Free speech and a free press are the bedrock of American democracy.

Over the past year, those liberties have come under threat in ways not seen in generations.

The events of recent weeks — including the arrest of two journalists for covering protests in Minnesota, and the raid on the home of a Washington Post reporter — represent a dangerous escalation.

• READ MORE: Washington Post announces massive layoffs in blow to storied paper
• ‘Journalism is not a crime’ – US journalists arrested for covering ICE church protest
• Other US media freedom reports

These are not isolated incidents. They are the latest in a sustained pattern of actions that are systematically undermining press freedom and the public’s right to know.

Such actions are unacceptable and intolerable.

The board of directors at the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) stands unequivocally in defence of a free and independent press — one that can report the facts and hold power to account without intimidation or interference.

For more than 40 years, CPJ has been consistent in its defence of journalists. As a nonpartisan, nonprofit organisation, we stand with journalists whenever they are threatened or placed in peril, anywhere in the world — including in the United States.

We hold all political leaders to the same standard. We will not be silenced by pressure, harassment, or efforts to punish journalists and those who support them.

A free press and the factual information journalists provide are essential to democracy, public safety, and social stability. Without them, the public is at greater risk.

This role is explicitly recognised and protected by the First Amendment to the US Constitution. Journalists have the right to report the news. Efforts to obstruct, punish, or deter them from doing so violate not only their rights, but the rights of all Americans.

CPJ stands with Don Lemon, Georgia Fort, Hannah Natanson, and all journalists targeted for doing their jobs in the United States.

Today we call on leaders across political, civic, and business life — especially those who lead media organisations — to speak out clearly and publicly in defence of press freedom.

Republished from the Committee to Protect Journalists website.

Palau’s largest newspaper is being sued for defamation by the company of President Surangel Whipps Jr’s father, just days ahead of general elections in the Pacific nation.

Surangel and Sons alleges “negligence and defamation” by the Island Times and its editor Leilani Reklai for an article published on Tuesday with “false and unsubstantiated allegations,” owner Surangel Whipps Sr said in a press release on Thursday.

Reklai has rejected the company’s allegations and said the “lawsuit is trying to control how media here in Palau tells a story”, a news article about the case in the Island Times reported on Friday.

• READ MORE: Media freedom at stake? Palau newspaper faces defamation lawsuit
• Regional Asia Pacific media freedoms

“I feel like we are being intimidated, we are being forced to speak a certain narrative rather than present diverse community perspectives,” said Reklai, who is also a stringer for BenarNews.

The Micronesian nation of 17,000 people — 650 km north of Papua New Guinea — goes to the polls on November 5. Whipps Jr’s rival is his brother-in-law Tommy Remengesau Jr, who was president from 2001 to 2009 and 2013 to 2021.

The controversy comes after Palau was top of the inaugural 2023 Pacific Media Freedom Index of 14 island countries that highlighted the region’s media facing significant political and economic pressures, bribes and corruption, as well as self-censorship.

Island Times reported on Friday the suit is seeking compensation and punitive damages and that the company asserts the “monetary awards should be substantial enough to prevent similar conduct from the newspaper and Reklai in future”.

Surangel and Sons financial details — leaked from the country’s tax office — were posted on social media last weekend, prompting heated online debate over how much it paid.

A new corporate and goods and services tax system introduced by Whipps Jr’s government is currently being rolled out in Palau and its merits have been a focus of election campaigning.

The company in a statement said its “privacy rights had been violated,” the tax details were obtained illegally, posted online without consent, and some of the figures had been altered.

Motivation ‘confusing voters’
“The motivation behind the circulation of this document is clearly for misinformation and disinformation to confuse voters. In the end Surangel and Sons is not running for office. Unfortunately, it has been victimised by this smear campaign,” the company posted on social media.

Island Times in a 225-word, front-page story headlined “Surangel & Sons condemns tax report leak as privacy violation” reported the company’s statement on Tuesday. It also quoted financial details from the leaked documents and accompanying commentary.

Whipps Jr. in a press conference on Wednesday accused the Island Times of publishing disinformation.

“Island Times continues to print political propaganda, it’s not accurate,” Whipps Jr said, calling for a correction to be published.

The lawsuit against the paper and its editor was served the next day.

Whipps Jr’s spokesperson told BenarNews any questions related to the lawsuit should be directed to the parties involved.

Surangel and Sons was founded in 1980 by Whipps Sr, who also served as Palau’s president briefly in 2005 and for two years from 2007.

Business ‘offers everything’
The privately-owned business “offers everything from housing design and automotive repair to equipment rentals, groceries, and scuba gear” through its import, sales, construction and travel arms, the company’s website says.

Previously as CEO, Whipps Jr transformed the company from a family store to one of Palau’s largest and most diversified businesses, employing more than 700 people.

His LinkedIn profile states he finished as CEO in January 2021, after 28 years in the position and in the month he became president. His spokesperson did not respond to questions from BenarNews about if he still retains any direct financial or other links to the company.

Surangel and Sons said the revelation of sensitive business information threatens their competitive advantage and puts jobs at risk.

Palau’s Minister of Finance Kaleb Udui Jr told the president’s press conference on Wednesday an investigation was underway, a special prosecutor would be appointed and apologized for the leak to the company.

“I would hope the media would make extra effort to help educate the public and discourage misinformation and breaches of privacy of the tax office and any other government office,” Udui said, confirming the tax documents had been altered before being posted on social media.

He said tax office staff have previously been warned about leaks and ensuring data confidentiality, as breaches negatively impact the confidence of foreign investors in Palau.

Explanation rather than leak
Whipps Jr added that the newspaper should have explained the tax system instead of reporting the leaked information.

He also accused Island Times of failure to disclose a paid advertisement in this week’s edition of the paper for his political opponent.

“I’m disappointed in the Island Times, because there was an article that was not an article, a paid advertisement,” Whipps Jr said about a colourful blue and yellow election campaign graphic.

Island Times told BenarNews it was not usual practice to put “Paid Advertisement” on advertisements but it would review its policy for political campaign material.

Reklai fears the lawsuit could have serious consequences for the media in Palau and bankrupt Island Times, the paper reported.

“If I don’t stand up to this, it sends a signal to all journalists that they risk facing claims for damages for powerful companies and government officials while carrying out their work,” she said.

Palau has two newspapers and four radio stations and enshrined in its constitution are protections for journalists, including a guarantee they cannot be jailed for refusing to disclose sources.

Surangel and Sons said they would no longer sell Island Times through their outlets.

Copyright ©2015-2024, BenarNews. Republished with the permission of BenarNews.

Until recently, Elon Musk was just a wildly successful electric car tycoon and space pioneer. Sure, he was erratic and outspoken, but his global influence was contained and seemingly under control.

But add the ownership of just one media platform, in the form of Twitter — now X — and the maverick has become a mogul, and the baton of the world’s biggest media bully has passed to a new player.

What we can gauge from watching Musk’s stewardship of X is that he’s unlike former media moguls, making him potentially even more dangerous. He operates under his own rules, often beyond the reach of regulators. He has demonstrated he has no regard for those who try to rein him in.

• READ MORE: Other articles in The Conversation media series

Under the old regime, press barons, from William Randolph Hearst to Rupert Murdoch, at least pretended they were committed to truth-telling journalism. Never mind that they were simultaneously deploying intimidation and bullying to achieve their commercial and political ends.

Musk has no need, or desire, for such pretence because he’s not required to cloak anything he says in even a wafer-thin veil of journalism. Instead, his driving rationale is free speech, which is often code for don’t dare get in my way.

This means we are in new territory, but it doesn’t mean what went before it is irrelevant.

A big bucket of the proverbial
If you want a comprehensive, up-to-date primer on the behaviour of media moguls over the past century-plus, Eric Beecher has just provided it in his book The Men Who Killed the News.

Alongside accounts of people like Hearst in the United States and Lord Northcliffe in the United Kingdom, Beecher quotes the notorious example of what happened to John Major, the UK prime minister between 1990 and 1997, who baulked at following Murdoch’s resistance to strengthening ties with the European Union.

In a conversation between Major and Kelvin MacKenzie, editor of Murdoch’s best-selling English tabloid newspaper, The Sun, the prime minister was bluntly told: “Well John, let me put it this way. I’ve got a large bucket of shit lying on my desk and tomorrow morning I’m going to pour it all over your head.”

MacKenzie might have thought he was speaking truth to power, but in reality he was doing Murdoch’s bidding, and actually using his master’s voice, as Beecher confirms by recounting an anecdote from early in Murdoch’s career in Australia.

In the 1960s, when Murdoch owned The Sunday Times in Perth, he met Lang Hancock (father of Gina Rinehart) to discuss potentially buying some mineral prospects together in Western Australia. The state government was opposed to the planned deal.

Beecher cites Hancock’s biographer, Robert Duffield, who claimed Murdoch asked the mining magnate, “If I can get a certain politician to negotiate, will you sell me a piece of the cake?” Hancock said yes.

Later that night, Murdoch called again to say the deal had been done. How, asked an incredulous Hancock. Murdoch replied: “Simple [. . . ] I told him: look you can have a headline a day or a bucket of shit every day. What’s it to be?”

Between Murdoch in the 1960s and MacKenzie in the 1990s came Mario Puzo’s The Godfather with Don Corleone, aided by Luca Brasi holding a gun to a rival’s head, saying “either his brains or his signature would be on the contract”.

Musk and his platform are to this election what Rupert Murdoch and Fox News were to past Republican campaigns—cynical manipulators and poisonous propaganda machines, pumping lies and outrage into the American political bloodstream. https://t.co/UsS4q3jaRf

— Frank-STOP-Christian-Nationalists-Schaeffer (@Frank_Schaeffer) September 19, 2024

Changing the rules of the game
Media moguls use metaphorical bullets. Those relatively few people who do resist them, like Major, get the proverbial poured over their government. Headlines in The Sun following the Conservatives’ win in the 1992 election included: “Pigmy PM”, “Not up to the job” and “1001 reasons why you are such a plonker John”.

If media moguls since Hearst and Northcliffe have tap-danced between producing journalism and pursuing their commercial and political aims, they have at least done the former, and some of it has been very good.

The leaders of the social media behemoths, by contrast, don’t claim any Fourth Estate role. If anything, they seem to hold journalism with tongs as far from their face as possible.

They do possess enormous wealth though. Apple, Microsoft, Google and Meta, formerly known as Facebook, are in the top 10 companies globally by market capitalisation. By comparison, News Corporation’s market capitalisation now ranks at 1173 in the world.

Regulating the online environment may be difficult, as Australia discovered this year when it tried, and failed, to stop X hosting footage of the Wakeley Church stabbing attacks. But limiting transnational media platforms can be done, according to Robert Reich, a former Secretary of Labor in Bill Clinton’s government.

Despite some early wins through Australia’s News Media Bargaining Code, big tech companies habitually resist regulation. They have used their substantial influence to stymie it wherever and whenever nation-states have sought to introduce it.

Meta’s founder and chief executive, Mark Zuckerberg, has been known to go rogue, as he demonstrated in February 2021 when he protested against the bargaining code by unilaterally closing Facebook sites that carried news. Generally, though, his strategy has been to deploy standard public relations and lobbying methods.

But his rival Musk uses his social media platform, X, like a wrecking ball.

Musk is just about the first thing the average X user sees in their feed, whether they want to or not. He gives everyone the benefit of his thoughts, not to mention his thought bubbles. He proclaims himself a free-speech absolutist, but most of his pronouncements lean hard to the right, providing little space for alternative views.

Kamala wants to destroy your right to free speech under The Constitution https://t.co/oJN5T8nPLn

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) September 5, 2024

Some of his tweets have been inflammatory, such as him linking to an article promoting a conspiracy theory about the savage attack on Paul Pelosi, husband of the former US Speaker, Nancy Pelosi, or his tweet that “Civil war is inevitable” following riots that erupted recently in the UK.

As the BBC reported, the riots occurred after the fatal stabbing of three girls in Southport. “The subsequent unrest in towns and cities across England and in parts of Northern Ireland has been fuelled by misinformation online, the far-right and anti-immigration sentiment”.

Nor does Musk bother with niceties when people disagree with him. Late last year, advertisers considered boycotting X because they believed some of Musk’s posts were anti-Semitic. He told them during a live interview to “Go fuck yourself”.

He has welcomed Donald Trump, the Republican Party’s presidential nominee, back onto X after Trump’s account was frozen over his comments surrounding the January 6, 2021, attack on the capitol. Since then both men have floated the idea of governing together if Trump wins a second term.

Is the world better off with tech bros like Musk who demand unlimited freedom and assert their influence brazenly, or old-style media moguls who spin fine-sounding rhetoric about freedom of the press and exert influence under the cover of journalism?

That’s a question for our times that we should probably begin grappling with.

Dr Matthew Ricketson is professor of communication, Deakin University and Dr Andrew Dodd is director of the Centre for Advancing Journalism, The University of Melbourne. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.

On the morning of April 15, I headed to a branch of Scotiabank in downtown Montreal to cover a pro-Palestine protest. Activists had chosen the venue due to the Canadian bank’s investments in Israeli defence company Elbit Systems.

I watched as protesters blocked the bank’s ATMs and teller booths and the police were called in.

Police officers showed up in riot gear. When it was announced the activists were going to be arrested, I didn’t expect that I would be included with them.

• READ MORE: Canada: RSF denounces “catch-and-release” arrest of Montreal journalist Savanna Craig
• Other media freedom reports

Despite identifying myself as a journalist numerous times and showing officers my press pass, I was apprehended alongside the 44 activists I was covering. It was inside the bank that I was processed and eventually released after hours of being detained.

I now potentially face criminal charges for doing my job. The mischief charges I face carry a maximum jail sentence of two years and a fine of up to C$5000 (NZ$6000). I could also be restricted from leaving the country.

Canadian police can only suggest charges, so the prosecution has to decide whether or not to charge me. This process alone can take anywhere from a few months to a year.

I am the second journalist to be arrested in Canada while on assignment since the beginning of 2024.

Arrested over homeless raid
In January, journalist Brandi Morin was arrested and charged with obstruction in the province of Alberta while covering a police raid on a homeless encampment where many of the campers were Indigenous. It took two months of pressure for the police to drop the charges against her.

Over the past few years, a pattern of arrests has emerged, with police specifically targeting journalists working freelance or with smaller outlets. Many of these journalists have been covering Indigenous-led protests or blockades.

Often they claim that the media workers they have come after “do not look like journalists”.

The Canadian police continue to use detention to silence and intimidate us despite our right to free speech under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. To specify, under section two of the charter, Canadians’ rights to freedom of thought, belief and expression are protected.

The charter identifies the media as a vital medium for transmitting thoughts and ideas, protecting the right for journalists and the media to speak out.

Furthermore, a 2019 ruling by a Canadian court reasserted the protection of journalists from being included in injunctions in situations where they are fulfilling their professional duties.

The court decision was made in the case of journalist Justin Brake, who was arrested in 2016 while documenting protests led by Indigenous land defenders at the Muskrat Falls hydro project site in Newfoundland and Labrador. Brake faced criminal charges of mischief and disobeying a court order for following protesters onto the site, as well as civil contempt proceedings.

Victory for free press
Despite Brake’s victory in the court case, journalists have still been included in injunctions.

In 2021, another high-profile arrest of two Canadian journalists occurred in western Canada. Amber Bracken and Michael Toledano were documenting Indigenous land defenders protecting Wet’suwet’en territory near Houston, British Columbia, from the construction of the Coastal GasLink pipeline when they were arrested.

They were held in detention by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) for three days until they were released.

In an interview, Toledano said he and Bracken were put in holding cells with the lights on 24 hours a day, minimally fed and denied access to both toothbrushes and soap.

“We were given punitive jail treatment,” Toledano explained. They faced charges of civil contempt which were dropped a month later.

Even though I knew about these cases, had analysed numerous press freedom violations in Canada over the last few years, and had researched the different ways in which journalists can experience harassment or intimidation, nothing prepared me for the experience.

Since I was arrested, I have not had the same sense of security I used to have. The stress, feeling like I have eyes on me at all times and waiting to see whether charges will be laid, has taken a mental toll on me.

Exhausting distraction
This is not only exhausting but it distracts me from the very important and essential work I do as a journalist.

I have also, however, received a lot of support. It has been genuinely heartwarming that Canadian and international journalists rallied behind me following my arrest.

Journalists’ solidarity in such cases is crucial. If just one journalist is arrested, it means that none of us are safe, and the freedom of the press isn’t secure.

I know that I did nothing wrong and the charges against me are unjust. Being arrested won’t deter me from covering blockades, Indigenous-led protests or other demonstrations. However, I am concerned about how my arrest may discourage other journalists from reporting on these topics or working for independent outlets.

I have been covering pro-Palestine activism in Montreal for eight years, and more intensely over the last eight months due to the war in Gaza. For years I have been one the few journalists at these protests, and often, the only one covering these actions.

The public must see what’s happening at these actions, whether they are pro-Palestine demonstrations opposing Canada’s role in Palestine or Indigenous land defenders opposing construction on their territory.

Regardless of its judgment on the matter, the Canadian public has the right to know what fellow citizens are protesting for and if they face police abuses.

Held to account
The presence of a journalist can sometimes be the only guarantee that police and institutions are held to account if there are excesses.

However, there is a clear lack of political will among officials to protect journalists and make sure they can do their work undisturbed.

Montreal Mayor Valerie Plante did not denounce my arrest or urge police to drop my charges. Instead, when asked for a comment on my arrest, her office stated that press freedoms are important and that they will allow police to carry out their investigation.

Just one city councillor wrote to the mayor’s office urging for my arrest to be denounced. Local politicians have also been largely mute on detentions of other journalists, too, with few exceptions.

The comment from the mayor’s office reflects the attitude of most politicians in Canada, who otherwise readily declare their respect for freedom of expression.

On May 3, World Press Freedom Day, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau put out a statement saying that “journalists are the bedrock of our democracy”.

Yet he never took a stance to defend Morin, Brake, Bracken, Toledano and many others who were arrested while on assignment. He, like many other politicians, falls short on words and action.

Until concrete steps are taken to prevent law enforcement officers from intimidating or silencing journalists through arrest, press freedom will continue to be in danger in Canada.

Journalists should be protected and their chartered rights should not be disregarded when certain subjects are covered. If journalists continue to be bullied out of doing their work, then the public is at risk of being kept in the dark about important events and developments.

Savanna Craig is a reporter, writer and video journalist covering social movements, policing and Western imperialism in the Middle East. Republished from Al Jazeera under Creative Commons.

After a week of violence that broke out in the capital of Nouméa following a controversial parliamentary vote for a bill expanding the settler electorate in New Caledonia, RSF said in a statement that the crisis was worrying for journalists working there.

RSF called on the authorities and “all the forces involved” to ensure their safety and guarantee the right to information.

• READ MORE: President Emmanuel Macron to fly to New Caledonia within hours
• Liberation for New Caledonia’s Kanak people ‘must come’, says media educator – Audio
• ‘You are not alone’ Pacific messages of solidarity for Kanaky
• Other Kanaky New Caledonia crisis reports

While covering the clashes in Nouméa on Friday, May 17, a crew from the public television channel Nouvelle-Calédonie La 1ère, consisting of a journalist and a cameraman, were intimidated by about 20 unidentified hooded men.

They snatched the camera from the cameraman’s hands and threatened him with a stone, before smashing the windows of the journalists’ car and trying to seize it.

“The public broadcaster’s crew managed to escape thanks to the support of a motorist. France Télévisions management said it had filed a complaint the same day,” RSF reported.

According to a dozen accounts gathered by RSF, working conditions for journalists deteriorated rapidly from Wednesday, May 15, onwards.

Acts of violence
As the constitutional bill amending New Caledonia’s electoral body was adopted by the National Assembly on the night of May 14/15, a series of acts of violence broke out in the Greater Nouméa area, either by groups protesting against the electoral change or by militia groups formed to confront them.

The territory has been placed under a state of emergency and is subject to a curfew from which journalists are exempt.

RSF is alerting the authorities in particular to the situation facing freelance journalists: while some newsrooms are organising to send support to their teams in New Caledonia, freelance reporters find themselves isolated, without any instructions or protective equipment.

“The attacks on journalists covering the situation in New Caledonia are unacceptable. Everything must be done so that they can continue to work and thus ensure the right to information for all in conditions of maximum safety,” said Anne Bocandé,
editorial director of RSF.

“RSF calls on the authorities to guarantee the safety and free movement of journalists throughout the territory.

“We also call on all New Caledonian civil society and political leaders to respect the integrity and the work of those who inform us on a daily basis and enable us to grasp the reality on the ground.”

While on the first day of the clashes on Monday, May 13, according to the information gathered by RSF, reporters managed to get through the roadblocks and talk to all the forces involved — especially those who are well known locally — many of them are still often greeted with hostility, if not regarded as persona non grata, and are the victims of intimidation, threats or violence.

“At the roadblocks, when we are identified as journalists, we receive death threats,” a freelance journalist told RSF.

“We are pelted with stones and violently removed from the roadblocks. The situation is likely to get worse”, a journalist from a local media outlet warned RSF.

As a result, most of the journalists contacted by RSF are forced to work only in the area around their homes.

“In any case, we’re running out of petrol. In the next few days, we’re going to find it hard to work because of the logistics,” said a freelance journalist contacted by RSF.

Distrust of journalists
The 10 or so journalists contacted by RSF — who requested anonymity against a backdrop of mistrust — have at the very least been the target of repeated insults since the start of the fighting.

According to information gathered by RSF, these insults continue outside the roadblocks, on social networks.

The majority of the forces involved, who are difficult for journalists to identify, share a mistrust of the media coupled with a categorical refusal to be recognisable in the images of reporters, photographers and videographers.

On May 15, President Emmanuel Macron declared an immediate state of emergency throughout New Caledonia. On the same day, the government announced a ban on the social network TikTok.

President Macron is due in New Caledonia today to introduce a “dialogue mission” in an attempt to seek solutions.

To date, six people have been killed and several injured in the clashes.

Pacific Media Watch collaborates with Reporters Without Borders.

A Radio New Zealand Pacific journalist has alleged that an Indonesian official attempted to both bribe and intimidate him following an interview at the Melanesian Spearhead Group (MSG) leaders’ summit in the Vanuatu capital of Port Vila last month.

The International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) and its affiliates, the Media Association Vanuatu (MAV) and the Alliance of Independent Journalists (AJI) Indonesia, have condemned the attempted bribery and harassment of the journalist and urged the relevant authorities to thoroughly investigate the incident.

On August 23, RNZ Pacific journalist Kelvin Anthony reported that a representative of the Indonesian government, Ardi Nuswantoro, attempted to bribe him outside Port Vila’s Holiday Inn Resort after Anthony conducted an exclusive interview with Indonesia’s Australian ambassador, Dr Siswo Pramono.

• READ MORE: Indonesia responds after claim official attempted to bribe RNZ Pacific journalist
• AJI slams treatment of White House reporter by Indonesian officials at ASEAN Summit
• Other West Papua reports

According to Anthony, Nuswantoro had previously expressed the Indonesian government’s displeasure at RNZ’s coverage of ongoing independence efforts in West Papua, reported the IFJ in a statement.

The journalist had advised him of the outlet’s mandate to produce “balanced and fair” coverage and was invited to the hotel for the interview, where he questioned Dr Pramono on a broad range of pertinent topics, including West Papua.

Following the interview, Anthony was escorted from the hotel by at least three Indonesian officials. After repeatedly inquiring as to how the journalist was going to return to his accommodation, Nuswantoro then offered him a “gift” of an unknown amount of money, which Anthony refused.

Anthony reported that he felt harassed and intimidated in the days following, with Nuswantoro continuing to message, call, and follow him at the conference’s closing reception.

Interview not aired
RNZ chose not to air the interview with Dr Pramno due to the incident.

In response to the claims of bribery and intimidation sent to the Indonesian government by RNZ, Jakarta’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Asia Pacific and African Affairs director-general Abdul Kadir Jailani said, “bribery has never been our policy nor approach to journalists . . . we will surely look into it.”

In a September 6 interview, New Zealand Prime Minister Chris Hipkins reiterated his government’s commitment to press freedom, stating the importance of free and independent media.

Journalists and civil society in West Papua have faced increasing threats, restrictions and violence in recent years. Indonesian media has disproportionately reflected state narratives, with state intervention resulting in the censorship of independent outlets and effective barring of local or international journalists from Indonesian-administered Papua.

In February, renowned Jubi journalist Victor Mambor was subject to a bombing attack outside his Jayapura home.

Pacific Journalism Review: How Indonesian media amplifies the state’s narrative on the Free West Papua movement. #westpapua #indonesia #humanrights https://t.co/J3Rj0Ulhzs pic.twitter.com/9ygIo6KjWN

— Human Rights Monitor (@hurimonitor) September 12, 2023

MAV said: “The Media Association of Vanuatu (MAV) is concerned about an alleged bribery attempt by foreign officials at a Melanesian Spearhead Group regional meeting.

MAV president Lillyrose Welwel denounces such actions and urges MAV members to adhere to the Code of Ethics, as journalism is a public service. She encourages international journalists to contact the association when in the country, as any actions that do not reflect MAV’s values are not acceptable.”

AJI calls for ‘safety guarantee’
AJI said:“AJI Indonesia urges the Indonesian government to investigate the incident with transparency. This action must be followed by providing guarantees to any journalist to work safely in Papua and outside.

“The Indonesian government must also guarantee the protection of human rights in Papua, including for civilians, human rights defenders, and journalists.”

The IFJ said: “Government intervention in independent and critical reporting is highly concerning, and this incident is one in an alarming trend of intimidation against reporting on West Papua.

“The IFJ urges the Indonesian government to thoroughly investigate this incident of alleged bribery and harassment and act to ensure its commitment to press freedom is upheld.”

Pacific Media Watch condemnation
Pacific Media Watch also condemned the incident, saying that it was part of a growing pattern of disturbing pressure on Pacific journalists covering West Papuan affairs.

“West Papua self-determination and human rights violations are highly sensitive issues in both Indonesia and the Pacific. Journalists are bearing the brunt of a concerted diplomatic push by Jakarta in the region to undermine Pacific-wide support for West Papuan rights. It is essential that the Vanuatu authorities investigate this incident robustly and transparently.”

According to a CNN Indonesia report on September 6, Indonesian authorities denied the attempted bribery and harassment allegation.

A Radio New Zealand journalist says an Indonesian government official attempted to bribe and intimidate him at last month’s 22nd Melanesian Spearhead Group leaders’ summit in Port Vila.

The Indonesian government has responded yesterday saying it would “surely look” into the claims.

RNZ journalist Kelvin Anthony was in Port Vila to cover the MSG Leaders’ Summit two weeks ago when he was offered “a gift” after an exclusive interview with Indonesia’s Ambassador to Australia, Dr Siswo Pramono.

• READ MORE:  Vanuatu – West Papua – MSG: An epic saga of messianic hope, betrayal, tragedy and resurrection
• Other West Papua in Vanuatu reports

The alleged bribe was offered between 1pm-1.10pm on Wednesday, August 23, in the carpark of the Holiday Inn Resort in Port Vila by Indonesian government representative Ardi Nuswantoro, Anthony said.

“I was offered an exclusive interview with the Indonesia’s Ambassador to Australia at the MSG meeting after being told earlier in the week by Ardi Nuswantoro that his government did not like what RNZ had published on West Papua and that it was not balanced,” he said.

“I advised the delegate that RNZ makes every effort to be balanced and fair and we want to get Indonesia’s side too, but we need the chance to speak on the record.”

After communicating face-to-face and online via WhatsApp — texts and call records seen by RNZ — Nuswantoro asked Anthony to visit the Holiday Inn Resort at 12pm for the interview on Wednesday, August 23.

Broad set of questions
“I interviewed Dr Pramono covering a broad set of questions including human rights issues in West Papua, the MSG meeting, and Jakarta’s intentions in the Pacific, which lasted over 40 minutes,” Anthony said.

“I thought I had an exclusive interview that went well for a strong story out of the meeting that touched sensitive but pertinent issues involving Indonesia, the West Papua issue, and the Pacific.”

Anthony said he was escorted out of the reception area at the end of the interview and accompanied by at least three Indonesian officials.

He said Nuswantoro, who he was liaising with to set up the interview, “asked me several times if I had a car and how I was going to get back”.

“I told them that my colleague from a local media who was with me was driving me back to town. As we walked to the car park, the same official continued to walk with me and just as we were about to approach the car, he said, ‘The Indonesian delegation would like to offer you token of appreciation’.”

“I asked him, ‘What’s that?’ He replied, ‘A small gift’.

“I asked him again, ‘But what is it?’ And he replied: ‘Money’.

‘I was shell-shocked’
“At that point I was shell-shocked because I had never experienced something like that in my career.

“I declined to accept the money and told him, ‘I cannot take money because it compromises the story and my credibility and integrity as a journalist’.”

Anthony said the Indonesian official looked visibly withdrawn at the rejection and apologised for offering money.

Due to the incident, RNZ chose at the time not to air the interview with Dr Pramono.

RNZ put the claims of bribery and intimidation to the Indonesian government.

In an email response, Jakarta’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Asia Pacific and African Affairs director general Abdul Kadir Jailani neither confirmed nor denied the claims.

“Bribery has never been our policy nor approach to journalists,” Jailani said.

“We will surely look into it,” he said.

‘I felt intimidated’
The offering of money happened while a local fixer was about five metres away “seeing everything unfold” waiting at the car, Anthony said.

“My local fixer saw and heard everything and as we drove off he said I should report on it but only when I am out of Vanuatu. I immediately communicated the incident to my superiors back in Wellington to put everything on record,” Anthony said.

The local ni-Vanuatu journalist, who was present when the alleged incident occurred, said: “I saw what was happening and knew exactly what the Indonesian guy was trying to do”.

“My advice to the RNZ journalist was to hold the story until he was out of the country because I was worried about his safety.”

RNZ has seen communications sent by the Indonesian official to the journalist, asking him when RNZ was going to publish the interview.

“I did not respond to the messages or calls. I did, however, encounter the Indonesia delegation representatives and the official who offered me the money on Thursday, August 24, at the closing reception of the MSG leaders’ meeting at the Warwick Resort Convention Centre,” Anthony said.

Official kept following him
He said the same official kept following him around and messaged him a video clip showing indigenous Papuans carrying out violent acts.

“I felt a little intimidated but I tried to stick around with the local journalists as much as I could so I could avoid the Indonesian officials coming up to me,” he said.

Another local media representative who was at the farewell function on Thursday, August 24, said they could “see the Indonesian delegate moving around the RNZ journalist continuously and following him everywhere he went”.

“It seemed obvious that one particular Indonesian delegate was pestering Kelvin and following him around,” they said.

In Indonesia’s official response to the allegations, Abdul Kadir Jailani said “we have no interest in following nor intimidating any journalists covering the Summit”.

MSG meeting coverage
RNZ was the only international media which had a journalist on the ground to cover the MSG meeting for its Pacific audience.

The MSG is an important sub-regional bloc that includes Fiji, FLNKS — the Kanak and Socialist Liberation Front, an umbrella group for pro-independence political parties in New Caledonia — Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands and Vanuatu.

The meeting had a packed agenda and the issue of full membership of the United Liberation Movement for West Papua (ULMWP) was a big-ticket item.

Indonesia, an associate member of the MSG, had the largest delegation at the meeting and has been on record saying it does not support or recognise the ULMWP as a representative body of the indigenous Papuans.

Dr Pramono said Jakarta views the ULMWP as a “secessionist movement” and walked out of the meeting when the movement’s representatives made interventions.

The MSG meeting concluded with leaders rejecting ULMWP’s application to become a full member of the sub-regional group.

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

The Fijian Media Association (FMA) has labelled comments made by former prime minister Voreqe Bainimarama this week to media workers of Mai TV, Fijivillage and Fiji Sun outside the Suva courthouse as “distasteful, unbecoming, and unacceptable”.

Bainimarama told the Mai TV cameraman in the iTaukei language on Tuesday: “Qarauna de dua tacaqe, au na qai caqeta yani na muna.” (“Be careful no one stumbles, for I will then kick your backside.”)

The former prime minister also told the Fijivillage cameraperson “watch out, you slip, and then I will kick your backside”.

• READ MORE: Other Fiji media freedom reports

Earlier in the week, Bainimarama also told a Fiji Sun press photographer “kwan kwan”, a derogatory term commonly used to chase away dogs or animals.

In a statement, FMA said they found these comments highly offensive.

“The FMA continues to reiterate that journalists, photographers and videographers are doing an important work of informing the public, and threats of violence against them is unacceptable,” the statement read.

The FMA stated that journalists had come through a period — 17 years of media repression since the 2006 military coup — where they had been beaten, intimidated, and abused and would not let these threats to deter them from doing their duty.

Former prime minister Bainimarama and suspended police commissioner Sitiveni Qiliho are on trial on a count each of attempting to pervert the course of justice and abuse of office over an abandoned investigation relating to the University of the South Pacific in 2020.

Rakesh Kumar is a Fiji Times reporter. Republished with permission.

For many years, Fiji’s media operated under imperious rule and struggled under restrictive laws and climate overwhelmed by fear.

Under that political environment, humiliation and threats against journalists and the media surfaced, inducing alarm, silence and suspicion.

This seemed to mirror reality in the world — that over the past decade the state of media freedom had depreciated rather abysmally.

• READ MORE: Timor-Leste makes top ten in 2023 World Press Freedom Index
• World Press Freedom Index 2023 – journalism threatened by fake news industry
• Other Pacific Media Watch reports

Despite having democratic and legal safeguards in Fiji, the fundamental right to seek and disseminate information through an independent press was often under attack and those who chose to deliberately speak the truth often found themselves on the wrong side of the law.

Who can ever forget the Media Industry Development Act 2010, a piece of law that was brought unilaterally into existence without genuine consultation with key stakeholders, and regard for simple good governance etiquette.

MIDA 2010’s provisions imposed excessive fines that hung over the heads of media executives, editors and journalists.

Designed to be vindictive, punish and control, they were not conducive to media freedom and achieving better media standards which politicians said would emerge.

‘Worst’ nation in Pacific
The truth is, after many years of a slump in media freedom, the World Press Freedom Index 2022 labelled Fiji the worst nation in the Pacific for journalists, with intimidation and other restrictions that threaten open civic spaces.

“Journalists [in Fiji] face the threat of heavy fines or imprisonment for publishing material ‘contrary to the public or national interest,’ a term that is poorly defined in the law,” the index explained.

“Against this backdrop, many journalists must think twice before publishing content critical of the authorities.”

The use of discriminatory advertising practices by Fijian authorities was also highlighted.

This badly affected this newspaper, The Fiji Times, but we survived to see the light of day.

There was not much thought put into MIDA 2010’s design and although government justified its existence with explanation that it would enhance professionalism in the industry and enforce quality, media ethics and training opportunities, to this day many believe its true motive was to instill fear, control the media, influence public thinking and remain in power.

This newspaper fought hard to stay in contention, as the ruling regime withdrew all its advertising in an attempt to sabotage business, stifle criticism and silence dissenting voices that dared to speak out.

Politicians influenced public
Politicians worked to influence public appreciation and support through its media channels.

They offered proactive support to “friendly” private outlets through measures such as lucrative advertising contracts, favourable regulatory decisions, and preferential access to state information.

The goal was to make the Fourth Estate serve those in power rather than the public.

In the end, democratic principles were compromised and room for corruptive practices and injustices were created.

Despite this descent of sorts, there were media outlets and journalists who continued to possess the courage to inform Fijians about prevailing injustices, speak with honesty and stand for democratic ideals and human rights.

Despite being denigrated and spoken harshly against, they kept the faith.

We were one of them!

Threats more nuanced
It was a pity that the source of the assault against independent journalism was not necessarily the consumers of information that the media worked hard to inform on a daily basis, but politicians that citizens elected to the legislature to serve their interests and defend their very rights and freedoms.

The media did not go through physical threats that were direct and visible, like how it was inflicted prior to 2014.

What it faced was more nuanced.

It was impaired subtly through laws and policies passed legally but strategically crafted to hamper work to the extent that the media was unable to effectively hold leaders accountable without first being ridiculed and penalised.

However, there were signs of change on the horizon.

The media experienced relief and content that had eluded it for over a decade when Prime Minister Sitiveni announced Cabinet’s decision to table a Bill in Parliament to repeal the draconian MIDA 2010.

Media houses, executives and journalists were unanimous in rallying behind the decision saying it had been a long time coming for everyone who were forced to unnecessarily struggle and shoulder a burden of threat and fear daily for the past 12 years.

Big for Fiji, democracy
Fiji Media Association general secretary Stanley Simpson said the MIDA Act 2010 and its subsequent amendments had restricted media development and suppressed media freedom and the FMA in its recent submission to government had been adamant that the Act should be repealed.

Rabuka’s revelation is big for Fiji and good for the health of our democracy.

It is rather bittersweet too.

Although the media can now celebrate the unshackling of restraint and anxiety associated with the past, it will have to live with the permanent scarring these had created.

But for now, Fiji can expect the brand of media freedom that was in existence prior to 2006, when governments had their share of flaws but were never dictatorial and had no ambition to control public life.

It is heartening to know political leaders now want to forge a new beginning for Fiji, appreciate diverse opinions and ideas, and genuinely listen to the voice of the people.

If all goes well, we hope to return to media self-regulation through the Fiji Media Council, for Fiji badly needs a strong, vibrant and responsible media that reports, analyses and stimulate debate, unafraid to carry out its work, ready to always speak the truth and free from political control.

The ball is now in the government’s court!

We pray that common sense and goodwill will prevail for it is in everyone’s interest.

John Mitchell is a senior Fiji Times feature writer who writes a weekly column, “Behind The News”. This article was first published on 2 April 2023 and is republished here with permission to mark World Press Freedom Day (WPFD2023) on May 3.

• In the World Press Freedom Index 2023, Fiji has risen 13 places to be ranked 89th out of 180 countries.

The man in charge of Fiji’s oldest newspaper has high hopes for press freedom in the country following the tabling of a bill in Parliament this week to get rid of a controversial media law.

Fiji’s three-party coalition government introduced a bill on Monday to repeal the 2010 Media Industry Development Authority (MIDA) Act.

The MIDA Act — a legacy of the former Bainimarama administration — has long been criticised for being “draconian” and decimating journalism standards in the country.

• READ MORE: Other Fiji media freedom reports

The law regulates the ownership, registration and content of the media in Fiji.

Under the act, the media content regulation framework includes the creation of MIDA, the media tribunal and other elements.

“It is these provisions that have been considered controversial,” Fiji’s Attorney-General Siromi Turaga said when tabling the bill.

“These elements are widely considered as undemocratic and in breach of the constitutional right of freedom of expression as outlined in section 17 of the constitution.”

Not a ‘free pass’
Turaga said repealing the act does not provide a free pass to media organisations and journalists to “report anything and everything without authentic sources and facts”.

“But it does provides a start to ensuring that what reaches the ordinary people of Fiji is not limited by overbearing regulation of government.”

The Fiji Times editor-in-chief Fred Wesley said he had a sense of “great optimism” that the Media Act would be repealed.

Wesley and the newspaper — founded in 1869 — were caught in a long legal battle for publishing an article in their vernacular language newspaper Nai Lalakai which the former FijiFirst government claimed was seditious.

But in 2018, the High Court found them not guilty and cleared them of all charges.

“After the change in government, there has been a change in the way the press has been disseminating information,” Wesley said.

“We have had a massive turnover [of] journalists in our country. A lot of young people have come in. At the The Fiji Times, for instance, we have an average age of around 22, which is very, very young,” he said.

Handful of seniors
“We have just a handful of senior journalists who have stayed on who are very passionate about the role the media must pay in our country.

“We are looking forward to Thursday and looking forward to the act being repealed and the draconian legislation kicked out.”

He said two thirds of the journalists in the national newspaper’s newsroom have less than 16 years experience and have never experienced press freedom.

He said The Fiji Times would then need to implement “mass desensitisation” of its reporters as they had been working under a draconian law for more than a decade.

He added retraining journalists would be the main focus of the organisation after the law is repealed.

‘Things will get better’
Long-serving journalist at the newspaper Rakesh Kumar told RNZ Pacific that reporting on national interest issues had been a “big challenge” under the act.

Kumar recalled early when the media law was enacted and army officers would come into newsrooms to “create fear” which he said would “kill the motivation” of reporters.

“We know things will get better now [after the repeal of the act],” Kumar said.

But he said it was “important that we have to report accurately”.

“We have to be balanced,” he added.

The bill to repeal the MIDA Act will be debated tomorrow.

While the opposition has already opposed the move, it is expected that the government will use its majority in Parliament to pass it.

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

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.

A prominent Papuan journalist has said a recent bombing near his home is the latest in a string of attacks against him, reports ABC Pacific Beat.

Victor Mambor said he heard motorbikes ride past his home before a bomb exploded about 3 metres from his house on Monday.

He suspects his attackers wished to scare him.

• LISTEN TO ABC PACIFIC BEAT: Papuan journalist Victor Mambor says bomb attack likely a result of his reporting
• READ MORE: ‘Terror’ bomb explodes near Papua journalist Victor Mambor’s home
• Tabloid Jubi journalist Victor Mambor ‘terrorised’ over Papua reports
• Papuan journalist Victor Mambor wins Udin Award for ‘dedicated journalism’
• Other Victor Mambor reports

“It’s not the first time, I have had more threats before,” Mambor said.

“They broke my my car, they threatened me through SMS texts and WhatsApp messenger.”

Mambor, editor of the Papuan news website Jubi, suspects the work he has done reporting on Indonesian-ruled West Papua has led to these threats.

“I think they think I’m a journalist who supports the West Papua freedom movement,” he said.

Presenter: Prianka Srinivasan

The co-founder of Tabloid Jubi, Victor Mambor has been presented with the 2022 Udin Award from Indonesia’s Alliance of Independent Journalists (AJI) during the organisation’s 28th-anniversary celebration.

Mambor is an indigenous Papuan journalist who has dedicated his life for decades to the field of journalism.

The Udin Award — presented last month — is AJI’s annual prize to promote press freedom and freedom of expression in Indonesia.

• READ MORE: Papuan journalist wins Udin Award
• Other reports on Victor Mambor

Through it, AJI seeks to recognise journalists (individuals and groups), who are dedicated to the field of journalism, and become victims of physical or psychological violence because of their journalistic activities.

Mambor, who is also a former chair of AJI Jayapura, is often reported as the leader and planner of public demonstrations against the government, although there is no evidence for the accusations.

In addition, Mambor has also often experienced digital violence and the destruction of personal property.

Last year, for example, Mambor’s vehicle was deliberately damaged by an unknown person. Prior to that, his social media was also doxed, and his personal data was exposed.

Laying the foundations
Even so, Victor Mambor and Jubi continue to lay the foundations and principles of journalism in their journalistic works.

“This award certainly reminds us again that intimidation, criminalisation, physical, verbal and digital violence against journalists like what was experienced by Fuad Muhammad Syafruddin (Udin), the owner of this award, still exists today and we are still fighting for a free press,” Mambor said after receiving the award last month.

The UN Human Rights Council in September 2021 called him a humanitarian and a rights activist who faced threats, harassment and intimidation for his reporting on West Papua, including reporting to UN human rights mechanisms, and for attending UN meetings for which they were questioned by security forces.

His name was raised among other human rights defenders in the Indonesia section of the report published by the UN. The report contains references to five cases of criminalisation and intimidation against human rights defenders working in or about West Papua

The Udin Award was taken from the pen name of the journalist for the Bernas Daily, Fuad Muhammad Syafruddin, who died on 16 August 1996 in Yogyakarta after being attacked by two unknown assailants.

Udin was persecuted and intimidated because of the news he wrote on 13 August 1996. To date, the case has not been thoroughly investigated and his killer was not identified.

Seven nominations
In 2022, AJI received seven nominations for the Udin Award. The proposals were assessed by a jury of three members.

One jury member, Bambang Muryanto, said that it was not easy for a journalist to maintain his professionalism and independence in an area of ​​armed conflict.

Especially when the situation in the area was similar to martial law without official government recognition.

“The safety of himself and his family is at stake. The very difficult location conditions are also a challenge to present comprehensive news that does not violate journalistic ethics,” said Bambang.

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.

Reporters Without Borders (RSF) has condemned the “unacceptable political meddling” behind Sincha Dimara’s suspension as head of news and current affairs at EMTV News, Papua New Guinea’s main public television news channel, after three news stories annoyed a government minister.

The Paris-based global media freedom watchdog said in a statement today she must be reinstated at once.

After 33 years at EMTV News, Sincha Dimara was suspended for at least three weeks without pay on February 7.

• READ MORE: Other reports on EMTV News and Sincha Dimara

From a leaked memo from Lesieli Vete, the CEO of Media Niugini Limited (MNL), EMTV’s owner – which was finally published on February 9 – her staff learned that she had been accused of “insubordination” and “damaging the reputation of the company”.

The “insubordination” consisted of three stories by Dimara’s news team about Australian hotel manager Jamie Pang’s legal problems in Papua New Guinea and suspicions that the police had violated criminal procedure in the case,

Their reporting seems to have displeased Public Enterprises Minister William Duma, who — according to several accounts — was behind the decision to suspend Dimara.

Duma is also in charge of Telikom, the state-owned telecommunications company that owns MNL, and therefore, by extension, EMTV News.

Two days after Dimara’s suspension, the Media Council of PNG issued a statement defending her decision to broadcast the three stories.

Dimara told RSF that she was very concerned that the suspension was “affecting the performance of my staff”.

Deliberate intimidation
“As Sincha Dimara’s suspension is clearly a ploy to intimidate the entire editorial staff at EMTV News, we demand her immediate reinstatement as head of news and current affairs,” said Daniel Bastard, head of RSF’s Asia-Pacific desk.

“This political interference weakening diversity in news and information is all the more unacceptable for having disturbing precedents and coming just four months ahead of next June’s general elections.”

Political and commercial pressure aimed at limiting editorial freedom at EMTV News is not new.

Scott Waide, an EMTV News senior journalist of long standing, was suspended in November 2018 over a story suggesting that the government had misused public funds by purchasing luxury cars, as reported by Asia Pacific Report.

He was later reinstated after protests and has since become an independent media operator.

The political pressure on EMTV News is such that Neville Choi was fired as head of news in 2019 on the same grounds as his successor now — for “insubordination.” He was eventually reinstated.

Papua New Guinea is ranked 47th out of 180 countries in RSF’s 2021 World Press Freedom Index.

Asia Pacific Report and Pacific Media Watch collaborate with Reporters Without Borders.

Vanuatu’s media advocacy group Media Association blong Vanuatu (MAV) has condemned what it calls intimidation of a local journalist by airport security and local police.

This was following action taken by security at Port Vila’s Bauerfield Airport who ordered Vanuatu Daily Post journalist Kizzy Kalsakau to delete her photos.

Kalsakau had taken photos of the arrival of a New Zealand plane transporting relief supplies for Cyclone Harold victims and the repatriation of 58 ni-Vanuatu caught in the covid-19 pandemic last Wednesday.

READ MORE: Vanuatu airport security force journalist to delete NZ repatriation photos

The journalist was asked by airport security and police not to take photos and told to leave the premises.

The president of MAV, Stevenson Liu, described the action of security as “inadmissible” in a country with free media.

He said people wanted to know about their families returning.

Vanuatu has no reported cases of covid-19 coronavirus.

• This article is republished by the Pacific Media Centre under a partnership agreement with RNZ.
• If you have symptoms of the coronavirus, call the NZ Covid-19 Healthline on 0800 358 5453 (+64 9 358 5453 for international SIMs) or call your GP – don’t show up at a medical centre.
• Follow RNZ’s coronavirus newsfeed