Not yet Uhuru- Elections, Gender and we the people- By Rashweat Mukundu
In Zimbabwe and Kenya, elections are a matter of life and death. Before one makes that decision to go and join a line to vote for whom so ever, one equally has to be aware of the direction to take on foot, when trouble comes. Elections in these two countries and indeed many other parts of Africa and the world have been a curse. As an inalienable cog of democracy, elections have lost their intended meaning and purpose. While some are used to this chaos, nothing has prepared many, rather me, for the shock of the USA elections to be finalized on 4 November 2008. The USA is, to many a beacon of democracy, and indeed this powerful nation has tried to live to expectations, strutting the globe installing democratic regimes and threatening the hell out of those who belong to the axis of evil, but like Africa, the land of ‘we the people’ still has a long way to go.
Africa and many parts of the word are conditioned to think that the major dichotomy between the west and south is the lack of democracy in the latter. Africa has too many examples of failed states, chaos and abundant hopelessness, that to some extent the world has given-up on us. An enduring contrasting image of Africa and the west is the "shoe shine', as Zimbos say, with which the Republicans and the Democrats campaign, the simplicity and serenity that occupy those events and the chaos that defines our own elections.
No example can be so close as the chaos in Darfur and the East of the Democratic Republic of Congo where women, men, children the elderly and sick are living in hell. In the case of the Congo, one can be forgiven for believing that that this region is cursed, as it has not known peace since King Leopold of Belgium appropriated the Congo to himself, cutting-off hands of the locals for failing to fill enough buckets with rubber. Africa aside. The world is fixed on the USA elections. This to the media is the story, the Congo is and will always be like that hence a permanent scenario of Africa, that we are used to and can be ignored or we can live with that, after all that is what the Congolese are. In Namibia the media recently reported about electoral related violence end of October between the ruling SWAPO and opposition, Rally for Democracy and Progress (RDP). The pitched battles in the sprawling, poor and cast out location of Katutura where instigated allegedly by SWAPO supporters who were demanding that the RDP should not hold a rally at a piece of ground, not council or proper stadium, but just a piece of land which the ruling party supporters allegedly cleared for its rallies. The struggle over this piece needed police intervention, and tear gas to calm. Some fire arms were confiscated by the police and sure they were going to be used. At the highest level, SWAPO lamented that the opposition was provocative, couldn’t they take a hoe, spade and wheel barrow and clear their own piece of land gushed the SWAPO spokesperson. Coming from Zimbabwe, I was not shocked; in any case this is Africa. Our eyes should be on the spectacle of the year, the USA elections.
The USA is famous for its ‘we the people’ statement, an affirmation of the centrality of its people to the governance of this country. A closer look at the nation of ‘we the people’ however shows surprising similarities with the politics in Katutura, Harare and Nairobi, of death, stereotyping and exclusion. While not declaring my own favorite between Obama and McCain, I am shocked at the treatment of Sarah Palin by the media and the American society in general. The very instance that the Alaska Governor was chosen as McCain’s running mate, the first group to welcome her were American entrepreneurs. All of a sudden her hair style, glasses, type of dressing and makeup became the hit of town. Gorgeous look-alikes' sprouted everywhere, look alikes' who act foolish, purportedly mimicking the real Palin. As if this was not enough, Palin was under the scrutiny for her $150 000 wardrobe (shocking though, but how much is Obama and McCain’s wardrobes), and many other sorts of things were said about her. I should hasten to say none of the main contestants have been subjected to that kind of sexual scrutiny. Recently a beauty pageant was organized to find out the most beautiful look-alike of Palin. Skimpily dressed and blond contestants (meaning daft) girls are displayed for men to feast their gorging eyes. Worse off, if one pursues Palin’s story on the net, they are reports that pornographic films featuring look-alikes’ are being done to be released before the November 4 vote.
This, ‘we the people’ will argue, is America, anything and everything is possible. ‘We the people’ are a free people. One gets a feeling that the Democrats and Republicans should have taken it upon themselves to, at least defend the rights of Palin, by condemning the sexual bigotry, the labeling and ‘placing her in her right place’ as an object of beauty and sex. That is the entire of what Americans see on her. Where she tried to speak her mind, McCain handlers were quick to call her a rebel. One gets the feeling she was chosen to be an ornament for the campaign and to be displayed as a talking parrot in the march of the great American Hero, John McCain, to the Oval office.
The story does not end here; many born in USA might not be able to vote after all. This is so because thousands received letters that their names were either incorrect, improperly registered or that they are, after all, not citizens etc. It reminds me of my 20 hour wait at a polling station in Harare, Zimbabwe 2002. A wait that was suddenly disrupted by tear gas fired by riot police, to disperse me from a voting line, a voting line of all places. Well in the USA this is done nicely with the all too good legal jargon and niceties. Apart from failing to vote, Democratic Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner has received threats for allegedly deciding to go ahead with a voter register that some deem faulty. At least her argument is that those she registered should be allowed to vote, some are fighting that fellow citizens be struck off.
So at the end of the day my fellow people, whether one is chasing you with an axe in Zimbabwe or Kenya because you did not vote right, or you are busy fighting over a piece of ground under a 40 degree Celsius sun in Katutura Namibia, or better still shouting kill him in the USA, or subjecting a fellow woman politician to such humiliation because she is woman, the world has not changed that much. The people of the world are still far from claiming and dictating politics. Elections and politics are still removed from the human values that we are all aspire to carry and cherish. One day I hope we can really and truly say, “WE THE PEOPLE”. //End//
Thursday 30 October 2008
Wednesday 15 October 2008
Cautious Hope: State of media in Southern Africa
Cautious hope: The state of media and freedom of Expression in Southern Africa- Rashweat Mukundu
Media development and respect for freedom of expression rights are increasingly coming to the centre of public debate in Southern Africa. While the region carries the infamous distinction of being home to Zimbabwe, one of the word’s worst violators of media and freedom of expression rights, Southern Africa is also home to South Africa the continent’s leading economy and media giant. While the region is a mixed bag of success and failures, one gets the feeling that despite all what has gone wrong in the region, especially in Zimbabwe, Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Swaziland and Lesotho, media development and freedom of expression rights issues can no longer be ignored by governments.
The democratisation of Southern Africa, a project of the early 1990’s saw many changes in the region. Critically the independence of Namibia and South Africa and consolidation of political multi-partiysm in Zambia, Malawi, Tanzania, Botswana, Madagascar and Mozambique. At the same time the region had to deal with the situations in Lesotho, Zimbabwe and DRC. At the centre of these challenges is the place of media and freedom of expression rights in national discourse, especially political transformation, reporting human rights violations and corruption. It difficult if not impossible to give a uniform score mark to Southern African countries but rather to distinguish amongst the broad categories that each given state finds itself in.
South Africa, Botswana, Tanzania, Madagascar, Mauritius, Zambia, Malawi, Namibia, and Mozambique are probably in their own category in which media plurality and diversity can be said to exist, not without challenges. The media in these countries has fairly diversified especially in the 1990s going into this century. This category boost of numerous newspapers printed by private players as well as government owned media in the form of broadcasting stations and newspapers. While most state owned media has played the role of supporting government projects in what this sector calls development journalism, the private or independent media has endeavoured to report critically around issues of bad governance and corruption. This has resulted in the private media being painted with the same brush as the opposition parties. And being seen as part of the opposition comes with its own challenges in the region. In Namibia as an example the government still maintains a ban on advertising in The Namibian newspaper, which it accuses of writing negatively about the SWAPO led government. In South Africa, the government made a threat to stop advertising in the Sunday Times after critical reporting on an arms purchase scandal that has engulfed the political leadership in that country. The ruling Africa National Congress (ANC) in South Africa has also proposed legislation that would restrict media freedom. The same has happened in Botswana. Apart from the threats of economic sanctions, all countries in this grouping have proposed laws to curb media and journalistic freedom under the guise of protecting national interests. At the time of writing this piece, the Zambia government was at the throat of The Post newspaper, threatening to deal with the newspaper should its Presidential candidate and Current Acting President Rupiah Banda win the Presidential by-election in that country. In Malawi the state has threatened to shut down private radio stations accused of supporting the opposition. Botswana once seen as the beacon of hope in the continent is discussing a Media Practitioners Bill, which critics have likened to the infamous Zimbabwean Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act (AIPPA) under which journalists and newspapers have been harassed. Under the proposed law, the government would register journalists and subject them to a disciplinary code developed by a government appointed commission. Those critical of the Botswana government especially its handling of the minority San communities have been bundled out of the country. In Southern Africa generally all media has a fixation with politics while critical areas of concern to the common citizen have been neglected. These include wider coverage of the HIV-AIDS issues, gender sensitive reporting among others. Where corruption is reported it is mostly related to politics.
The second or ‘bad guys’ grouping of the media in Southern Africa includes Zimbabwe, the DRC, Lesotho and Swaziland. In these countries the media operates under tight control and threats are put into action. Zimbabwe has in the past few years banned four newspapers, and exiled tens of journalists. The private media operates in a legal minefield in which literally anything critical of the ruling elite can result in arrest. If one escapes arrest, extra judicial means have been used including the murder of one independent camera person and beating of journalists. Swaziland is increasingly tightening its control of the media and freedom of expression rights are impugned upon with impunity and increasingly so. The growing demand for political plurality is drawing the worst out of the world’s last absolute Monarch as marches, processions and demonstrations are banned. The private media is increasingly being called upon to tow the line. The same happens in Lesotho, where Harvest FM, a private radio station was handed a 12 month ban and private journalists threatened with legal suits and arrests. In the DRC independent journalism is rarely tolerated and being a critic has dire consequences.
It is important to state that while media and freedom of expressing rights are still very much in peril, investment in the media is growing in the region, except in few countries as Zimbabwe. And even in Zimbabwe hope has been rekindled that a political settlement between the main political rivals might result in the relaxation of media and freedom of expression laws. Of importance in Southern Africa is the growing use of new technologies in information generation and sharing. If is for this reason that while the Zimbabwe government could afford to ban all foreign media, the story of Zimbabwe remained in the public domain regionally and internationally due to online publishing. Mobile telephony has given the common person new power to communicate and share information without much restrictions. A lot however still needs to be done with regard to repealing undemocratic media laws, and encouraging the development of media and telecommunications. Nonetheless Southern Africa is changing, albeit slowly. //End//_____________________________________________
Media development and respect for freedom of expression rights are increasingly coming to the centre of public debate in Southern Africa. While the region carries the infamous distinction of being home to Zimbabwe, one of the word’s worst violators of media and freedom of expression rights, Southern Africa is also home to South Africa the continent’s leading economy and media giant. While the region is a mixed bag of success and failures, one gets the feeling that despite all what has gone wrong in the region, especially in Zimbabwe, Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Swaziland and Lesotho, media development and freedom of expression rights issues can no longer be ignored by governments.
The democratisation of Southern Africa, a project of the early 1990’s saw many changes in the region. Critically the independence of Namibia and South Africa and consolidation of political multi-partiysm in Zambia, Malawi, Tanzania, Botswana, Madagascar and Mozambique. At the same time the region had to deal with the situations in Lesotho, Zimbabwe and DRC. At the centre of these challenges is the place of media and freedom of expression rights in national discourse, especially political transformation, reporting human rights violations and corruption. It difficult if not impossible to give a uniform score mark to Southern African countries but rather to distinguish amongst the broad categories that each given state finds itself in.
South Africa, Botswana, Tanzania, Madagascar, Mauritius, Zambia, Malawi, Namibia, and Mozambique are probably in their own category in which media plurality and diversity can be said to exist, not without challenges. The media in these countries has fairly diversified especially in the 1990s going into this century. This category boost of numerous newspapers printed by private players as well as government owned media in the form of broadcasting stations and newspapers. While most state owned media has played the role of supporting government projects in what this sector calls development journalism, the private or independent media has endeavoured to report critically around issues of bad governance and corruption. This has resulted in the private media being painted with the same brush as the opposition parties. And being seen as part of the opposition comes with its own challenges in the region. In Namibia as an example the government still maintains a ban on advertising in The Namibian newspaper, which it accuses of writing negatively about the SWAPO led government. In South Africa, the government made a threat to stop advertising in the Sunday Times after critical reporting on an arms purchase scandal that has engulfed the political leadership in that country. The ruling Africa National Congress (ANC) in South Africa has also proposed legislation that would restrict media freedom. The same has happened in Botswana. Apart from the threats of economic sanctions, all countries in this grouping have proposed laws to curb media and journalistic freedom under the guise of protecting national interests. At the time of writing this piece, the Zambia government was at the throat of The Post newspaper, threatening to deal with the newspaper should its Presidential candidate and Current Acting President Rupiah Banda win the Presidential by-election in that country. In Malawi the state has threatened to shut down private radio stations accused of supporting the opposition. Botswana once seen as the beacon of hope in the continent is discussing a Media Practitioners Bill, which critics have likened to the infamous Zimbabwean Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act (AIPPA) under which journalists and newspapers have been harassed. Under the proposed law, the government would register journalists and subject them to a disciplinary code developed by a government appointed commission. Those critical of the Botswana government especially its handling of the minority San communities have been bundled out of the country. In Southern Africa generally all media has a fixation with politics while critical areas of concern to the common citizen have been neglected. These include wider coverage of the HIV-AIDS issues, gender sensitive reporting among others. Where corruption is reported it is mostly related to politics.
The second or ‘bad guys’ grouping of the media in Southern Africa includes Zimbabwe, the DRC, Lesotho and Swaziland. In these countries the media operates under tight control and threats are put into action. Zimbabwe has in the past few years banned four newspapers, and exiled tens of journalists. The private media operates in a legal minefield in which literally anything critical of the ruling elite can result in arrest. If one escapes arrest, extra judicial means have been used including the murder of one independent camera person and beating of journalists. Swaziland is increasingly tightening its control of the media and freedom of expression rights are impugned upon with impunity and increasingly so. The growing demand for political plurality is drawing the worst out of the world’s last absolute Monarch as marches, processions and demonstrations are banned. The private media is increasingly being called upon to tow the line. The same happens in Lesotho, where Harvest FM, a private radio station was handed a 12 month ban and private journalists threatened with legal suits and arrests. In the DRC independent journalism is rarely tolerated and being a critic has dire consequences.
It is important to state that while media and freedom of expressing rights are still very much in peril, investment in the media is growing in the region, except in few countries as Zimbabwe. And even in Zimbabwe hope has been rekindled that a political settlement between the main political rivals might result in the relaxation of media and freedom of expression laws. Of importance in Southern Africa is the growing use of new technologies in information generation and sharing. If is for this reason that while the Zimbabwe government could afford to ban all foreign media, the story of Zimbabwe remained in the public domain regionally and internationally due to online publishing. Mobile telephony has given the common person new power to communicate and share information without much restrictions. A lot however still needs to be done with regard to repealing undemocratic media laws, and encouraging the development of media and telecommunications. Nonetheless Southern Africa is changing, albeit slowly. //End//_____________________________________________
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
