by Keith R. Williams
The first Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America states that:
CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW RESPECTING AN ESTABLISMENT OF RELIGION, OR PROHIBITING THE FREE EXERCISE THEREOF; OR ABRIDGING THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH, OR OF THE PRESS; OR THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE PEACEABLY TO ASSEMBLE, AND TO PETITION THE GOVERNMENT FOR A REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES.
I do believe that we in Guyana are living in fulfillment of the first part of this American constitutional principle. It is a fact that the State of Guyana has enacted no laws that can remotely be construed to mean the establishment of an official religion. We pretty much worship how we please, whether we are Christian, Hindu, Muslim, Rastafarian or Hallelujah. However, unlike the citizens of the United States of America, the citizens of Guyana do not benefit from the existence of a credible Freedom of Information Law, and continued Government ownership and control of media entities, including being in control of the only radio station in the country, seriously impinges on and prejudices against the rights and freedom of the Guyanese citizenry to petition their Government for redress of grievances arising out of the operations and performance of said Government. For how effectively can you carry out this function when the heavy hands of the Government continue to deny these tools of freedom to Guyanese people, and persist in competing with private media while regulat u cannot effectively petition your Government for a redress of grievance, if you do not have access to information pertinent to your particular complaint. And no Nation can claim to have internationally recognized press freedomS, when the State own and control virtual two thirds of the media, and regulate their competitors in a manner that guarantee State monopoly over key aspects and areas of news and information dissemination.
“Media and Good Governance” was the theme for UNESCO’s celebration of World Press Freedom Day in Senegal in May of this year, and among the communiqués issued were these thoughts: “Independent, free and pluralistic media have a crucial role to play in the good governance of democratic societies, by ensuring transparency and accountability…….” Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights emphasizes the importance of reasonable unfettered freedom of expression and freedom of the press as demonstrable components of any true democracy. Can we truly say that what obtains today in Guyana is in keeping with these principles? Can we truly say that the manner by which media is constructed and ordered in Guyana, transparency and accountability in Governance is a principle that can be guaranteed to the Citizenry? Maybe the Independent Press can answer those questions.
In a vituperative attack upon an embryonic assemblage of stake holders in an envisioned “New Guyana”, a Governmental and Party Mouth Piece assailed the media competition for giving a voice to those who, unlike his party and Government, do not own or control media entities. Since this person is authorized to issue press communiqués on behalf of the Government, we have to presume from this that this Paramount State/Party duopoly is leery about exposure of ideas and beliefs that run contrary to theirs. So much so that despite having the facility of electronic and print media at their beck and control, they still wish to limit views other than theirs. This politically triggered defense mechanism of selective exposure, that is, attempting to minimize information flowing to the populace and thus electorate through bullying and other means was a pet peeve of this Government when it was an opposition party. Today, after thirteen years of experiencing “the good life” that being in charge guarantees, that peeve has come full circle, metamorphosing into a sometime strident outpourings that should always elicit the response, “methinks thou doth protest too much”.
John F. Kennedy, late President of the United States of America asserted that:
A NATION THAT IS AFRAID TO LET ITS PEOPLE JUDGE THE TRUTH AND FALSEHOOD OF IDEAS IN AN OPEN MARKET IS A NATION THAT IS AFRAID OF ITS PEOPLE.
I believe that it is reasonable to suggest that a State that evidences a reluctance to take its grubby hands off of the end apparatus for public dissemination and proliferation of information is a State that is afraid of the logical conclusions people will come to when exposed to a full and unfiltered dose of news and information. Do we have to provide proof that freedom of information and the press are the strongest pillars upon which democracy can be built? Do we need to learn again what happens to societies that that ignore these precepts, what they degenerate into? Adolph Hitler proposed that:
THEATRE, ART, LITERATURE, MOVIES, THE PRESS , POSTERS, AND WINDOW DISPLAYS MUST BE CLEANED OF THE SYMPTOMS OF A ROTTING WORLD AND PUT INTO THE SERVICE OF THE STATE IN ORDER TO PREVENT A PEOPLE FROM BEING DRIVEN INTO THE ARMS OF SPIRITUAL LUNACY.
And this is the general articulation one hears from lunatics like him when they are attempting to justify or rationalize State monopoly and control of media and information. It is never sound, it is never right, and can never be wholesome for a society yearning and struggling to achieve true democracy.
Guyana cannot lay claim to a pluralistic democracy, pluralistic press, and a society in which citizens are guaranteed the facilities to petition their Government for redress of grievances until a credible Freedom of Information Law is enacted, and the State divests itself from the commercial news and information business. You should never be able to regulate your competition. To prescribe how far and wide they should be able to sell their products. To determine where they should be heard and who should hear them. Not when you are in the same business. It is unethical, it is unfair, and it reeks of the F word and the D word, no not expletives, fascism and dictatorship. But superimposed as a principle above all these is the age old but still viable concept of the press as the referee in the interaction between the people and their government. So those mouthing idle nothingness about democracy and press freedom, and all the while clinging to the notion that it is OK for the Government to own radio, television and print media, are merely trying to conceal their sins through the means of cunning art.
