Stakeholders asserted that the measure should enhance media credibility rather than restrict media rights.
This statement was originally published on freedomforum.org.np on 2 August 2024.
Freedom Forum held a multi-stakeholder discussion on the ‘Media Council Bill’, which is under consideration in the Legislative Management Committee of the National Assembly, the upper house of the federal parliament. The event was held in the federal capital city on July 30. The discussion gathered around 40 persons from diverse sectors representing parliament, media, academia, civil society organizations and law.
Most of the participants who spoke on the occasion underlined the need for amending the Bill to make it timely and contextual, while the present lawmakers from the Upper House, assured they would pay heed to the concerns and vowed they would carry out an amendment.
The discussion was held to highlight the faults in the Bill and the points to be amended. The Bill was registered at the National Assembly on April 25, 2024.
Freedom Forum’s General Secretary Sanjeeb Ghimire welcomed the participants and spoke about the program objectives. The Bill is important not only for media practitioners but also for media consumers, he reminded everyone, adding that the event would throw light on major issues and seek views from CSOs and the media.
Following General Secretary Ghimire, Executive Chief Taranath Dahal stressed that the program was important to reinforce discussion on the Media Council Bill in the context of the new government formation. He informed the attendants that FF’s suggestions were also incorporated in the lawmakers’ amendment in the Bill.
Dahal shared a brief presentation on the background and objectives of the Bill. He said more clarity was required in a few provisions, such as those referring to independent journalists and dignified journalism. The Bill lacks the necessary details on the structural autonomy of the Media Council and is also not clear about the appointment of the chairperson and council members. Moreover, it provides the council authority to regulate social networks which, actually, is beyond the council’s jurisdiction because it is assigned to regulate journalistic contents only.
The proposed Media Council should be accountable to parliament and the Bill should take the approach of building media credibility, rather than restricting media rights.
On the occasion, media researcher Ujjwal Acharya seconded Dahal, saying that while this revised Bill addressed few concerns in comparison to the previous one, some provisions un it do not guarantee the independence of the proposed Media Council. The council should be independent, autonomous and acceptable to the media industry. He specifically mentioned Section 20.4.4, which stipulates that the press identity card of a journalist will be suspended for a year if he/she is found violating the code of conduct. This must be removed, he demanded.
Advocate Pabitra Raut reminded the lawmakers to keep in mind the existing provisions for press freedom while formulating the Bill. The lawmaking process is principally narrow, which restricts international standards for freedom of expression and speech. She also expressed her concern over the lack of paying attention to the federal context.
A reporter at the “Nagarik: daily, Tapendra Karki, also stressed that Section 6 of the Bill delegates authority to the concerned ministry’s secretary and joint secretary, which is against the norms of freedom of expression. The Bill is also ambiguous about the reporting mechanism. Whom is the Media Council accountable to? he asked.
Please refer to Freedom Forum’s site for the full statement.
