Radio owners oppose tough new media Bill

Kampala

Proprietors of broadcast stations in the country are on a collision path with the government following the tabling last week of a Bill which could arm the State with legal powers to influence content of what is aired.

The new Bill to regulate broadcasting, telecommunication and postal service providers by creating a new governing body, the Uganda Communications Regulatory Authority, in effect disbanding the Uganda Communications Commission (UCC) and the Broadcasting Council (BC), appears to do more than just that.

An analysis by this newspaper of the 70-page Uganda Communications Regulatory Authority Bill 2012 shows that the proposed law seeks to further tighten the process of acquiring licences for radio and television operators.

But more worrying for the state of media freedom in the country, the Bill intends to hand to the government the power to control the operations of broadcast houses.

For anyone to obtain a licence, for instance, the Bill sets a condition for the “provision of service on priority service to the government or specified organisation.”

What that means is that the government will make it a requirement that any broadcast house publishes its propaganda material, or that of allied agencies, as and when it deems fit, a matter that has left proprietors enraged.

“We are definitely going to oppose that law,” said veteran politician Capt. Francis Babu, who heads the National Association of Broadcasters. “Anything to do with restrictions and management of content, we shall not accept.” He added, however, that the exception would be in case of a natural disaster or national crisis.

The Bill also contains curious provisions on the right to broadcast, prohibiting the publication of material which infringes on the privacy of any individual or which contains false information.

“It would appear this Bill is attempting to slip in some clauses of an already defunct penalty (in Uganda) - publishing false news,” said Mr Tom Rhodes of the Committee to Protect Journalists in an interview. “It appears to be a loophole to allow individuals to prevent a broadcast through charges of ‘false information’ or on personal privacy grounds - where the onus is up to the broadcaster to defend themselves from the claims.”

He added: “In general, across East Africa, personal privacy and false information clauses are often used by officials and wealthy businessmen to silence critical reporting.”

Law was quashed
In 2004, the Supreme Court struck down the law against publication of false news, declaring it unconstitutional following a protracted appeal by two local journalists.

The Bill also hands down a fine of about Shs2 million or a four-year jail term upon conviction for anyone who intercepts government communication.

While the proposal is silent about e-mail communication, it will worry journalists who, for instance, may report a story from a source who will not want his identity revealed about a curious radio communication issued by the military. “Government will have to define what all these means,” said Mr Babu.

The Bill requires proprietors to obtain licenses for installation of broadcast equipment, before proceeding “within fourteen days” to register with the Media Council and then obtain a broadcasting licence.

These stages present financial implications even though the Bill is silent on specifics, only stating that “the minister” may make regulations relating to fees payable.

“I really don’t see the relevance of the Media Council here,” said media scholar Mr Adolf Mbaine. “I thought a converged regulator was supposed to be a one-stop centre for all regulatory requirements.”

The Bill also is packed with just enough ammunition for State control, handing the government leeway to take full control of any communication station in Uganda for at least half a year in the event of a state of emergency (as per Article 101 of the Constitution),
“This tactic was used in Khartoum, Sudan, and ensured widespread self-censorship for essentially 20 years. It would be a very dangerous precedent for Uganda to follow,” said Mr Rhodes.

Mr Rhodes also picked issue with a proposal that hands the director-general of the authority power to examine private mail by post if the Authority believes the articles contain “prohibited subject matter” or items deemed threatening, obscene or of “grossly offensive character.”

“This seems like a gross invasion of privacy with intentionally vague wording to allow the [Authority] free access to intercept individual’s mail,” he said.

Controversial merger
While the Bill appears to ride on a noble cause on the face value, moving to reduce duplication of roles and centres of power by merging the UCC - issuer of frequency modulations - and the BC (issuer of broadcast licences), government has long put the cart before the horse following a 2010 decision to fuse the two entities.

In 2010, government set up an interim body headed by Eng. Godfrey Mutabazi consolidating the two institutions, a matter that prompted the Uganda Law Society to petition the High Court in Kampala for a judicial review on the matter. Two years on, however, the case is still pending completion.

“The idea is to get away with double regulation,” said Eng. Mutabazi. “Really, this law is just streamlining the laws governing the broadcast, telecommunications and postal sector. There is nothing new.”

Section 33 of the Bill makes it compulsory for every person with a television set to register it with the authority, failure of which elicits a fine not exceeding two and half currency points (Shs50,000) or imprisonment for not less than one month, or both.

“Our TV spread in the country is still very small, perhaps 20 people own TV sets per every 1,000,” said Mr Mbaine. “We should be looking at how to encourage people to acquire TV sets and access information, rather than impose licences and fees, which are ultimately a disincentive. From a media policy perspective, that is a very poor decision.”

Modifying licences
Section 42 hands the authority express rights to modify licences at will, including limiting the broadcast area of reach, a matter that Capt. Babu said “shouldn’t be at the whims of the Authority and must be mutually agreed upon.”

Mr Mbaine also opined: “That power to modify licences and limit areas of reach is inimical to media freedom and threatens the broadcasting industry. I can see KFM [radio] or CBS, for instance, being limited to the Central Business District of Kampala.”

Mr Rhodes said: “This is too much power in too few hands. Without an independent appeals board in place, the Authority may fall under political influence and allow extensive frequency reach to their supporters and minimal to their political opponents.”

In tabling the new law, the government appears keen on arming itself with legal power to exert more influence in the broadcast sector. The unceremonious shutdown of Buganda Kingdom’s CBS radio in 2009 on grounds of failing to observe “minimum broadcasting standards” provided a turning point in government’s quest for more control in the sector.

Tabled on Thursday last week by junior ICT Minister Mr Nyombi Thembo, the contentious Bill is now before Parliament’s ICT committee awaiting scrutiny. This newspaper understands that authorities at Parliament plan to conduct a seminar for lawmakers to enlighten themselves about the proposed law before public hearings are conducted.

[email protected]