By Mervyn de Silva
The end of the Cold War has made Israel less important though Middle-East oil resources and the Arab (Islamic) world do make the region strategically significant.
In 1894, Captain Alfred Dreyfus, a Jew, was sentenced to jail for life on patently false charges of treason. To protect Major Charles Esterhazy, the true culprit, fellow "gentile officers" lied to court. In the courtroom was Theodor Herzl, a Jewish laywer-journalist. His report on this cooked-up case was published in the Vienna-based Neue Freie Presse Herzl went a step further. He produced a pamphlet Der Judenstaat (The Jewish State). Herzl argued, say Eugene Fisher and Cherif Bassiouni in their book it Storm it over the Arab world - a people in Revolution. In an interesting, if brief, foreward Arnold Toynbee says that a "British observer can see their physiological affinity with the Protestant British and Dutch Settlers in Northern Ireland and in Southern Africa."
Students of the Middle-East as well as political and ethnic conflict in general, will surely see another reason why they should follow closely the fast-moving events in Israel and the Arab world. NATO's cop-on-the-beat may not be able to perform his traditional duties unless it resolves its own domestic conflicts. As Desert Storm demonstrated the US and its main allies may have to intervene to safeguard the assets of the giant oil companies, while the US keeps its own oil in a 'strategic reserve'.
The assassination of Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin was the first scene in the new drama which is now unfolding. Shimon Peres is no militarist; he is a trade unionist. (On the two occasions that this writer interviewed him the meeting took place at the office of the HISTRADUT, the giant labour federation, Peres' vital political base". A deeply dedicated unionist, and a formidable intellectual, Peres realised in the late 80's that the Palestinian struggle for statehood and the intifada in particular, had made "national security" the obsessive concern of the average Israeli family, certainly the new immigrants, from the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe.
He made the supreme sacrifice... inviting General Yitzhak Rabin to lead the Labour Party. Rabin was no ordinary commander. He was the hero of the "Six Day War". The IDF took the Gaza strip, seized Old Jerusalem, occupied the Sinai peninsula to the Suez canal, moved onto the Golan Heights (Syrian territory) and advanced into Jordan's West Bank. In short, a replay of David... and all the hostile Arab neighbours in one (6 day) shot.
With Yitzhak Rabin in command on the parliamentary battlefield, Labour won a splendid victory at the Knesset polls on June 23, 1992.
But there were Israeli intellectuals who feared the long-term consequences of seizing and occupying the land of other nations, and other people with sharply different views. Would not this "mixture" dilute the purity of the Zionist ideal?
One such writer was Eliezer Livneh who in his book Israel and the crisis of western civilisation argued that these conquests must expose the new Israeli generation to the "Jewish religious tradition" and reverse the steady drift towards cultural identification with the Gentile West".
The debates of this kind and the new challenge of a post-Khomeini Islamic revivalism and the advent of armed organisations such as HAMAS and the ISLAMIC FRONT that have transformed party politics in Israel, a predictable development, say some Israeli analysts. Islamic revivalism or "fundamentalism" has been confronted by Jewish exremism.
Thus, the young man who assassinated Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, the hero of the six-day war, was no Islamic fundamentalist but a young middle-class Jew who had attended secret classes of rightwing "orthodox" Jewish groups, some operating secretly. Rabin and Peres were 'traitors'. And they could not trust the power-hungry Benjamin Netanyahu, leader of the conservative LIKUD party, the traditional parliamentary opponent of Labour.
If the revival of Jewish fundamentalist or 'ultra' Jewish orthodox groups parallels the Islamic anti-PLO organisations, the problem did not remain too long an ideological confrontation. It assumed a new character... /a terrorist character. Not just the "Engineer", the Palestinian mastermind, who was followed by MOSSAD agents to Cyprus and assassinated, but many small, well-armed groups that have hit Israel's main population centres so hard that "the garrison state" is now under seige.
This passage from the Washington Post's Barton Gillman, based in Jerusalem, presents the scene quite vividly:
"Jeannette Ziffrin, 59, was about to step aboard her bus when the sudden blare of an amplified voice stopped her short, Attention! This is the Central Bus Station Police", the man with the loudspeaker roared. Mrs. Ziffrin tightened the muscles in her face and crossed her arms, protectively at her chest. She looked ready to hit the ground, or maybe flee. "It was a false alarm."
Ideologically, Israel is the Jewish State (Judenstaat) or the Zionist State but in other terms, it is also the most sophisticated National Security State, or as some political sociologists would now say The State of Seige, inspired by the novelist or the movie-maker.
As violence, indiscriminate violence, becomes a way of life, the constitutional - political structures will come under severe strain. Even a casual glance at the pattern of representation in the new Knesset does encourage such disturbing thoughts... and this is a garrison state with a nuclear capability. The most interesting of these formations is SHAS, the ultra-orthodox Jewish party which could command nine votes in the new 120-member assembly.
Another party which will have a say in government-making and in the survival of any regime is B'Aliya, which speaks for some 700,000 new immigrants from the former Soviet Union.
Strategists in Jerusalem encouraged this Russian migration, fearing the Jewish-Moslem balance would gradually change. Nathan Sharansky B'Aliya now commands about ten percent of the Israeli electorate.
The National Religious Party which also increased its parliamentary seats has been a partner of Rabin-Peres and Labour but nobody is certain on which side its MP's will sit in the next house. The communist Hadash, with five votes instead of the three votes it had before Peres faced the electorate, will have a voice in Israeli politics too. The United Arab Group commands three votes... a puzzling parliamentary picture which does not promise a stable Israel whether Labour or Likud runs the new administration.
Since it mirrors quite accurately the 51% - 49% division of political allegiance, the prospects of stability in an increasingly turbulent Middle-East seem poor.
By Kishali Adhikari
Comprehensive and wide ranging amendments to the Sri Lankan media laws are vitally necessary to bring Sri Lankan law in line with international standards, states the committee on the reform of laws affecting the media and freedom of expression, in its report presented to minister of media Dharmasiri Senanayake last Monday.
The committee which comprises eminent lawyers, academics and journalists point out that Sri Lanka still has a long way to go towards fulfilling its obligations with regard to freedom of expression under the International Covenant on civil and political rights. Several aspects of the Sri Lankan media laws had already come in for severe criticism by the UN.
Human Rights Committee before which Sri Lanka presented its third periodic report in July 1995.
"We strongly recommend that urgent steps be taken by the state party to ensure that its domestic laws are in full compliance with the Covenant. In this regard, we further recommend that within the context of the present efforts to award the constitution due consideration be given to the provisions of the Covenant, said the committee members of which are reputed independent experts whose pronouncements carry considerable international weight.
Recent proposals on constitutional reform by Justice Minister G.L. Pieris had taken into account the strengthening of constitutional provisions relating to freedom of expression. The Media Reform Committee recommendations, however, go further than the Ministry draft proposals. The Committee differs in that it suggests a wider formulation of the right of freedom of information which interestingly follows an earlier draft (1994) of the Ministry of Justice and Constitutional Affairs. It also disagrees with the present proposals that suggest that the right to freedom of expression be limited in order to "maintain the authority of Parliament" and points out moreover that where the right is limited in times of emergency, it should be one that threatens the life of the nation.
The committee is also seen to regret the fact that the 1996 justice ministry proposals has seen fit to limit judicial review of future legislation to a two-year period and adds that it is equally to be regretted that the draft proposals uphold existing laws even if they are inconsistent with fundamental rights. Constitutional guarantees of freedom of expression aside, the committee on Media Law Reform strongly recommends the abolition of criminal defamation as an offence as is the practice in other advanced jurisdictions.
At present defamation may be prosecuted either as a civil or criminal offence. Notwithstanding the availability of a civil action for damages, successive governments have often used the resources of the state to initiate a criminal prosecution against the offender.
"The possibility of a prosecution can discourage criticisms of government ministers and policies or the expression of political dissent" comments the committee and recommends that even if the offence is retained it should be with appropriate safeguards that discourage privolous prosecutions.
The committee report deals with other aspects of media practices and laws taking into account norms and standards prevalent in other legal systems.
One particular recommendation of the committee that merits interest is its suggestion that the 1953 position as regards parliamentary privilege be restored and the supreme court be vested with the power to impose fines and punishment on errant journalists. Amendments after 1978 subverted the law on parliamentary privilege in that parliament was given the power to punish and fine concurrently with the court. The first such exercise of its powers made the Sri Lanka parliament the laughing stock of the world in the bizarre Ceylon Observer case which involved the then Foreign Minister A.C.S. Hameed and the publication of a wrong caption. subsequently, the criticism of this parliamentary exercise of authority by S. Nadesan QC in the Sun led to Mr. Nadesan himself being charged with breach of privilege. Fortunately, the case was referred to the supreme court which held that he had committed no offence.
Time and time again it has been pointed out that it is unsatisfactory for parliament to act as a judge in its own cause. The committee on Media Law Reform confirms this point of view and adds moreover that those privilege laws that allow statements normally amounting to contempt of court to be uttered in parliament be repealed. Parliamentary abuse of this licence in order to critisise judges in an unwarranted personal manner has been apparent on many occasions the most recent being certain remarks highly critical of a supreme court judge made by Deputy Minister of Ethnic Affairs and National Integration Jeyaraj Fernandopulle. This was following the decision of a fundamental rights case adverse to the Deputy Minister.
The Media Law Reform Committee proposals further include suggestions that attempt to clarify the law relating to contempt of court. This is view of a great deal of uncertainty by the media, the public and even lawyers regarding the scope of the applicable legal principles. The committee points out that most democratic countries are now advocating a greater freedom of expression with regard to criticism of the judiciary.
The English Contemtps of Court Act which was enacted following a decision by the European Court of Human Rights in the Thalidonaide case sets down the principle that strict liability be imposed only with regard to a publication that creates a substantial risk that the course of justice would be seriously impeded or prejudiced in ongoing court proceedings.
The Act also provides on defence to a publisher who having taken all reasonable care did not know and had no reason to suspect that the relevant proceedings were active. A publication which discusses in good faith public affairs or other matters of general public interest is exempt from the rule of strict liability if the risk of prejudicing particular proceedings is very slight.
At present the Sri Lankan law leaves it to the judges (who may be thought to have a personal interest in the outcome of the case) to decide whether a contempt has been committed or not. The committee recommends that only abusive or scurrilous comment about a judge as a judge or of an imputation of impropriety or of corrupt bias or an attack on his integrity as a judge be prohibited.
The Media Law Reform Committee also explains the need for freedom of Information Act that would grant public access to government held information which is withheld due to bureaucratic procedures. In India, the Supreme Court has already recognised the right to know as an integral part of the consitutional right to freedom of expression.
Among the other recommendations put forward by the committee is the repealing of the Official Secrets Act and the replacing of the Press Council Law by a Media Council Law which contains appropriate safeguards that would enable it to function as an independent body that monitors both the print and the electronic media.
Meanwhile, press censorship under emergency rule is singled out for some scathing criticism by the media law reform committee which emphasises that the exercise of his discretion by the competent authority has often been erratic and illogical.
The committee states that Sri Lanka should follow the Johannesburg principles on censorship law and practice (1995). There specify that restrictions on freedom of expression cannot be imposed even on the grounds of national security unless the government can demonstrate that the restrictions are prescribed by law and is necessary in a democratic society to protect a legitimate national security interest. This is in accordance with international norms and standards. What is meant by prescribed by law is that the law must be accessible, unambiguous, drawn narrowly with precision so as to enable individuals to determine whether a particular action is unlawful. The Johannesburg principles make it clear that censorship cannot be used as a cloak to prohibit information unrelated to national public security including, for example, attempts to protect a politician from embarrassment or exposure of wrong doing to conceal information about the conduct of public institutions or to suppress industrial unrest.
Dealing with other aspects of Sri Lankan media policy, the committee recommends the repeal of the 6th Amendment which prohibits even the peaceful advocacy of separatism to the extent that this conflicts with the right to freedom of expression. The committee however records the dissent of Mr. Victor Gunewardene to the extension of this right on the basis that there is a need for constitutional prohibition of the advocacy of separatism. The need for adequate laws that protect the confidentiality of sources of information of journalists is also commented upon by the committee. The present law provides this protection only for inquiries under the Sri Lanka Press Council Law.
"The absence of such protection is a serious impediment to investigative journalism and the exposure of public scandals and wrongdoing" remarks the committee. However in a fair balance of the principles involved the committee also recommends that individuals should be given the right of reply in order to protect them against false media reports.
Other recommendations of the committee include doing away with the power of the customs department to ban books or journals from abroad that contain articles of "sensitive interest". Incidentally the committee rewards that it was unable to find any legal basis on which the customs officials exercise such power.
Commenting on the responsibility of state run or public funded media, the committee considers several instances in Zambia, Germany, Belize and Trinidad where relevant principles on the issues involved had been set down by the courts. What had been emphasised in all mere cases was that while private owned media is entitled to decide the content of what should be published or broadcast themselves, the obligations cast on the state media is different.
Public funded media is obliged to reflect a pluralism of views and the interests of the state and of the public at large have to be distinguished from whatever political party that is in power at that time.
Political opponents have the fundamental right to have their news aired over the state media, says the committee. The committee also goes on to recommend provisions that ensure the independence of the Sri Lanka Broadcasting Corporation and the Rupavahini Corporation.
Members of the committee appointed to advise the government on the reform of laws affecting media freedom were Mr. R.K.W. Goonesekera (Chairman), Prof. Shirani Bandaranayake, Mr. Rohan Edirisinghe, Mr. Lucien Rajakarunanayake, Dr. Jayampathi Wickremaratne, Mr. Victor Gunawardene, Mrs. Suriya Wickremasinghe (members) and Mr. K. Marimuthu (Secretary).
Media Minister Dharmasiri Senanayake last week promised to implement the report of the committee on the reform of laws affecting media freedom pointing out that the government has guaranteed to the people that it would promote and protect media democracy in the country.
The Minister made this pledge when the report containing the recommendations of the committee was presented to him by its chairman, senior lawyer R.K.W. Goonesekere. The report makes specific reference to the election pledges made by the Peoples Alliance to guarantee a free and independent media and emphasises that its objectives in formulating such a report is to promote a new democratic media culture, to free the existing media from government/political control and to create new institutions aimed at guaranteeing media freedom as well as to raise the quality and standards of free media.
The terms of reference of the committee appointed by the government in January 1995 directs the committee to study all existing legislation and regulations affecting media freedom, freedom of expression and the public's right to know with a view to identifying the areas which need to be recinded, amended or reformed in order to ensure media freedom, freedom of expression and the public right to information. It also empowers the committee to make recommendations as to the amendment and / or repeal of existing regislation as well as new legislation required to strengthen media freedom in general and to ensure freedom of expression and the public right to information.
Please send your comments and suggestions on this web site to
info@suntimes.is.lk or to
webmaster@infolabs.is.lk