Despite the many challenges faced by Pacific journalists in recent years, the recent Pacific International Media Conference highlighted the incredible strength and courage of the region’s reporters.

The three-day event in Suva, Fiji, earlier this month co-hosted by the University of South Pacific, Pacific Islands News Association (PINA) and the Asia Pacific Media Network (APMN), was the first of its kind for Fiji in the last 20 years, marking the newfound freedom media professionals have been experiencing in the nation.

The conference included speakers from many of the main newsrooms in the Pacific, as well as Emmy award-winning American journalist Professor Emily Drew and Pulitzer-nominated investigative journalist Irene Jay Liu, as well as New Zealand’s Indira Stewart, Dr David Robie of APMN and Moera Tuilaepa-Taylor of RNZ Pacific.

• READ MORE: Other Pacific Media Conference reports

Given Fiji’s change of government in 2022, and the ensuing repeal of media laws which threatened jail time for reporters and editors who published stories that weren’t in the “national interest”, many spoke of the extreme challenges they faced under the previous regime.

And two of Fiji’s deputy prime ministers, Manoa Kamikamica and Professor Biman Prasad, also gave keynote speeches detailing how the country’s newly established press freedom is playing a vital role in strengthening the country’s democracy.

Dr Robie has worked in the Pacific for several decades and was a member of the conference’s organising committee.

He said this conference has come at “critical time given the geopolitics in the background”.

Survival of media
“I’ve been to many conferences over the years, and this one has been quite unique and it’s been really good,” he said.

“We’ve addressed the really pressing issues regarding the survival of media and it’s also highlighted how resilient news organisations are across the Pacific.”

Dr David Robie talks to PMN News on the opening day.   Audio/video:PMN Pacific Mornings

The conference coincided with the launch of the 30th anniversary edition of Pacific Journalism Review, which is the only academic journal in the region that publishes research specifically focused on Pacific media.

As founder of PJR, Robie says it is heartening to see it recognised at a place — the University of the South Pacific — where it was also based for a number of years.

“It began its life at the University of Papua New Guinea, but then it was at USP for five years, so it was very appropriate to have our birthday here. It’s published over 1100 articles over its 30 years, so we were really celebrating all that’s been published over that time.”

Climate change solutions
RNZ Pacific manager Moera Tuilaepla-Taylor spoke on a panel about how to cover climate change with a solutions lens.

She says the topic of sexual harassment was a particularly important discussion that came up and it highlighted the extra hurdles Pacific female journalists face.

“It’s a reminder for me as a journalist from New Zealand and something I will reinforce with my own team about the privilege we have to be able to do a story, jump in your car and go home, without being tailed by the police or being taken into barracks to be questioned,” she says.

“It’s a good reminder to us and it gives a really good perspective about what it’s like to be a journalist in the region and the challenges too.”

Another particular challenge Tuilaepa-Taylor highlighted was the increase in international journalists coming into the region reporting on the Pacific.

“The issue I have is that it leads to taking away a Pacific lens on a story which is vitally important,” she said.

“There are stories that can be covered by non-Pacific journalists but there are really important cultural stories that need to have that Pacific lens on it so it’s more authentic and give audiences a sense of connection.”

But Dr Robie says that while problems facing the Pacific are clear, the conference also highlighted why there is also cause for optimism.

“Journalists in the region work very hard and under very difficult conditions and they carry a lot of responsibilities for their communities, so I think it’s a real credit to our industry … [given] their responses to the challenges and their resilience shows there can be a lot of hope for the future of journalism in the region.”

Justin Latif is news editor of Pacific Media Network. Republished with permission.

The University of the South Pacific journalism programme is hosting a cohort student journalists from Australia’s Queensland University of Technology this week.

Led by Professor Angela Romano, the 12 students are covering news assignments in Fiji as part of their working trip.

The visitors were given a briefing by USP journalism teaching staff — Associate Professor in Pacific journalism and programme head Dr Shailendra Singh, and student training newspaper supervising editor-in-chief Monika Singh.

• READ MORE: The Pacific Media Conference at USP

The students held lively discussions about the form and state of the media in Fiji and the Pacific, the historic influence of Australian and Western news media and its pros and cons, and the impact of the emergence of China on the Pacific media scene.

Dr Singh said the small and micro-Pacific media systems were “still reeling” from revenue loss due to digital disruption and the covid-19 pandemic.

As elsewhere in the world, the “rivers of gold” (classified advertising revenue) had virtually dried up and media in the Pacific were apparently struggling like never before.

Dr Singh said that this was evident from the reduced size of some newspapers in the Pacific, in both classified and display advertising, which had migrated to social media platforms.

Repeal of draconian law
He praised Fiji’s coalition government for repealing the country’s draconian Media Industry Development Act last year, and reviving media self-regulation under the revamped Fiji Media Council.

However, Dr Singh added that there was still some way to go to further improve the media landscape, including focus on training and development and working conditions.

“There are major, longstanding challenges in small and micro-Pacific media systems due to small audiences, and marginal profits,” he said. “This makes capital investment and staff development difficult to achieve.”

The QUT students are in Suva this month on a working trip in which students will engage in meetings, interviews and production of journalism. They will meet non-government organisations that have a strong focus on women/gender in development, democracy or peace work.

The students will also visit different media organisations based in Suva and talk to their female journalists on their experiences and their stories.

The USP journalism programme started in Suva in 1988 and it has produced more than 200 graduates serving the Pacific and beyond in various media and communication roles.

The programme has forged partnerships with leading media players in the Pacific and our graduates are shining examples in the fields of journalism, public relations and government/NGO communication.

The QUT visit to Fiji was sponsored by the Australian Government’s New Colombo Plan Mobility Programme. Asia Pacific Report publishes in partnership with The University of the South Pacific’s newspaper and online Wansolwara News.

• The university is hosting a Pacific Media Conference in partnership with the Pacific Islands News Association (PINA) and the Asia Pacific Media Network (APMN) in Suva on 4-6 July 2024.

Suva lawyer Richard Naidu is a free man after the Suva High Court ruled this week that no conviction be recorded against him.

High Court judge Justice Daniel Goundar ruled on Tuesday that the charge of contempt scandalising the court against Naidu be dismissed.

He said summons to set aside the judgment that had found Naidu guilty in November last year was by consent and was dismissed as he did not have jurisdiction.

• READ MORE: Other Richard Naidu reports

Justice Gounder ordered the parties to bear their own costs.

While delivering his judgment, Justice Gounder said while mitigation and sentencing were pending, a new government had come into power and a new Attorney-General had been appointed.

He said that after the change of government [FijiFirst lost the general election last December], Justice Jude Nanayakkara, who had been previously presiding over the case, had resigned as a Fiji judge and left the jurisdiction without concluding proceedings.

Justice Gounder said the new Attorney-General, Siromi Turaga had taken a different position regarding the proceedings, which he had expressed in an affidavit filed in support of the summons to dismiss the proceedings.

Ruling set aside
Turaga stated that his view was that the proceedings should never have been instituted against Naidu in the first place.

In the affidavit, Turaga said he had conveyed to Naidu that his view was that the ruling of 22 November 2022 ought to be set aside and the proceedings dismissed.

He added that Naidu had confirmed he would not seek to recover any costs he had incurred in defending the proceedings.

Justice Gounder said the Attorney-General played an important function as the guardian of public interest in contempt proceedings which alleged conduct scandalising the court.

Lawyer Richard Naidu’s conviction ruled not to be recorded and the charge of contempt dismissed. Video: Fijivillage.com

He said the position of the Attorney-General had shifted and he was not seeking an order of committal against Naidu.

The judge said Turaga dkid not support the findings that Naidu was guilty of contempt scandalising the court.

He said it had not been suggested that the present Attorney-General was acting unfairly as the representative of public interest in consenting to an order setting aside the judgement.

Facebook posting
Naidu was found guilty in November last year by High Court judge Justice Jude Nanayakkara for contempt scandalising the court.

Naidu posted on his Facebook page a picture of a judgment in a case represented by his associate that had the word “injunction” misspelt [as “injection”], and then made some comments that he was pretty sure the applicant wanted an injunction.

The committal proceeding was brought against Naidu by the then Attorney-General, Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum.

Naidu was represented by Jon Apted while Feizal Haniff represented the Attorney-General.

Rashika Kumar is a Fijivillage reporter. Republished with permission.

At a time when the West has weaponised human rights, the United Nations body that promotes freedom of expression needs to rethink what it means.

Every year UNESCO (United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organisation) marks World Press Freedom Day (WPFD) on May 3, with a particular theme and this year’s was its 30th edition.

UNESCO has mainly provided a platform through their WPFD to civil society groups that are funded by Western agencies to shape the free speech agenda.

• READ MORE: Other media freedom reports in the Pacific

With many countries in the Global South seeing these groups involved in so-called “colour revolutions” as a security threat, it is time UNESCO paid some attention to the views of its member states who are not of the Western alliance.

This year’s theme was “Shaping of Future Rights: Freedom of Expression as a Driver of all other human rights”.

UNESCO gave four special briefs in their website for campaign action on the day.

First of which is the “misuse” of the judicial system to attack freedom of expression.

Focuses on defamation
It focuses on the use of criminal defamation to silence journalists, but no mention at all about how the UK and US judicial systems are being used to silence Julian Assange of Wikileaks.

Yonden Lhatoo, the chief news editor of the Hong Kong-based South China Morning Post in a recent videolog made a powerful indictment regarding the Assange case.

“There is no limit to the insufferable hypocrisy of these gangsters in glass houses,” he said referring to the US, UK and Australian government action against Assange.

Safety of foreign journalists and those covering protests are two other issues, while the fourth UNESCO brief is about journalism and whistleblowing.

The 16-page UNESCO brief on whistleblowing talks about the new electronic means of leaks to media and publishing of such information.

It mentions “Pub/Leaks” and “Latamleaks” in Latin America but no mention of Wikileaks.

It also argues that whistleblowers and publishers must have guarantees of protection and that their actions do not lead to negative consequences, such as financial sanctions, job dismissals, undermining their family members or circles of friends, or threats of arbitrary arrest.

US views Assange as ‘hacker’
But no mention whatsoever about Assange’s case including Western financial institutions blocking donations to Wikileaks.

The document seems to distance itself completely from this case because the US considers Assange a computer hacker not a journalist.

The brief talks about the benefits to society from whistleblowers that “allow people to get information and evidence of acts of corruption, human rights violations, or other matters of unquestionable public interest” but no direct reference to war crimes, that Wikileaks exposed through whistleblowers like Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden.

Unfortunately, today, it is okay to talk about war crimes if the Russians are doing it but not when the Americans, NATO or Australians are involved.

In June 2019, the Australian Federal Police raided the newsroom of Australia’s national broadcaster ABC after it exposed Australian forces’ war crimes in Afghanistan.

They took away the laptops of some journalists in an attempt to trace the whistleblowers describing the action as a “national security” operation.

Today, human rights arguments have lost credibility because of these double standards.

China’s human rights agenda
Thus, it is interesting to note how China is now pushing a new human rights agenda via the United Nations.

In July 2021, China succeeded in getting a resolution adopted at the 47th session of the UN Human Rights Council on development rights.

It affirmed that the eventual eradication of extreme poverty must remain a high priority for the international community and that international cooperation for sustainable development has an essential role in shaping our shared future.

The resolution was adopted by 31 votes to 14 against.

Interestingly, those voting against were 12 European countries plus Japan and South Korea.

Joining China in voting for it were Russia, India, Pakistan, Cuba, Indonesia, Philippines and Fiji, plus several African and Latin American countries.

The vote itself gives a good indication of the new trends in the human rights agenda promoted by the Global South.

Issue of free speech
This brings us to the question of where freedom of speech stands in this human rights agenda.

Human rights according to this agenda are what is prescribed in the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

Providing clean water and sanitation to the people, a good education, developing and nurturing sustainable systems of agriculture to provide food security to people, protecting the environment and protecting communities from the impacts of climatic change, empowering women, providing proper housing and healthcare to people, and so forth.

Governments should be held accountable to provide these rights to people, but that cannot be achieved by the media always accusing governments of corruption, or people coming out to the streets shouting slogans or blocking roads or occupying government buildings.

Reporters need to go out to communities, talk to the people and find out how they live, what is lacking and how they think these services could be provided by governments.

Journalists could even become facilitators of a dialogue between the people and the government.

Marvellous concept on paper
Human rights is a marvellous concept on paper, but its practice is today immersed in double standards and hypocrisy.

Media has been a party to this.

In 2016-17, I was part of a team at Chulalongkorn University in Bangkok to develop a curriculum to train Asian journalists in what we call “mindful communication for sustainable development”.

It was funded by UNESCO, and we used Asian philosophical concepts in designing the curriculum, to encourage journalists to have a compassionate mindset in reporting grassroots development issues from the peoples’ perspective.

We want to develop a new generation of communicators, who would not demand rights and create conflicts, but work with all stakeholders, including governments, to help achieve the SDGs in a cooperative manner rather than confrontation.

It is time that UNESCO listened to the Global South and rethinks why we need to have freedom of speech and for what purpose.

Dr Kalinga Seneviratne is a Sri Lanka-born journalist, broadcaster and international communications specialist. He is currently a consultant to the journalism programme at the University of the South Pacific. He is also the former head of research at the Asian Media Information and Communication Center (AMIC) in Singapore. This article was first published in The Fiji Times on 3 May 2023 and is republished under content sharing agreement between Asia Pacific Report, USP Journalism and The Fiji Times.

By David Robie

Timor-Leste has topped a stunning rise among Asia-Pacific countries to make it to into the “top ten” countries in this year’s World Press Freedom Index that saw island nations improve their rankings.

The youngest nation in Southeast Asia — which gained independence from Indonesia in 2002 — jumped from 17th last year to 10th as the Paris-based global media watchdog Reporters Without Borders (RSF) warned that this year’s survey demonstrated “enormous volatility” because of “growing animosity” towards journalists on social media and in the real world.

The 2023 RSF Index was launched today as Pacific nations marked the 30th anniversary of World Press Freedom Day with editorials, celebrations, seminars and rallies.

• READ MORE: World Press Freedom Index 2023 – journalism threatened by fake news industry
• Other Pacific Media Watch reports

Timor-Leste’s success was hailed after the country had survived many challenges and threats to media freedom in the years following independence with Bob Howarth, a former newspaper executive in Papua New Guinea and editorial adviser and trainer in Dili, said it was partially thanks to a “vibrant media” scene.

The RSF report said that Timor-Leste was “one of this year’s surprises . . . a young democracy still under construction [entering] the Index’s top 10.” It previously had a track record of intimidating the media.

New Zealand, which had previously been a regular country in the top ten list slipped from 11th to 13th. Although the Index did not state why, it is believed that the hostile and threatening atmosphere against the media during last year’s anti-vaccination parliamentary protest contributed.

The Index describes NZ as a “regional press freedom model”.

Samoa rose dramatically 26 places to 19th to place it ahead of Australia. This was probably due to the change of government in the Pacific nation with the country’s first woman prime minister, Fiamē Naomi Mataʻafa, and her FAST party having ousted the authoritarian HRPP government of Tuila’epa Sa’ilele Malielegaoi and ushered in a more consultative relationship with the media.

Australia improves
Australia also improved 12 places to 27th, also thanks to a more relaxed media environment coinciding with a change of government and some positive media freedom moves.

Fiji did even better, rising 13 places to 89th, but should expect to significantly improve on this next year after the new coalition government scrapped the draconian Fiji Media Industry Development Act last month. This hated law was originally a decree imposed after the 2006 military coup and “weaponised” by the FijiFirst government and other recent media freedom initiatives.

However, this step along with other promising media freedom developments happened after the Index cut-off assessment period. The autocratic FijiFirst government was ousted in an election last December.

“Today is World Press Freedom Day,” wrote Fiji Times editor Fred Wesley today in an editorial.

“It is perhaps more significant than ever for journalists in Fiji now that we have the draconian piece of legislation, the MIDA Act repealed.”

Papua New Guinea rose three places to 59th in spite of the Index noting that direct political interference often “threatened editorial freedom at leading media outlets”. The report cited EMTV as an example, where the entire newsroom walked out in protest over the suspension of experienced news director Sincha Dimara in February 2022.

EMTV news team walk out in protest over suspension of their chief editor

Sacked, the journalists started their own online media, Inside PNG, and covered the 2022 general election, which was marred by violence.

Tonga rose five places to 44th although the Index said some political leaders “did not hesitate to go after reporters who embarrass them”.

Welcoming the elevation of Timor-Leste as an example to the Pacific region, media consultant Bob Howarth, a founding member of the Timorese journalists association AJTL, said there were several contributing factors.

Non-stop training
“The country has been running non-stop training for media with support from UNDP and several donor countries, a vibrant media scene including a huge community radio network and a government easily accessible for local journos — remember the Chinese minister [Wang Yi] who ignored media all over the Pacific but had to front in Dili?

“Plus they now host the Dili Dialogue, an annual gathering of Southeast Asian and some Pacific press councils.

“Not a single murder, assault or threat to local journos. And visiting reporters don’t need special visas like in Papua New Guinea.

“Plus Timor-Leste is free of religious or ethnic biases after 25 years of brutal occupation by Indonesia and it has a very active and united journalists’ association.”

In Paris, RSF noted how Norway had topped the Index for the seventh year running.

“But – unusually – a non-Nordic country is ranked second, namely Ireland (up 4 places at 2nd), ahead of Denmark (down 1 place at 3rd),” said the report.

The Netherlands had risen 22 places to 6th – “recovering the position it had in 2021, before [investigative crime reporter] Peter R. de Vries was murdered.”

Bottom of the scale
At the bottom of the scale, China – “the world’s biggest jailer of journalists and exporters of propaganda” – had dropped four places to 179th, just ahead of North Korea, unsurprisingly bottom at 180th.

According to Christophe Deloire, RSF’s secretary-general, “The World Press Freedom Index shows enormous volatility in situations, with major rises and falls and unprecedented changes, such as Brazil’s 18-place rise and Senegal’s 31-place fall.

“This instability is the result of increased aggressiveness on the part of the authorities in many countries and growing animosity towards journalists on social media and in the physical world.”

He also blamed the volatility on the “growth in the fake content industry, which produces and distributes disinformation and provides the tools for manufacturing it”.

Dr David Robie is convenor of Pacific Media Watch and author of Don’t Spoil My Beautiful Face: Media, Mayhem and Human Rights in the Pacific.

• The full RSF World Press Freedom Index

Pacific eyes will be on the World Press Freedom Index 2023 when it is launched today as concerns grow over the slip in the US ranking in past years.

Fiji will hope to see an improvement in its ranking from 102nd last year with the change of government last December and a commitment by the new administration to greater press freedom with the scrapping of the draconian Fiji media law last month.

However, the index survey is based on the 2022 research by the Paris-based Reporters Without Borders (RSF) media freedom watchdog and is unlikely to yet reflect the current changes in Fiji.

• READ MORE: Historic day for Fiji journalism as ‘draconian’ media law scrapped
• Other Pacific media freedom reports

The US has signalled its greater engagement with media freedom issues with Secretary Antony Blinken participating in the live launch of the 2023 Index rankings in Washington today.

“The United States has a responsibility to promote and embody the values of press freedom around the world,” said RSF’s Washington bureau executive director Clayton Weimers.

“Secretary Blinken’s participation in this live event is a welcome commitment to those values.

“We look forward to continuing to work together to create even more concrete action that makes journalists around the world safer and protects everyone’s right to information.”

Protecting journalists
RSF is a member of the Washington Post’s Press Freedom Partnership, which brings together nonprofit organisations working to protect journalists and raise awareness for the issues journalists face.

RSF’s World Press Freedom Index has become an important global tool to measure press freedom, scoring and ranking 180 countries and territories.

Each year’s Index prompts reactions from officials around the world, including the White House’s reaction in 2018 to the US drop in ranking.

The US is ranked 42nd in the 2022 World Press Freedom Index, published by RSF.

This position is due to a small number of outlets controlling the media narrative, the disappearance of local news, as well as polarisation and distrust in the media.

As one of the world’s oldest democracies and the country of the First Amendment, the US has the potential to develop as a stronger leader in the promotion and protection of press freedom around the world, while also setting a better example at home,” said the RSF in a statement.

“RSF hopes the 2023 Index launch will mark the start of further collaboration with the Biden administration to find ways for the United States to improve its own record domestically while also using its considerable influence abroad to promote press freedom.”

• Tune into the event on Wednesday, May 3, 2023 at 9 am ET. Register to watch the virtual livestream at wapo.st/wpfdmay2023

Le Classement mondial de la liberté de la presse publié par @RSF_inter paraît le 3 mai. À Washington, où le secrétaire d’Etat Antony Blinken participera à un débat organisé avec le @washingtonpost, nous avons apposé 50 bannières publicitaires sur la voie publique. #PressFreedom pic.twitter.com/6TEgk0zG3p

— Christophe Deloire (@cdeloire) May 2, 2023

The Fiji Parliament has voted to “kill” a draconian media law in Suva today, sending newsrooms across the country into celebrations.

Twenty nine parliamentarians voted to repeal the Media Industry Development Act, while 21 voted against it and 3 did not vote.

The law — which started as a post-coup decree in 2010 — has been labelled as a “noose around the neck of the media industry and journalists” since it was enacted into law.

• READ MORE: Fiji’s longest active newsroom keen for ‘kicking out’ of tough media law
• Other Fiji media freedom reports

While opposition FijiFirst parliamentarians voted against the bill, Fiji’s Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance Professor Biman Prasad said binning the act would be good for the people and for democracy.

Removing the controversial law was a major election promise by Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka’s coalition government.

Emotional day for newsrooms
The news was “one for the ages for us”, Fiji Times editor-in-chief Fred Wesley, who was dragged into court on multiple occasions by the former government under the act, told RNZ Pacific in Vanuatu.

He said today was about all the Fijian media workers who stayed true to their profession.

“People who slugged it out, people who remained passionate about their work and continued disseminating information and getting people to make well-informed decision on a daily basis.”

“It wasn’t an easy journey, but truly thankful for today,” an emotional Wesley said.

“We’re in an era where we don’t have draconian legislation hanging over our heads.”

He said the entire industry was happy and newsrooms are now looking forward to the next chapter.

“The next phases is the challenge of putting together a Fiji media council to do the work of listening to complaints and all of that, and I’m overwhelmed and very grateful.”

Holding government to account
He said people in Fiji should continue to expect the media to do what it was supposed to do: “Holding government to account, holding our leaders to account and making sure that they’re responsible in the decisions they make.”

Journalists ‘can be brave’
Islands Business magazine editor Samantha Magick said getting rid of the law meant it would now create an environment for Fiji journalists to do more critical journalism.

“I think [we will] see less, ‘he said, she said’, reporting in very controlled environments,” Magick said.

“Fiji’s media will see more investigations, more depth, more voices, different perspectives, [and] hopefully they can engage a bit more as well without fear.

“It’ll just be so much healthier for us as a people and democracy to have that level of debate and investigation and questioning, regardless of who you are,” she added.

RNZ Pacific senior sports journalist and PINA board member Iliesa Tora said the Parliament’s decision sent a strong message to the rest of the region.

“The message [this sends] to the region and the different regional government’s is that you need to work with the media to ensure that there is media freedom,” said Tora, who chose to leave Fiji because he could not operate as a journalist due of the act.

“The freedom of the media ensures that people are also able to freely express themselves and are not fearful in coming forward to talk about things that they see that governments are not doing that they [should] do to really govern in the countries.”

MIDA is dead.

A huge win for media freedom in Fiji.

— Dan McGarry (@dailypostdan) April 5, 2023

‘Step into the light’ – corruption reporting project
Organised Crime and Corruption Reporting Project co-founder and publisher Drew Sullivan told RNZ Pacific that anytime a country that was not able to do the kind of accountability journalism that they should be doing, this damaged media throughout the region.

“It creates a model for illiberal actors in the region to imitate what’s going on in that country,” Sullivan said.

“So this has really moved forward in allowing journalists again to do their job and that’s really important.”

Fiji journalists, Sullivan said, had done an amazing job resisting limitations for as long as they could.

“Fiji was really a black hole of journalism [in] that the journalists could not participate in on a global community because they couldn’t find the information; they weren’t allowed to write what they needed to write.

“So this is really a step forward into the light to really bring Fiji and media back into the global journalism community.”

Korean cult investigation
Last year, OCCRP published a major investigation on Fiji, working with local journalists to expose the expansion of the controversial Korean Chirstain-cult Grace Road Church under the Bainimarama regime.

Rabuka’s government is currently investigating Grace Road.

Sullivan said OCCRP will continue to support Fijian journalists.

“But [the repealing of the act] will allow a lot more stories to be done and a lot more people will understand how the world really works, especially in Fiji.”

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

The Fiji government has announced it will repeal the controversial Media Industry Development Act 2010.

Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka said cabinet had approved the tabling of a bill to repeal the Act “as a whole.”

“The decision is pursuant to the People’s Coalition Government’s commitment to the growth and development of a strong and independent news media in the country,” said Rabuka in his post-cabinet meeting update.

• READ MORE: Other Fiji media freedom reports

“It has been said that ‘media freedom and freedom of expression is the oxygen of democracy’,” he said.

“These fundamental freedoms are integral to enable the people to hold their government accountable.

“I am proud to stand here today to make this announcement, which was key to our electoral platform, and a demand that I heard echoed in all parts of the country that I visited,” he added.

The announcement comes just days after Rabuka’s government introduced a new draft legislation to replace the act.

Strongly opposed
The move to replace the 2010 media law with a new one was strongly opposed during public consultations by local journalists and media organisations.

They said there was no need for new legislation to control the media and called for a “total repeal” of the existing regulation.

The country’s Deputy Prime Minister, Manoa Kamikamica, told RNZ Pacific last Friday that there were areas of concern that local stakeholders had raised during the consultation session of the proposed new bill.

“We hear what the industry is saying, we will make some assessments and then make a final decision,” he said.

But Rabuka’s announcement today means that the decision has been made.

RNZ Pacific has contacted the Fijian Media Association for comment.

‘Good decision’ but investment needed
University of the South Pacific head of journalism programme Associate Professor Shailendra Singh said the announcement was expected.

Dr Singh said repealing the punitive legislation was a core election platform promise of the three challenger parties which are now in power.

“This is a good decision because the Fijian media and other stakeholders were not sufficiently consulted when the decree was promulgated in June 2010.”

But he said while getting rid of the media act was welcomed, the coalition was working on a new legislation and “we have to wait and see what that looks like”.

“The media act was dead in the water or redundant before the change in government. The new government could not have implemented it after coming to power, having criticised it and campaigned against it in their election campaign,” he said.

“Repealing the act removes the fear factor prevalent in the sector for nearly 13 years now.”

Dr Singh said the government had committed to the growth and development of a strong news media.

Public good investment
But that, he said, would require more than the repeal of the act.

“[Improving standards] will require some financial investments by the state since media organisations are struggling financially due to the digital disruption followed by covid.”

He said among the many challenges, the media industry was struggling to retain staff.

“So incentives like government scholarships specifically in the media sector could be one way of helping out.

“Media is a public good and like any public good government should invest in it for the benefit of the public.”

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Communications Fiji Ltd (CFL) chair William Parkinson has called for a repeal of Fiji’s Media Industry Development Act 2010 and more discussion on the proposed Media Ownership and Registration Bill 2023.

He said this during a public consultation on the review of MIDA Act 2010 at Suvavou House yesterday where a draft replacement law was handed to participants.

“I am concerned because after we pass this Bill, we will be stuck with it for a very lengthy period while we have this wider consultation with the community, and the media is then just spinning its wheels, unable to move forward on critical issues it needs to address,” Parkinson said.

• READ MORE: Other reports on Fiji media law

“The question is, do we start with the complete repeal of the Bill and then have the consultations over any issue that you may have, or do we start with this (the draft)?

“For me, I think we start with a clean slate and then we can have a wider conversation about whether there is the need for regulation in any sensitivity areas, and of course part of the conversation are these issues are already covered under (other) forms of legislation or control.

“For example, cross media ownership or the unscrupulous player taking control of large sections of the media, that could apply to an unscrupulous player taking large control of the supermarket or any other form of business in Fiji, and its already covered by way of FCCC (Fiji Competition and Consumer Commission).

Don’t ‘over-complicate’ media law
“These are all covered already, and I don’t see a need for any further particular legislation for the media.

“So our call from the media, we have no problem with a wider media consultation or media regulation, if that is necessary, lets start with a clean slate, that is our position.”

University of the South Pacific head of journalism associate professor Shailendra Singh urged the drafters of the legislation to be aware of Fiji’s media system, especially after the covid-19 pandemic when it was vulnerable politically and financially.

He urged the drafters not to “over-complicate” laws for the media.

Arieta Vakasukawaqa is a Fiji Times reporter. Republished with permission.

A Pacific journalism academic has warned proposed amendments to media laws in Papua New Guinea, if “ill-defined”, could mirror the harsh restrictions in Fiji.

Prime Minister James Marape’s government is facing fierce opposition from local and regional journalists for attempting to fasttrack a new media development policy.

The draft law has been described by media freedom advocates as “the thin edge of the web of state control”.

• LISTEN TO RNZ PACIFIC WAVES:  Dr Shailendra Singh speaks on the Fiji media law and draft PNG policy
• READ MORE: PNG’s proposed policy could lead to government control of the press
• APMN calls for ‘urgent rethink’ over PNG draft media regulation plan
• Other PNG media policy reports

PNG’s Information and Communications Technology (ICT) Department released the Draft Media Development Policy publicly on February 5. It aims “to outline the objectives and strategies for the use of media as a tool for development”.

The department gave stakeholders less than two weeks to make submissions on the 15-page document, but after a backlash the ICT chief extended the consultation period by another week.

“I recognise the sensitivity and importance of this reform exercise,” ICT Minister Timothy Masiu said after giving in to public criticism and extending the consultation period until February 24.

Masiu said he instructed the Information Department to “facilitate a workshop in partnership with key stakeholders”, adding that the Information Ministry “supports and encourages open dialogue” on the matter.

“I reaffirm to the public that the government is committed to ensuring that this draft bill will serve its ultimate purpose,” he said.

The new policy includes provisions on regulating the media industry and raising journalism standards in PNG, which has struggled for years due to lack of investment in the sector.

But media leaders in PNG have expressed concerns, noting that while there are areas where government support is needed, the proposed regulation is not the solution.

“The situation in PNG is a bit worrying if you see what happened in Fiji, even though the PNG Information Department has denied any ulterior motives,” University of the South Pacific head of journalism, Associate Professor Shailendra Singh, told RNZ Pacific.

“There are concerns in PNG. Prominent journalists are worried that the proposed act could be the thin edge of the wedge of state media control, as in Fiji,” Dr Singh said, in reaction to Masiu’s guarantee that the policy is for the benefit of media organisations and journalists.

“If you look at the Fiji situation, the Media Act was implemented in the name of democratising the media, ironically, and also improving professional standards.”

Dr Singh said this is what is also being said by the PNG government but “in Fiji the Media Act has been a disaster for media rights”.

“Various reports blame the Fiji Media Act for a chilling effect on journalism and they also hold the Act responsible for instilling self-censorship in the Fiji media sector,” he said.

“If the PNG media policy provisions are ill-defined, as the Fiji Media Act was, and if it has harsh punitive measures, it could also result in a chilling effect on journalism and this in turn could have major implications for democracy and freedom of speech in PNG.”

The Media Industry Development Act (MIDA) 2010 and its implementation meant that Fiji was ranked 102nd out of 180 countries by Reporters without Borders in 2022.

Earlier this month Fiji’s Attorney-General Siromi Turaga publicly apologised to journalists for the harassment and abuse they endured during the Bainimarama government’s reign.

But Dr Singh said PNG appeared to have been “emboldened” by the Fijian experience.

Media freedom a Pacific-wide issue
He said other Pacific leaders had also threatened to introduce similar legislation and “this is a major concern”.

“Fiji and PNG are the two biggest countries in the Pacific [which] often set trends in the region, for better or for worse. The question that comes to mind is whether countries like Solomon Islands or Vanuatu will follow suit? [Because] over the years and even recently, the leaders of these two countries have also threatened the news media.”

A major study co-authored by the USP academic, which surveyed more than 200 journalists in nine countries and was published in Pacific Journalism Review in 2021, revealed that “Pacific journalists are among the youngest, most inexperienced and least qualified in the world”.

Dr Singh warned the research showed that legislation alone would not result in any significant improvements to journalism standards in Pacific countries, which is why committing money in training and development was crucial.

“Training and development are an important component of the Fiji Media Act. However, our analysis found zero dollars was invested by the Fiji government in training and development,” he said.

“If we are to take any lessons from Fiji, and if the PNG government is serious about standards, it needs to invest at least some of its own money in this venture of improving journalism.”

This is a sentiment shared by Media Council of PNG president, Neville Choi, who said: “If the concern is poor journalism, then the solution is more investment in schools of journalism at tertiary institutions, this will also improve diversity and pluralism in the quality of journalism.

“We need newsrooms with access to training in media ethics and legal protection from harassment,” Choi added.

Dr Singh said that without proper financial backing in the media sector “there is unlikely to be any improvement in standards, [but] just a cowered down or subdued media [which] is not in PNG’s public interest, or the national interest, given the levels of corruption in the country.”

APMN calls for ‘urgent rethink’
The publisher of the Pacific Journalism Review, the Asia Pacific Media Network, has also condemned the move, calling for an “urgent rethink” of the draft media policy.

The group is proposing for the communications ministry to “immediately discard the proposed policy of legislating the PNG Media Council and regulating journalists and media which would seriously undermine media freedom in Papua New Guinea”.

The network also cited the 1999 Melanesian Media Declaration as a guideline for Pacific media councils and said the draft PNG policy was ignoring “established norms” for media freedom.

The statement was co-signed by the APMN chair Dr Heather Devere; deputy chair Dr David Robie, a retired professor of Pacific journalism and author, and founding director of the Pacific Media Centre; and Pacific Journalism Review editor Dr Philip Cass, who was born in PNG and worked on the Times of Papua New Guinea and Wantok newspapers.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

While steps are being taken behind the scenes by Fiji’s coalition government to review the country’s existing media legislation, civil society organisation Dialogue Fiji says coming up with a law that protects media freedom and safeguards against reporting that can have negative implications is difficult.

Speaking at the launch of the Fiji Media Industry Development Act 2010 – An Analysis report in Lami last week, Dialogue Fiji executive director Nilesh Lal said Fiji’s punitive Media Industry Development Act was promulgated in 2010 and remained in place, although the new Fiji government had expressed its intentions to replace it.

The report was produced by Dialogue Fiji and contained important lessons and insights on the challenging issue of media freedom and regulation in a multiethnic society with conflict dynamics like Fiji.

• READ MORE: Lice Movono: Hopes for the return of press freedom in Fiji
• Other Fiji media law reports

“We will need to consider elements such as capacity of the Fijian market to sustain a multiplicity of media players. Media ownership has been a key element of the regulatory regime under previous administration and this will need to be looked at,” Lal said.

“The challenges to traditional media posed by social media in a small market context will need to be considered to ensure that media organisations remain financially viable and a robust and diverse media sector is maintained.”

Lal said many lessons had been learnt from the experience of the past 12 years, operating under a highly restrictive and punitive media regulation.

He said it was important that stakeholders be consulted at every stage of the review process of the media legislation, including pre-drafting.

Friction possible
“If the draft does not meet expectations, it is going to unduly create friction between the government, media and other interest groups such as CSOs,” Lal said.

The launch programme also included a panel discussion on the issue of media regulation and features of the media legislation desirable in Fiji.

A Fiji government video of the Dialogue Fiji media freedom discussion.

Lal said as an organisation that championed democratic freedoms, dialogue and deliberations, Dialogue Fiji believed it was important to create opportunities for Fijians to deliberate on issues that affected their lives.

“Media freedom is an important element of freedom of expression. We need the media to be able to exercise this right, which is afforded to them in Fiji’s Constitution,” he said.

The comprehensive analysis on the Act was authored by USP Journalism Programme coordinator Associate Professor Dr. Shailendra Singh, Nilesh Lal and the chief deputy Attorney-General of Arizona (US) Daniel Barr.

Dr Singh said a major complaint against the Act from the media sector and observers was the ambiguities in some of the provisions.

“Section 22 is a good example of this. Section 22 states no content must include materials against the public interest, order, national interest or anything that might create disharmony in society,” he said.

National interest ‘subjective’
“The national interest/order can be subjective matters. The question is, who decides what is national interest or public interest, especially when these terms are so ill-defined in the Act.

“The reality is that the media, government and the public all have different viewpoints about what constitutes the national interest in any particular time or year. Vagueness in some of the provisions in the Act is another shortfall when it comes to international benchmarks.”

For issues like hate speech, he said it was important to ensure key terms were first defined.

“The broader the definition, the more it opens the door for arbitrary application of these laws. Some people might say, in all its years of existence, no one has been charged or prosecuted under the Media Act. Sometimes this is touted as a positive development but the problem is, it can be invoked at any time,” Dr Singh said.

“Even though no one might have been charged or cited, it is still like an axe hanging over the news media’s heads. This is why Media Act is accused of instilling a chilling effect on journalism in Fiji.”

Penalties excessive
Dr Singh noted that penalties in the Act were also in breach of some international benchmarks, adding that excessive sanctions should be reserved for exceptional cases. In Fiji’s Media Act, penalties applied across the board regardless of the seriousness of the offence.

He noted that there was little evidence of the separation of powers in the Act and that all powers were invested in the Communications Minister and Attorney-General, breaching international benchmarks on independence of regulatory bodies of government.

“Any national media regulatory body should be independent from the government in a democracy. The A-G and Communications Minister, who have so much power in the Act, are part of government and are expected or required to work in the interest of government first and foremost,” Dr Singh said.

“So two ministers had so much powers and are expected to work in unison, rather than in the interest of media organization,” Dr Singh said.

“What we found peculiar is that, with the previous government, the Communications Minister and A-G positions were held by the same person, one person with two different portfolios controlling everything. When we talk about separation of powers, it was almost non-existent in the Media Act.”

Dr Singh also noted that a core grievance with the Act was the criminalisation of ethics, adding that Fiji was one of the few countries in which journalism ethics had been criminalised.

Under self-regulation, ethics are considered non-punitive breaches but under the Media Act, a breach of ethics is treated as criminal offences.

“Ethics are not set in stone; you cannot have the same response for every ethical dilemma out in the field,” he said.

“Another key analysis in the Act is the lopsided hearing and appeal procedures where the appeal provisions for the media are restricted. It raises some really serious questions, for example, why are complainants against news media given full appeal whereas media can only appeal decisions for penalties more than $50,000?

“There is non-compliance of universal human rights, all should be equal before the law, provided equal protection of the law.”

Dr Singh said the Act was well protected legally so that no court of any kind could entertain any challenges by any person or body in relation to the validity or legality of the Act, and any decision of the Tribunal except for appeals.

“The immunity clause shows how the Act and its entities are bestowed all the powers without being bound by some of the core accountabilities of the justice system,” he said.

Government’s commitment
Attorney-General Siromi Turaga, who joined the panel discussion alongside newsroom editors from Fiji’s mainstream news media, said the coalition government recognised the pivotal role that the media played in Fiji, in terms of ensuring the circulation and responsible reporting of information.

He reaffirmed the government’s support of a free, independent and responsible media and reiterated that the Media Industry Development Act 2010 would be reviewed with the assistance of a committee that would be established for the task.

While there was no set timeframe on the completion of the review, Turaga said this was a priority for government as it continued to encourage robust journalism, urging journalists to also “practise fair and balanced reporting, and most importantly, allow for the right of reply at all times”.

Turaga said the analysis by Dialogue Fiji provided an insightful commentary on the Act and was a helpful resource for the review process.

Republished under the journalism education partnership between Asia Pacific Report and the University of the South Pacific regional journalism programme.

Veteran Fijian journalist Netani Rika and his wife were resting in their living room when he was suddenly woken, startled by the sound of smashed glass. “I got up, I slipped on the wet surface,” he recalls.

He turned on the lights and a bottle and wick were spread across the floor. It was one of the many acts of violence and intimidation he endured after the 2006 military coup.

Back then, Rika was the manager of news and current affairs at Fiji Television.

• LISTEN TO ABC PACIFIC BEAT: Media freedom under the new Fiji government
• READ MORE: Former Fiji Times editor has no regrets about resisting censorship
• Fiji’s media veterans recount intimidation under FijiFirst government – eye on reforms

No news at 6pm, no news at 10pm
Back then, Rika was the manager of news and current affairs at Fiji Television.

He vividly remembers the time his car was smashed with golf clubs by two unknown men — one he would later identify as a member of the military — and the day he was locked up at a military camp.

“We were monitoring the situation . . .  once the takeover happened, there was a knock at the door and we had some soldiers present themselves,” he said.

“We were told they were there for our protection but our CEO at the time, Ken Clark, said ‘well if you’re here to protect us, then you can stand at the gate’.

“They said, ‘no, we are here to be in the newsroom, and we want to see what goes to air. We also have a list of people you cannot speak to … ministers, detectives’.”

Rika remembered denying their request and publishing a notice on behalf of Fiji TV News that said it would “not broadcast tonight due to censorship”, promising to return to air when they were able to “broadcast the news in a manner which is free and fair”.

“There was no news at six, there was no news at 10, it was a decision made by the newsroom.”

Organisations like Human Rights Watch have repeatedly criticised Voreqe Bainimarama, who installed himself as prime minister during the 2006 coup, for his attacks on government critics, the press and the freedom of its citizens.

Fear and intimidation
Rika reported incidents of violence to Fiji police, but he said detectives told him his complaints would not go far.

“There was a series of letters to the editor which I suppose you could say were anti-government. Shortly after … the now-honourable leader of the opposition (Voreqe Bainimarama) called, he swore at me in the Fijian iTaukei language … a short time later I saw a vehicle come into our street,” he said.

“The next time (the attackers) came over the fence, broke a wooden louvre and threw one (explosive) inside the house.”

The ABC contacted Bainimarama’s Fiji First party and Fiji police for comment, but has not received a response.

The following year, Rika left his job to become the editor-in-chief at The Fiji Times, the country’s leading independent newspaper. With the publication relying on the government’s advertising to remain viable, Rika said the government put pressure on the paper’s owners.

“The government took away Fiji Times’ advertising, did all sorts of things in order to bring it into line with its propaganda that Fiji was OK, there was no more corruption.”

Rika said the government also sought to remove the employment rights of News Limited, which owned The Fiji Times.

“The media laws were changed so that you could not have more than 5 percent overseas ownership,” Rika said.

Rika, and his deputy Sophie Foster — now an Australian national — lost their jobs after the Media Act 2011 was passed, banning foreign ownership of Fijian media organisations.

‘A chilling law’
The new law put in place several regulations over journalists’ work, including restrictions on reporting of government activities.

In May last year, Fijian Media Association secretary Stanley Simpson called for a review of the “harsh penalties” that can be imposed by the authority that enforces the act.

Penalties include up to F$100,000 (NZ$75,00) in fines or two years’ imprisonment for news organisations for publishing content that is considered a breach of public or national interest. Simpson said some sections were “too excessive and designed to be vindictive and punish the media rather that encourage better reporting standards and be corrective”.

Media veterans hope the controversial act will be changed, or removed entirely, to protect press freedom.

Retired journalism professor Dr David Robie, now editor of Asia Pacific Report, taught many of the Pacific journalists who head up Fijian newsrooms today, but some of his earlier research focused on the impact of the Media Act.

Dr Robie said from the outset, the legislation was widely condemned by media freedom organisations around the world for being “very punitive and draconian”.

“It is a chilling law, making restrictions to media and making it extremely difficult for journalists to act because … the journalists in Fiji constantly have that shadow hanging over them.”

In the years after Fijian independence in 1970, Dr Robie said Fiji’s “vigorous” media sector “was a shining light in the whole of the Pacific and in developing countries”.

“That was lost … under that particular law and many of the younger journalists have never known what it is to be in a country with a truly free media.”

‘We’re so rich in stories’
Last month, the newly-elected government said work was underway to change media laws.

“We’re going to ensure (journalists) have freedom to broadcast and to impart knowledge and information to members of the public,” Fiji’s new Attorney-General Siromi Turaga said.

“The coalition government is going to provide a different approach, a truly democratic way of dealing with media freedom.” But Dr Robie said he believed the only way forward was to remove the Media Act altogether.

“I’m a bit sceptical about this notion that we can replace it with friendly legislation. That’s sounds like a slippery slope to me,” he said.

“I’d have to say that self-regulation is pretty much the best way to go.”

Reporters Without Borders ranked Fiji at 102 out of 180 countries in terms of press freedom, falling by 47 places compared to its 2021 rankings.

Samantha Magick was the news director at Fiji radio station FM96, but left after the 2000 coup and returned three years ago to edit Islands Business International, a regional news magazine.

“When I came back, there wasn’t the same robustness of discussion and debate, we (previously) had powerful panel programs and talkback and there wasn’t a lot of that happening,” she said.

“Part of that was a reflection of the legislation and its impact on the way people worked but it was often very difficult to get both sides of a story because of the way newsmakers tried to control their messaging … which I thought was really unfortunate.”

Magick said less restrictive media laws might encourage journalists to push the boundaries, while mid-career reporters would be more creative and more courageous.

“I also hope it will mean more people stay in the profession because we have this enormous problem with people coming, doing a couple of years and then going … for mainly financial reasons.”

She lamented the fact that “resource intensive” investigative journalism had fallen by the wayside but hoped to see “a sort of reinvigoration of the profession in general.”

“We’re so rich in stories … I’d love to see more collaboration across news organisations or among journalists and freelancers,” she said.

Lice Movono is a Fijian reporter for the ABC based in Suva. An earlier audio report from her on the Fiji media is here. Republished with permission.

Fiji’s Media Industry Development Act will soon be reviewed over the next few weeks.

Speaking to The Fiji Times in Lautoka on Monday, Minister for Communications Manoa Kamikamica said the review was one of the main objectives of the coalition government when it came to freedom of the press.

“The Media Decree is going to be reviewed,” he said.

• READ MORE: Fiji’s media veterans recount intimidation under FijiFirst government – eye on reforms — Lice Movono
• Other Fiji politics reports

“It is no secret that it is one of the priorities of the coalition government, so hopefully in the next few weeks we will be making some progress on that.”

He said that since the change in government media freedom had been felt among the industry.

“You can see there is already freedom of the press that you can feel when there is a change in leadership.

“So that is a positive for the media industry and I can assure you that the Media Decree review is happening and it will be happening over the coming weeks.”

More communication plans
He added that there were more plans to develop Fiji’s communication sector.

“There are a lot of things to do in communication,” he said.

“There are still a lot of people that have not been reached yet in terms of service delivery so that is a priority of government as well.

“There are also a lot of technological industries that are starting to come to Fiji for example the BPO (business process outsourcing) sector.

“This is one so need to make sure that the government supports and there are a few things we are going to be doing there.

“So there’s a lot to do and we have a plan and we will take it forward.”

Repeka Nasiko is a Fiji Times reporter. Republished with permission.

Radio Australia’s Pacific Beat reports today on how Fiji has fared under the draconian Media Act that has restricted media freedom over the past decade.

There are hopes that state-endorsed media censorship will stop in Fiji following last month’s change in government to the People’s Alliance-led coalition.

Reported by Fiji correspondent Lice Movono, the podcast outlines former Fiji Times editor-in-chief Netani Rika’s experiences of repression under the former FijiFirst government.

• LISTEN TO ABC PACIFIC BEAT: Media freedom under the new Fiji government
• READ MORE: Former Fiji Times editor has no regrets about resisting censorship

But a change in government has also been reflected by a change in attitude towards the media.

It comes as the Fijian Broadcasting Corporation board has terminated the contract of FBC’s chief executive Riyaz Sayed-Khaiyum amid reports that the CEO for the public broadcaster earned more money than the prime minister of the country.

Media veterans are also hoping for changes to Fiji’s controversial Media Act, or its complete removal, to protect freedom of the press.

Movono also reports on Islands Business editor Samantha Magick’s view on media freedom and retired journalism professor Dr David Robie, who founded the Pacific Media Centre, expressing his “scepticism” over whether the hoped for relaxed rules would go far enough for the global RSF Media Freedom Index which ranks Fiji at just 102nd out of 180 countries.

The media item is rounded off with an interview with Attorney-General Siromi Turaga who says the repression of the past should never have happened.

He said he would directly work on the changes to the Act, once the minister responsible for information moves to suggest changes.

“The coalition government is going to provide a different approach, a truly democratic way of dealing with press freedom,” Turaga said.

“We’re going to ensure they have freedom to broadcast to impart knowledge information to members of the public.”

Interviewed:
Netani Rika, former editor of The Fiji Times and former Fiji Television manager of news and current affairs
Samantha Magick, editor of Islands Business
Dr David Robie, retired journalism professor and editor of Asia Pacific Report
Siromi Turaga, Attorney-General of Fiji

In other items on today’s Pacific Beat:

• Fiji’s top cop and head of prisons are suspended pending an investigation by a special tribunal.
• A programme is launched in the Australian state of Victoria to get seasonal workers road-ready.
• Pacific women take part in Tennis Australia’s leadership programme, coinciding with the Australian Open.
• And scientists warn some sharks are on the brink of extinction.

Reporter Lice Movono

Presenter: Prianka Srinivasan

Fiji’s 14 December 2022 election will go down as a momentous occasion in the nation’s history — including for potential impacts on Suva’s diplomatic ties with Pacific partners.

Immediate tasks identified by new Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka’s tripartite coalition include the revival of the pandemic-scarred economy, the re-examination of foreign relations, and the restoration of democratic institutions, which never quite recovered from the battering of the 2006 coup.

The election ended the 16-year reign of the FijiFirst government headed by Voreqe Bainimarama, the country’s larger-than-life figure after seizing power in 2006, before winning elections in 2014 and 2018.

• READ MORE: Steven Ratuva: What an election in Fiji – some reflections, lessons
• Other Fiji politics reports

Bainimarama’s military background coupled with Fiji’s “coup culture” had raised concerns about a smooth transfer of power amid fears about the military being called to assist police.

For two weeks after the new government was finally sworn-in on Christmas Eve on a slim, three seat majority in the 55-member house, the country was on edge as tensions between the former and successor governments intensified.

Bainimarama’s actions suggested that he would not leave quietly. Not only did Bainimarama fail to concede, he did not bother to congratulate the new prime minister, as per democratic tradition.

To the contrary, Bainimarama upped the ante with belligerent media statements claiming the ruling coalition was engaging in “repressive conduct”, attacking the values and principles of the 2013 constitution, and that the country was “reliving the dark ages”.

Sharp rebuke
This was met with a sharp rebuke from Rabuka, who accused Bainimarama of bombarding the country with lies and trying to create racial disharmony alongside former attorney-general Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum.

Police confirmed receiving a complaint against Bainimarama for “inciteful” statements, with a border alert issued for Sayed-Khaiyum should he return to Fiji for allegedly “inciting communal antagonism”.

It was a remarkable turn of events for what had been the two most powerful men in the FijiFirst government, which had ruled with an iron grip yet could only secure 42.5 per cent of the vote in December.

The government diffused a potentially risky situation, and despite a stand-off over the role of the police chief, seems to be in control so far.

The actions of military commander Major General Jone Kalouniwai have been crucial. In an address at the military’s end-of-year parade just a week before the elections, Kalaouniwai had ordered his troops to honour the democratic process and respect the wishes of voters.

Kalaouniwai’s pledge is significant in light of the description of Fiji by longstanding Pacific academic Professor Stewart Firth as a democracy by military permission. This was in reference to Fiji’s 2013 constitution mandating that “It shall be the overall responsibility of the Republic of Fiji Military Forces to ensure at all times the security, defence and well-being of Fiji and all Fijians”.

‘Hybrid regime’
Professor Firth calls this provision a “capacious definition of the military’s role that could easily be invoked to justify another coup”. In 2017, the Economist Intelligence Unit categorised Fiji as a “hybrid regime”, while the 2022 Freedom House report rated Fiji only as “partly free”.

Should the new government remain cohesive and the present situation prevail, it will mark Fiji’s first smooth transition of power. Rabuka staged the first two pro-indigenous Fijian coups in 1987 against perceived Indo-Fijian dominance. During his prime ministership from 1992–99, the former military commander had a change of heart and adopted a multiracial stance by forging a partnership with the late National Federation Party (NFP) leader Jai Ram Reddy to usher in the more equitable 1997 constitution, only to be rejected at the 1999 polls.

For Rabuka, re-claiming government is a vindication of his partnership with the NFP and its current leader, Deputy Prime Minister Biman Prasad. In his pre-election campaign Rabuka stressed the importance of social harmony in a country with “so many races, so many religions”.

Rabuka’s multiracial credentials in this ethnically tense country will be put to the test during his term.

The new government’s 100-day “first order of business” emphasises not just the economy, but democracy and human rights. A pledge to ensure “separation of powers” in crucial institutions such as the judiciary, “strengthen human rights”, and review the draconian 2010 Media Industry Development Act will be welcomed by international partners such as the United States, which is assembling a “community of democracies” to counter growing authoritarianism.

How the government handles its diplomatic relationships will be the focus of regional attention. Whereas the Bainimarama government enjoyed close relations with China, all three leaders of the coalition government have stated that they preferred to align with countries with democratic traditions.

While campaigning, Rabuka indicated that his government would forge closer ties with Fiji’s traditional partners, Australia and New Zealand, while distancing from China. But in a subsequent interview with the ABC in his first week in office, he changed tone, chiding Australia and the United States for their “colonial” mindset while praising China for seeing “us as just development partners”.

Largest development partner
While Australia is the largest development partner in the region, China remains an important actor in Fiji and the Pacific — a reliable source of development finance and aid, a market for the Pacific’s resources sector, including fisheries, and a growing source of tourists. Given its unprecedented debt challenges in the wake of the pandemic, Fiji is unlikely to scorn any source of development funds.

At a “New Approaches to Economic Progress” panel discussion in Suva last week, Professor Prasad, who also holds the finance portfolio, stated that the “task ahead of us is huge” and announced the forthcoming budget to be released in about six months will target job creation, the high cost of living and investor confidence.

Professor Prasad emphasised that ultimately Fiji’s progress hinges on social cohesion and political stability. Building consensus on major policy issues, equitable sharing of economic benefits, keeping the coalition intact and preventing the collapse of government will be the key challenges.

Dr Shailendra Bahadur Singh is associate professor and head of the journalism programme at the University of the South Pacific. He is a research associate and board member of the Pacific Journalism Review and Asia Pacific Report and a member of the Asia Pacific Media Network. This article was first published in The Interpreter and is republished with permission.

Fiji’s much-anticipated Media Industry Development Authority (MIDA) Act review is now being drafted and expected to be tabled at the next cabinet meeting on January 17.

Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka confirmed this to journalists during an interview in Suva last Friday when he was questioned about the government’s actions to repeal the Act that was imposed by the FijiFirst government.

“It is currently being drafted by our legal team at the Office of the Attorney-General in conjunction with input from the Ministry of Information,” Rabuka said.

• READ MORE: John Mitchell: Media freedom, public interest and The Fiji Times
• Rabuka’s ‘wasteful spending’ spotlight now turns onto FBC, Fiji Sun
• Other Fiji news media reports

Fiji Times editor-in-chief Fred Wesley welcomed the statement by Rabuka.

“It has been long overdue, and this is something we had been hoping to see happen,” Wesley said.

Meanwhile, Rabuka reminded journalists they could do their work without fear as long their reporting was balanced.

Arieta Vakasukawaqa is a Fiji Times reporter. Republished with permission.

Fiji Deputy Prime Minister Viliame Gavoka says the Media Industry Development Act will be replaced soon.

Speaking to members of the media after the coalition agreement signing for Fiji’s new government on Friday, he said the three leaders were in harmony in terms of repealing the Act.

“Absolutely free, we want to remove any kind of prohibitions and restrictions,” Gavoka said.

• READ MORE: Behind the Fiji censorship: A comparative media regulatory case study as a prelude to the Easter putsch
• The evolution of media laws in Fiji and impacts on journalism and society
• Other Fiji media law reports

He said it was the wish of the coalition government for the media to be free and for the people of Fiji to live in a free society.

“We want you to be totally free to act and that is also the part of understanding — we live in a totally free country,” he said.

Pacific Media Watch reports that Associate Professor Shailendra Singh, head of the University of the South Pacific regional journalism programme, commented on Twitter:

“Fiji’s much-criticised punitive Media Act to be replaced — question is replaced with what? Since its implementation 13 yrs ago no one has been charged under the Act underscoring its redundancy.

“But it was like a noose [around the] media’s neck and blamed for self-censorship/chilling effect.”

Pauliasi Mateboto is a Fiji Times reporter. Republished with permission.

Fiji’s much-criticized punitive MediaAct to be replaced- question is replaced with what? Since its implementation 13yrs ago no one has been charged under the Act underscoring it’s redundancy. But it was like a noose in media’s neck and blamed for self-censorship/chilling effect. https://t.co/DiwUv93CPp

— Dr Shailendra B Singh (@ShailendraBSing) January 1, 2023

Supervisor of Elections Mohammed Saneem has issued a legal direction to The Fiji Times to remove an article which he said misquoted him.

Saneem objected to the headline of the article, which read: “Saneem: I will not apologise.”

Unity Fiji party candidate Riaz Mohammed had demanded that Saneem apologise for initially rejecting his nomination on the grounds of an alleged criminal conviction.

• READ MORE: Other Fiji elections reports

In response, Saneem, declining to apologise, said that if Mohammed wanted an apology “that means we have some malice, there is no malice in this”.

Saneem issued a legal notice to The Fiji Times yesterday under section 144A of the Electoral Act, directing the removal of the online article.

In a separate letter to The Fiji Times, Saneem said he “did not make the statement as quoted in your headline”.

“The headline is clearly misleading and also appears to be fabricated by Fiji Times,” Saneem said.

“If the same is your own views, then you should correctly identify it to yourself and not the SOE.”

Fiji Times disagrees
Section 144A, giving the power to the Supervisor to remove or correct “false statements” was enacted by Parliament last year.

Fiji Times editor-in-chief Fred Wesley replied it was not necessary for the Elections Supervisor to serve legal notices on the newspaper every time he wanted a correction to a news story.

Wesley said he did not agree that The Fiji Times had breached the law but was prepared to remove the article as directed because “it was not an article of great importance”.

Felix Chaudhary is a Fiji Times reporter. Republished with permission.

Addressing the training development deficit in the Fiji media industry can stem journalist attrition and improve coverage of election reporting in the country, says University of the South Pacific journalism coordinator Dr Shailendra Singh.

Speaking during last week’s launch of the National Media Reporting of the 2018 Fijian General Elections study in Suva, Dr Singh said media watch groups regarded Fiji’s controversial media law as having a “chilling effect on journalism” and “fostered a culture of media self-censorship”.

Dr Singh, who co-authored the report with Dialogue Fiji executive director Nilesh Lal, said scrapping or reforming the 2010 Media Industry Development Authority Act was crucial to “professionalising journalism”.

• READ MORE: Scrap or reform Fiji’s media law, says new elections report
• Other Fiji media reports

“The Act does nothing for training and development or journalist attrition. In fact, the Act may have exacerbated attrition,” he said.

This situation, Dr Singh said, highlighted the importance of training and development and staff retention, which were longstanding structural problems in Fiji and Pacific media.

“This underlines the role of financial viability and newsroom professional capacity in news coverage.”

He said two core media responsibilities in elections were creating a level playing field and acting as a public watchdog.

“It seems doubtful that these functions were adequately fulfilled by all media during reporting of the 2018 Fijian general elections.”

Advertising spread
Dr Singh said the research also recommended the even distribution of state advertising among media organisations as well as the allocation of public service broadcasting grants fairly among broadcasters to minimise financial incentives to report overly positively on any government.

According to the report, the FijiFirst Party received the most media coverage during the 2018 Fiji general elections and this was expected given its ruling party status.

However, variance in coverage tone and quantity appeared too high.

“The largely positive coverage of the ruling FijiFirst party could be deemed irregular. It questions certain media’s ability to hold power to account,” Dr Singh said.

“Under a stronger watchdog mandate, ruling parties face greater scrutiny, especially in election time. Instead, media coverage put challenger parties more on the defensive which is curious.”

He said challenger parties were forced to respond to allegations in news stories and were grilled more than the incumbent during debates.

“It should be other way around. In such situations the natural conclusion is journalist bias but only to a certain extent,” he said.

Direct political alignment
While the report found that certain media outlets in Fiji seemed to privilege some political parties and issues over others, distinguished political sociologist and Pacific scholar Professor Steven Ratuva said this could be due to several reasons such as direct political and ideological alignment of the media company to a political party or conscious and subconscious bias of journalists and editors.

“Bias is part of human consciousness and sometimes it is explicit and sometimes it is implicit and unconscious. This deeper sociological exploration is beyond the mandate of this report,” Professor Ratuva said in the foreword to the report.

“Election stories sell, especially when spiced with intrigue, scandals, mysteries, conspiracies and warring narratives.

“The more sensational the story the more sellable it is. The media can feed into election frenzies, inflame passion and at times encourage boisterous political behaviour and prejudice which can be socially destructive.

“The media can also be used as a means of sensible, intellectual and calm engagement to enlighten the ignorant and unite people across cultures, religions and political ideologies.”

He said keeping an eye on what the media did required an open, analytical and independent approach and this was what the report attempted to do.

Research findings
The research found that after FijiFirst, the larger and more established opposition parties SODELPA and NFP, were next in terms of the quantity of coverage, but were more likely to receive a lesser amount of positive coverage and at times found themselves on the defensive in responding to FijiFirst allegations, rather than being principles in the stories.

The smaller, newer parties had to content themselves with marginal news attention and this was generally consistent across four of the five national media that were surveyed — the Fiji Sun, FBC (TV and radio), Fiji Television Limited and Fiji Village.

“The only exception was The Fiji Times, whose coverage could be deemed to be comparatively less approving of the ruling party and also less critical of the challenger parties,” the report found.

“Besides comparatively extensive and favourable coverage in the Fiji Sun, FijiFirst made more appearances on the major national television stations, FBC and Fiji One, as well as on the CFL radio stations and news website.”

The report noted that even in special information programmes where news media allowed candidates extended time/space to have their say, the FijiFirst representatives enjoyed a distinct advantage over their opposition counterparts in the two national debates, with regards to the number of questions asked, the nature of the questions, and the opportunity to respond.

“When the two major opposition parties were in the media, it was often in order to respond to allegations by the ruling party, or to defend themselves against negative questions,” the report noted.

“The results could explain why the government accuses The Fiji Times of anti-government bias, and the opposition blame the Fiji Sun and FBC TV of favouring the government.”

However, there were other factors other than media/journalist bias that could be attributed to the lack of critical reporting.

“These could range from the news organisation’s and/or newsroom’s partiality towards the ruling party politicians and its policies. The reporting could also be affected by the inexperience in the national journalists corps to report the elections in a critical manner.”

This observation, the report highlighted, was supported by “issues balance” results indicating that key national issues, such as the economy, were understated.

The focus was instead on election processes, procedures and conduct. Another factor in the reporting could be news media’s financial links to the government.

Election reporting
As Fiji prepares for its next general election, Dialogue Fiji’s Nilesh Lal said it was important to put the spotlight on factors that impinged on an even electoral playing field.

“Given the importance of news media in disseminating electoral information and shaping public opinion, it can profoundly influence electoral outcomes, and therefore needs to come under scrutiny,” he said.

“There may also be imperatives to consider safeguards against the negative impacts of unequal coverage of electoral contestants through legislating as other countries, like the US, for instance, have done.

“Alternatively, media organisations can self-regulate by instituting internal guidelines for election reporting. A good example is the BBC’s Guidelines on election coverage. Another alternate could be the formation of an independent commission/committee made up of media organisation representatives and political parties representatives that can set rules and quotas for election coverage.

“For example, in the UK, a committee of broadcasters and political parties reviews the formula for allocation of broadcasting time, at every election.”

Lal said the purpose of the report was not to accuse any media organisation of having biases but rather to show that inequitable coverage of electoral contestants was a problem in Fiji that required redress at some level if “we are sincere about improving the quality of democracy in Fiji”.

He said the co-authors hoped the report would initiate some much-needed public discourse on the issue of equitable coverage of elections by media organisations.

Wansolwara is the student journalist newspaper of the University of the South Pacific. It collaborates with Asia Pacific Report, which prioritises student journalism.

“We need to scrap or reform the Media Industry Development Act.”

This is one of the key recommendations in the National Media Reporting of the 2018 Fijian General Elections Report.

Co-author and University of the South Pacific (USP) journalism coordinator, Associate Professor Shailendra Singh, said the Act was supposed to promote professionalism in journalism and did not address journalism’s lack of training and development.

• READ MORE: News Coverage of Fiji’s 2018 General Election Campaign: Insights from a Content Analysis of the National Print and Broadcast Media
• Behind the Fiji censorship: A comparative media regulatory case study as a prelude to the Easter putsch
• Other reports on Fiji media freedom

Dr Singh added that state advertising needed to be evenly distributed among media organisations, and public service broadcast grants needed to be allocated evenly among broadcasters.

The National Media Reporting of the 2018 Fijian General Elections research was presented by Dr Singh and Dialogue Fiji executive director Nilesh Lal.

The report provides a content analysis of the media coverage of the 2018 elections.

It focuses on a number of indicators such as direct quotation space and time, frequency of appearance, directional balance in terms of positive, negative or neutral representation of political parties or election candidates and issue balance in relation to prioritising coverage of various issues.

• Pacific Media Watch reports that Fiji’s Media Industry Development Act was originally a military decree imposed in 2010 after the 2006 Bainimarama coup and became codified law in 2015. It is widely regarded by critics as draconian.

People’s Alliance leader Sitiveni Rabuka says a People’s Alliance government will scrap the draconian Media Industry Development Act and allow a free press to thrive in Fiji.

Rabuka has condemned the decision of the FijiFirst government to amend its Media Act by outlawing the appointment of a media company manager without the approval of government.

He said this was the height of the government’s “arrogance and despotism”.

• READ MORE: Other Fiji media freedom reports

Rabuka asked what was the government’s business in the operations of a private media company, adding why should a private company seek the permission of a “basically dormant government office” on the manager it wanted to hire.

He said this was unheard of as government had no business “poking its nose” into the operations and management of a private company.

These were companies that ran on their own money, not depending on a single cent from taxpayers — unlike the pro-government media outlets, he said.

Rabuka asked what message was the government sending local and foreign investors in Fiji.

Challenge to investor confidence
At a time when the economy was slowly recovering from the economic lows of the covid-19 pandemic, Rabuka questioned how such “legislated interference’ in the running of private enterprise would boost investor confidence.

He also said the Media Industry Development (Budget Amendment) Bill was appalling, coming as it was after the naming of Fiji as the worst nation in the Pacific for press freedom and an open civic space in the 2022 World Press Freedom Index.

The former Prime Minister said the tag of Fiji being the worst nation for press freedom sank lower with this proposed amendment of the Media Act.

He said the government thrived on an oppressive and no consultative type of rule.

The 2022 World Press Freedom Index had labelled Fiji the worst nation in the Pacific for journalists, with intimidation and other restrictions threatening open civic space in the country.

Reporters Without Borders, the Paris-based global press freedom watchdog that operates the index, said journalists were often subjected to intimidation when they were overly critical of the government or attempted to hold leaders accountable by ensuring they delivered on their promises.

Fiji placed 102nd out of 180 countries.

Managing media affairs
The Media Industry Development (Budget Amendment) Bill 2022 which was being debated in Parliament this week, sought to amend the Act to prohibit a media organisation from entering into any agreement which allowed any other person from managing the affairs or operations of the media organisation without the prior approval of the authority.

It said this would ensure that control of a media organisation remained with the media organisation.

The Bill seeks to amend the Act to ensure that those who are directly in charge of a media organisation and its operations are shielded from any outside influence that may — by formal agreement or other arrangement — essentially take over or control the provision of services.

These services deal with the day-to-day operations of the media organisation, including its finances, staffing, productions or publications.

The Bill also amends the Act to require a media organisation to notify the authority where any such agreement exists and to provide details of the agreement in order to verify and ensure that the media organisation’s operations are not in any way unduly influenced.

The Media Industry Development Act 2010 Act provides for the regulation and registration of media organisations in Fiji.

Under section 33 of the Act, every media organisation that provides or intends to provide media services in Fiji must be registered.

Sworn affidavits
A media organisation is registered when the proprietor or proprietors of the media organisation deposit with the Media Industry Development Authority, a duly sworn and signed affidavit or affidavits containing the required information as specified under the Act.

Section 38 of the Act provides that in the case of a company, all directors of a media organisation must be Fijian citizens permanently residing in Fiji. In the case of any other legal entity, the person or persons with analogous powers in a media organisation, must also be Fijian citizens permanently residing in Fiji.

The Act also provides the limits of beneficial ownership of shares in a company or any other interest in the nature of ownership of a media organisation.

Up to 10 percent of the beneficial ownership or interest in the nature of ownership of a media organisation is allowed for any foreign person holding such shares or interests while 90 percent of any beneficial ownership of shares or any other interest in the nature of ownership of the media organisation, must be owned by Fijian citizens permanently residing in Fiji.

Vijay Narayan is news director of Fijivillage.

The Fijian Media Association says the Reporters Without Borders (RSF) 2020 World Press Freedom Index report is another clear reminder to the government to review and remove sections in the Media Industry Development Authority Act that impose harsh penalties.

In a statement, the FMA said these penalties included for content that was deemed against the public interest or order, was against national interest, or created communal discord, or even if the media did not include a byline for articles exceeding 50 words.

The association also asked who defined what was against the public interest or what was against the national interest. While the Fijian media had been doing their best to be “bold and free” and abiding by their Code of Ethics, these laws were making many media organisations and editors “hesitate about publishing or broadcasting certain views that may go against the government based on how they may interpret that legislation and come after a media organisation”.

• READ MORE: Other World Press Freedom Index reports

The FMA added it do not endorse any report it had not participated in, but agreed with certain statements by the RSF report, particularly on the threat of legislation such as the MIDA Act to “criminalise and impose heavy fines on media organisations or editors”.

It stated that intimidation did occur from various sides of the political divide — both government and opposition and the report was not correct about journalists being imprisoned.

The FMA also said no imprisonment of journalists had happened in the last decade although there had been instances of journalists being questioned over their reports, and cases of media organisations and editors being taken to court.

It also said the fines were too excessive and designed to be “vindictive and punish the media rather that encourage better reporting standards and be corrective”, adding that media organisations in Fiji were almost unanimous in seeking the removal of the harsh fines and penalties and a review of the act.

‘Dangerous for media freedom’
The FMA added it the law was “dangerous for media freedom” now and also in the future.

The association also highlighted that the MIDA Act had been ineffective and done “little to nothing to raise media standards”.

While the media in Fiji had been doing its work in informing the public and holding government accountable, the “massive fines hanging over their heads” was not conducive to a free media environment, said the FMA statement.

Meanwhile, Radio NZ reported that Fiji had been ranked as the worst place in the Pacific region for journalists in the World Press Freedom Index.

In the Index released last week, Fiji was placed 102nd out of 180 countries — receiving an overall score of 56.91 out of 100.

The country slipped by 47 places compared to its 2021 rankings when it was placed 55th out of 180 nations.

The media watchdog said journalists critical of the government were regularly intimidated.

Other countries from the region included Aotearoa New Zealand, which was ranked 11th, Australia (39th), Samoa (45th), Tonga (49th) and Papua New Guinea (62nd).

RSF said Aotearoa New Zealand, which received an overall score of 83.54, was a “regional model” for press freedom “by having developed safeguards against political and economic influences” for journalists to conduct their work.

Vijay Narayan and Naveel Krishant are Fijivillage journalists.

Fiji has no place for a partisan media using press freedom as a blank cheque to be a mouthpiece of government, says opposition National Federation Party leader Professor Biman Prasad.

In a statement to mark World Press Freedom Day last week, Professor Prasad urged journalists to be fearless and amplify the truth and voice of the people at all times.

He said it was critically important for the media to be impartial and to amplify the voice of the people without fear — especially in an election year.

• READ MORE: RSF 2022 World Press Freedom Index
• Other Press Freedom Index reports

“Since September last year, the media, particularly The Fiji Times and Communications Fiji Ltd, operators of five radio stations and the vastly popular FijiVillage news site, have been repeatedly criticised by government for amplifying the voice of the people through their elected representatives,” he said.

“The Fiji Times and CFL are simply doing what any media organisation should do at all times. They are simply performing their fundamental role as an effective watchdog of government.

“They are the messenger of truth, but unfortunately the truth is unpalatable to the current government because its broken promises and failed policies that are severely hurting the people, are being exposed.

“The Attorney-General’s statement in Parliament on September 24 last year, while agreeing to the tirade against The Fiji Times and CFL by Assistant Minister Selai Adimaitoga for the media to declare which political party they support in their editorial policy, is the clearest indication of government preferring a pro-FijiFirst and partisan media in the country.

‘Freedom of expression’ right
“Instead, government must fully adhere to Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which states, ‘Everyone has right to freedom of opinion and expression’.

“This right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through the media regardless of frontiers.

“This freedom and right are reposed in the people, which the state and politicians must respect at all times.

“Therefore, it is totally wrong and unethical for government or anyone to launch a tirade against the media organisation and their news director or editor-in-chief just because they don’t like the media amplifying the truth and voice of the people without fear.

“Do the right thing – shoot the message, not the messenger.”

MIDA Act ‘dangerous’ for Fiji media
Meanwhile, Pacific Media Watch reports that the Fijian Media Association (FMA) issued a statement welcoming the Reporters Without Borders (RSF) 2022 World Press Freedom Index, in which Fiji’s ranking slipped by 47 places to 102nd in 180 countries. RSF criticised the legislation in Fiji that “criminalised” journalism.

The statement said that while the Fiji media was under pressure “the Fijian media remains bold and thriving, and committed to fulfil its role”.

“Who defines what is against the public interest or what is against the national interest?” asked the statement by general secretary Stanley Simpson.

“While the Fijian media have been doing their best to be bold and free and abiding by their code of ethics — these laws are making many organisations and editors hesitate about publishing or broadcasting certain views that may go against the government based on how [it] may interpret that legislation and come after a media organisation.

“The fines are too excessive and designed to be vindictive and punish the media rather [than] encourage better reporting standards and be corrective.

“Media organisations are almost unanimous in seeking removal of the harsh fines and a review of the Act [Media Industry Development Authority (MIDA) Act].

“It is dangerous for media freedom now and also in the future. The MIDA Act has been ineffective and has done little to nothing to raise media standards,” the FMA statement said.

RSF changed its system of analysis this year to include a breakdown on specific categories such as legal framework and justice system, technological censorship and surveillance, disinformation and propaganda, arbitrary detention and proceedings, independence and pluralism, models and good practices, media sustainability, and violence against journalists, which partially explains Fiji’s sudden major fall on the Index.

Luke Nacei is a Fiji Times reporter. Republished with permission and additional reporting by Pacific Media Watch.

If anyone is wondering why the Fijian media hasn’t reported the details of my reporting on Grubsheet Feejee of the Prime Minister’s secret role in the sacking of the Solicitor-General, his alleged action in shutting down a police drug investigation into a close family member, or his Attorney-General’s alleged behaviour in inviting his female staff to give him massages in his hotel rooms on overseas trips, it is because they are terrified of the AG’s draconian 2010 Media Industry Development Decree and the very real prospect of prosecution.

The following is what can happen to any Fijian news media outlet that Attorney-General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum decides has breached the terms of the decree, which became legislation on the return to parliamentary rule in 2014 and has had the effect of gagging the media and preventing it from reporting stories that are genuinely in the national interest.

As you can see, the national interest is not defined in the legislation, which means the AG effectively decides what is in the national interest.

• READ MORE: ‘Secrets and Skeletons’ and other reports
• UN urges Fiji to amend media law

And if he thinks that it is not in the national interest for allegations against him and the PM to be aired in the local media, then he can use the law against any organisation that republishes my disclosures.

Fortunately, I am beyond his reach but these stories go untold for anyone without the internet.

[MED 22] CONTENT REGULATION:

The content of any media service must not include material which—

(a)is against the public interest or order;
(b)is against national interest; or
(c)creates communal discord.

[MED 24] OFFENCES RELATING TO CONTENT REGULATION:

A breach of any of the provisions in or under section 22 … by a media organisation shall constitute an offence and the media organisation shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding $100,000 or in the case of a publisher or editor to a fine not exceeding $25,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 2 years or to both.

The details of what I reported are in my Secrets and Skeletons: The Inside Story.

But how tragic it is that accessing the work of journalists outside Fiji is the only way the Fijian people can gain information on anything remotely approaching the truth about what is really happening in their country.

Republished with permission.

What do you do when the other small island nations don’t recognise your brilliance and won’t go along with your suggestions?

Well, when you are Fiji Attorney-General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum, you call up your brother, Riyaz’s, broadcasting network (their FBC, not yours), and instruct it to express your displeasure.

FBC News reports that the Chair of the Alliance of Small Island States, Antigua and Barbuda, rejected a proposal on oceans put forward by Fiji at COP26 and “this has not gone down well with Fiji, which says it does not believe this position is in the long-standing collaborative interest of AOSIS”.

• READ MORE: Fiji misses another COP26 chance – linking with Greta
• Other COP26 reports

Which actually means the big slap in the face has not gone down well with Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum, an oceans champion at COP.

The FBC News story doesn’t carry the name of the author of the story, which is a requirement for every story under the AG’s media laws. But those rules don’t apply either when the AG orders a version of a story to go to air to try to counter a humiliating setback.

Grubsheet Feejee understands that with the Chair of AOSIS “shunning Fiji’s presentation” – which is how even FBC News put it – other island nations have taken Antigua and Barbuda’s lead.

Indeed, there are reports that not a single other AOSIS member has sided with the AG, which just compounds his humiliation.

It wasn’t meant to be this way. COP26 was meant to showcase Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum’s brilliant negotiating skills by putting oceans at the centre of the climate agenda.

But Glasgow is not Suva. And the AG is finding out the hard way that just because he wants something doesn’t mean that he will get it.

Maybe he can use his celebrated skills of persuasion to turns things around before it all ends in failure.

But let’s hope Captain Mendacious has learned a valuable lesson in one of his first forays onto the global stage. That the leaders of other nations don’t necessarily share his high opinion of himself.

Australian-Fijian journalist Graham Davis publishes the blog Grubsheet Feejee on Fiji affairs. He was a member of the Fiji government’s climate delegation at COP23.

https://www.fbcnews.com.fj/news/aosis-chair-shuns-fijis-presentation/

Fiji’s Assistant Minister for iTaukei Affairs Selai Adimaitoga said quite a lot on Friday in her end of week statement on the Media Industry Development Act 2010 in Parliament.

She blamed reckless reporting by journalists as “one of the causes of violence and economic destruction over the past years”.

She said dishonest media had played a role in every troubling event in Fiji’s history. For that, she said, media organisations had a duty to tell the truth to the public and not to publish things that would stir political instability or violence.

• READ MORE: Selai takes a swipe at the Fiji media

“We must ensure that history does not repeat itself as Fijians deserve honest and fair media,” Ms Adimaitoga said.

She said every media organisation should only speak the truth and fairly report on facts, adding “Fiji cannot afford the reckless reporting of the past. The media have a responsibility to publish the truth. They also have a responsibility to maintain professional standards, a responsibility to maintain integrity”.

We totally agree with her that media organisations have a duty to tell the truth and fairly report on issues. We do not just talk about it. We do it, every day.

We try, every day, to fairly report on issues of importance to the nation, and to provide coverage that cuts through any imaginary demarcation line.

There are many such lines — political leanings, ethnicity, gender and religion for instance. Any good news organisation lives on its reputation for reliability. If its information is reliable it has the trust of its readers or viewers. But a key part of the media’s role is to hold power to account.

Ms Adimaitoga, whose [FijiFirst] government has held power (in one form or another) for more than a decade, said nothing about that. Our editorial decisions on what information we present must factor in what is of public interest, and the public interest requires close scrutiny of those who exercise power over us.

So when a government politician talks about “anti-government” news, she must think carefully about the fact that the public expects accountability from her government. Keeping the trust of our readers requires us to maintain a balance and not to be partisan advocates for one political side or the other.

Ms Adimaitoga needs to better appreciate and understand the role of the media. And we will say to her what we have said to the government in the past when we have faced the same “anti-government” label.

We are not anti-government, nor are we pro-government, and neither she nor anyone should try to put us into one corner or another.

The Fiji Times does not exist to create positive headlines for the government. It exists to publish all views and to ensure there is balanced coverage of the news and balanced political debate.

The public in any democracy expects to read diverse news and opinions which are representative of our whole society and the different viewpoints and perspectives that exist in our nation.

And we believe in serving the public in line with those democratic expectations.

The Fiji Times was founded at Levuka in 1869. This editorial was published in The Sunday Times edition of the newspaper yesterday (September 26) under the title “The role of the media” and is republished by Asia Pacific Report with permission.