PESHAWAR: Media Matters for Democracy, an NGO, has planned to launch digital solution net ‘Muhafiz’ for media safety to avert possible life threats to journalists across the country.

Sharing details with mediapersons at Peshawar Press Club (PPC) on Thursday, the NGO’s executive director Asad Baig said that about 111 mediapersons had been killed in parts of the country so far and 74 of them were targeted in the line of duty.

He said that in most of the cases the victims had not shared information about life threats with anyone.

“In 70 cases no one has been nominated and data is not available in this regard,” he said. Flanked by PPC president Syed Bukhar Shah, Mr Baig said that the pilot project of the net would be launched in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa in January 2016.

He said that‘Muhafiz’ was a Unesco-funded project which was initiated in collaboration with the National Press Club, Islamabad, and PPC to impart training to the media workers about digital solution to media safety.

The initiative, he said, was meant to introduce an easy, effective and secure way to document threats, threat actors and trends affecting media safety in the country.

During the training sessions, he said media workers would be sensitised to keep close liaison with respective bodies of journalists, local police and media houses through SOS messages.

Dawn

An official of the Khuzdar administration said on Monday that the club’s office-bearers had decided to close the facility after receiving threats over the past two weeks. He said journalists associated with different media groups had stopped working.

He said media personnel had started receiving threats after two members of the minority Hindu community disclosed at a press conference names of some people allegedly involved in kidnapping of the community members.

They were kidnapped in Khuzdar last month and released upon payment of ransom.

He said unidentified people called many reporters, some of them office-bearers of the press club, and warned them against publishing the names of those identified by the Hindu families.

The official said the press club would remain closed for 10 days.

This is the second time in the past two years that the Khuzdar Press Club has been closed because of threats to media personnel from unidentified groups.

A senior journalist told this correspondent from Khuzdar that the journalist community of the city was feeling insecure and that there was no other option but to close the press club.

At least 12 journalists, including a president and a general secretary of the Khuzdar Press Club, have been killed over the past six years.

Reporters Without Borders, an international organisation, two years ago declared Khuzdar as the most dangerous place on earth for journalists.

DAWN

Against this backdrop, a group of experts on Pakistan and its media came together, under the auspices of the Commonwealth Journalists Association and the Institute of Commonwealth Studies at the University of London to discuss the threats facing the country’s journalists. In a discussion chaired by BBC presenter Owen Bennett Jones, former High Commissioner of Pakistan Wajid Shamsul Hasan, Kiran Hassan of the International Institute of Strategic Studies, BBC Urdu Service Editor Aamer Ahmed Khan, New York Times Pakistan Bureau Chief Declan Walsh and renowned journalist and author Babar Ayaz tried to answer the question, How safe is it to be a journalist in Pakistan?

Censorship in Pakistan used to be straightforward, explained Khan. Certain topics were simply off limits. Today, the situation is more complicated and more confusing. Threats to journalists and press freedom take many different shapes, and come from many different sources, including the government, extremists like the Taliban, the intelligence service ISI and powerful media owners.

There are currently 84 different cases against Geo TV, of which 53 are over blasphemy. You cannot defend yourself against that, said Khan. Ayaz raised a similar point when arguing that extremists are the biggest threat to the media. The government might put a person in jail, but these extremist groups will kill for their beliefs, Ayaz said.

While Geo TV and ISI have long been fighting behind closed doors, the case of Hamid Mir created an “open battlefield”, explained Walsh, who was expelled from Pakistan in May 2013. The station aired reports linking the security services to the attack.

Walsh also brought up the ownership issue within the Pakistani television landscape, which he says has gone from “zero to 100″ in the past few years. The country today boasts some 90 TV stations. Editorial control remains with media owners, according to Hassan.

But even journalists themselves did not escape criticism. Sections of the media are responsible for the current situation through irresponsible reporting, said Hasan. Quite a few were “playing with fire” by earlier glorifying the Taliban as peacemakers, he explained. Khan also highlighted corruption within the media as a “novel form of censorship”. However, as Khan pointed out, it is difficult for the Pakistani media to be responsible, without enabling them to be responsible. Most of the information that effects people’s lives is under strict control by authorities, he said.

Hassan, however, argued that there has been some progress. Journalists, and by extension the threats they face, are more visible and garner more attention today. She also pointed out that despite part closures, all Pakistan’s TV stations are still running. There was some talk of the role of media regulation in improving the situation, and Hassan said she had hopes for Pemra, the Pakistan Electronic Media Regularity Authority.

Yet, the overall conclusion was that Pakistan is not a safe place to be a journalist – illustrated well by Walsh explaining how, for the first time since he’s covered Pakistan, The New York Times recently had to use a pseudonym to protect their reporter on the ground.

Hasan summed it up: “The establishment doesn’t want the media to be as free as it can be.”

This article was originally posted on 24 February 2014 at indexoncensorship.org

IFEX

Jamshed Baghwan, as I know him for the past 15 years, is a brave and self-made journalist. He is among those who have balanced views and encourage unbiased reporting. He researches thoroughly, making sure never to air any kind of story without multiple credibility checks. He is a strictly professional journalist and is liked by everyone inside his community, which is why he remains the general-secretary of the Peshawar Press Club and the vice president of the Pakistan Federal Union of Journalists. While being committed to ethics, he maintains friendly relations with his fellow journalists at the Express News bureau in Peshawar.

If Baghwan can be attacked, so can other journalists in Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa. Its no wonder that Amnesty International deemed Pakistan to be the most dangerous place for journalists. Pakistani journalists face multiple threats from all sides. They are not free to think freely and write freely. He/she is always threatened, always feeling stifled and stressed.

In the past eight years, I have seen 13 journalists being killed in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas. Majority of the journalists in this area have imposed self-censorship. Many are found saying that their lives are more precious than media ethics.
Journalists get no support from the federal or provincial authorities. The injured get no monetary compensation. Families of those dead are not extended any support either.

The other sad side of his story is the rivalry and jealousy between media organisations. While reporting Baghwan’s attack, his name and his media group’s name was not even mentioned in the bulletins. When Hamid Mir was attacked, there was country-wide outrage. But when Baghwan was attacked, that too for the third time, his predicament was largely under-reported and even ignored. He was ignored like those dozens of journalists who lose their lives or are paralysed in FATA and Balochistan, as if they are not citizens of the state, but some unwanted aliens.

Express Tribune

Upon arrival at the court, Hamid Mir was accorded a warm welcome by the journalists from different media outlets who were chanting slogans in his favour and were demanding justice.Hamid Mir came into court on wheel chairs accompanied by his brother Amir Mir.

Earlier, Hamid Mir had appeared before the Judicial Commission once in Supreme Court’s Karachi Registry. On Monday, Hamid Mir appeared before the same commission second time.

Mir is, presently, recovering from multiple bullet wounds he had suffered after coming under an armed attack while en route to office from the Karachi airport on April 19.There were tight security arrangements at the tribunal during the Hamid Mir’s commission meeting as the whole Supreme Court’s building was occupied by police personnel.

The News

Speaking to The News here, the Liberal Democrats leader said that any individual being attacked in unacceptable but Hamid Mir’s case is important because it highlights threats to investigative journalists in Pakistan and other South Asian countries. The veteran politician said: “One of the basis premises of a civilised society is that people have freedom of expression and with this it’s not just the people’s ability to speak and write and practise your faith but it’s also the freedom for journalists to write and speak and to broadcast.”

He condemned attack on Hamid Mir and said that it was shocking that a journalist of Hamid Mir’s stature was attacked. “I strongly condemn the attack on Hamid Mir. It’s unacceptable on any individual.

It’s doubly unacceptable in the political sense if the person is doing his job as a critical journalist like Hamid Mir. Politicians and governments don’t like being criticised but that’s no excuse for anyone to take law into their own hands and try to repress that criticism. The laws are there to make sure that people can speak freely, provided that they are respectful of other people’s faith and liberty. I hope the message is loud and clear. What happened is unacceptable and attack on Hamid Mir is regarded with great disfavour in the United Kingdom.”

He regretted that journalists and free media don’t have protections in Pakistan. “It’s increasingly the case in Pakistan and other countries that journalism is under attack and journalists are under attack and the impression we get here is that there is increasing pursuit of critical journalism in Pakistan and many parts of South Asian.”

Simon Hughes said that Britain stood in solidarity with the Jang and Geo against the onslaught the media group has faced in many forms. “This solidarity is from the international community. We must make sure that message from our government in the UK to is clear that its unacceptable. we must make sure that judiciary are strengthened to understand that they must act and punish those who are brought before them and most importantly the law enforcement agencies – the police, the secret services, the prosecution services – must hand down and find the responsible people.”

He said attacking journalists was an unacceptable behaviour and it has to be met by a very strong response otherwise there can’t be a pretence that Pakistan or any other country is a place of freedom where people can speak freely.

The Liberal Democrats MP said that investigative journalists are often a problem for the government but that’s not an excuse for the government to prevent them from going out and its very important in all countries that the press is free and able to be critical of the govt collectively and individuals in govt in particular. He said that the media be held accountable if they tell the untruths but the accountability doesn’t mean anything which muzzles freedom of press. “I hope that message is loud and clear that a country like Pakistan which has a huge population, has leadership in the commonwealth in the Sub-continent, we look to countries like that to set an example for others to follow. There is no hope for other countries in Asia if countries like Pakistan don’t allow journalists to be free.”

The News

The blame game is on. Who is a traitor and who is not? What is the national interest? Who remains its sole custodian and arbiter? Which institution transgressed its mandate? What should be the role of our spy agencies? What are the red lines for media houses? What is responsible journalism and what’s not?

The Jang/Geo Group – Pakistan’s biggest media house – is being dubbed a traitor and is being threatened amidst calls for banning its news channel and newspapers for what some can call irresponsible or sensational journalism in the aftermath of the attack on Hamid Mir – nothing less, nothing more.

Pakistan’s defamation laws, regulatory authorities and courts should be able to address this issue. If the laws are ineffective or regulatory authorities are weak and dysfunctional and fail to provide relief to an aggrieved individual or institution, the episode provides an opportunity to develop an effective legal framework – as has been done in all civilised societies where press freedom remains synonymous with responsible journalism.

People there can approach the justice system if they believe that they have been wronged by any media outlet. The application of defamation and libel laws is never selective or aimed to benefit the powerful alone, especially in the advanced democracies from where we have imported the concept of press freedom. Any private citizen manages to get swift justice there, unlike Pakistan where court cases drag on from grandfather to grandson.

If mudslinging and spreading unsubstantiated allegations is bad journalism – which it certainly is – then one Pakistani media group cannot be singled out for this offence. If one has triggered the wrath of Pakistan’s mightiest institution, others have been riding roughshod with lesser mortals, including the targeted vilification campaign directed against the Jang/Geo Group itself.

But bad journalism by others should be no excuse to follow suit. It is time for many of us in the media industry, including journalists, news managers, and owners, to be self-critical. Let’s reassert the basic universal values of journalism, which calls for accuracy, objectivity, balance and fairness in reporting. Yes, we have to be current, we have to be candid and at times controversial, but the most important of all the four ‘Cs’ of journalism remains credibility. As the old cliché of the world of journalists say that you are as good as your last story.

The debate on ethics and values of journalism, especially in the electronic media, has been raging within professionals even before the April 19 attack on Hamid Mir. It is time to do it in a more structured way by involving all the stakeholders, and develop not just a voluntary code of conduct but also recommend improvements in the defamation laws and regulatory framework.

Responsible, factual and objective journalism, which keeps a demarcation between facts, opinions and allegations, remain the best way to protect press freedom. Effective laws against defamation and libel should not be seen as curbing press freedom, but protecting it. In every international media organisation the first lesson drilled in the minds of both reporters and desk-persons is how to avoid the pitfalls of defamation, libel and slander while reporting.

This ongoing blame game, barrage of allegations and counter-allegations and awarding tickets of being patriotic or unpatriotic will not lead us anywhere. It is time to do some serious soul searching and try to resolve the issue with maturity, restraint and sticking to the legal course.

Fanning public emotions with the help of various political and religious parties and wilfully or inadvertently taken unlawful steps against Jang/Geo – or any other group for that matter – is charting a dangerous course. Organised incidents of outright intimidation and harassment to vilification campaign against Jang/Geo and efforts to block the distribution of its newspapers or removing Geo News from the cables or pushing it on the lower slot are unlawful. Non-state actors and various illegal and legal pressure groups can take advantage of this situation to target and intimidate the media or for that matter any voice of dissent.

Pakistan remains one of the most dangerous countries for journalists. It will become even more dangerous if our major stakeholders, including the top civil and military leaders, fail to take the lead in guaranteeing press freedom at every cost. So far the signs from the top are encouraging – from the prime minister to the army chief, all have vowed to protect the press freedom.

It is now necessary to put across this message down to the ranks. When legal means are available, disgruntled individuals should not be allowed to exploit the situation and target any media house – even if ‘right or wrong’,s there are complaints against it.

The most urgent need is that civil and military leaders should take note of the direct threats to journalists affiliated with the Jang/Geo group and all the other media houses and try to ensure maximum security in this age of lawlessness.

Individuals, political parties or organisations have every right to boycott this or that newspaper or news channel. That is a matter of choice and also of readers’ or viewers’ preference. But trying to force this boycott on others in an organised manner to stifle a media group is setting a wrong precedent and should be seen as an effort to muzzle the independent press.

The biggest irony of the Hamid Mir episode is that amidst all these relevant or irrelevant questions and the blame game, the real issue is almost lost – the precarious state of law and order in Pakistan.

This is a country where no one is safe – including journalists, who relatively enjoy a sort of a privileged status in the society. We have seen professionals, including doctors, teachers and lawyers, being systematically targeted in major cities by religious fanatics and extremists. Unsuspecting civilians – men, women and children – have been the victims of suicide bombings and other acts of terror. The unabated bloodletting has consumed senior government officials, politicians, religious scholars, clerics and students. There are scores of policemen who have been martyred in their line of duty.

Our soldiers and defence installations remain on the hit list of Al-Qaeda-inspired local militant groups, especially the outlawed Tehreek-e-Taliban with which our civilian government is locked in the so-called peace talks. From our senior-most officials of the armed forces down to the foot soldier, all have borne the brunt of terrorism.

The internal challenge of terrorism and extremism is the most crucial, life and death issue for today’s Pakistan. It is so unfortunate that this issue has been placed on the backburner and those institutions which remain the best bet for a democratic, prosperous and peaceful Pakistan appear to be at loggerheads with one another.

This situation benefits only the external and internal enemies of Pakistan. This strengthens only the forces of chaos and anarchy, trying to bring down the state of Pakistan from within. Who else but the military leadership has greater awareness of this grave challenge? It needs to keep this most important issue in the main national narrative – no matter what the distracters of Pakistan’s armed forces try to do in the covert or overt manner by bringing any secondary issues to the forefront. The armed forces and the people of Pakistan must stay on course.

The writer is editor The News, Karachi. Email: amir.zia@thenews.com.pk

The News

They were furious about the negative portrayal of those in the agency held responsible but oblivious to the growing concerns over threats to journalists from the intelligence agencies. Their debate was centered on the coverage of allegations against the responsible. Not a single segment, let alone complete programme, was devoted to a discussion of why journalists consider elements in the agencies a threat.

In a majority of the cases, the anchors were found hand-in-glove with the choice panelists. A dissenting voice would form part of the panel but only for the purpose of ‘flogging’ which was inevitable if one belonged to the Jang Group.

My personal experience was no different. One ‘patriotic’ anchor wanted my presence in his show but didn’t want to hear me. In a desperate attempt to make an issue out of nothing, he dismissed the Saleem Shahzad Commission report (demanding legislation for the intelligence agencies) on the grounds that it had wrongly alleged this correspondent of not recording his statement. (As a matter of fact, the then-PFUJ President Pervez Shaukat had conveyed my unwillingness to the commission to record the statement without even contacting me). I told the anchor that it was not the commission’s fault; our journalist representative fed them the wrong information about me but he was unconvinced and handed his own verdict that could discredit the commission report demanding laws for the agencies.

Another channel that invited me for a discussion on the issue censored when I demanded laws for the agencies and said that holding them accountable was the only way forward. The said channel also muted the voice of Kamran Shafi, who was a co-panelist. Even the conclusion of the talk show host, Absar Alam, was censored.

Air Marshal (retd) Shahid Latif regularly featured in the programmes on this subject. He would repeat two questions: (1) Why was the Jang Group against the defence organisations? (2) Why was it that journalists belonging to this group alone who felt threatened by the agency? I tried to answer his questions but it was a cry in the wilderness.

To his first question, I gave a personal example. I have been meeting Shahid Latif several times. He would discuss the issues relating to nepotism and lack of accountability in the defence organisations. Wasn’t he anti-Pakistan by that standard? He was not. Traitors are only those giving voice to the concerns raised by the likes of Shahid Latif.

What about Lt. Gen. (retd) Shahid Aziz who authored a book “Ye Khamoshi Kab Tak.” Any civilian author of such a book could have been termed a traitor, if not killed. Was Lt. Gen. (retd) Shuja Pasha wrong when he told the Abbottabad Commission that his agency had roughed up some ‘decent gentlemen’? Was it the right decision of Musharraf to tell the US channel, ABC TV, about the rogue elements within the agency?

His second question is equally important. Incidentally, he has been found raising this question during TV shows hosted by the channel which lost several employees to terrorism and the TTP had claimed responsibility for the attacks. Does it look good putting this question to the channel inquiring the reason for becoming a specific target of the TTP? By the way, an anchor of that channel had also echoed the same line taken by Shahid Latif. For their education, journalists of the Jang Group and other organisations are also facing similar threats from the agencies.

Rauf Klasra, a senior journalist, is not affiliated with the Jang Group. His recent column would make instructive reading for the likes of Shahid Latif. He should also ask Kamran Shafi, who is also a retired soldier, who had also blamed the agencies for firing at his home in 2010. Absar Alam is also not affiliated with the Jang Group. Azaz Syed was not with Geo TV when his house was attacked twice. Imtiaz Alam is yet another example. Saleem Shahzad is not alive to tell him why he had sensed danger and accused an agency of an attempt on his life. He was silenced through violence. Abdul Salam Soomro, a cameraman of a Sindhi TV channel who made the video of Sarfraz Shah who was gunned down by Sindh Rangers in Karachi, could also explain his threat concerns.

Let’s believe for a moment that Hamid Mir’s suspicion that an agency is involved is baseless. His vocal position on a number of issues earned him many enemies. It is quite likely that somebody else might have attacked him. However, the question remains as to why he considered the agency the main threat to his life.

Let’s suppose that my allegations about the agency’s involvement in my kidnapping and torture were wrong. But it will also have to kept in mind that my belief in this regard was strengthened with the passage of time. The more I interacted with informed persons the more they endorsed my view.

This perception among journalists regarding threats from the agency must be taken up as a challenge by the agency. Equally important is for the ‘patriotic’ anchors to take up this issue in their programmes. Among them are those who were harassed in the past, something they had been sharing. A debate about this negative perception is not going to malign the agency. It will herald a new era of trust with each other.

American journalist Tim Weiner’s book on the CIA — ‘Legacy of the Ashes’ — could not weaken the most powerful agency of the world; it was a litany of failure though. The book rather generated a new debate and triggered reforms making the agency stronger and better.

Note: This reporter and some other people were not allowed to speak. As the Jang Group is being incriminated, to educate people and give the reporter a full opportunity to be heard, it is necessary to publish this story. – Editorial Board

The News

He was speaking at a ceremony to distribute health insurance cards among members of the Karachi Union of Journalists (KUJ) at a hotel on Tuesday night.

The KUJ has signed a memorandum of understanding with an insurance company under which cards have been issued to over 1,000 members.

Muzaffar asked the KUJ president to submit the list of martyred journalists so that the process of the distribution of plots could be expedited as per the directives of PPP Co-chairman Asif Ali Zardari and Patron-in-Chief Bilawal Bhutto Zardari.

He said the PPP had rendered many sacrifices for democracy in the country and even its founder chairman, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, was not spared, while former prime minister Benazir Bhutto was assassinated in December 2007 following her return to the country. He also applauded the role of journalists and their struggle along with the PPP.

President KUJ GM Jamali said that under the health insurance policy the members would be entitled to avail treatment at major hospitals of the city. He hailed the issuance of the health cards as a milestone, as it would prove beneficial to the journalist community.

He appealed to the government to ensure safety of the journalists, particularly those working in a critical environment.

President Pakistan Federal Union of Journalists Rana Azeem presented a traditional gift and a shield to Muzaffar.

The News

It was a bloody start to 2014 for the journalists in Pakistan when a Larkana-based correspondent of Ab Tak TV, Shan Daher, was shot dead on the eve of New Year. Since January, six media workers had been killed in targeted attacks while over a dozen have already received ‘death threats’, including three anchors.

So, all is not well in Pakistan for journalists and the media houses. The situation is far more alarming and threatening than it has been realised. The risk factor for the media has increased as conflict escalates. Today, the country is caught in the midst of many conflicts including terrorism, sectarianism, separatist movements violence between underworld mafias. Journalists report these stories from the conflict zones without having any training or even understanding of the danger.

To address journalists’ challenges, different journalist bodies, press clubs, editors, broadcasters’ bodies and media-related NGOs have conducted training workshops, seminars, conferences and have come forward with different proposals.

The most serious efforts so far came from the Pakistan Coalition On Media Safety, a joint forum of media stakeholders. The forum is making efforts to bring all major stakeholders on one platform on the one-point agenda of ‘safety of journalists’.

The information committees of the National Assembly and the Senate have now decided to address the issue more seriously and the government, through the Ministry of Information and the Ministry of Interior, has shown some urgency in addressing this issue.

However, actions often speak louder than words. In the last meeting of the Senate committee, the government had submitted a draft of 20 steps, which it is taking in consultation with all the stakeholders for the safety of journalists. But how and when these would be implemented is the real test.

There is a whole set of measures which the government has assured the Senate committee of, which it is ready to take up in consultation with all media stakeholders. There is a sense of realisation within the government that the security of media in Pakistan is the responsibility of the state. Therefore, the government assured that any issue related to the security of the media or media personnel would be handled on a priority basis.

The government also accepted that the media, as well as the rest of Pakistan, is confronting a highly volatile situation and that steps must be taken to restore peace and reduce the threat perception. But there have been incidents of targeted killings, abductions, sectarian violence, bomb blasts and suicide bombings. Journalists often become the victims while covering some of these events.

Moreover, the government acknowledged that journalists often become the victim in three kinds of violent incidents: in the line of duty while covering the event, because of issues other than work and thirdly, his or her family also faces threats and is sometimes attacked.

The Upper House said that it had been informed by the government that the compensation to media personnel hurt or martyred in the line of duty would be standardised across all provinces and that a Special Public Prosecutor will be inducted for fast-track investigations in Islamabad to expedite the cases of journalists.

All IGs are to be asked to inform the standing committee of ‘hotlines’ assigned for media personnel in case of emergencies. As informed by the relevant ministry and the Minister of Information, government officials have made a commitment for the media’s security and thus, special hotlines will be established by April 8.

For increased protection, it was also proposed that bulletproof vests must be provided to all journalists in the line of duty, special arrangements at all media houses be undertaken by government to ensure top-level security and scanners be installed by government at all media houses.

All investigations of cases of attacked or injured journalists must be closed within three months and full compensation be paid. Every single attack on media must be fully investigated.

The task on the part of the media bodies is that they must provide the standing committee a complete and comprehensive security plan for all media personnel working for them including any security infrastructure they wish to install.

However, after reading these assurances, I found an important step missing i.e., measures for training journalists to work safely. Therefore, I suggest that there is need to set up a National Training Institute for Safety of Journalists and Media Workers in Islamabad, with its subsidiary in all the major cities. The media houses should also contribute and make it mandatory for every journalist and media worker to get basic safety training.

If the government sets up such an institute and invites local as well as international trainers, it would certainly help minimise the risk factor. They should also get the training from ex-army officers particularly for working in conflict areas. Professional trainings are also required, instructing journalists on how they should go about to report safely from a conflict zone.

I hope when we observe the International Press Freedom Day, in 2015, these assurances and steps would be implemented.

Express Tribune