85th Goftegu Public Debate: Media and Freedom of Expression; Examination of a Decade of Work نسخه فارسی

 On the occasion of a Week for Human Rights, Media and Freedom of Expression

Armanshahr Foundation*, in collaboration with French Institute of Afghanistan, Transitional Justice Coordination Group, Women’s 50% Campaign, Women’s Political Participation Committee, Writers House, 8-Sobh Daily, International Media Service (I.M.S) and supported by French Embassy, Swiss Cooperation Office Afghanistan, Open Society is pleased to invite you to its 85th (year VI) public debate GOFTEGU.

Media and Freedom of Expression:

Examination of a Decade of Work

Speakers: Alireza Rohani (Senior advisor to AIHRC), Sediqullah Towhidi (Director, Media Watch), Shah-Hussain Mortazavi (Deputy director of 8-Sobh daily), Malek-Shafiei (secretary, Autumn Human Rights Festival), Sabrina Saqeb ( ex-MP)

Report from BONN II:

Dr. Alema (Women’s Political Participation Committee, Women’s 50% Campaign), Ms. Soraya Perlika (President of Women’s Union, Women’s 50% Campaign)

Moderator: Rooholamin Amini

Discussant: Azizollah Sherzad

*Member of the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH)

Freedom of expression and human rights in Afghanistan media, 10 years on

Including a short report from Bonn conference

The 85th (6^th year) Goftegu, a bridge between the elite and the citizens, of Armanshahr Foundation, was held at the French Cultural Institute in Kabul on 14 December 2011 with the title of “Media and Freedom of Expression-Examination of a Decade of Work.” The meeting was organised with the cooperation of Transitional Justice Coordination Group, Women’s 50% Campaign, Writers’ Home, Open Society, 8 Sobh Newspaper, Swiss Cooperation Office In Afghanistan, the French Embassy and the International Media Services. The speakers of the meeting were: Messrs Shah-Hussein Mortezavi (deputy director of 8-Sobh Newspaper), Alireza Rohani (senior adviser to Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission), Sadiqullah Tohidi (director, Media Watch), Malek-Shafei (secretary, Autumn Human Rights Film Festival), Ms. Sabrina Saqeb (former Member of Parliament) and Drs Alema (a participant at the Bonn Conference). Mr Rooholamin Amini was the moderator of meeting and Mr Azizollah Shirzad asked questions to the speakers. About 100 people, mostly students and young people, took part in the meeting.

Mr Shah-Hussein Mortezavi:
The past 10 years provided a golden opportunity in the history of the Afghanistan media as compared with the Taleban era, when there was only one print media (“Zarb-e Momen”) and a radio station (“Voice of the Sharia”). During the past decade, the media have grown qualitatively and quantitatively. Nevertheless, they have been facing numerous problems resulting from ongoing wars in the country, breach of the laws by armed groups, powerful political actors, warlords and ethnic leaders. This, all in all, displays that the culture of democracy and freedom of expression is not taking shape in Afghanistan and it has not been embedded in the mentality of our political actors as a basic principle.

The challenges facing the Afghanistan media are: 1) Taking influence from the tendencies opposed to human rights and freedom of expression, in particular the former Jihad leaders, who do not believe in the values of human rights and freedom of expression; 2) Taking influence from external circles owing to absence of sufficient financial resources. This problem is so serious that it occasionally jeopardises the national security. The dependence on foreign sources gives an image of a media zoo. We shall witness the demise of most of the media in Afghanistan after 2014, when foreign aid is reduced.

Why do human rights not have a place in the media? One reason is the lack of attention on the part of the government and the other is the conflict between human rights and interests of Jihad leaders and other circles. “The state media suffice to publish a report or a statement on Human Rights Day. The free media have endeavoured to provide a proper voice for human rights institutions during the last 10 years. However, there are very few of them and they do not have adequate financial resources. On the other hand, the people are not properly familiar with human rights and quite a few people regard human rights to be in conflict with Islam. We need to begin human rights education in the schools.”

All the media operating in Afghanistan are one way or another financed by foreign sources. It has been asked if the media dare report the sources of their finances. It is only then that we can talk of their independence.

Mr Alireza Rohani’s speech was about the role of victims in the transitional justice process and their role vis-à-vis the media:
The history of Afghanistan is a history of atrocities, full of inequalities and injustice. The Constitution of Afghanistan has admitted this bitter reality in its preamble. In the face of that history, we have only two choices: we may either forget the past or remember it, learn from experience and pave the way for a better future.

Forgetting is a drug that will take the past away from us and destroy our future. Therefore, we must never yield to forgetfulness.

One of the major roles of the victims is documentation. The most important and sincere narrative is that of the victims. Their other role is to provide a proper direction to reconciliation. This is a serious topic today. However, there are serious concerns regarding the pretexts and the criteria underlining reconciliation. The presence and memory of the victims in the minds and eyes of the people of Afghanistan shall assist to expose the human rights violators. The latter may try to offer a new image, but the presence of victims of human rights breaches can expose them. The victims can also engage in an enduring campaign to abolish laws and regulations that have practically provided the opportunity for extending amnesty to human rights violators. To summarise it, the least benefit of the persistent presence of the victims is to bring constant shame to human rights violators.

The media can play a fundamental role in uncovering the truth, documentation, proper reporting of the facts and providing direction to the public opinion, coordinating and converging the victims and their quest for justice.

Committees and commissions never have judicial or executive status, even though they may have some impact. The Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission (AIHRC) is another institution next to other state institutions. The three branches of power are full of shortcomings and flaws. The AIHRC cannot be expected to have full success within the context of those state institutions. While the government action plan for transitional Justice was being implemented, the Parliament approved the Amnesty Law to block the path of justice.

Mr Sadiqullah Tohidi
There are 46 TV channels, 145 radio stations, 22 newspapers, 67 weeklies, 10 bi-weeklies, 50 monthlies, 25 magazines, four gazettes, three bi-monthlies, 10 periodicals, nine news agencies and one quarterly, a total of 198 media.

There are four types of media in Afghanistan: 1) State media: they all publish the same news and reports; whatever comes to them from above; 2) Free private media, which are more independent, but very reliant on financial support from donor institutions; 3) the media affiliated to businesspeople, political parties, ethnic and political actors with specific resources; 4) the numerous media financed by regional intelligence services.

We have had 300 violent events in the past 10 years. As I was coming here today, a journalist sent a report from Qandahar. Apparently, the rector of Qandahar University told the reporter of Kelid Radio: I’m not prepared to answer all your questions. The reporter said: But that is the law. The rector answered: I have my own law. The reporter said: The people of Qandahar need that information. The rector said: The people are dogs. He then threw out the reporter. No wonder we have the highest figures of violence against journalists every year. In the past 10 years, 18 journalists have been killed.

Atrocities did not start in 1978. The history of Afghanistan is a history of crimes against humanity: massacre of the Hizara under Abdur-Rahman Khan, the Shinwar suppression, Amanullah Shah’s approach to his political opponents, the suppression of the Shomali people by Nader Khan… But, we always forget. There remain neither writings nor voices. The forgetfulness helps the continuation of those crimes.

As to reasons for self-censorship and the government’s support for the media, the government has a duty to protect media freedoms, but it has neither had a plan for it nor has it given any support. Even though it has not officially expressed its opposition, there has been strong unofficial opposition. The government has engaged in banning, threats, temporary detentions etc. Journalists who are working in the eastern zone say they are afraid of both factions: the Taleban and the government.

Even though some of the media are quite active and report the truth, the government’s failure to listen and to follow up the issues disappoints the media workers.

Let’s take the murder of several women journalists and the government’s failure to pursue the related dossiers. In the killing of Shakiba Sangeh Amaj, her family was suspected. Her father was taken to prison and released soon without being prosecuted. Regarding Ms Zaki, there have been frequent statements and messages demanding her murderer to be identified. No government organisation is prepared to respond to the question, even though both of them were killed in government premises. Samad Rohani was kidnapped in the city of Lasgargah, was tortured in government-controlled areas and killed. However, the government did not issue any reports in his case.

Ms Sabrina Saqeb spoke about women, media and human rights:
Even though women are present in the media, they are absent from and management positions as a result of economic problems and lack of political support. There is still no media to deal solely with women’s issues, in particular among the audio visual media, which have a wider audience.

Women in the media face specific problems. In addition to violence directed by the government and the Taleban at male and female journalists, women are subject to violence in their families as well. For example, Ms Shima Rezaei and Ms Sangeh Amaj were killed by members of their own families.

The media in Afghanistan face two other major problems: The first problem is absence of the rule of law. The Media Law is a good law, but the government does not adhere to it. For example, the former information and culture minister, who is now director of Mr Karzai’s office, once said: Freedom is idle talk. Second, absence of a law for access to information creates dangers. Such a law could prepare for a healthy media. As Mr Tohidi said, the media are at the service of the government and function according to government policies, but they are also censored.

Mr Malek-Shafei spoke about freedom of expression and censorship in cinema:
Filmmakers in Afghanistan have not faced censorship, because we do not yet have challenging films threading on red lines or dealing with fundamental issues. Nevertheless, under the filmmaking rules, films against religion or national interests or films containing naked scenes shall be censored. Three films were banned in the past few years: Kabul Express, the Kite Runner and Osama. Two other firms faced problems, i.e. the Traveller and the School, both of which were about African migrants in Iran.

The cinema has made good gains in the past 10 years. We have produced about 100 feature films, documentaries, short and long films. A year’s output under the present conditions equals the production of half a century of cinema in Afghanistan prior to 2001.

Where does cinema stand in relation to human rights? In the past 10 years, human rights were discussed only from the two legal and political aspects; the Human Rights Film Festival tried to bring human rights out of those two angles into the society.

A short report on the Bonn Conference
Dr Alema, a women’s rights activist and member of the Women’s 50% Campaign who was present on the sideline of the Bonn Conference, reported her observations as follows:[1]

The Afghanistan civil society offered its views to the Bonn Conference in four areas: process of transition, long-term commitments of civil society institutions, regional cooperation and the issue of political solutions and reintegration.

The civil society was represented by two members who took its message to the conference. Other members of the civil society institutions were present at the conference as observers. The UN Secretary-General, the US Secretary of State and the German officials met the civil society delegation at the conference. About 1,000 people took part at the conference, including 85 foreign ministers and representatives of 15 international organisations. The anti-war forces, comprising 115 groups, demonstrated outside the conference and called for an end to the war in Afghanistan. They shouted: End occupation Afghanistan! Afghans of Europe and human rights organisations took part in those demonstrations for three days.

Unfortunately the 33-article final document of the conference failed to mention transitional justice, even though the issue had been visible on the agenda in the first Bonn Conference. The growing political corruption was mentioned in passing. There is no guarantee to continued assistance to Afghanistan in the period of 2015 to 2025. Furthermore, a conference of NATO leaders in Chicago in May 2012 will decide about the transition and a conference in Tokyo will discuss the economic issues regarding Afghanistan.

According to our information, two members of the Taleban were in Germany until the end of the conference. However, the Taleban issue was not discussed probably because of Pakistan’s absence.