Uganda’s general election coming up in March of next year, these restrictions on press freedom will most likely hinder a fair and free election.

In a wider context, the behaviours of the government upon the media show that Uganda is perhaps not the democratic, non-partisan body that it claims to be. Their obvious lack of discretion in curbing bad press is also completely contradictory; they are stopping the media because they want a good reputation, yet their bullying and abusing of human rights gives them nothing but a bad reputation.

Further still, the government now wants to legally and publicly stop the media from criticizing the government. In Uganda, the Press and Journalism Act requires annual licensing and the government have put forward a draft proposal, making criticizing the government illegal. The Human Rights Watch is currently appealing to members of parliament to reject the proposed draft changes to the act, asking them to honour press freedom in light of the upcoming elections. What seems absurd to me is that a government would want to publicly become more autocratic in an increasingly democratic world. Looking outside of this context, many other things point to this conclusion. For instance, currently there is the proposed bill to make homosexuality illegal, introducing the death penalty for those found ‘guilty’. It seems Uganda is moving backwards, not forwards, in reducing human rights violations and creating a fairer, free society.

The effect of these restrictions is that journalists are scared, scared to report on anything considered controversial, and this is leading to continual self-censorship.

However, it is not all doom and gloom. Recently, journalists that were beaten by police, when trying to report on police living in a football stadium, won their case in court. The judge’s final comments expressed how freedom of speech for journalists in Uganda is essential. Perhaps the court and the government are mutually exclusive after all.

Coincidentally, last week I met a journalist who’s experiences put all of this in context and perspective. He was put in prison in 2001 when he was working on an Eritrean newspaper. All editors and reporters were interrogated and locked up for six months without being charged before a court of law. They were all tortured in an attempt to force them to sign a confession to subversive activity against the Eritrean government. None of them succumbed. His editor in chief died during the torture.

After spending three years in prison, he escaped with two other journalists and fled to Sudan. He arrived in Uganda in October of last year as he is on the run again from Sudan because he was documenting the human rights violations committed in refugee camps in Darfur.

This man is truly passionate and determined to fight for freedom of expression for journalists. He is campaigning for the Eritrean President to release the journalists that are still detained.

His testimony did put the current Ugandan problems with press freedom in perspective. Journalists are not degraded and restricted to the same extent currently, but the way the government has dealt with recent events and with their plans to suppress freedom of expression further, the situation may well deteriorate.

When professional journalists and radio stations are shut down in controversial times, it is the Ugandan blogging community that can keep freedom of speech alive, informing others of what is happening. With blogs and twitter and other forms of social media, then the ‘truth’, or at least varying perspectives, will reach the people of Uganda.