He said this while addressing the Right to Information Act Punjab seminar arranged by the Chakwal Press Club here on Sunday. Pakistan Federal Union of Journalists leader CR Shamsi presided over the seminar. Mazhar Hussain said that all the Punjab government institutions as well as NGOs, which were funded by the government, were accountable to the people of Pakistan and these institutions must have to produce each and every information regarding their working and function. He said that more than 400 public relation officers had been appointed in different government institutions in Punjab and they were bound to provide information in a simple application that was posted to them. The officers concerned would provide information within 14 working days and if they would not do then another application would be send to the chief information commissioner, he added. CR Shamsi said that journalists’ community would cooperate to implement the Right to Information Act Punjab. Chakwal Press Club chairman Khawaja Babar Saleem and others also spoke.

The News

CC: Amina J. Mohammed, Assistant Secretary General

Dear Mr. Secretary General,

We write to you as a coalition of civil society organisations committed to sustainable development, to urge you to highlight the importance of the right to information, free media, and the protection of civil society organisations’ ability to organise and engage in your upcoming stocktaking report on the Sustainable Development Goals to the General Assembly.

We welcome your recent announcement on the creation of an Independent Expert Advisory Group on the Data Revolution for Sustainable Development. However, as experts and practitioners in the field, we feel strongly that the data revolution cannot succeed without substantial improvement in the openness of governments to their people and an improved and enabling environment for civic space that allow individuals, civil society and communities to know, speak, engage and operate freely. To achieve this, the rights to freedom of information, free media, freedom of association, and freedom of peaceful assembly must be fully recognised and enabled.

The importance of these rights has been recognised in the Millennium Declaration, the Rio+ 20 declaration and numerous UN papers. These rights are also highlighted in the report of the High Level Panel of Eminent Persons and in the recommendations of the Open Working Group, both of which recommended that access to information and the protection of fundamental freedoms be included as targets. However, even with the crucial role these rights play in development, they are largely unincorporated in currently agreed development mechanisms and were conspicuous by their absence in the Millennium Development Goals.

As you acknowledged in your “Freedom Lecture” speech last year at the University of Leiden, civil society is under increasing pressure: journalists and human rights defenders are imprisoned; internet and media outlets are shut down; and peaceful protests are banned. These issues need to be addressed as part of the SDGs or they will continue to hinder development progress and the data revolution will be restricted to the status quo of limited and unreliable information by the few, for the few, instead of access to information by everyone, for everyone, and the ability to act upon it.

Mr. Secretary General, today is globally recognised as “Right to Know Day”. Governments and civil society organisations around the world will celebrate the progress made so far to ensure everyone is empowered to have greater control over their lives by better knowing how governments operate. Please take the time today to ensure these rights are not forgotten in the SDGs.

Thank you for your consideration. If your office wishes to discuss this further, please contact us.

Yours sincerely,

ARTICLE 19
Access Info Europe
Accun pour la Culture Numérique
Action 2015 National team-Sri Lanka
Active Remedy Ltd
Adevarul (The Truth)
Africa Freedom of Information Centre
Albanian Media Institute
Amnesty International
Arlan
Asociación Gestión Salud Población
Association Al Bawsala
Association for Freedom of Thought and Expression
Association I Watch – Tunisia
Association Nigérienne des Femmes Diplômées
Association of Caribbean Media Workers
Association of Private Nature Reserves of Minas Gerais State
Association TANSA
Association Tunisienne de Soutien Aux Minorités
Association Tunisienne des Contrôleurs Publics
Association Vigilance pour la Démocratie et l’Etat Civique
Associazione Museo Energia
Bahrain Center for Human Rights
BBC Media Action
Belarusian Association of Journalists
CAFSO-WRAG for Development
Cambodian Center for Human Rights
Campaign2015+ International
Canadian Journalists for Free Expression
Caribbean Policy Development Centre
CEEweb for Biodiversity
Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility
Centre for Human Rights and Climate Change Research
Centre for Independent Journalism – Malaysia
Centre for Law and Democracy
Centre for Sustainable Development and Education in Africa
Centro de Reportes Informativos sobre Guatemala – CERIGUA
CF Sange Research Center
CIDAC
Civil Society Partnership for Development Effectiveness
COLLECTIF 24
Comité por la Libre Expresión – C-Libre
Comité Sénégalais des Droits de l’Homme
Corruption Watch UK
EDW ENERGIA
Federation of SUNFO Global Youth Forum
FEMNET – The African Women’s Development and Communication Network
Finnish NGDO platform to the EU
Finnish NGO Platform KEPA
Fondation Mohamed Belmufti Pour La Justice et Les Libertés
Foro de Periodismo Argentino
Foundation for Press Freedom – FLIP
Freedom Forum
Freedom House
Fundamedios – Andean Foundation for Media Observation and Study
GCAP Sri Lanka
Groupe AGORA pour les Droits de l’enfant et la paix (GRA-REDP)
Hong Kong Journalists Association
IMove 2015 Campaign Sri Lanka
Initiative for Freedom of Expression – Turkey
Institut panafricain pour la Citoyenneté, les Consommateurs et le Développement
Institute for Economic Research on Innovation
Institute for the Studies on Free Flow of Information
Instituto de Estudos de Direito e Cidadania
Instituto Internacional de Derecho y Medio Ambiente
Instituto o Direito por um Planeta Verde
Instituto Prensa y Sociedad de Venezuela
International Federation of Journalists, Asia Pacific
International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions
International Publishers Association
Interregional Union of Life Help for Mentally Handicapped Persons “Sail of Hope”
Journaliste en danger
Kikandwa Environmental Association
La Ligue Tunisienne des droits de l’Homme
Laboratório de Educação e Política Ambiental – OCA USP
Le Labo Démocratique
Ligue Africaine des blogueurs et activistes pour la démocratie
Ligue Sénégalaise des Droits de l’Homme
Maharat Foundation
Media Institute of Southern Africa
Media Watch
Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance
MediaLink
Metamorphosis, Foundation for Internet and Society
Mujer y Sociedad
Mujeres Mundi
National Union of Somali Journalists
NGO Federation of Nepal
Observatoire Tunisien de l’Indépendance de la Magistrature
Organisation nationale des droits l’homme
Pacific Islands News Association
Pakistan Fisherfolk Forum
Pakistan Press Foundation
Palestinian Center for Development and Media freedoms (MADA)
PEN American Center
PraveenLata Sansthan
PRESSAFRIK
Pro Media
Public Association “Journalists”
Publish What You Fund
Ramfa “Rehomfa” Welfare Org
Rede Latinoamericana do Ministério Público Ambiental
Rencontre Africaine pour la Défense des Droits de l’Homme (RADDHO)
Reporters Without Borders
Request Initiative
Réseau des Organisations Féminines d’Afrique Francophone
Restless Development
Right to Information Coalition Ghana
RightsWay International
Second Chance foundation
Section Sénégalaise de la Société Internationale pour les Droits Humains
Southeast Asian Press Alliance
Southern Minas Gerais Institute for Nature Studies and Conservation
Southwest Freedom of Information Act Network
Sri Lanka United Nations Friendship Organization
Stichting Bakens Verzet (NGO Another Way)
Sunlight Foundation
Terra-1530
The Climate Reality Project Canada
Tobacco Free Association of Zambia
Tunisian Association for the Advancement of Science, Technology and Innovation
Union des Radios Associatives et Communautaires, Senegal
Union des Tunisiens Indépendants pour la Liberté
Unión Nacional de Instituciones para el Trabajo de Acción Social-UNITAS
Voice
West African Journalists Association
Whistleblower-Network Germany
World Association of Community Radio Broadcasters – AMARC
Zambia Heart and Stroke Foundation
Zo Indigenous Forum

ARTICLE 19

The official data and the research conducted by this correspondent indicate that the bureaucracy in KPK seems readier to share information regarding its working to the public as compared to its counterpart in Punjab despite the fact that the two provinces have enacted almost similar Right to Information Law early this year.

The data provided by the respective information commission of the two provinces show that over 400 complaints have been filed against various departments in Punjab for withholding information during last four months while in KPK only around 180 such complaints have been received in the last eight months.

This correspondent also sent similar information request to all districts of Punjab and KPK on the same date but the response from KPK was much faster and better in terms of information than that from Punjab. The request was sent to 19 districts of KPK on September 2, 2014 and until yesterday (Wednesday) five districts had already responded with the required information. In contrast, out of 35 districts of Punjab, only four had responded with the required information while one has snubbed this correspondent for making the information request.

The executive district officer (Health) of Lahore even summoned this correspondent to his office in response to an information request, in an illegal move depicting the typical secretive and authoritative mindset of the bureaucracy.

“You are requested to appear personally along with your original National Identity Card in this office on any working day for collection of the said information,” reads the response signed by EDO (Health) Lahore.

When contacted, the member of Punjab Information Commission (PIC) Mukhtar Ahmad Ali said the EDO had no right to summon a citizen over an information request indicating that the commission would proceed against the official after receiving a written complaint against his attitude.

According to data provided by PIC member, around 400 complaints have been received by the commission during last four months against the officials of the Punjab government who failed to provide information to the citizens under the Punjab Transparency and Right to Information Act (RTI) 2013.

“Under the law, the concerned department is bound to provide required information within 14 days of the filing request. Even if the information cannot be provided owing to some genuine reasons, the concerned department must give its response to the applicant within the stipulated time,” Mukhtar Ahmad said.

He said the culture of secrecy was still prevalent in the province but the commission was trying to create more awareness about the law through training workshops for officers of the various departments.

However, he said PIC was yet to get a proper office and budgetary allocation by the government.The situation is a lot better in KPK where the Right to Information Commission started working in December 2013. Talking to The News, the provincial Chief Information Commissioner Sahibzada Muhammad Khalid said the fist complaint against a KPK official for withholding information was received in February 2014.

“So far we have received 170 individual and seven group complaints against various officials of KP government for violation of KPK’s Right to Information Act 2013 and the commission have already disposed of 55 such complaints,” he said.

Khalid said the KPK Assembly must be commended for passing the RTI law as it had enabled the common citizen to access information regarding the working of the government. “This is something that I had not imagined happing during my life,” he said.The chief information commissioner said the law was playing a vital role in improving governance in the province as the officials knew that they were under public scrutiny.

He said in other countries several years were given for awareness campaigns before the implementation of RTI law but in KPK and Punjab, the law had been immediately implemented.

The News

As the proceedings commenced, Advocate Azhar Siddique argued that the ban on helicam by Pemra authorities is against the Article 19 and 19-A of the Constitution. He said the helicams are being used because of the safety of the journalists. The petitioner said right to information has been enshrined by the Constitution which cannot be taken away from them. He prayed the court to set aside the ban on helicam imposed by Pemra. After hearing the arguments of the petitioner, Justice Ijaz-ul-Haq of the LHC issued notice to Pemra to submit reply. The court will resume hearing on September 11.

The News

This has raised questions about the establishment of the Punjab Information Commission (PIC), and the three information commissioners tasked with implementing the Act.

The Punjab Assembly passed the RTI Bill 2013 on December 13, 2013. The bill became an act after the governor approved it on December 16.

The information commissioners appointed on March 5, have reportedly been running from pillar to post to arrange offices for themselves so they can implement the Act.

The government appointed Additional Inspector General Ahmed Raza Tahir and Mukhtar Ahmad Ali as information commissioners, and Justice (r) Mazhar Hussain Minhas the chief information commissioner.

The appointments were made in line with clause five of the RTI Act 2013. The clause states that the PIC should have an office to start its operations, implement the act and frame rules under the Act.

Several government officials have revealed that the three commissioners are in quandary as they have no funds at their disposal to set up offices and implement the Act.

The notification of their appointment had been issued only to fulfil official procedures, said the officials. They said the commissioners had been asked to stay at home and keep drawing salaries until a further directive.

Officials requesting anonymity said that the information secretary had informed the three commissioners that a summary regarding the budget for the commission was pending with the Finance Department.

A senior government officer said that instead of empowering the PIC, the provincial government was relying on the Information Department.

“Allocating and approving budget is only a matter of two days. Six months have passed since the Act was introduced but the government has not allocated a single penny for the PIC. This shows that the commission is not the government’s priority,” the officer told The Express Tribune.

He said the chief minister was assisted by his Press Secretary Shoaib Bin Aziz, Information Secretary Momin Agha and Director General Public Relations Athar Ali Khan.

He said the government was delaying funds for the PIC on purpose.

The government has also violated clause 7 of the RTI Act 2013 which states a public body “shall within 60 days of the commencement of this Act designate and notify as many officers as public information officers in all administrative units or offices under it, as may be necessary”.

Currently, the government has notified only 50 public information officers for Lahore. Other districts in the province await appointment of information officers.

Momin Agha declined comment. He said he was busy at a meeting.

PML-N Parliamentary Secretary on Information Rana Arshad said that the party had always favoured transparency and merit. He said he would place the matter before the chief minister.

Mukhtar Ahmad Ali said 50 public information officers had been trained by the Management and Professional Development Department. They would serve in Lahore, he said.

He said officers from other districts would also be trained after the month of Ramazan. He admitted he had no staff to implement the Act.

Express Tribune

It was decided during the 9th meeting of the committee, which was held in the Parliament House under the chair of committee Chairperson MNA Marvi Memon.

Under the ToRs, the task force would identify the needs, if any, for amendments, changes, etc in sections of media laws, rules, regulations including “definitions” and substantive provisions so as to accurately reflect contemporary realities and factors such as new technologies, and to propose specific amendments to existing laws, rules and regulations for consideration by the respective legislatures.

The task force would also draft the texts for new laws, rules and regulations in the light of contemporary conditions and emerging trends, and with reference to the recommendations of the media commission as unanimously endorsed by the national assembly standing committee on information, broadcasting and national heritage in its meeting on 16th April 2014.

The task force would also develop a monitoring framework for committee reference to have an oversight on the implementation of the existing and the amended laws rules regulations. The committee also empowered task force to add any other TORs after deliberations of the members of the task force with the approval of the committee.

The members of task force included leading lawyer of the country Babar Sattar, Barrister Salman Afridi, Rizwan Ejaz, Nawazish Peerzada, Faisal Siddiqi, Ayub Baloch, Yasmeen Aftab Ali and Aafia Salam. One member would be included later.

The committee also discussed recommendations on code of conduct of Pakistan Electronic Media Regularity Authority (PEMRA). The acting director general of Pakistan National Council of Arts also gave a presentation on Pakistan Culture and Arts Foundation Relief Fund to the members of committee. The committee was satisfied with the presentation and briefing of the acting DG and directed secretary information to appoint a permanent DG of the council. The secretary assured the committee to appoint a permanent DG by the first of July.

The standing committee on information, broadcasting and heritage also reviewed the subcommittee on right to information’s recommendations on right to information bill. The members appreciated the work done by subcommittee and decided that its notes would be included in final report. The committee also proposed 14 amendments/recommendation to be included in government bill to make it a better law.

The committee decided to review the report of subcommittee headed by MNA Arifa Khalid Pervaiz regarding recommendations on code of conduct of PEMRA and further information on the authority in the next committee meeting.

The Nation

In its letter, Geo has reminded all the cable operators that though Pemra has conveniently failed to get the orders of the apex court implemented, the cable operators themselves were also violating the terms of their licence by first shuffling the Geo News number and later suspending the transmission.

The channel has reminded all the cable operators that suspending the transmission of a channel was the worst violation of the Constitution and law and after the SC verdict it was tantamount to making a mockery of the institutions and the state.

Regarding the cable operators’ claim about threats to them, it is also stated that the cable operators have been either blacking out the Geo channels or shifting them to the furthest numbers since April 24, but they have never contacted the police or the authorities concerned with proof. They never gave the police any phone number from where the threats were received. The cable operators were also reminded that when in the past they changed Geo position, the Supreme Court issued strict orders to them, Pemra and the government to set the things right.

Geo has highlighted that due to mysterious reasons, the cable operators were openly confronting the apex court and were punishing the Geo/Jang Group for taking its case to the Supreme Court to get justice after operators across the country blocked the transmission of all other channels of the group, including Geo Super, Geo Tez, Geo Kahani and Geo Entertainment.

This attitude of cable operators and hidden forces backing them is the worst example of confronting the judiciary.The letter was sent to all the cable operators and also copied to Pemra, all members of the authority and the Federal Ministry of Information and Broadcasting by the legal counsel for Geo Faraz Raza.

The relevant portions of the letter are reproduced here:

1. For the last several weeks, you have been violating the terms of your license by deliberately and illegally first shuffling the channel from its normal position and then completely suspending the transmission of Geo News.

2. Our client repeatedly reported your violation of license to Pemra, requesting that Pemra must take immediate steps to have transmission of Geo News restored but Pemra illegally in violation of its statutory obligation, failed to get Geo News transmission restored at its previous position.

3. Your continued violation of your license, and Pemra’s illegal omission to have Geo News transmission restored, left our client with no option but to approach the Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan with the grievance that Pemra is not implementing the order of Hon’ble Supreme Court of 2010 in which, relying on the Court’s appointed Mediator Mr. Javed Jabbar’s Report, Honourable Supreme Court had directed Pemra to ensure that two channels Geo News and ARY News were not shuffled from their current position.

4. On 26.05.2014, the honourable Supreme Court disposed off our client’s petition on the basis of Pemra’s counsel Mr. Ibrahim Satti and Pemra’s Head Legal Department Mr. Zahid Malik, undertaking that Pemra “shall abide by the terms of order dated 13.08.2012 passed in Constitution Petition No.51 of 2010, by which the report of Mr. Javed Jabbar, the Mediator, was made part of the said order and that the Pemra will ensure that there is no shifting of the channels contrary to or in violation of the order dated 13.08.2012.”

5. It may be noted that the illegal so-called order supposedly passed by three members of Pemra, preceded the hearing of our client’s petition in the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Neither Pemra accepted the so-called decision of three private members, nor did Pemra or any anyone else bring it to the Honourable Court’s attention at the time of hearing and the order of Honourable Supreme Court does not even mention the illegal meeting of three private members who have been announcing their decision on rival TV channels.

6. You therefore have absolutely no excuse to disobey the clear orders of Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan.

7. However, it is shocking to note that despite the above clear direction of Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan, you still continue to keep Geo News ‘transmission suspended without realising that it is not only illegal and a clear violation of your license, but now it amounts to contempt of court too’.

8. For your easy reference, we are producing below certain relevant excerpts of the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of Pakistan on a petition filed by our client and that was clubbed with a petition of ARY News, titled Shahid Masood versus The Federation of Pakistan and published PLD 2010 SCMR 1849, that the Supreme Court has now directed to be implemented:

“11. Such was then the importance attached to the obligations, inter alia, cast on the Cable T.V. Network Operators offering the distribution of services and the importance attached to the undisturbed distribution of the said services by such operators. It would also be noticed from the said provisions that:

(iii) the license of any such operator causing any interference/obstruction in the distribution of any broadcast could result in suspension or even revocation of the license granted to such an operator;’ and

(iv) such an act of interference and obstruction was also a penal offence carrying a sentence of imprisonment up to three years or a fine of rupees ten million or both and such an offence was a cognizable offence authorizing the police to arrest the accused persons without any warrant. [emphasis provided]

The reason for such weight being attached to the said business is not far to find as the same stems out of the fundamental rights of freedom of speech, expression and of press as guaranteed by Article 19 of the Constitution and equally importantly, if not more, the right of every citizen to have access to information in all matters of public importance as guaranteed by the recently inserted provisions of Article 19-A of the Constitution.

13. In this view of the matter, we find that the act of the respondent Operators of the Cable T.V. Networks blocking/obstructing the transmission of ARY News and GEO News and the consequent denial of distribution service to the said Channels and to the viewers who were paying the said operators for the said service, prima facie, was a gross violation of the terms and conditions of the licenses granted to them under sections 20 and 24 read with the provisions of sections 27 and 28 of the said Ordinance of 2002 and thus attracted penal provisions of sections 30 and 33 of the said Ordinance in respect of not only the ones committing the said violations but also those abetting the same. [Emphasis provided].

15. … … … The said blockade, prima facie, was not only a denial of duty towards the law, towards Pemra and towards the two broadcasters, but was also a serious breach of the constitutional, legal, moral and financial obligations of the cable operators in question to the hundreds and thousands of subscribers who had the right to information and who had paid for their right to viewership. … … …

17. Having thus examined the factual, the legal and even the constitutional aspects of the matter; the factually incorrect claims being made before us and the consequent legal violations, it is ordered, for the present, as under:

(i) …. Pemra shall ensure immediate distribution of broadcast services of Pemra licensed channels, namely, ARY News and GEO News, even if the same involves strict legal action against the delinquent cable T.V. operators, if any;

(ii) … Pemra shall personally monitor and ensure that the transmission of the broadcast of the said two channels i.e. ARY News and GEO News is continued to be aired without any hindrance or obstruction of whatever kind.”

9. It is in view of above clear directions of Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan that we call upon you to immediately restore transmission of Geo News on its original position at which you were showing it a month ago.

10. As, despite above clear direction of Supreme Court of Pakistan, you have illegally continued to keep Geo News off air, Pemra was required by the statute as well as under the above-quoted direction of Supreme Court to not only proceed with formalities to suspend and then revoke your license, but also to prosecute you for the offence of causing obstruction in the broadcasting of Geo News. Unfortunately, to-date, Pemra has failed to do either of the above.

11. This letter is being copied to Pemra and Ministry of Information. In case Pemra still fails to have Geo News’ transmission restored, our client shall have no option but to approach the Honourable Court for appropriate actions that may be available under law against any person who may be committing the offence of disobeying clear orders of Hon’ble Supreme Court of Pakistan or being party to an effort not to allow the Court’s order to be implemented.

12. In addition to what has been stated in this letter, it is shocking to discover that instead of complying with the direction of Honourable Supreme Court by restoring the transmission of Geo News to its original position, as if in order to punish us for approaching Supreme Court for relief or to show extra contempt to Honorable Court, you have illegally suspended the remaining channels of Geo TV network too, namely Geo Tez, Geo Kahani, Geo Entertainment and Geo Super. There could not be worse example of showing contempt to the Honorable Court.

13. Suspension of all our channels is causing huge losses to Geo TV network on a daily basis for which, apart from other legal remedies against you, we shall seek compensation from you for the financial damages that you are causing to our client by illegally suspending all the channels of Geo TV network.

The News

Worst-ever confrontation with judiciary by cable operators, hidden backers

“It amounts to obstructing the right to information and violates our culture, religion and Constitution of Pakistan”. In a statement Tuesday, the HRSP said emotions should not be given the language of violence.

If anyone tries to impose his views on others by taking the law into their hands, he is no different from a terrorist who wants to impose his will through violence, the statement said. It further added that such an attitude will breed intolerance and encourage other groups to follow the same course to force the common people of Pakistan to follow and accept his understanding of religion and the norms of society. It has appealed to the government, both federal and provincial to wake up to its responsibility in reversing this trend, otherwise it will be the government which ultimately will suffer the most.

The News

A statement issued by CRCP secretary general Mian Abrar Hafeez praised the committee and the information ministry for including almost all proposals presented by the commission during a recent roundtable discussion on the Federal Right to Information (RTI) Bill and the role of ombudsmen.

Keeping in view the poor state of governance, transparency and accountability, all provinces should take steps to enact effective RTI laws.

He said Sindh and Balochistan should follow the precedent set by Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Punjab and now the centre by amending old and ineffective laws.

Mian Abrar said the right to information law was a strong tool to improve governance, eradicate corruption and enhance transparency and accountability.

Proper implementation of RTI laws could help free flow of information and facilitate citizens’ meaningful involvement in decision-making, he said. He urged civil society and the media to join hands to make the RTI regime successful.

DAWN

Umar Cheema, a Pakistani journalist, wrote often about the military. Then one night masked men hauled him from his car and during six hours of torture, sexual humiliation, and threats, they made it clear that the reporting should stop. Cheema not only refused to stop writing, he went public with his ordeal. “I wanted to send a message that I had not cowed down,” Cheema said of his response to the 2010 assault. “I did nothing wrong, and that kept me strong.” The Committee to Protect Journalists awarded him its International Press Freedom Award in 2011.

The assault spurred him on to do more reporting, and, in December 2012, he launched the Center for Investigative Reporting in Pakistan. To mark the opening, he published a list of members of Parliament who paid no taxes and ignited a political firestorm. Despite his success in unearthing wrongdoing and corruption–some might even say because of it–Cheema has few powerful domestic allies or financial backers to develop his work.

There are Umar Cheemas in most countries, ferreting out land titles, company accounts, and public records, in an effort to hold governments and businesses accountable and serve the public interest. But many are under-funded and exposed. They are harassed, threatened, or lose their jobs. An increasing number are imprisoned, and many are simply murdered.

Their work and the broader role of journalists and media organizations as a voice for the poor and powerless, a provider of information and ideas, a forum for politics and culture, and an engine of change is acknowledged by economists and political scientists as vital to economic development and democracy.

But multilateral institutions from the United Nations to the World Bank, along with individual Western donor nations and agencies, have a mixed record in providing the sustained support, protection, and investment that journalists in repressive or impoverished countries or regions require. At the dawn of this millennium, world leaders vowed to improve the health and welfare of much of humanity by 2015 and agreed on eight goals for doing so. Press freedom was not among them. Neither were democratic governance and accountability, which press freedom underpins.

The UN Millennium Development Goals are credited by some economists with helping mobilize support for overseas development aid, which rose sharply between 2001 and the financial crash of 2008. The increase contributed to lifting about 500 million people out of extreme poverty, although some economists argue that the economic rise of China was as much a factor in this success as a surge in aid.

Whatever their achievements, the eight goals have been overtaken, not least by the explosion in communication technology, and no longer fully address peoples’ aspirations. According to the UN’s own poll of more than half a million people worldwide in 2013, citizens want the UN to focus on promoting open and responsive government, which they ranked as a priority behind only food and health care.

Keeping politicians, government officials, and business people honest, however, is no easy task, especially in poor countries where institutions, civil society and the rule of law are weak. The role of journalists and bloggers empowered by new technologies in helping to improve the lives of ordinary citizens has never been clearer, and the price that some of them pay in terms of their own lives or liberty has never been higher. International and regional institutions that promote economic development or security are increasingly aware of the role of journalists as defenders of human rights, vital to promoting transparent and accountable government.

This awareness surfaced in a UN-commissioned report by 27 prominent political leaders and experts that freedom of expression advocates welcomed as an opportunity to put press freedom on the UN agenda.

The Report of the High-Level Panel of Eminent Persons on the Post-2015 Development Agenda published in May 2013 lays out ways to end extreme poverty. The report, titled “A New Global Partnership: eradicate poverty and transform economies through sustainable development,” has as one of its recommended goals the promotion of “good governance and effective institutions.” To reach that goal the leaders identify two necessary conditions: “ensure that people enjoy freedom of speech, association, peaceful protest and access to independent media and information,” and “guarantee the public’s right to information and access to government data.”

“This report is hugely welcome,” writes James Deane, director of policy and learning at BBC Media Action, the BBC’s international development charity. “It presents a fresh, ambitious agenda that provides a comprehensive framework for meeting a set of immense development challenges. It does so by putting issues of governance and rights–including freedom of the media–at its heart, not its periphery. That has not happened before.”

The panel, which was headed by British Prime Minister David Cameron and Presidents Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono of Indonesia and Ellen Johnson Sirleaf of Liberia, also called for a “data revolution” for citizens to access information and statistics and for governments to make them available. “I’m excited that we have expanded the boundaries,” said the report’s lead author, Homi Kharas of the Brookings Institution. “The press has an extremely important role to play … in holding authorities and private companies accountable,” he told CPJ.

That a free press and democratic governance go hand in hand is now well established in the development community. But it was not always so, as made evident by the glaring omissions in the first set of UN goals in 2000.

The World Bank started considering press freedom in its assessments in the 1990s. “We showed that corruption mattered for economic development,” said economist Daniel Kaufmann, president of the Revenue Watch Institute, who used to work at the World Bank in several capacities, including as lead economist.

However, over the years, a number of authoritarian countries have become uneasy with the bank’s focus on governance. Kaufmann added that there has been “pushback” by economically powerful states unsympathetic to policies that promote press freedom and accountability, and that, he said, has made implementing a global policy difficult.

Reporters rely on institutional support to do the kinds of watchdog journalism that keep democracy healthy. These conditions include rule of law, functioning state institutions, an independent judiciary, access to information, and strong civil society groups.

Some of these elements were present in a few Eastern European countries, including Poland and the Czech Republic, in the years after the collapse of the Soviet Union, and press freedom and governance made important strides in both countries. After Indonesia shook off the yoke of President Suharto, the press played an important role in nudging the country toward greater democracy.

This was also true in post-apartheid South Africa. Since Nelson Mandela left office, however, some officials and business people have sought to cover up corruption or incompetence, and media groups and human rights activists have had to push back against threats of encroachment on free expression and access to information.

“Many newly free or newly democratic states celebrate freedom of the media, often because brave reporting helped them to become free,” South African editor Brendan Boyle told CPJ. “But many of those same states and governments turn against the same reporters and media when the reality of transforming their societies starts to bite and the media report on their failings.”

As editor of the Daily Dispatch in East London, Boyle had a pair of young reporters investigate corruption and mismanagement in South Africa’s school hostels. Education is a prime sector of the Millennium Development Goals strategy. His reporters won the CNN Africa Journalist Award for 2013. “The reports led to some improvements but also saw the newspaper banned this month from covering the annual year-end examinations for school leavers,” Boyle, who has since become executive editor of South Africa’s Sunday Times, added.

For decades, authoritarian leaders of emerging economies have tried to promote “development journalism,” that is, insisting journalists accentuate positive news in the name of economic advancement. This has become prevalent in Africa, where China’s growing economic and political clout has spilled over to journalism. Autocrats from Gambia to Ethiopia laud their own versions of a Chinese media development model, arguing that critical or “socially irresponsible” journalism and pesky investigative reporting hurt the economy, undermine stability, and deter foreign investors. The Ugandan Parliament still has a bill before it that could criminalize reporting that the authorities deem “economic sabotage.”

This false choice between development and press freedom has been pedaled by autocrats throughout much of the life of the millennium goals. The High-Level Panel’s report explodes that argument by placing democratic governance at the core of any anti-poverty drive and recognizing the role of a free press in achieving it.

“Making media freedom a formal measure of good governance with potential links to the assessment of investment risk would not only help to protect reporters and publications but to protect societies from governments unable or unwilling to protect and to serve their people,” Boyle said.

Challenging the economy-versus-rights narrative can be dangerous and underlines the need for a comprehensive international approach to defend journalists. The figures speak for themselves: more journalists were behind bars in 2012–some 232 worldwide–than at any time since CPJ began counting them in 1990. In the past 15 years, the trend line for journalists killed for their work has been rising, averaging more than 47 deaths per year.

Significantly, the ability or willingness of states to prosecute those who murder journalists and other advocates of civil liberties is lacking. CPJ’s global Impunity Index shows that hundreds of murder cases involving journalists remain unprosecuted and that more than a quarter of those killed were covering corruption. Threatened with harm, and unprotected by the authorities, many reporters have simply fled. The number of journalists in exile, whether from fear of persecution or imprisonment in Sri Lanka or Ethiopia, or fear of being killed in Syria or Somalia, is growing.

Despite some success stories in countries that have shaken off autocratic rule, the overall environment for critical journalism has not improved in recent years. Freedom House, the Washington foundation that promotes democracy, publishes a global press freedom index which, if averaged out, has flat-lined since the mid-1990s. The percentage of countries that Freedom House deems free dropped to 35 from 39 in the decade after 2000.

“Essentially the past decade or more has been a decade lost in terms of media freedom around the world,” said Kaufmann, the economist.

The reasons for the decline in press freedom and the rise in deaths and imprisonment of journalists are complex. It is an area that needs more rigorous academic analysis and better diagnostics, according to media development experts interviewed for this article.

Technology has enabled journalists and bloggers to self-publish, but authoritarian governments have quickly learned how to turn the same technology into a tool for censoring and tracking critical reporters. The cost of entry into the news business has been lowered to the point that anyone with a smartphone can be a reporter and publisher. This has dramatically increased the number of people who are able to report events, particularly in conflict zones and repressive environments, thereby increasing the number of reporters who get into trouble.

Journalists themselves and media development groups have pushed the United Nations to do more to protect reporters, starting in 2006 with the adoption of Security Council Resolution 1738, which underlined the civilian status of and protections due to reporters covering conflict. Since then, these groups have urged the UN to incorporate the protection of journalists into its broader work.

In May 2013, this bore fruit in the form of a U.N. Plan of Action on the Safety of Journalists and the Issue of Impunity. The plan calls for a new U.N. inter-agency mechanism to assess journalist safety, for greater powers for the U.N. special rapporteur on freedom of expression, and for assistance to member states in passing national legislation to prosecute the killers of journalists. It envisions partnerships between the UN and media safety groups along with global awareness campaigns. It also calls for development of emergency response procedures for journalists in the field and provisions for press safety in conflict zones.

But even this victory was hard won and shows the enormous obstacles that have to be overcome in a multinational body in which member states suspicious of an independent news media have influence. The adoption of the plan was in doubt for some time after Pakistan, India, and Brazil, all of which have long histories of high levels of violence against journalists, objected to certain provisions. After pressure from CPJ and others, Brazil relented and backed the plan.

Champions of freedom of expression are now girding for what will doubtless be a hard battle to shepherd the High-Level Panel’s press freedom goal through the political wrangling of the UN and into the final framework. The panel’s 12 goals and 54 related national targets are just one of several reports that will land on the desk of UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon by the end of 2014. He will synthesize them into one report, which will be the starting point for inter-governmental politicking that will culminate in a special September 2015 summit to agree on the final document.

“I don’t want to be too simplistic but, on the issue of press freedom, countries that oppose press freedom in their own country are going to be our main spoilers on this agenda,” a U.K. diplomat at the country’s UN mission in New York who follows the issue told CPJ.

Jan Lublinski, a research and development manager at DW Akademie, a media development agency affiliated with the German broadcaster Deutsche Welle, agrees. “It will not be easy to convince authoritarian regimes to commit to such an agenda,” he told CPJ.

Lublinski and his colleagues have already begun speculating on what form the framework could take. “It may be easier to define and agree upon a new set of development goals without explicit mention of freedom of expression, information rights and the media,” they wrote in a discussion paper. “But such a choice would also mean avoiding an answer to the challenges the world faces today. A new MDG”–Millennium Development Goals–”agenda that focuses on poverty, health, environment, gender equality, and education only, would neglect essential elements of the human rights as well as governance processes with all their potential influence on other development sectors.”

Kharas, the High-Level Panel report’s lead author, thinks it’s too early to speculate on the likely language of the final document. He suggests supporters not only argue for the effectiveness of press freedom as an instrument of economic development but also stress that freedom of expression is a basic human right as guaranteed by the UN’s own founding principles and enshrined in Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Guy Berger, director of UNESCO’s freedom of expression unit, echoes the human rights argument. “If press freedom is not ultimately recognized in the 2015 agenda, it would be a missed opportunity for a human-rights centered, richly rounded and practically effective understanding of development,” he told CPJ. “In fact, the recognition of the important role of free media in the report is much greater than that of the Internet and ICTs,” he said, referring to information and communications technologies. “By treating development as a human, not technology-driven, process, the issue of rights is inseparable from the concept of development.”

This point that press freedom is a basic human right sometimes gets lost in the diplomatic maneuvering and contortions over wording behind UN agreements, but it is one that journalists and their allies will need to make. “This is the time for advocacy,” the U.K. diplomat at the UN said. “I think that it is one of the more controversial components of this report and has absolutely no guarantee to get into the final framework. … If we want it in the final framework, we and other likeminded member states and civil society organizations are going to need to fight pretty forcefully for its inclusion.”

Whatever document is eventually drafted in New York, reporters like Umar Cheema will continue to probe the dark corners of Pakistani society, often with minimal resources and protection from the state, because that’s what reporters do.
“I still feel the power of truth, and it keeps me moving now. I try to be more and more objective, and when you are objective, half of your fear is gone,” he said, knowing that many courageous journalists have been silenced in recent years–for good.

Robert Mahoney is CPJ’s deputy director. He has worked as a reporter, editor, and bureau chief for Reuters throughout the world. Mahoney has led CPJ missions to global hot spots from Iraq to Sri Lanka.

Committee to Protect Journalists