Freedom comes at a price, but for the media in Pakistan the price is rather high, almost unaffordable. Since 1992 about 80 journalists have been murdered and many more injured - an unenviable distinction that puts our country among the most dangerous places in the world for working journalists. And the irony is that no one gets caught and punished. Whether the judicial commission set up to investigate the murder attempt on the life of television anchorperson Hamid Mir will help bring to book the criminals we are not optimistic, given the track record of such moves. If anyone involved in killing a journalist or attacking a media house was ever punished there is no example. Of course, there is all the fury and fulmination over such incidents but nothing happens the day after, till there is another such ghastly incident. But this must come to an end. Media acts as the lungs of society and in today's Pakistan its role is all the more critical. Given the enormity of challenges to the lives of people - ranging from misconceived national 'interests' to political pressures to evil designs of the underworld - journalists and media houses are in the line of fire. But there is no escape for them from this high-risk obligation. So let this be the test case for the media to secure its constitutional right of informing the people and for the government to decide how far it can go in delivering on its constitutional responsibility to ensure the media's right to inform and the peoples' right to be informed.
But how to go about it, for reasons not yet clear there are problems from the very word go. Within minutes of the incident the media house to which Mir worked for started accusing the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) Directorate particularly its head Lieutenant General Zaheerul Islam of masterminding the murderous attack. And, for that it copiously cited his brother and some of his colleagues with whom he had purportedly shared his fears. To an average viewer this was a bit unprofessional, in that a premier media outlet was maligning the country's premier intelligence agency and its chief even before the aggrieved party had filed its complaint with the police. Probably, finding it no more digestible the Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR) department which speaks for the armed forces and its branches including the ISI directorate returned the fire. Curtly rejecting this wild allegation the ISPR questioned its authenticity and warned that 'legal and constitutional litigation against this shameful allegation' was being deliberated.
No less significantly, it asserted that the allegation by the concerned media outlet has 'resulted in gross insult and degrading of the army as an institution'. Realising, perhaps, that its channel has overplayed its hand, the media group issued a statement which 'clarified that it has not put the blame on any institution or section of any institution (read ISI)'. And that 'Mir had sent written and video statements to his colleagues and friends and members of family where security risks and threats to his life had been clearly identified... has been categorical in stating that some individuals in the security agencies have been after him for a while'. So, in essence, while the media group has disowned any role as a media house in what was broadcast by it, but has not disowned Mir's fears. Therefore, it is important that the ISI should help find the truth in the matter. It's just possible that having learnt that Mir has sent a video to a world body of journalists, accusing ISI of planning to harm him and whether some third-party or rival foreign intelligence outfit attacked him rightly assuming that ISI will earn the flak - who knows. For a change, therefore, the inquiry commission should seek help from all relevant quarters including the ISI and make public its verdict within the three-week mandated timeframe.
Wednesday, April 23, 2014
Pakistan: Media under attack
Freedom comes at a price, but for the media in Pakistan the price is rather high, almost unaffordable. Since 1992 about 80 journalists have been murdered and many more injured - an unenviable distinction that puts our country among the most dangerous places in the world for working journalists. And the irony is that no one gets caught and punished. Whether the judicial commission set up to investigate the murder attempt on the life of television anchorperson Hamid Mir will help bring to book the criminals we are not optimistic, given the track record of such moves. If anyone involved in killing a journalist or attacking a media house was ever punished there is no example. Of course, there is all the fury and fulmination over such incidents but nothing happens the day after, till there is another such ghastly incident. But this must come to an end. Media acts as the lungs of society and in today's Pakistan its role is all the more critical. Given the enormity of challenges to the lives of people - ranging from misconceived national 'interests' to political pressures to evil designs of the underworld - journalists and media houses are in the line of fire. But there is no escape for them from this high-risk obligation. So let this be the test case for the media to secure its constitutional right of informing the people and for the government to decide how far it can go in delivering on its constitutional responsibility to ensure the media's right to inform and the peoples' right to be informed.
But how to go about it, for reasons not yet clear there are problems from the very word go. Within minutes of the incident the media house to which Mir worked for started accusing the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) Directorate particularly its head Lieutenant General Zaheerul Islam of masterminding the murderous attack. And, for that it copiously cited his brother and some of his colleagues with whom he had purportedly shared his fears. To an average viewer this was a bit unprofessional, in that a premier media outlet was maligning the country's premier intelligence agency and its chief even before the aggrieved party had filed its complaint with the police. Probably, finding it no more digestible the Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR) department which speaks for the armed forces and its branches including the ISI directorate returned the fire. Curtly rejecting this wild allegation the ISPR questioned its authenticity and warned that 'legal and constitutional litigation against this shameful allegation' was being deliberated.
No less significantly, it asserted that the allegation by the concerned media outlet has 'resulted in gross insult and degrading of the army as an institution'. Realising, perhaps, that its channel has overplayed its hand, the media group issued a statement which 'clarified that it has not put the blame on any institution or section of any institution (read ISI)'. And that 'Mir had sent written and video statements to his colleagues and friends and members of family where security risks and threats to his life had been clearly identified... has been categorical in stating that some individuals in the security agencies have been after him for a while'. So, in essence, while the media group has disowned any role as a media house in what was broadcast by it, but has not disowned Mir's fears. Therefore, it is important that the ISI should help find the truth in the matter. It's just possible that having learnt that Mir has sent a video to a world body of journalists, accusing ISI of planning to harm him and whether some third-party or rival foreign intelligence outfit attacked him rightly assuming that ISI will earn the flak - who knows. For a change, therefore, the inquiry commission should seek help from all relevant quarters including the ISI and make public its verdict within the three-week mandated timeframe.
No comments:
Post a Comment