Letter from the Levant
Dead Sea debate: Charting the
waters for a liberal press law



By Osama El-Sherif

A ONE-DAY workshop held in a remote Dead Sea resort to discuss the shortcomings of Jordan's press law has put forward the general framework for what could be viewed as the most progressive piece of legislation the Arab world is likely to see. More than 30 Jordanians including former Prime Ministers and Ministers, lawmakers, political party representatives, union heads and journalists not only highlighted the negative aspects of the existing law but drew an outline of what could be described as the most liberal law to regulate the press yet. The workshop's recommendations will be sent to lawmakers who will be meeting in an extraordinary session to discuss, among other things, amending the present law.

Regardless of the final impact of the Dead Sea meet, it is worth looking at some of the points that the participants had raised and how they could make up the essential components of a liberal press law. These principles can be outlined as follows:

n Removing any form of official censorship unless in specific cases of national emergencies.

n No law shall contradict in letter or spirit article 19 of the International Declaration of Human Rights and accordingly no law shall be enacted to limit press freedom.

n Removing any form of government immunity against litigation making it possible for government decisions to be appealed in court.

n Public boards shall run national television and radio stations and its editorial freedom must be guaranteed.

n The government shall remove all forms of economic pressures against mass media including taxes on newsprint, printing machines and wireless communication equipment.

n No law shall be made to suspend or close down a publication and accordingly publications shall be registered and not licensed by the government.

n Journalists appearing in press related legal suits must be guaranteed a fair trial by specialized civilian courts and should never be detained during investigation or while awaiting trial.

n Journalists must be guaranteed full and free access to public information. Their sources must be protected.

n Prohibitions in any press law shall be limited and well defined and shall be directly linked to the journalists' code of ethics.

n Press laws shall seek to regulate the profession of journalism on the basis of general principles and in the spirit of the constitution. They shall not turn into penal codes and listings of punitive measures and prohibitions.

n Government ownership in the press shall not be allowed.

n Drafting of a code of ethics by journalists to govern their profession. This is to be applied and governed by a higher council of the press, an independent body.

It goes without saying that the above recommendations represent a rather idealistic and ambitious approach to the issue of press freedom. In reality the majority of Arab governments are unwilling to accept or implement, even partially, such principles. The reason is that one cannot separate the issues of press freedom from the more important one of democratization. One cannot exist without the other. So while the Dead Sea debate is concentrating on expanding press freedom within the existing state of democratization in Jordan, such talk is unheard of in most Arab countries.

This is why the Jordanian example has been exciting to watch for almost a decade. In Jordan, where legislation vacillated between the liberal 1993 press law and the more repressive 1998 one, the trend has been one of regression rather than progression. No sooner that the 1993 law has been passed than successive lawmakers and governments began colluding to revise it and introduce legal means to harness the press. Rightly or not, Jordan's press has been accused of souring the Kingdom's relations with many of its neighbors, particularly at the height of the Gulf Crisis. Economic slowdown and Jordan's isolation in the wake of the Gulf War did the rest of the damage. The debacle began in 1995, coinciding with the signing of the Jordan-Israel peace treaty, through a series of measures and temporary laws that finally culminated with the controversial 1998 law.

Today the Jordanian press is terrorized by a law that carries hefty fines and penalties on the one side, and market forces that have derailed many of the pioneering weeklies, on the other. The current drive to ease the pressure on the press is not coming from the lawmakers or the government but from an unlikely source; the palace. The young King Abdallah has committed himself, in more than one occasion, to a free and vibrant press. He even talked about the prospect of licensing private TV stations. As in most Arab countries change, for good or for bad, usually comes from the top. In Jordan's case, it was the late King Hussein who put the country on the path of democratization back in 1989. Almost a decade has passed since the great winds of change swept through Jordan; when it held its first free elections in decades. The parliament of 1990 paved the way for the passing of the most liberal legislative package in the Arab world, namely the press and political parties' laws. It is not clear how and why the regression began. But it is not unusual to praise the King for introducing reform and blame the government for reversing it!

In any case, the Jordanian experience has been watched with interest, and sometimes anxiety, by its Arab neighbors. Ten years after the experiment began one could say that Jordan had taken three steps forward and two steps backward. Now, under a determined and visionary King, the country appears ready to move forward again. The press law, just as it was the case back in the early 1990's, will be the litmus test to determine the nature of the coming phase. The government, which would prefer to concentrate on the economy and on the thorny issue of privatization, has tried to put off the inclusion of the current law on the agenda of the extraordinary session of parliament. But in the last minute the law was added, apparently by Royal intervention.

Between the progressive principles of the Dead Sea workshop and the modest, and more realistic, amendments of the Jordan Press Association, the lawmakers and the government will have to hammer out a more feasible alternative. And unless we are surprised by another form of Royal intervention, the government is likely to have its day at the House.

But the political mood of the country has changed from the way it was at the turn of the decade. Jordanians are now more concerned with the state of the economy than with free expression; their priorities are changing as the economy remains in a state of sedation. They are more interested in a swift political settlement between the Palestinians and Israelis, an end to Iraq's siege and an opening up of the Gulf markets; issues that are conditional to the invigoration of the Jordanian economy. Foreign debt, unemployment and poverty occupy a higher priority in the public psyche than the on-going intellectual debate about press freedom.

But if Jordan moves back towards a liberal legislation, then this will mean that its democratic transition has resumed. The reform drive is likely to include the election law and the most liberal economic laws the country has ever seen. Backed by an aggressive foreign policy that underlines Jordan's moderation and spirit of reconciliation, the democratic drive may have a better chance of making it this time.

 

1