Demystifying Zimbabwe Media Commission

me these sentiments stem from either the desire to become outlaws and in the process attract unnecessary attention or simple ignorance of the media laws in Zimbabwe.
Indeed, as what George Orwell said; “During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.” There is a clear attempt in some sections of the media to unnecessary create a furore and deliberately misinform the public regarding media laws in Zimbabwe.
For the record, the ZMC was established by Constitutional Amendment (No 19) Act of 2009 and later came into operation in February 2010 through the gazette by His Excellency President Mugabe.
The commission is made of nine members appointed by President Mugabe from a list of nominees submitted by the Parliamentary Portfolio Committee on Standing Rules and Orders.
The commissioners were appointed on the basis of their knowledge and experience in the media and their tenure is five years.
As mandated by Constitutional Amendment (No 19) Act the commission seeks to uphold, promote and enforce good practice and ethics, equitable wide access to information and the development of all indigenous languages spoken in Zimbabwe.
In the day to day execution of its broad mandate, the Commission is guided by the provisions of the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act (AIPPA).
The legislative functions of the commission as prescribed by AIPPA include upholding, promoting and enforcing good practice and ethics in the press, print, electronic and broadcasting media.
Its functions also include the registration of mass media, monitor and raise user awareness and to investigate complaints against any journalists or mass media service.
In his own words, ZMC chairman Godfrey Majonga made it clear that in discharging its duties the commission aims at “raising awareness about the changes and other dynamics that continue to shape and influence the role of the mass media in national developmental roles in its endeavour to make the media responsive to the needs and aspirations of the people of Zimbabwe.”
Since its establishment, the commission has managed to register 65 mass media service providers publishing dailies, weeklies and monthly magazines.
Unless one just wants to be mischievous, the law in Zimbabwe is quite clear.
No mass media service provider can operate without being registered by the commission and for any journalist to enjoy journalistic privileges as provided by the Act, one has to be accredited by the commission.
When registering, mass media services are required to submit to the commission their own codes of conduct and ethics as an internal measure that they stick to the best practices or professional conduct of the trade.
It must also be made clear that while the commission does not register broadcast media, the Act provides for the regulation of broadcast content by the commission.
One outstanding requirement yet to be fulfilled by the commission is the establishment of Media Council, which will be responsible for coming up with a Code of Conduct and Ethics for journalists.
A number of associations dealing with the media are expected to submit nominations to the commission for appointment to the council.
The Media Council is then expected, in consultation with ZMC, to develop a Code of Conduct and Ethics governing the rules of conduct to be observed by journalists and mass media services.
The code is required to put in place mechanisms that will deal with publication or broadcasting of injurious media content and the penalties to be imposed on any journalist or mass media service for breaches of the code.
Any person, including members of the public who feel aggrieved by any publication of news either in print or electronic media, are free to approach the media council for remediation.
It is a myth that ZMC is a self-serving organ meant to stifle media freedom and expression as in most cases the media gets away with a lot of libellous articles couched away as news because individuals aggrieved lack resources to ensure those particular media account for their actions.
According to AIPPA, the Media Council will put in place regulations governing its conduct on how to deal with complaints and ways of enforcing its decisions in line with the provisions of the Act.
When sitting to hear complaints from members of the public, the Council will act as a quasi-judicial body and its decisions have the same effect as those of the courts of law.
Any decision that the council comes up with in consultation with the Commission is supposed to be registered in the High Court and upon registration that decision may have the same effect as any judgement passed by the High Court.
According to Majonga, all the necessary groundwork for the establishment of the council has been completed and it is only the funding part that has remained a sticking obstacle.
Any journalist would agree that just like any other profession journalism has its own internationally recognised professional and ethical code of conduct.
There is therefore nothing amiss for the Commission to seek adherence by all media houses to these universally agreed principles.
One of the universally agreed principles is fair competition and adherence to laws in a particular country that the media is operating in.
It boggles the mind that some foreign publications with no office in Zimbabwe have continued to circulate their publications without due regard of the law.
This contemptuous attitude is further worsened by the fact that these papers enter our borders duty-free and do not pay any of the taxes levied on local publications.
One does not need to be a rocket scientist to understand that the circulation of these foreign publications along with local papers creates an uneven playing field on the market.
The papers are printed outside the country where the cost of newsprint and other raw materials is low and yet local publications are operating in a very difficult economic environment and are made to compete with these foreign publications which are not adding any economic value to the country.
Members of the public who have complaints against certain stories carried by these foreign publications have nowhere to seek recourse as they do not have local offices.
It is my fervent view that the Commission is justified in seeking to block the entry into the country of such publications as The Sunday Times and The Zimbabwean. It must be mandatory for all foreign publications to have offices in Zimbabwe and register as stipulated by the law.
Not fulfilling these statutory obligations must be viewed as a serious act of provocation and deviant behaviour that must be dealt with by the relevant law enforcement bodies.
Free Press does not entail being an outlaw.
In fact, the issue of a free Press is more of a myth than reality existing in most countries, even those that are touted as being more democratic.
Nowhere is the myth of a free Press captured aptly than in an article written by Baffour Ankomah, the editor of the New African titled: The role of the African media in promoting African integration when he says there is nothing like the free Press in world.
“There is NOTHING like a ‘free Press’ anywhere in the world! Not in Britain. Not in America. Not in France. Not in Germany. Not anywhere! And I challenge anybody who knows, or has ever met, this ‘Mr Free Press’ to kindly introduce me to him because I would want to have dinner with him and ask some searching questions.”
Ankomah says what students are told in journalism textbooks are that the freedom of the Western media is restricted by national laws and various agendas that influence their reporting of the news.
He says the agendas that drive the British media, like its counterparts elsewhere in the West, restrict its freedom to report freely.
He furthers attests that Britain has perhaps the most laws on its statute book restricting Press freedom in the whole world.
“That British journalists are not routinely harassed or dragged before the court by the government is testament to the journalists’ religious observance of the restrictive laws and not to any democratic inclinations of the British state of government” says Ankomah.
Ankomah says African journalists feed themselves with the notions of a mythical free Press and on the wings of this deceit set forth to reproduce this “free Press” in Africa, often with catastrophic results.
He says the attempt by some African journalists to be truculently hostile to their governments even if they harm national interests is very retrogressive.
“In fact, many times we are not even conscious whether we are harming national interest or not.
“For example, we have all read recent articles by Zimbabwean journalists who, because they want President Robert Mugabe out of office, thunder about how ordinary Zimbabweans ‘want jobs, not land’.
“It may be so, but these journalists are simply refusing to look at the broader national interest issues involved.”
Indeed, in a country where agriculture (reduced to its simplest denominator, land) is the major foreign exchange earner, it is suicidal for Zimbabwe to continue to leave the control of land in the hands of only 4 500 white commercial farmers.
Jobs may be important, but the truth is that Zimbabweans who want “jobs now, not land” are looking at the short-term only, and not thinking about the future generations.
In the final analysis, while the Commission cannot dictate the editorial policy of individual media houses it hopes to ensure that journalists exercise utmost objectivity in their reportage and realise our core national interests as a nation.
After all, was it not George Orwell who said; “He who controls the past controls the future. He who controls future controls the present.”