MEDIA REPORTING: ARMED CONFLICT AND VIOLENCE

South Asian Senior Editors' Conference, 2007 Dhaka, Bangladesh

Editors Philippe Stoll Surinder Oberoi

Press Institute of Bangladesh

MEDIA REPORTING: ARMED CONFLICT AND VIOLENCE

South Asian Senior Editors' Conference, 2007 Dhaka, Bangladesh

Editors Philippe Stoll Surinder Oberoi

28th - 29th October 2007

Press Institute of Bangladesh Seminar is dedicated to Late Mr Tahir Mirza, Editor Dawn, Pakistan who was one of the speakers in the 2006-2007 Senior Editors conference held at New Delhi

Designed & Printed at Multiplexus (India), New Delhi, India Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence Content/Programmes PAGE Foreword 7 International Humanitarian Law and Protection of Media 9 professionals working in armed conflicts by Knut Dormann, Head of the Legal Division ICRC, Geneva Inaugural Session 17 Chair: Dr. Shaikh Abdus Salam, Professor and Chairman, 17 Department of Mass Communication and Journalism, University of Dhaka Welcome Address: Mr Finn Ruda, Head of Mission, ICRC Bangladesh 17 Chief Guest’s address: Barrister Mainul Hosein, Hon’ble Advisor 20 Ministry of Information Address: Ms Mridula Bhattacharya, Director General, Press Institute of 23 Bangladesh SESSION ONE: The Media, violence and torture 27 Chair: Mr Mahbubul Alam 27 Editor, The Independent Bangladesh Glamorizing violence – What should be Media response: 27 Mr Swapan Dasgupta Senior Editor and columnist India Impact of Media on society while reporting violence: 31 Mr Ugyen Penjor Deputy Editor, Kuensel Bhutan Impact of Society on media while reporting violence: 34 Mr Murtaza Razvi Senior Editor, Daily Dawn Pakistan Torture reporting in the media – an outcome: 38 Mr. Abdul Aziz Danesh Editor, Pajhwok Afghan News Afghanistan 3 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

Violence, torture and ill-treatment in films/TV, and its impact 41 on a daily life: Mr Philippe Stoll Communication Coordinator, ICRC

Panel discussion followed by Question and Answer session 44

Session two: 53

Media and protection - What does the law says about it

Chair: Mr Bazlur Rahman, Editor, Sangbad 53

Price of truth – Media persons are dying to tell the truth: 53 Mr Farid Hossain Bureau Chief Associated press (AP) Dhaka, Bangladesh

Violence against journalists is increasing with passing years: 55 Mr Lankabaarage Anura Solomons, Deputy Editor, Foreign News and Feature Editor, Daily Divaina, Sri Lanka

Who kills journalist and why? What are the protection measures 57 for them: Mr Amitabh Roy Chowdhury Senior Editor, Press Trust of India, India

Freedom of Expression and dangerous assignments: 61 Mr Dharmendra Jha, News Editor, Annapurna Post, Nepal

Civil Society view of Media persons and their protection: 64 Dr. Mizanur Rahman Shelley Chairman, Centre for Development Research, Bangladesh Editor, Asian Affairs Dhaka, Bangladesh

Panel discussion followed by Question & Answer 68

4 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

SESSION THREE: 76 The Media and the law of armed conflict Chair: Mr Mahfuz Anam, Editor, The Daily Star Journalists engaged in dangerous professional missions in 78 areas of armed conflicts – State response: Mr Nurul Kabir, Editor, New age Bangladesh Journalists engaged in dangerous professional missions in areas 80 of armed conflicts – Employers’ response: Mr Gopal Guragain Managing Director Ujyalo FM and Satellite Channel, Kathmandu, Nepal Journalists engaged in dangerous professional missions in areas 83 of armed conflicts – Journalists response: Mr Amit Barua, Foreign Editor, The Hindustan Times India Journalists in danger – a new law needed? 88 Mr Surinder Oberoi Communication Officer ICRC Civil Society view on media and the danger they face in 91 conflict reporting: Amb. Farooq Sobhan President, Bangladesh Enterprise Institute, Bangladesh Panel discussion Followed by Question & Answer 94 SESSION FOUR: War/Conflict time responsibility of media 106 Chair: Mr Iqbal Shoban Chawdhury, Editor, Bangladesh Observer 107 Civil Society view on media responsibility in conflict reporting: 107 Dr Hafiz G.A Siddiqi Vice Chancellor North South University Bangladesh 5 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

Competition and infrastructure leapfrogging - a bane or boon 111 in conflict reporting: Ms Pamela Philipose, Senior Associate Editor, Indian Express, India

Is self-regulation necessary for media in war without borders? 115 Mr Kesara Abeywardena, News Editor, Daily Mirror Sri Lanka

The relationship between media and the security forces 117 during conflict: Ms Faida Faruk Senior Journalist Maldives

Do journalists continue to be impartial observers in present conflicts? 119 Mr Reazuddin Ahmed Editor, The News Today Bangladesh

Panel discussion followed by Question & Answer 126

Valedictory Session 131

Chair: Mr. Finn Ruda, Head of Mission, ICRC, Dhaka 131

Address: Dr. Shaikh Abdus Salam, Professor and Chairman, Department 131 of Mass Communication and Journalism, University of Dhaka

Address: Ms Mridula Bhattacherya, Director General, Press Institute 132 Of Bangladesh

Guest of Honour: Mr. Fida Kamal, Attorney General, Bangladesh 133 Supreme Court, Ministry of Law Justice and Parliamentary Affairs

Address by Chief Guest: Dr. Ifterkher Ahmed Chowdhury, Hon’ble 134 Advisor, Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Concluding address: Mr Vincent Nicod, Head of the Regional Delegation 137 South Asia, ICRC

6 Editor’s Seminar FOREWORD

History of Journalism in South Asia is old and treasured. With the passage of time, journalism has diversified multi fold. Media that came into existence to do the basic job of disseminating information to the society is now playing a domineering role in the development of the social order amid new-fangled challenges.

In the 21st century, media has turned into the most important tool in spreading the knowledge to the masses about politics, education, development, reforms and about the role of stakeholders in difficult situations. Media now is the strongest and quickest source of information, bringing-in instant news into the drawing rooms, offices, streets and even to the mobile phones.

With this fast lane travelling of news, society harbours huge expectations from the media. However, with the infrastructure leapfrogging and advanced technology, the relationship between the viewer/reader and the journalist has been distorted to some extent. The viewer now wants instant results and expects media to play an executive as well as a policing role. Media groups grapple with conflicting priorities of journalistic probity verses commercial interests in their day-to-day functioning. The mushrooming of 24X7 news channels has further complicated the realm of media ethics.

Undoubtedly, owing to both external and internal factors, media is not living up to its expectations and has much diverted from its original purpose i.e. being the disseminator of information. In addition, the competition within the print, the television and the internet media has raised new array of problems that need to be dealt with urgently.

Media persons covering conflict or violence at ground zero are worst affected by the current problems engulfing media. The number of media causalities in present scenario has been reported to be a much bigger number than the number during World War II according to the worried media welfare agencies. In some conflict- ridden places, it has become difficult for the media persons to reach on the spot and cover the story. Here again the issue is what protection media gets so that it can report back fearlessly and truthfully from such places.

In view of these new developments, the ICRC in association with partners conducted the second senior editors conference in Dhaka, Bangladesh to look at the issues of media protection, its obligations and the new challenges it’s facing. Senior editors from reputable print and electronic media groups from eight South Asian countries debated on the role of the media in reporting of the conflict and the protection they require while reporting. 7 Editor’s Seminar

The proceedings of the two-day conference that had four sessions have been documented in this report so as to assess the views of the editors and thus enlighten readers including media persons about the issues discussed at the conference.

This document also aims to spread the knowledge of the challenges faced by the media to the new generation in the media so that they can learn from the experience of their seniors.

Those who are planning to go to the conflict areas for the coverage should know what is the role and responsibilities of the media and what constrains are there in the field, and how to cope with them. Lastly, the report also deals with how important it is for the media persons to know about the Geneva conventions, the international humanitarian law, the human rights law, the customary law and the media protection laws.

The panel discussion has been able to give some of the answers. If you need any further information or books on the above-mentioned laws, feel free to contact ICRC documentation centre in New Delhi or visit the website: www.icrc.org. It has all the relevant documents.

Hopefully this work will trigger further intellectual debate and studies on the issue in focus thereby throwing up some practical measures to tackle better the problems faced by the media when covering armed conflict.

Philippe Stoll / Surinder Oberoi ICRC, New Delhi

Note: The views expressed by the speakers are their own and are not necessarily the views of the organisers of this workshop. 8 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence PREAMBLE

International Humanitarian Law and the Protection of Media Professionals Working in Armed Conflicts*

By Knut Dörmann, Head of the Legal Division, ICRC Geneva

Journalists and crew members who cover armed conflict run risks. They are exposed to the dangers arising from military operations; they can become the victims of battlefield hostilities, such as bomb raids, direct enemy fire or stray bullets, mine explosions.

Journalists and their accompanying team can also become victims of arbitrary acts of violence, such as murder, arrest, torture, disappearance, carried out by members of the armed or security forces or by non-state armed actors in the country where journalists are working.

Against this background, the present note looks at the provisions in international humanitarian law (IHL) that protect media professionals and facilitate the exercise of their professional activity. It aims to demonstrate that the harm suffered by journalists and their teams could be significantly reduced if there were a greater respect for these laws and if they were more vigorously enforced.

Protection of journalists under existing law

The scope of IHL is to spare persons not or no longer taking a direct part in hostilities from undue harm resulting from an armed conflict. Therefore, the instruments of IHL make no statements on the journalists’ freedom of action or speech. They do not grant the right to enter a territory without the consent of the authority controlling it. They do however set the ground rules for their legal protection whenever they find themselves in a context of an armed conflict.

In IHL treaty law journalists are mentioned in two different ways. Firstly, the Third Geneva Convention (GC III) relative to the treatment of prisoners of war covers war correspondents. Secondly, the 1977 Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions (AP I) deals specifically with journalists engaged in dangerous professional missions in areas of armed conflict. Both treaties apply to international armed conflicts.

*This text was originally published on the ICRC website (www.icrc.org) on 01.12.2007 9 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

War correspondents are representatives of the media who, in case of an international armed conflict are accredited to and accompany the armed forces without being members thereof. This would be the situation of most embedded journalists.1 While being civilians, they are entitled to the status and treatment of a prisoner of war in case of capture.2 Thus all the protections of the Third Geneva Convention as supplemented by Additional Protocol I and customary international law apply to them.

Other journalists who cover armed conflicts enjoy the same rights and must abide by the same rules of conduct as civilians.3 The legal situation of war correspondents and other journalists differs only once they find themselves held in the hands of a party to a conflict.

Contrary to these rules applicable to international armed conflicts, journalists are not specifically mentioned in any treaty applicable to non-international armed conflicts. However, in such situations they are considered to be civilians/persons not or no longer taking a direct part in hostilities. All protections applicable to these persons also apply to journalists and their crews.

Journalists facing the danger of combat operations

International armed conflicts

A journalist on a dangerous professional assignment in a combat zone is a civilian. He or she is entitled to all rights granted to civilians per se. AP I, Article 79, establishes this rule for international armed conflicts. Thus, journalists do not lose their civilian status by entering an area of armed conflict on a professional mission, even if they are accompanying the armed forces or if they take advantage of military logistic support.

Journalists are protected in the same way as all other civilians, independent of their nationality, provided that they do not undertake any action which could jeopardise their civilian status.

1 Because these journalists are often “inserted” in the military units and agree to a number of ground rules obliging them to remain with the unit to which they are attached and which ensure their protection, they tend to be equated with war correspondents within the meaning of the Third Geneva Convention. 2 An identity card as foreseen in GC III will be proof of this authorization, proof that the enemy can demand before deciding on his status. The war correspondent card plays a similar role to that of a soldier’s uniform: it creates a presumption. If there is any doubt about the status of a person who demands prisoner of war status, that person remains under the protection of the 1949 Convention pending the decision of a competent tribunal, according to the procedure laid down in the second paragraph of Article 5 of the Third Convention. 3 Thus, if one replaces the term “civilian” in other provisions of IHL by the term “journalist and crew members” one gets a better idea of the protections IHL grants. 10 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

As civilians, journalists and their crew must under no circumstances be the object of a direct attack. Parties to an armed conflict have the obligation to take all feasible precautions to ensure that attacks are only directed at military objectives. Moreover, a deliberate attack causing the death or injury of a journalist would constitute a war crime.4

War correspondents accredited by military authorities, as mentioned in GC III, are protected in like manner to non-accredited journalists: they maintain their civilian status despite the special authorization received from military sources.5

While journalists and their crews do not lose their right to protection as a civilian, they (as any other non-combatant person) act at their own risk if they stay too close to a military unit or get too near to a military target. The unit or military target could be the object of a lawful enemy attack, and ensuing death or injury to the journalist or the crew would thus be considered a side-effect of that attack, that is, as so-called “collateral damage”. Such an attack is only unlawful, if the expected civilian death or injury is excessive in relation to the military advantage anticipated from the attack (proportionality rule).6

However, even in this scenario the prohibition of any direct attack against journalists and their teams stands.

Journalists are not protected against deliberate attacks if and for as long as they take a direct part in hostilities. A journalist’s usual activities are covered by the immunity against direct attacks and do not constitute a direct participation in the hostilities. By accepting journalists as civilians, States agreed to let them do their job, i.e. take photographs, shoot films, record information, take notes and transmit their information and materials to the public via the media. However, if journalists overstep their role and the limits of their professional mandate, they risk being accused of spying or of committing other hostile acts.

Non-International Armed Conflicts

While journalists are not specifically mentioned in any treaty applicable to non- international armed conflicts, they are considered to be civilians.7 The civilian

4 AP I and Art. 8(2)(b)(i) of the Rome-Statute of the International Criminal Court.

5 Likewise, journalists must be respected whether or not they are in possession of an identity card for journalists engaged in dangerous missions. The card attests to their capacity as journalists; it does not create a civilian status.

6 Art. 51(5)(b) AP I.

7 Jean-Marie Henckaerts and Louise Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law, Volume I. Rules, Cambridge University Press, 2005, pp. 115-118 11 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence population and individual civilians may not be the object of attacks, unless and for such time they take a direct part in hostilities.

Consequently, journalists and their teams benefit from the full protection granted by law to civilians, in both international and non-international armed conflicts.

Journalists in the hands of a party to an armed conflict (whether by capture or arrest)

In international armed conflicts, the legal provisions applying to a journalist and his or her crew in the hands of a party to an armed conflict depend on a number of factors, including origin and nationality.

Local journalists arrested by their own authorities are subject to the law of their country. They may be deprived of their liberty if domestic legislation permits their detention. The authorities are bound by the guarantees and rules relative to detention laid down in their own legislation and in any international human rights provisions to which their State is party.

Otherwise journalists and their crews are protected by a range of IHL norms that apply to civilians and that are contained in the Fourth Geneva Convention and in AP I, as well as in customary international law. In particular, they are entitled to an important number of fundamental guarantees. For example the following acts are prohibited, at any time and in any place whatsoever:

• violence to the life, health, or physical or mental well-being of persons, in particular:

(i) murder;

(ii) torture, whether physical or mental, cruel or inhuman treatment;

(iii) corporal punishment; and

(iv) mutilation;

• outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment;

• collective punishment;

• hostage taking.

12 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

Violations of most of these provisions constitute war crimes. The alleged commission of these acts must be investigated and prosecuted in accordance with relevant international and domestic law.

The armed or security forces of a State have the right, under specific conditions, to intern/detain people, including civilians, whom they find in an area of military operations. If arrested, detained or interned for actions related to the armed conflict, civilian journalists and their crews must be informed promptly of the reasons why these measures have been taken. Except in cases of arrest or detention for penal offences, such persons must be released with the minimum delay possible and in any event as soon as the circumstances justifying the arrest, detention or internment have ceased to exist.

If detained for penal offences, they are entitled to fair trial guarantees.

Journalists in enemy hands may be visited by representatives of the ICRC, who check on their conditions of internment. They have the right to communicate with their relatives.

While the above rules are spelled out in detail for international armed conflicts, the law of non-international armed conflicts is again less explicit. Nonetheless, it provides legal protection to all persons who do not take a direct part in the hostilities or have stopped to do so. It states that detainees must be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction. The same fundamental guarantees apply to them as in the case of international armed conflicts. IHL does not, however, offer much recourse against unjustified or excessive detention. This gap is however filled by human rights law. IHL does however foresee judicial guarantees in case of trial.

The ICRC normally offers its services to all parties involved in a non-international armed conflict.

Assessment

At first sight one could have the impression that IHL does not provide much protection for journalists and other media staff, given that IHL treaty law only contains two references to media personnel (war correspondents and journalists in dangerous professional missions in areas of armed conflict).

However, if one reads these provisions in the context of other provisions of IHL, the protection under existing law is quite comprehensive, namely for journalists in the hands of a party to an armed conflict, in particular if held in detention or if facing criminal proceedings.

13 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

With regard to the risks that media professionals run on the battlefield, existing rules provide a solid and realistic basis for protection, at least on paper. It is difficult to imagine that the State would be willing to grant much more extensive legal protection or that it would indeed be able to effectively ensure more protection in concrete battlefield situations.

The most serious deficiency presently is the lack of vigorous implementation of existing rules and the systematic investigation, prosecution and sanction of violations, rather than the lack of rules.

How could protection be improved?

Better implementation of the existing rules

As we have seen, the grounds for basic legal protection exist. As so often with rules of IHL, they are not sufficiently respected in practice. It should therefore be the foremost objective to work for improved compliance with these rules. This requires proper training and instructions for those who have to implement them, i.e. members of armed and security forces and of other armed groups. It also requires that those who violate the rules be held to account and, if found guilty of crimes, be sanctioned. Everyone is accountable to the provisions of international humanitarian law and all States have an obligation to ensure that these laws are known, respected and enforced.

14 The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) is an impartial, neutral and independent organization whose exclusively humanitarian mission is to protect the lives and dignity of victims of armed conflict and other situations of violence and to provide them with assistance.

The ICRC also endeavours to prevent suffering by promoting and strengthening humanitarian law and universal humanitarian principles.

Established in 1863, the ICRC is at the origin of the Geneva Conventions and the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement. It directs and coordinates the international activities conducted by the Movement in armed conflicts and other situations of violence.

Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence INAUGRAL SESSION

Welcome Address by Dr. Shaikh Abdus Salam, Prof. and Chairman, Dept. of Mass Communication and Journalism, University of Dhaka

The Dhaka University, Dept. of Mass Communication and Journalism, being an active partner of ICRC in Bangladesh and as recently we have signed a memorandum of understanding with ICRC; we became one of the organizing partners and as a follow up of that, today we are enjoying this fruitful and extremely important gathering of the two-day International Conference in Dhaka.

ICRC is a great name and bears the emblem of image, definitely different from many other organizations. ICRC flag indeed carries a symbol and meaning for serving humanity during disaster emergencies. Where there is crisis, where there is distress and destruction, ICRC steps in immediately to redress the situation.

ICRC acts to mitigate the suffering definitely with dynamic and beyond doubt manner and means. ICRC steps into the circumstances and situations to mitigate the emergencies arising out of any kind of turmoil and turbulence. For all these good doings, we salute ICRC and thus, express our feelings and commitment to support ICRC.

I am sure that during this two day Conference, we would have series of discussions, debates, deliberations and discourses, and we would be able to renew our courage and confirm our commitments for building our nations free from all evils and misdeeds.

Welcome Address by Mr. Finn Ruda, Head of Mission, ICRC, Bangladesh

ICRC is a private humanitarian organization with a mandate on the international law through what you know as the 1949 Geneva Convention. It is an impartial and independent, neutral humanitarian organization working for the victims of armed conflict and other situations of violence. ICRC is active, at the moment, in more than 80 countries worldwide including the majority of the countries of this region.

We have been present on the battlefield for the last 150 years. We faced and we witnessed war correspondents and newspapers multiplying the reporting of the conflicts and war. There was a time when nobody knew what was happening on the battlefield, hardly anyone reported as battles used to take place miles and miles away from populated areas and there were far less civilian casualties at that time.

Today, the scene is different. Certainly we acknowledge that the global village is a reality. With the courtesy of the media and modern technology, the news or 17 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence events enter our homes and that is true, within minutes of the occurrence. The big question in the competing media world is that are we presently maintaining the respect of profession of ethics, basic humanitarian values and responsibility? I am convinced that over the next two days, our speakers will be debating on these issues too, and there will be other questions that will be dealt with, as the Conference progresses.

As planned, we have four themes that will be discussed. The first is the Media, Violence and Torture; the second is Media and Protection – what does the law say about it; the third is the Media and the Law of Armed Conflict and finally, the Responsibility of the Media while covering conflicts.

In all these four discussions, the central point for every journalist is the importance to understand the law of armed conflict that has been signed by every country and is known as the Geneva Convention or International Humanitarian Law (IHL). Humanitarian law is a special branch of law covering situations of armed conflicts, a law that seeks to mitigate the effects of war, first in limiting the choice of means and methods of conducting military operation and secondly, to spare persons who do not or no longer are participating in the hostilities.

Today in the 21st century, when the fight against terrorism has brought new terminology, the question remains – Can humanitarian law still be considered a meaningful and legitimate answer? This again leads to other question – Can humanitarian law help States settle their conflicts peacefully? In other words, can the law prevent war? Another point in case here is if the conflict could be prevented, is it then the role of the law to concern itself with the war and its consequences? And on the other hand, are the laws of any value on the battlefield or in the prison cell?

Coming from the ICRC, I would say yes, the law exists and the law is strong; however, it is human folly, the implementation is lacking behind. What is the role of the media in this? The media can play an important role, but importantly, it must first inform itself about the laws of war, humanitarian law and then, disseminate to the population, the masses by using the law. Some journalists tell us that IHL was always present in the situations covered, by not having enough knowledge on the subject – they were not able to report properly and have missed several important stories on the ground. The media has the power to shed public opinion because news is about events, news is about people. The media therefore has the ability to draw attention to injustice and suffering created by conflict and violence. The reporting on war casualty is not merely a matter of head count. Behind these figures, the media must help us find the stories of human sufferings. Reporting about conflict is about giving dignity to the victims

18 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence of injustice as has amply been demonstrated by the enormous impact of the media over the years.

Once the media and the general masses are aware of the Geneva Convention and other international treaties, they can protect the war or conflict-victims in one form or the other. There are many journalism-students here today and so, I should then reiterate what we all should do and not do. As a journalist, one has to have the power to speak to the people in their own style and language. That power however comes with responsibility – the responsibility to use that power objectively and not to harm individuals or groups or the society. We have to resist the temptation of using power as the opinion makers in the society as much as we have to resist attempts to strangle the truth or prevent access to information.

This can make reporting a difficult and a dangerous job, but understanding the ethics of good journalism can help. I may not be wrong if I say that the father of the Red Cross who was awarded the first Nobel Peace Prize in 1901 was also first a Reporter, when he wrote the book, ‘The Battle’; he transcripted what he witnessed in this war and came up with two solid suggestions – the ICRC and the IHL.

Allow me here shortly for a moment to reflect a little on the path of the ICRC in Bangladesh. I personally was honoured when I was asked to reopen an ICRC mission in Bangladesh, a country where our path is so closely connected with the work of your country.

In December, 1971, the ICRC offered its services to the then Government of Bangladesh and sent a delegation to Dhaka. The ICRC delegates posted there were particularly alarmed because there was every indication that the Pakistan Army would entrench itself in Dhaka on which the Indian forces were convening and converging, that there would be fierce striking in what already at that time was a densely populated city, and that a terrible revenge would be taken for atrocities of the past few months. The ICRC therefore proposed on the IHL that there should be two neutralized zones – one, the Holy Family Hospital and the other, Hotel Inter Continental, today’s Hotel Sheraton.

After negotiations, ICRC delegation took charge of these two neutralized zones on the 9th of December 1971. More than a thousand wounded civilians, many of them, former senior government officials in terror of their lives, found temporary refuge in those two safety zones which were strictly respected by the fighting forces when Dhaka was captured. The ICRC in compliance with the law lifted the neutral status of the zones on the 19th December 1971, three days after the end of hostilities. So, now we are here – the same hotel, but different time. This hotel has a historical significance for all of us; let us, with the past and the present, allow ourselves to conduct this conference in this period of the neutral zone. This venture 19 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence has brought together the senior editors of the South Asian region and this is a positive signal for all the journalists of this region. I would therefore like to warmly thank our partners to this, the Dept. of Mass Media and Journalism, University of Dhaka and the Press Institute of Bangladesh. I also thank our presenters, panelists, moderators, senior editors and academics from the region, to have made time in their busy schedules to travel to Dhaka in order to share their views with us on this important subject.

It is an old saying that the first casualty of war is truth! Despite an increasing number of war correspondents and major media houses covering armed conflicts and violence today, this saying is still correct today as it was about 100 years ago. The proliferation of technological means to provide major coverage does not guarantee objectivity or balanced reporting. Access for journalists to sensitive areas or to decision making circles is more and more difficult and the journalists pay a very heavy price to get to the source of information. I am sad to say that even in 2007; some 100 journalists were killed to this task. How can then the media ensure that the real story is told to the world and that it will remain the truth that is recorded into history? At the risk of their lives or their physical integrity, journalists today are writing contemporary history as were those writing in the past.

I wish you all an interesting debate. I trust that it will be a lively one. I will reiterate by saying that it needs to be a lively debate. Living in the same world, and breathing the same air does not mean that we all agree, when discussing a given subject.

Let me conclude with the hope that the seminar will make the powerful media aware of the need to constantly remind our leaders, men and women of good will of the victims of the armed conflict, of untold violence, of the need to bring a human face to figures and numbers, of the need to provide vital information about the innocent people caught in world’s events and chaos, of the need to consider a wider perspective in telling the world about what is really happening in all the corners of this global village.

Inaugural Address by Barrister Mainul Hosein, Advisor Ministry of Information, Bangladesh

Today’s world affairs has brought together the senior editors of South Asia Region and this is a positive signal for all journalists of the region, who will discuss and debate issues this morning.

I warmly thank the three partners – the Press Institute of Bangladesh, the University of Dhaka and the ICRC – for bringing about such a convergence of so many senior editors of this region. The participants are going to discuss and debate for two 20 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence days, the current issues and challenges that media face in covering the dangerous conflicts around the world, especially of this region. I also thank the panelists, civil society leaders and academics from the region to have come forward for sharing their views on this important occasion.

The key issue, no doubt is the role of journalists, but the questions that you will be required to deal with are many including the international law, the desirable response from the parties involved in such conflicts.

We have rightly been expressing as regards the human aspects of innocent men, women and children who suffer extensively in situations of conflict. The term which has been used by some of you to explain journalism in violent conflict situation, should be more appropriate in my view, if we call it humanity journalism and not human development journalism. I, on behalf of myself and on behalf of the Government of Bangladesh extend warm welcome to you all to this regional gathering at which you will express your ideas freely and frankly leading to concrete recommendations on how the media can contribute to the better understanding of the humanitarian issues of the State while reporting on conflicts and violence within the region or anywhere else.

The political leaders of SAARC countries have agreed long ago that promoting free flow of information across borders can have dynamic effect in strengthening the process of cooperation against hostilities and differences. It is important to analyze dispassionately, how far such expressions of good intensions have materialized into good deeds.

Earnest cooperation amongst the SAARC countries can make a world of difference in my judgment, to ensure rapid development and lasting peace among the people of these nations. It cannot be realistic to say, however much we demand and wish, that journalism can be risk-free in a condition of conflict situation – big or small. As some of you have pointed out earlier, you have to discourage violent confrontation as a means of resolving political disputes by contending States or non-State players. No matter how much is said in Geneva Conventions or other international laws, no law will prove adequate to educate the protection of journalists covering armed conflicts. The journalists are risking their lives and dying in huge numbers while armed conflicts go unabated around the world.

As the most responsible institution, the government must learn to show restraint and follow international laws by allowing the international institutions to play their part before resorting to violent means. Only then, it will be easy for the government of a country to contain violent elements within the country.

21 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

State violence has contributed to globalization of violence. In these days, national borders are no barrier or protection against spread of violence. If arrogance of military might of States can be kept in check, then, the UN’s collective power can be best used for avoiding dangerous conflicts, you feel concerned about. The effectiveness of the UN is our best hope.

Military might of a super power has become helpless in imposing its way and instead it has only succeeded in spreading violence globally. The political leaders have to learn fast how best to resolve political differences justly and peacefully. The purpose of press freedom is not merely the freedom of reporting but the freedom to serve public interest and peace. Journalism has to be more reflective and far-sighted when reporting armed conflicts. The major the crisis, the greater is the need to reflect about the objectivity of journalism. In a violent conflict, reporting about death and destruction is not enough. Violation of human rights of non-combatant innocent people must be brought to the fore. The parties to the conflict must be made accountable for the legal redress of such human rights violation. It is most unfortunate and yet, it is the reality, that in modern warfare, fighters or soldiers are more careful about protecting themselves than saving the lives of the innocent people. Nobody will disagree that the journalists should have a more legitimate claim to have full and safe access to reporting national or group armed conflicts.

As you all know, truth itself becomes the first casualty in such situations. Constant vigilance is required about the root-causes of violent conflicts or war; exposing them impartially for peaceful solution without waiting for the situation to go beyond the point of no return.

It is my earnest hope that this Conference shall inspire powerful media awareness, about the need to remind our leaders that violence must not be taken as an easy option in dealing with human affairs. In my view, the world has become potentially too dangerous, and in reality, too close, to regard any war or violent conflict as just. There should be no just violence, only just peace.

It is the responsibility of all, not only of the journalists, to fight for the safety of the brave journalists who cover armed conflicts so that peace and humanity can be rescued from the badness of death and destruction. Because only the journalists can show the highest form of impartiality and risk their lives, when so demanded, at a time when the humanity itself is in danger.

I thank the organizers for giving me the honour to address such an assembly of eminent journalists, academics and civil society members. I expect bold directions to come from your deliberations, not only for regional leaders, but also for international community as a whole.

22 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

As has been mentioned by Mr. Ruda, Head of the ICRC mission in Bangladesh, we believe in global village. So, international situation is as important as our domestic situation as far as violence goes.

The futility of armed conflicts against injustice has to be exposed and upheld to the might of journalism. Law alone will not prove enough, as has been said already; we need a change of mindset of world leaders, and I hope, we will be able to achieve that.

Welcome Address Ms. Mridula Bhattacharya, DG, Press Institute of Bangladesh

In the present world, commercialization in media has diverted many of the newspapers and electronic media to keep away from the main social issues, while reporting in this competing time.

The Press Institute of Bangladesh tries hard to change and educate the media persons to focus on such issues along with many others.

Press Institute of Bangladesh (PIB) is a unique organization playing a lead role in imparting training to country’s evergreen community of journalists, to bring about a qualitative improvement in media. PIB has undertaken an uphill task of imparting updated training both theoretical and practical, to the journalists and media related people all over the country.

PIB has training programmes both long-term and short-term for journalists and media persons, along with arranging courses, workshops, dialogues, seminars, etc. on current issues and on a variety of subjects like reporting on women and children, flood and water management, HIV-AIDS, environment, gender and reproductive health, human rights and many others. The foundation courses for the journalists are arranged by the PIB in Dhaka and in districts all over the country, on a regular basis. PIB also conducts research work on different aspects of media, including its influences and impact in the society, analysis of major contemporary issues and events as depicted in the newspapers. A multi-media journal is published by PIB, to help develop the professional expertise of the journalists and to enrich the knowledge on limited topics along with publishing media related books and journals.

PIB also conducts a 10-month long academic course, named ‘PG Diploma in Journalism’ for working journalists and interested persons, with necessary background. PIB has working relationship with CPU, CJA, International Institute for Journalism (IIJ), Asian Media, Information and Communication Centre (AMICRC), UNESCO, UNICEF, Asia Foundation, etc.

23 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

A couple of months ago, when ICRC came up to PIB with the proposal of holding this International Conference on Conflict Reporting, we were wondering why an international organization that is supposed to be looking after the medical assistance is interested in the education of the media? Under directives from the Ministry of Information, this Institute is jointly organizing this two-day long Conference with the ICRC and the Dept. of Mass Communication and Journalism, University of Dhaka.

It may be mentioned here that the ICRC is spreading the knowledge of the Geneva Convention of 1949 and the Protocols of 1977 across the globe; it is the guardian of it. Every country, including Bangladesh has signed this Convention and thus, it becomes more pertinent for every citizen to know about the law. By visiting the website anyone can find out that they have done excellent job in preparing customary law studies and research on IHL.

Today, when we see around, we see that violence is everywhere – violence of the street, violence of social exclusion, violence of radical extremism and the violence of war. Whatever form violence takes, nobody is free of it; as most of us witness, most of the times, it makes breaking news in our media from all around the world. To make us witness the violence, somewhere somebody is reporting, taking the risk in the midst of demonstration or under fire in Iraq. Therefore, it was decided that the PIB, with the support of University of Dhaka, join in this programme with a view to promote awareness of the IHL.

I wish you all, an interesting two-day Conference and discussion and let me, on behalf of our partners, thank the senior journalists from India, Pakistan, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Bhutan, Maldives, Afghanistan and Bangladesh for sparing their valuable time in attending this Conference and sharing their knowledge and giving views at this august gathering.

I express my heartfelt thanks, on behalf of the organizers to the respected Chief Guest of today’s Inaugural Session, Barrister Hosein, Hon. Advisor, Ministry of Information for sharing his precious time and for sharing his thoughts with the media on such an important issue.

I firmly believe that the next two days will be lively and thought-provoking. I also hope that this Conference will make the powerful media at home and abroad aware of the need to remind our leaders, and men and women - of the victims of conflicts, of untold violence and the international law governing the same.

24

Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence SESSION – 1 MEDIA, VIOLENCE AND TORTURE

Mr. Mahbubul Alam (Chairman and Moderator), Editor, The Independent, Bangladesh

Mr. Swapan Dasgupta, Senior Editor, India

Topic: Glamorizing violence – What should be Media response

I have been given rather the daunting subject of “glamorizing violence”, which is the easy part and the more difficult part – What should the media response be?

I can make no claims to larger generalization and whatever I say would of course be coloured by my own experiences and particularly the experience of the media in India.

To begin with there are two important factors of the media which are important to stress right at the outset. The first is a very important trend which has just started, notably the increasing corporatization of the media; hitherto in the past, say about 20-25 years ago, the media was by and large, family-owned enterprises, of course, they remain in many cases like that. But the infusion of organized equity capital into the media, the floatation of media stocks in the larger equity market, the induction of foreign institutional finance has made the media or media organizations far more responsive or sensitive to what may be called, the compulsions of their shareholders, in other words, ‘the need to deliver’, to have impressive financial results.

This is a very important backdrop in which the media in India can be seen because it is no longer a cottage industry. It is a multi-billion dollar industry which has an ambition of making an impact, not only within the sub-continent but also perhaps outside.

The second feature about the media is that in the context of a society where development levels are uneven, where income levels are grossly uneven, in the past, the basic entry condition for consumers into the media used to be literacy. The mass impact of TV particularly and I stress, maybe, there might be other media as well, but TV in particular has removed that entry barrier and so, made media, in a sense, accessible to every citizen. And, these days, TV sets are no longer a rarity; Cable TV and other forms of Satellite TV have made their entry in almost every remote corner of the country and so, it becomes a truly mass consumption item. 27 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

It is important to keep these two in view. The issue of glamourizing violence is not something which is unique in any way to South Asia. It is a phenomenon which is almost global in character. I was reading a report which was published sometimes in the mid-90s that an American teenager, by the time he or she reaches 18 years of age, has probably witnessed something like 40,000 deaths on TV or cinema or both. So, in terms of plethora of violence which an average individual is exposed to, whether in the form of cartoons – some of these cartoons, particularly that are made in Japan, are terribly violent in nature. In the films – Bollywood always had certain violence-there is also a glorification of political violence, a covert glorification of terrorism and also, not so covert glorification of those who fight terrorism, taking the law into their own hands. This is not a dirty Harry, the encounter-deaths are something which are very widespread in India and the glorification of those policemen who somehow decide that they can take the ‘rough and ready’ method – these forms of glorifications are very much there. Even things like reality issues, the subliminal violence which is there, the ‘crime shows’ which became extremely popular, far from showing good things, they are being done. Maybe, there is a caveat put at the end of the show saying ‘crime does not pay’, but everything else about the shows, more or less would indicate that it is certainly a glamourous business, and gives a lot of ideas to people. So, this is the larger context in which this is happening. On top of that, as journalists, as news reporters, we are confronted with the other new phenomena which start to emanate from the “War on Terrorism”, which is the so-called last testament of the suicide bombers, which are being played out endlessly on TV. Our friends in Sri Lanka are more familiar with this for a longer time, but the rest of the world is catching up to it. They have a tremendous impact, in terms of motivating people into violence. These are motivational behaviours.

The Internet clips which are doing the rounds, showing gory execution are completely brutal in nature. A few of us may be repelled by these, but there are some people who might take this as an active encouragement. In other words, the environment for glamorization of violence does exist and the main method of dissemination of this glamorization happens to be the media, whether in the process of entertainment or otherwise. The role of the media in encountering this environment is obviously very complex. There are many of us in the trade who feel that the role of the media is basically that of a passive reporter. We are not social reformers; so, why should we bother? In our own hearts of heart, we know that there are certain things which are extremely disturbing, but what the hell, if that is what the market wants? Then, the market can have it. If the market wants pornography, let them have pornography; if they want perversion, let them have perversion; if they want violence, so be it, as long as our ratings go up, as long as our circulation goes up, and as long as our profitability goes up. This is the very laissez faire way of looking at the whole approach.

28 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

Theoretically, that is dishonesty because the media is not a receptacle for everything that happens in the world. The media, by its very definition, involves a process of selection. When we publish a newspaper, there are lot of things. A man crossing the road is also news to somebody, but that is not reported. We report what we think is relevant. We report what we think has a certain larger bearing on the rest of the society. So, the process of selectivity is engrained into the media. So, those who say that it is our duty to somehow do it may not be correct.

They use the word censorship, but maybe you would like to call it selectivity. Even selectivity involves a bit of sensation. We know what to publish and we know what not to publish. We take an informed judgment, keeping in mind certain social values, keeping in mind certain larger questions. The issue is, to some extent, important about what the media’s role is because there is often a knee-jerk interpretation of a lot of people to say that it is for the States, let the States get in, let the States become the true ombudsman of what is wholesome and what is not wholesome in the media.

In India there has been a furore over a proposed regulation of the media which enables the government to act as a filter for content. It is just a proposal and it has naturally and very predictably been opposed by most of the media organizations, for the very simple reason that the ostensible reason for government to try and intervene in content may be very wholesome and may be very desirable, but in practice, it is the thin end of the wedge. You allow the State, a role in determining your content at one go, and it is not going to be stopped because the definition of what constitutes the social good as far as those who are the custodian of the State are concerned, sometimes is at variance with what the rest of the society believes in the public interest.

So, one of the things which has to be backed is – this is my personal view – under no circumstances, if in terms of resisting the cult of violence, under no circumstances, should an institutional role be assigned to the State. So, the question arises, should therefore, the media has any coherent response? Or should we just leave it to individual editors, to good citizens who happened to have drifted into the media, to the good citizens to fight the bad citizens who have gone into the media? Will there be a market competition between the forces of good? Some people will have things which take into account the values of society and others who will go and do anything, quite recklessly?

Ultimately, is the relationship of media with the consumers, which are the readers, viewers, etc. based on trust? Trust is the most important aspect of what constitutes the media and what credibility in the media is. For example, media often covers large political events. We do not necessarily manage to interview; get the views 29 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence of every single individual involved in that process because sometimes, they do not want to come on record, but there are other reasons as well – sheer logistical reasons. What do we do is we take what we consider representative views and hope that epitomizes, in a nutshell, what the larger trends are. That is a sphere which is largely open to dishonesty. TV can be a very dishonest medium, and it is so easy. It is child’s play to manipulate the news both on the TV and on the print, you can write anything you like, give it credibility, knowing very well that this is not really the case. But in doing so and in defining credibility, you are also violating the institution of trust, which exists between you and the media. If that trust breaks down, there are larger consequences which also affect, in turn, the profitability and the worth of your organization. So, it is really the trust and there are certain social norms if there are. In the larger context, a certain abhorrence of violence exists in the world today, I think the people are sick and in a way, they are disgusted, they are frightened of the type of violence that they see around. Glamorizing them and putting in the shred of humanity, which one of the earlier speakers alluded to, is a very important one. A code of ethics is something which has often been spoken about in terms of the functioning – a self-imposed or voluntary code of ethics, but as we know in reality, these things never really work. At a drop of a hat, people do violate it. It was a very interesting phase when the late Prime Minister of India, Rajiv Gandhi was assassinated under rather violent conditions in Tamil Nadu. Most of the media took the decision that the pictures of that blood splattered body, is not going to be printed. It was a wise decision. One or two publications, for their own reasons, violated it, there was a certain social stigma which was attached to those people who actually published it. So, it is important at this time, when there is a greater degree of corporatization that we have a greater degree of civil society interaction with the investors, with those who control the media corporation. In other words, certain leads can be taken from the type of environmental activism which we have seen in terms of companies in having good business practices and the glamorizing of violence in my view, constitutes a bad business practice. To fight it really calls for a greater interaction of civil society with the media. So, media perhaps have got to take really the civil society as one of its partners in this and not see itself in terms of a grand isolation. These were some stray ideas that I thought to put forward. It is a far larger issue; I thought I would just leave some ideas, float something and leave it to you to shoot them down. Thank you.

Mr. Mahbubul Alam: Thank you Mr. Dasgupta for your illuminating opening presentation. It was very rewarding for all of us. You have given us an idea of the 30 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence industry in India today, the state of the industry itself, and how it is flourishing, the induction of foreign equity funds and so on. So, we see rise of managerial authority in Indian newspapers; editors do not appear to be as powerful as they used to be 20-30 years ago. He has raised certain points about glamorizing violence - it was interesting and informative. I am sure, at the end of the presentations from our colleagues here, he may have to face a volley of questions because he has provoked a debate on ethical issues, the role of the newspapers, the media – I am referring to TV because you mentioned about TV specifically and other electronic media covering violence. So, whatever violence, that the cinema or TV may show, at the end, they have to send the message that terrorism does not pay, violence has to be stopped because the people committing violence are taken into custody and prosecuted. It is not the same as in the western countries that you have referred to.

Mr. Ugyen Penjor, Deputy Editor, Kuensel, Bhutan

Topic: Impact of Media on society while reporting violence

I remember coming to this hotel in 2001 with editor of mine. That was few months after I got the job as a Reporter in the newspaper. We checked into the hotel and I had to spend one night with putting on the light in the bathroom. It was my first trip. I did not knew then how to switch on the light with a card. Now, I am back, I am enjoying, and I know how to put on the lights!

When we first received the invitation to participate in this seminar, I thought that I might not fit into the Senior Editors’ Conference because I am a Deputy Editor of my paper and I am in this position just for the last few years. Anyway, I wrote back saying that Bhutan is a very peaceful country and we do not have any violence in Bhutan. Mr. Surinder Oberoi, the organizer, in his reply suggested why not then to speak about not having violence in Bhutan. So, I changed my decision and thought it will be interesting to gel my views with other participating senior editors and experienced journalists.

First, I would like to briefly give you the picture of media in Bhutan. I know especially the students of journalism would like to know the state of the media in Bhutan. Until recently –till last year – my paper was the only newspaper in Bhutan. The King thought that we should have more newspapers and the media should be free; so, there are two new newspapers both are weekly. Now, Kuensel is a bi- weekly newspaper and the other two newspapers are weekly newspapers. We do not have daily newspapers. I was surprised when someone said that we have 167 daily newspapers in Bangladesh. It is really amazing. We have a national TV which broadcasts for a few hours in the morning and then, in the evening we telecast what we had in the morning. 31 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

I feel that there are only about 50 practicing journalists in Bhutan and out of that 50% are just out of the college, graduates, who just came in for the job. So, when I am here, I am trying to look out for some training for the journalists back in Bhutan. I take this opportunity to meet the people from the University of Dhaka.

With this background, I base my talk on what violence means in Bhutan, how we cover it and what had our experience been in Bhutan. I was trying to prepare something and I saw a lot of references on the Internet; there are hundreds of people who have written on the topic: Impact of media on society. There are thousands of instances quoted everywhere and I do not want to repeat those here and just want to share with you the Bhutanese experience.

Today when we talk about violence, we are talking about sectarian violence, communal violence, political uprising, armed conflict, etc. Bhutan falls in a region where these conflicts are a part of everyday life. Luckily or fortunately we are spared by these events. However, it is wrong to say that there is no violence at all in Bhutan.

Personally I feel that many parts of the world are extremely violent – Whether it is the suicide bombing in Sri Lanka or the communal riots in Gujarat; anger in Yemen or the conflict in Iraq. Sometimes, from the amount of coverage given to the Israel-Palestine conflict by the Western Media, I get an impression that people in that region have nothing other than fighting and killing each other. But a friend of mine whose father is the Ambassador in the Middle East has different things to say. He visited Israel and he said that it is a beautiful country, although, security is tight, people are living a quite different life that it is different from what is quoted by the Media. So, I was quite surprised to hear this because my perception of that region was just war and killing. My preposition of that region was totally distorted, thanks to the media. What is reported by the media definitely has an impact on the society.

If I shape my talk on that, I can only imagine, what kind of influence it might be having on the people who are living in that region, who are affected by the long- drawn conflict. It actually contributes to perpetuating the problem. Reporting violence and crime is a regular ingredient of news, as Mr. Dasgupta pointed out. It is the violent-kind of news that really gets the readers’ attention, rather than the coverage of what benefits the entire village, etc. People would like to read about anybody killed somewhere or a suicide bombing somewhere, etc. As Mr. Dasgupta pointed out, there is pressure for a newspaper to outshine and have large circulation. I sometimes feel how the international media covers the blood and war. I was watching Aljazeera Channel last night; I thought I will put some points so that I will add some international experience to my talk, when I was watching that, most of the news is about violence. I do not know whether it is because the 32 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence readers want to read or listen to violence or it is because that these are the news that really sells the paper or makes the TV Channel right into the reading level. That is the question and we should draw a line when it comes to reporting violence.

Bhutan is a land of people’s country and we hope to remain that way for all times to come. But we do have a sporadic or bout of violence, homicide, murder or domestic violence. We cover it as and when it comes. In my newspaper, we have some experienced editors and our approach so far is that we try not to be sensational – we try and be sensitive to the people who may have been perpetrators and to the victims as well. We want the news interesting and at the same time, not at the cost of somebody else. Sometimes, when we do that, we are challenged by our readers that we do not give the full picture and all the gory details of how a murder or a rape took place. We often try to explain our reasons or our stand. Most of the times, we do that.

To give you one particular example, there was this case where a man had raped an 11-month old girl and that made headlines for Bhutanese newspapers. The Bhutanese society was shocked to the extreme. We had that story and we decided not to go with the picture of the rapist. Our readers said that we should have released the picture to name and shame the rapist. But we did not because we thought that the man had a family and he had kids going to school. Just imagine what impact it would have left to his daughter who was going to school. The other paper did run it with the picture of the man, etc. A few days later, there were lots of reports saying that many mothers had started escorting their daughters to school. This is just an example of an impact.

Another policy that we follow in our newspaper is that we try to be sensitive to what we do. We try and avoid anything that is too violent to look at. Many of our readers are still high school students and it would actually interest them, but we decided that we will not do that.

Let me give you an interesting Bhutanese case. In 1999, Bhutan became the last country to open up the cable TV and Internet. That was a part of our developmental process, but three years later, I saw an article in The Guardian, the British-based newspaper, whose headline was ‘Forcing it into Trouble – Bhutan crash lands into the 21st Century’. The reporter has linked all the crime, violence and a little bit of robbery and murder, etc. into the cable TV in Bhutan. I did not agree with them, when I first read the article. But the time I saw my nephew, imitating a WWF wrestler and trying his skill on his sister, I thought that the report was really true. Without much violence happening within Bhutan, I think, violence in true sense is more present in the entertainment media that we have in Bhutan. When the TV was launched, there were about 100 channels, people really do not know what to choose; there was no regulation because it just was opened up. We were 33 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence bombarded with 100 channels. Today it is no exaggeration to say that violence in the entertainment media had been a major contributor to the aggressive and violent behaviour in real life. The rape incidents, armed robbery, murder, all started after cable TV came into Bhutan. Now, I agree with the report. An impact study was immediately done after a lot of countries started writing about the impact of TV in homes. After the study, the government banned the particular channel, Ten Sports, because in Ten Sports, we see the WWF programme; there are wrestlers who show hell a lot of fight. It is a fake programme; they really do not fight but it is shown as if they fight. We have seen a lot of small boys imitating them and most of them landing in hospitals. So, the government banned the channel and the government also banned the FTV channel which they thought that it was not too good to see. So, it is no exaggeration to say that we saw, for the first time, school dropouts and other negative youths, indulging in crimes. Today we are beginning to see crime associated with drug users all over the world. We see shop-lifting, violence and drug abuse is becoming an emerging problem for Bhutan.

Like everywhere in the world, Buddhists also get into brawl every now and then; there have been few instances where even deaths have occurred. Given our society, such incidents are taken very seriously and felt by everyone – maybe, our coverage sometimes, stimulates fear or anxiety or magnifies; what I am presenting here is, how it stands in Bhutan, but we all know that change is the only permanent thing in this world.

As a media person in Bhutan, I feel that it is my responsibility to keep my country as peaceful and this responsibility must continue to guide me when covering or reporting violence. Thank you.

Mr. Mahbubul Alam: Not many in Bangladesh know what is going on in Bhutan and we still have the perception that violence in Bhutan is nothing compared to other parts of the subcontinent and beyond. Sometimes we read about thefts or burglary or scuffle in Phyentsholing but not much in Punakha. There are many such peaceful places in Bhutan and I think, your newspapers will play a constructive role in ensuring that violence is not spread because essentially the people of Bhutan – I find – are very peaceful.

Mr. Murtaza Razvi, Senior Editor, Daily Dawn, Pakistan

Topic: Impact of Society on Media while reporting violence

The topic of my discussion is ‘Impact of Society on media’ while reporting violence. Sensitivities prevailing in a society at a given point have a restrictive impact on precision reporting of conflict or violence. The question is: Can the media remain truly independent of, and insensitive to, public sentiment when such sentiment 34 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence either represents a sizable portion of the media’s audience or when there is public consensus on a conflict, say, involving another country?

Under the circumstances, you have to be damn brave to stick to the bookish maxim of reporting ‘truth and nothing but the truth’. A more pragmatic resort to credibility with the audience generally comes to the rescue of the most upright editor. Patriotism takes charge from here, and you are as much part of the street frenzy dictating the monolithic angle to your stories as the most rightist media organ that you have known.

In Pakistan, as elsewhere in the region, we’ve all been part of this phenomenon off and on, and not just for fear of drop in public ratings. Patriotism, real or perceived, and when linked to an ongoing crisis, comes ashore roaring like a tsunami; it takes all in its killer sweep. You may, then, months or years later, rise from the ashes and dare to tell the truth, like McNamara did about the Vietnam War. He did so in 1996 because the fear of public outcry was a calculated risk then and not more than two decades before. Doing so while the war lasted would have saved many lives but the ego that entrenched America in the Vietnam War would have been sacrificed. Much to McNamara’s disappointment, America did not learn a lesson from that bloody episode, and a re-enactment of a similar policy is in progress in Iraq.

The West’s war-mongering over the Iranian nuclear issue is another such instance where society has a clear impact on how the media report the conflict in various countries. We live in a world where the bin Ladens and the Huntingtons have drawn battle lines between civilizations, poisoning the minds of their respective audiences and societies. The West’s desire for political supremacy, as compared to its preceding centuries’ battle cry of white supremacy is equally chilling and politically incorrect. Thus we have embedded journalists, both in the Muslim world and in the West, who see and report facts through the prism of the fiction that will supposedly further their causes. Many in the Muslim world see America’s war on terror as a war on Muslims. Thus, to counter the West’s onslaught, bin Laden’s self-proclaimed deputies have set out to recruit squads of Jihadis across the Muslim world - from Bosnia to Chechnya, from Afghanistan and Kashmir to Bali, you name it. If this is to continue over a period of time, entire societies will face the risk of being polarized beyond what we know and observe today.

The process in Pakistan is well underway. Here is a relatively free-for-all society sandwiched between a working democracy but a hostile India to the east, a volatile, largely tribal, and to many, occupied Afghanistan and an evangelist Islamic Iran to the west. The battle lines in today’s Pakistan are many, and the fronts overlap – between the religious and the secular, between the democratic and the autocratic, between Islamist militants and a westernized political elite, between the haves 35 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence and the have-nots, between tribal authority and that of the State, between ethnic nationalists and the majority Punjabis, between the traditionally docile, shrine- visiting Muslims and the puritan Wahabis, between Sunnis and Shias.

Imagine the sensitivities involved and expectations of the media amidst this multitude of conflicts and violence - in a society that’s going through transition from the medieval to the modem, while grappling with media tools that belong in a very post--modern world. Yes, society does dictate to, and sets limits on what the Pakistani media can and cannot, as opposed to what they should or should not, broadcast or publish. In recent months, this has become more apparent. The proliferation of TV channels and FM radio stations has meant manifold more airtime for religious programming under a liberal Musharraf regime than under the Islamist Zia ul Haq back in the 1980s. Never before did we have religious preachers, from the conservative and the intolerant to the enlightened and the evangelist, gracing the prime time TV screens during the holy Islamic months of Ramzan, Rabiul Awwal and Muharram. Media coverage on other religious occasions now often translates into several days of airtime instead of religious programming hogging the prime time on the actual day of a festival.

The handling of the Lal Masjid episode in July last, when a bunch of radical and heavily armed clerics were holed up inside an Islamabad mosque was another such instance. The immense public interest in the unfolding, bloody drama forced the media to perpetually have running commentaries on the issue. While television covered the entire week-long military operation live and blow by blow, front pages of newspapers were flooded with ambivalent analyses, where no one wanted to take a clear stance as to assigning blame. It was a full-blown bloody insurgency led by the radical clerics, but who would dare say that in so many words? Why? Because society wasn’t perhaps ready to hear the media passing a judgment because that would challenge the people’s religious sensibilities.

Towards the end of the gory drama media organs were so overwhelmed by social pressure, whether it was real or perceived, that they donned the mantle of an intermediary between the rebel clerics and the Government.

Anchormen and women were seen going beyond the call of their profession to appear as if they were siding with the criminals, offering propositions to the Government to accommodate requests for a safe passage for the militants holed up inside the mosque, despite the fact that the latter had torched public buildings, encroached on public land, terrorized the entire neighbourhood and even hijacked and got several innocent people killed in the process. Days after the military operation concluded and the public sentiment eased, the same media were able to debate the issue more logically and dispassionately.

36 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

Then came May 12, a day which is hard to forget in recent history. The May 12- violence on the streets of Karachi this year, in which dozens of political workers belonging to opposition parties died as a result of the city administration giving the ruling party goons a free hand, was another significant instance of society’s impact on media. The restoration of the Chief Justice of Pakistan suspended by Gen. Musharraf was seen as a national cause espoused by millions nationwide and which the national media, almost entirely headquartered in Karachi, gave wholehearted coverage.

It continued doing so when the protesters and the Chief Justice came to Karachi despite the fact that the ruling MQM, known for its highhanded tactics vis-à-vis the media, had taken out a counter rally in the city the same day to condemn the Chief Justice and his supporters, successfully thwarting his entry into the city. In the process, whereas people were killed in the streets, news channel offices were also attacked by the ruling party sympathizers who saw the media operating out of their ‘territory’ as being hostile. But the media coverage of the Chief Justice’s cause did not stop. The reason, the media had its credibility on the line with a much larger national audience that did sympathize with the Chief Justice and not with the Karachi-based MQM and its politics.

Lastly, media coverage leading to Benazir Bhutto’s return from self-imposed exile and the subsequent events surrounding it proved another important litmus test for society’s impact on media. The entire debate in TV studios over Bhutto’s return had focused on the corruption cases against her, the amnesty offered by Musharraf in a clandestine power-sharing deal and the West’s backing of Musharraf and of Bhutto. On the morning of Bhutto’s plane touching down in Karachi and the massive public reception she was set to receive by hundreds of thousands of her supporters who had come from across the country, the media made a swift U- turn. So much so,that the reporters’ and the analysts’ tone and tenor seemed to resonate the Bhutto supporters.

The overnight sea change was brought about as a result of public support seen on the occasion. The media had not even suspected that Bhutto would still have so many followers after what embarrassingly seemed as their attempt in the preceding weeks at ‘destroying’ her. Here was ‘a silent majority’, as it began to be dubbed, which reacted totally opposite to what the pundits had predicted. All talk of foul play on the part of Bhutto and Musharraf gave way to ready admiration for a leader whom the media had long dismissed as assuming discredited in the public eye. The terrorist attacks on her convoy within hours of her arrival home won her further sympathy with the media. By contrast, nobody remembered any more the abortive attempt by Bhutto’s rival Nawaz Sharif to return to Pakistan, nor his swift, forced deportation to Saudi Arabia barely five weeks before, because the people too had not taken much notice of it. 37 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

The urban and the rural divide in Pakistan could explain the sharp difference seen between the extent to which media influences society and vice versa. The mass media, that is, cable TV and FM stations largely remain a very urban phenomenon. They may at best influence the way urbanites feel and receive their information – read infotainment – but molding the perceptions of the huge numbers, where one vote for one individual is concerned, remains the uncharted media territory in the un-cabled, rural Pakistan. So, where numbers are concerned, it is society, for now, that holds sway over the media in Pakistan.

Did someone say that the media influenced society, and it did so unconditionally? I don’t think so.

Mr. Abdul Aziz Danesh, Editor, Pajhwok Afghan News, Afghanistan

Topic: Torture reporting in the Media - An outcome

Ladies and gentlemen, I am sure; you know how we cover the violence in Afghanistan and in the lives of Afghans what is the outcome of this reporting. Let me give you some brief information on media development and situation in Afghanistan. On the positive side, the media had very fast growth in Afghanistan. Hundreds of papers are being published and tens of radio and TV stations have been established. Access to the Internet in cities has become affordable, and mobile technology, for the first time in the history of the country, has connected towns and villages to cities - almost to the entire outside world for that matter. The freedom of expression has been guaranteed by the constitution and the people have access to information about the performance of the Government on a scale that has no precedent in the history of the country.

On the negative side, both Government and private media suffer from low- language skills. This problem results from the poor state of education in the county. It will take many years and a lot of planning and resources to solve this problem. This also means journalists and the media in general are not able to properly report torture cases. But the questions are what torture is? Who commits the crime? Who are the victims? What is the role of media in reporting torture and what are possible consequences of these reports?

Torture is difficult to define, but we do not need to do so for the purpose of reporting mere allegations. We must be able to show that:

• Severe physical or mental pain or suffering has deliberately been inflicted or that intentional exposure to significant mental or physical pain or suffering has occurred. • The state authorities either inflicted this suffering personally, or knew or ought to have known about it but did not try to prevent it.

38 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

How does torture happen? And who are the perpetrators? Anyone acting in official capacity including police, security forces, prison officers, military personnel, Government officials or civil servants, political heavyweights, ‘death squads’, medical professionals, PRTs, NATO and ISAF, warlords and Taliban. Members of armed groups and anyone else can become a victim of torture and at any location, including during transportation or inside a victim’s home, but especially any place where interrogation is likely to take place. Torture can happen in the early stages of being held, particularly if being held incommunicado. The risk persists as long as an investigation lasts.

It is important to report about torture; the media plays a watchdog role in Afghanistan; however, reporting on torture must be done in a responsible manner. Despite its positive outcome, torture reporting in Afghanistan and other parts of the region may have negative effects as well. In Afghanistan, unfortunately, media mostly highlights news stories about violence while playing down the development and reconstruction effort. One illustrative example is that Afghan reporters, especially in the south, fail to file any stories when there is no security incident. Additionally, file photos are used to support stories regarding violence, a practice that often angers the Government.

Pajhwok Afghan News was the first media outlet to receive the videotape of the beheading of the Afghan driver kidnapped along with an Italian journalist and his interpreter Ajmal Naqshbandi in March this year. The idea behind the video was to pressure the Afghan Government and torture the captives. We did file a detailed story on the issue but avoided releasing the photographs for obvious reasons. Interestingly, an Italian TV channel aired the videotape after Daniel Mastrogiacomo was freed.

We understand “what bleeds that leads.” But as media professionals, we need a paradigm shift. We must inform the public. What changes people’s lives - either positively or negatively is important. If the media continues to report selectively, it would have a very negative outcome for the country, international community and the media itself. Some bad results of this media approach may lead to the following implications:

1) The relatively good opportunity that has been given to the media and press freedom can be lost and we may return to the situation where journalists were in the not-so-distant past, or even worse than that.

2) Inaccurate reporting on torture can scare away international investors and local business-people. This will hugely affect the already weak economy of the country and deprive Afghans, particularly youth of job opportunities. The out - of - job youngsters will then likely join terrorists or get involved

39 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

in other activities such as drug smuggling and consumption, robberies and street crimes.

3) Prevent the Afghan Diaspora and refugees from returning to the country of their origin and taking part in the re-building of Afghanistan.

4) International aid agencies and civil society initiative will be undermined, with harmful results for Afghanistan’s reconstruction.

5) Violations of journalistic ethics in torture reporting and newsmen’s lack of capacity to report accurately on such issues, release of gory photos are bound to affect the psyche of children and women in particular. The practice can encourage the culture of violence.

6) Reporting from a conflict zone must focus on the context. When in 1917 Western media failed to give background information about what was happening in Russia, the Russian Revolution came as a big surprise. It was then easy to demonize revolutionaries, since the public lacked knowledge about the reasons for the revolution and popular aspirations. As of the September 11 attacks, American citizens did not know why the attacks took place, because media coverage of international issues had been decreasing dramatically in the years preceding the terrorist act. Also without the correct context, images can mislead viewers, listeners and readers.

7) Before writing on conflict situations, definitions are important to be made. As the Reuters news agency says, “One person’s terrorist is another person’s freedom fighter”. Journalists should be aware that the versions given by parties to the conflict are shaped by propaganda and can provoke certain reactions from the audience. Big news organizations usually have style guidelines on using the word “terrorist”.

Article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights says: “No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.” Since its adoption in 1948, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights has served both as a source of international law and as an articulation of the aspirations of humanity. The Preamble to the Universal Declaration refers to it as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations. To the end that every individual and every organ of society, keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures - national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance.

40 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

In light of lessons learned in Afghanistan, civil society and NGOs, both national and international, can make contributions in the following areas:

1) Raising public awareness and mobilizing opinion through campaigning.

2) Can be the best source of information both primary and secondary in some cases and this way the media can highlight the activities of NGOs and civil society and foster a public understanding of what they are, what the outcomes of their work are, and effects of these organizations on the lives of the people.

3) Leveraging efforts of media organizations and sharing of resources/ information.

4) Reaching out to the public and grass-roots organizations in the most effective way and thus building a strong coalition that can work together to protect human rights and help prevent cases of abuse and torture.

5) Play as a watchdog and observer and follow up on reports that the media publish about it.

6) Provide sufficient information on the “positive developments” occurring in the country.

7) Promote and attract regional and international support to the cases of torture and abuse where the locals cannot do it alone.

In short, torture reporting can be damaging if not handled properly. At the same time, it can be very useful if managed professionally. Media and civil society together can play a major role in ensuring it and above all the key questions that you may ask is: “How this should be done?” The Answer is very simple: “Let’s work together by linking regional media and civil society with the Center in Afghanistan”, which could be one of the best platforms to keep an eye on human rights abuses including torture and ill-treatment.

Mr. Philippe Stoll: Please note that I am speaking in my own name and that my presentation reflects my own views and not necessary those of the ICRC. I am really very sorry for the admirers of Runa Laila; she unfortunately could not come this morning due to a last minute change in her programme and you will have to listen to me instead of…Sorry again, I definitely do not have the crystal voice of hers and I promise I am not going to sing!

I have the great honour to take over this presentation with little preparation. When we were working with my colleagues on this conference, it came to our

41 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence mind that media is an important medium, but cinema and movies are important ones too. I do not need to give more details when I can summarise in one word: Bollywood.

This topic, Violence, torture and ill-treatment in films/TV and its impact on daily life, came to our minds few months ago. We were on our way back from Varanasi where we had organised a Conference for teachers of Law Faculties from the East and North East of India. It was a three-day training programme in which we focused on the implementation of IHL. The debate was lively and participants came to the conclusion that torture is illegal and also immoral. We were sitting – a little tired – at the airport and there were several TV screens. They were playing a movie; I do not know the title, but something from the 80s, a Bollywood one. The nice guy was handsome, the bad guy was dressed in black and of course, there was a beautiful lady in-between.

At one point, the nice guy hangs the bad guy by the feet over a tree and pulls him down over the fire. We were sitting there and we saw some members of the security forces on duty at the airport laughing at the scene. I am sure, now you understand how the topic came to our mind.

I am unfortunately not at all a specialist of Bollywood or South Asian cinema, even though it is difficult to escape from it when you live in this region. I will have to take one example from Hollywood. I know it is very easy to point out at the USA, because this country represents the big power, “the target”, but during my one year in this region, I could witness that many people are watching US TV serials and movies. As my colleague at the panel has mentioned it, we do live in a global village and I guess that my point will be applicable also in this part of the world.

Violence and movies are old friends I would say. Since the invention of cinemascope, violent acts and behaviours are part of the landscape. When it is about representing wars and conflicts, the only limits of filmmakers is their imagination. So what is new, you would ask me! For the last few years, the level of this violence, its frequency, its representation has dramatically evolved.

One example: I would like to quote the statistics from an US Organization called “Prime Time Torture”, which has estimated that from 1996 to 2001, over a five year period, American public was watching 102 torture scenes on television during the prime time, which is from 8pm – 10pm. The same organization has identified 624 scenes of similar behaviour between 2002 and 2005, over a four year period! More so, according to this organization, the perpetrators are no longer the bad guys like the drug-dealers, the serial killers. The people using these methods, most of these are unlawful, are the good guys, the heroes.

42 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

The most striking example is the TV show called “24”. I do not know, if some of you are familiar with it. For those who do not know, I would just explain the concept of this serial. It is a Cine Award, Golden Award and Emmy Award winning TV show, broadcast by Fox TV and is available worldwide. You can easily buy the DVD in numerous shops in South Asia. “24” is presented in real time which means that each season lasts for 24 episodes of 1 hours. It depicts the life of Jack Bauer, who works for the US Government and is fighting threats on the American soil. He is often in the field, working for a fictional counter-terrorism unit, and Jack Bauer and his men are engaged in trying to safeguard the nation from terrorist strikes. These terrorists are poised to set off nuclear bombs or bio-weapons, or by using other methods aim to annihilate entire cities. According to the latest figures I could find on Internet, during the season 6 of the serial, which were broadcast in 2006, each of the 24 episodes gathered about 16 million viewers. I think now you can understand the importance of this show.

According to “Prime Time Torture”, during season 6 of “24”, on 67 occasions, this heroic counter-terror agent used methods that have been qualified as torture by “Prime Time Torture”. Most of the time, suspects held by Bauer are beaten, suffocated, electrocuted, drugged, assaulted with knives, or more exotically abused; almost without fail, these suspects divulge critical secrets.

I do not need to elaborate further on to make you understand the impact on the viewers. Not only it has an important impact on audience like housewives, kids or youth, but try to imagine the impact on security forces who are big consumers of this kind of programmes.

For that I will refer to an article published by the “New Yorker” on February 19, 2007 titled The politics of the man behind “24”, where the author, Jane Mayer quotes U.S. Army Brigadier General Patrick Finnegan, the dean of the United States Military Academy at West Point. He says that it had become increasingly hard to convince some cadets that America had to respect the rule of law and human rights, even when terrorists did not. One reason for the growing resistance, he suggested, was misperceptions spread by “24,” which was exceptionally popular with his students.

Tony Lagouranis, a former Army interrogator in the war in Iraq goes further and has this to say about soldiers stationed in Iraq. “People watch the shows, and then walk into the interrogation booths and do the same things they’ve just seen.”

As I said I do not want to point out bad behaviour of one country or another. I just want to share this small piece of information is so as to initiate the discussion on the theme of this session, taking into account the power of the world cinema industry, be it Hollywood, Bollywood, or cinema from Hong Kong, Japan, Nigeria… 43 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

By the way, I forgot to tell you that if the serial demonstrates that torture works quite well, it has no effect on the hero, Jack Bauer!!!!

Question and Answer session

Q. Mr. Ibrahim Khan, Dhaka: I would like to draw the attention of Mr. Razvi of Pakistan and Mr. Danesh of Afghanistan, both of whom have talked about the reporting of violence and conflicts. I want to know – as these are very regular incidents and you are tired of reading histories about violence and armed conflicts in Pakistan and Afghanistan, what are the situations, what are you reporting to stop the incidents of violence and conflicts?

A. Mr. Abdul Aziz Danesh: We try a lot to stop violence by writing stories suitable for maintaining peace. But, before 2001, in Afghanistan there was no media at all. Taliban had one radio station, which encouraged people to take to violence. After 2001, now media came to the ground and we try to do something on that. But it is not in our power to stop violence. Media did not want to do something which would encourage violence. In Afghanistan, there is lot of international people who want to destroy our country; there are Soviet people; Osama is there; there are a lot of people out there.

The second big issue is that our people are not educated. That is why, when something is done to the tourists, we will respect them and follow that. So, it is better to educate our people and say what is good for them and what is not.

Q. Mr. Amit Baruah: I have a question for Stoll. When he referred to the 24 hour serial. Clearly an organization like the ICRC which has been doing a lot to educate people that torture is wrong, that humanitarian law must be applied. In such a case when you are beaming at mass audiences such a message, the message at least to me is that these kinds of things are okay, torture is okay. This is what happens finally when you see it actually happening around you, you will probably assume that there is nothing really wrong with it. My question is, does the ICRC look at organizations or big media groups like Fox News or TV and does it try to tell them, this is not something which is in the interest of peace and security. And that there is a need to re-look at some of the things that you are showing to people because this is not okay. Clearly there is an element of trying to ensure that you are in a situation where all these things are part and parcel of daily life, which is what an organization like you, should try to do, that it is not okay. I was struck when you made the comment – do you approach non-governmental actors or big corporates to try and tell them that the message that you sometimes beam out perhaps could be altered a little bit?

A. Mr. Philippe Stoll: We have a large spectrum of different activities in order to prevent violation of international or national laws. We spent a big part of 44 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence our budget upto 75% in curing and trying to deal with the effect of violence, not only torture. The important part is also about prevention. We have started for the last ten years to work with Mass Communication Departments of different universities in South Asia; Prof. Salam has mentioned that we have memorandum of understanding with Bangladesh University. I go the same way as my colleague, Mr. Danesh, saying that education is an important part of this. We are not fighting with the same means, but we try to educate the people. We are starting programmes at the youngest age; there is a programme called ‘exploring humanitarian law’ and we are trying to raise questions and drawing the attention of school kids towards what is humanity, what is law, etc. Through different ways, we try to target. You can imagine when such an organization try to tell people in which direction they should go, the difficult one is touching the freedom of speech. So, by convincing and by organizing today’s event, we try to reach out to as many people as possible and I hope, we will work towards that; but the battle is still on.

If I can just use this occasion to say this, like last year, we will publish a book about the outcome of the speeches and about the conference; the articles of the speakers will be printed in the book form and that will then be distributed around the world. That is also a kind of an action that will raise awareness, not only in Bangladesh or in India, but also elsewhere in the countries where we have our presence. This kind of conference will prove to be a milestone by bringing forth the South Asian perspective on the issue under discussion.

Q. Mr. M K Swathi Raja, Sri Lanka: It is a kind of a conundrum when it comes to media – I do not know whether it is an inherent thing in the media which makes it so. What I have noticed is that it is not the abundance of violence that sensationalize violence. Actually sometimes, the absence of violence is there; it is the absence of violence that is sensationalized. India is having abundance of violence; violent incidents do not get so highlighted. I have seen in Sri Lanka for instance, we have a civil war in the country for the last 30 years; there was a period of ceasefire for about two years, and thereafter, hostilities have again resumed. During the ceasefire, whenever one person gets killed somewhere, it becomes the headline news. But after the ceasefire breaks down and when war resumes, maybe everyday there will be about 20-25 persons getting killed from both sides, but they get sucked away inside somewhere. I want to ask the panel, what is the observation regarding this?

A. Mr. Swapan Dasgupta: I guess, it is re-assuring, if one person gets killed and that becomes a headline, that shows the degree of sensitivity which is still left in the whole system. That is very heartening; the problem sometimes in a conflict is that human tragedy gets reduced to statistics. In Sri Lanka, you have

45 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence witnessed more than a fair share of that. The real issue is that there is violence in the society; we cannot escape it. We did not create it. As media professionals, sometimes, we have to deal with it in a wholesome way. This is the thing – what is the fair balance we strike? There is the conflicting pressure. Murtaza here pointed out the issue of patriotism which is involved; other forms of ideological pressures do come about. Popular mood sometimes can turn very ugly. If you are going to swim with the tide, you might have to sometimes end up condoning really ugly things which happen. So, it is never a very easy balance for the media – how much of your basic humanity, sense of decency can you retain, while at the same time, taking part in a debate or a vibrant churning process in society? There is conflict, but here we are trying to differentiate between conflict and violence. You cannot really hope for a situation where there is no conflict – I mean, ideological conflict, disagreements on policy, normal civil agitations, etc. are going to be part of life or part of democracy. But how can we just say this? What is common, in the language of the Ramayana, we call it Lakshman Rekha, which is a boundary that you create after which something becomes illegitimate. May I know whether torture and willful use of violence constitute one of them? That is really the issue at stake.

Q. Ms. Pamela Philipose : I have an observation and also a question. The observation is: A part of the problem is that the media sees it as an end and not a process. Therefore, in reporting violence, the violence remains, but not the impact of violence that has on people. Those connections are often lost in our reporting. That is also something that we should think about, the way we cover events.

The question that I have for Murtaza is that it is very interesting to note in your presentation wherein you talked about that the rise of religiosity in a situation where the media has a very liberal quest. We thought that more TV stations was one way to deepen democracy or the process of democracy in Pakistan. But in your presentation you have talked of the other aspect of it. What is finally your assessment because Musharraff came with this liberalization of the media? In fact, many people said that it was to counter India because the Indian media’s influence on Pakistani was also a concern. So, it would be interesting to know your take on this.

A. Mr. Murtaza Razvi: First of all, I do not think Musharraff gave media the independence; in fact, he failed to give. It came as a part of a process. Let us not take it away from the Pakistan media organs. They have fought for to write the truth, to project the truth inspite of all odds. They have done that during Zia ul Haq’s time; they have done that inside the country at great peril to themselves. With the whole world opening up, Musharraf or Nawaz Sharif or Benazir, whoever it might have been, they would have been left with no choice but to have multiple opinions on TV, multiple opinions in the press. And that process is a part of a

46 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence historical process and the evolution of the media has now come in a big way because the people are getting the news from the BBC. There is an entity called BBC-Pakistan which has FM radios in all the urban areas broadcasting Urdu news every hour. How are you going to stop that? Every hour, the Pakistani TV channels have to compete. You cannot fight the truth any more. We are telling the truth about Afghanistan as well. Some of the media in Pakistan is saying that ISI is involved in Afghanistan. Pakistan is part of the problem of what has happened in Afghanistan and so are other key players. So was America, when the US wanted Pakistan to produce jehadis, Zia ul Haq did that. Now, the US want Pakistan to kill jehadis, Musharraf is doing that. So, where is our own policy? Media really has won that independence and these are moot points that are being debated freely in Pakistan in the national media. You will be surprised to know that I find the Pakistani press and the media, much more open to self-criticism than any other South Asian press, with the possible exception of Sri Lanka perhaps.

About religiosity, yes, I was trying to get back to Stoll also, when he said that education is what we lack and also Danesh mentioned this fact. For the first time in the history of Pakistan, we have graduates in the Parliament, we have graduates in the State assemblies, in what we call Provinces. For the first time, we have the latest Parliament. They may or may not wear beards; look at Benazir; she is carrying rosary in her hands and she is covering her head and using a very religious Lexicon. Why? It is because she does not want to alienate the people. Religiosity is running at an all time high in Pakistan and look at the level of education – the kind of debate that the parliament takes up, there is uproar over Danish cartoons about Prophet Mohammad in a Danish newspaper and the Parliament takes it up and condemns it; it takes a week discussing that. But the Parliament has no time to discuss other compelling issues. The President issues Ordinances to even make laws, bypassing the Parliament because the Parliament, for the first time, comprises of at least graduate people. But religiosity has raised its head at a time, when the public sentiments were so much for it because of excruciating circumstances, international environment, etc. At that time, a lot of liberals joined those who used religion to further their politics. And that is what is happening unfortunately at the moment in Pakistan.

Mr. Swapan Dasgupta: There is a small point to what he has just talked about – about events and processes. I just would like to disagree, being a slightly more conservative in journalism. The point of the media is to communicate, to reach a target audience and the target audience varies. You might be reaching out to a very educated audience; you might be reaching out to a larger community. I think, it is not the job of the media to talk down to people. By presuming that we have the exclusive right of analysis of understanding the processes rather than give the raw material in the form of events to people and let them discern it. I would

47 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence rather prefer that to be the case rather than it being mediated to the subjective eyes. Of course, there is a part of that also which creeps in. It is an extraneous one.

Ms. Pamela Philipose: When I talked of processes, I am not really talking of academic kind of engagements with that. I am really talking about the fact that we do not report on the impact of violence which is also within the general requirements. We do not even look for it. We move on to the next big story and in the process, violence remains the dominant one.

Q. Mr. Moinul Islam, Bangladesh TV: I am asking on media reporting, armed conflict and violence – what are we seeing? Is it continuously in the media that armed conflict and violence will remain till the end? The government agencies are capable of holding arms and other ammunitions, explosives, etc. But in our South Asian region, the miscreants have RDX, C4, AK47. Who makes these and how these are being intruding into our region? What is ICRC doing about this smuggling or transportation of arms, ammunitions and other explosives? Answer from the Panel: I will answer only the last part; there are some initiatives. At the international level, there are some initiatives to regulate these forms and the other means of creating violence. You remember about the Ottawa Treaty, etc. Asia, as such, is not involved in the process of the small arm initiative. However, any means that can reduce violence in times of armed conflicts are more welcome. This is a small thought to your question. I do not know who wants to take the first part. My colleague, Mr. Dasgupta put it very aptly – it is not for the media to set out to transform society because if every media organ start doing that, which some of us are already doing, it would be a more difficult thing to be in. Yes, it is the job of the politicians to make sure that violence does not spread and it is the job of the State also to do that. If the media were to faithfully restrict itself to reporting and reporting only the facts and letting the people to decide for themselves which side of the ideological or otherwise, political divide that they want to fall out, that is the best state to be in. I agree with my colleague from India also that the impact of violence is there. That is the one loose end that media needs to get attention and we should be bringing in more stories about how the violence affects the lives of people. We are following the rating model, which is the western model and there are long-standing conflicts in Palestine for instance where the impact of violence is very shoddily reported, if reported at all – and it is always more and more violence that hogs the limelight. Q. Ms. Savikunnana, University of Dhaka: My question is to Mr. Penjor of Bhutan. He told that his country has banned the Ten Sports and FTV. Do you think that banning some TV channels can be the solution to restrict violence?

48 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

A. Mr. Ugyen Penjor: As I told in the presentation, when we first went for cable TV, there was not that much violence. At that time, Bhutan was celebrating the 25th anniversary of the coronation of the King. As a part of that, we opened it up and it was not planned. Then there were about 100 channels; 10 Sports and other few channels were also banned based on a study which recommended the ban on them. Now I do not agree that banning particular channels is a solution. In fact, I wrote a lot of applications to the media to bring back 10 Sports because I want to watch football and tennis both. There are so many other channels which air violence and as we all said, movies show violence so, just banning 10 Sports is not a solution. It was, maybe, just a reaction from the government based on the study.

Q. Mr. Sanshul Islam: I teach at the Stanford University, Bangladesh. My question is to any of the ICRC representatives here. My question is why Bangladesh has received so much attention lately from the ICRC side? Are you anticipating conflict or violence here also? I would appreciate if you could answer this.

Mr. Finn Ruda: The question is pertinent. Even in the past, we have had it in Bangladesh. What you have not seen over the years is a constant stream of ICRC delegates and specialists visiting Bangladesh, working with your authority, working with the educational institutions. What you like to have it for yourselves and you do so rightly, is that you are one of the countries in the world providing more peace keeping forces around the globe. ICRC is where you are going. We were there, before you arrived. We will be there, when you are there. We will also be there, when your forces often come home. For this, we need a very intensive and very close consultation and discussion. So, ICRC is developing a network globally with government, with authorities, with civil societies and we call it – do not quote me on that – humanitarian diplomacy! This is a part of the reason for opening this, to establish the network. We really appreciate this. That is my short remark.

Audience Question: My question is to Mr. Dasgupta. He said that we, as journalists, can communicate. But it has a social problem, economic problem and political problem. Unfortunately all bad news is good news for a journalist and good news always do not get that preference and especially in our sub-continent. What do you think and what should be a bottom-line for the journalist who is reporting violence? If I am very objective, I should write what I have seen. I should ethically be honest in that story, whether it is in print or electronic media. But to stop violence, not to expand or should not influence others where the journalists or the reporters should have their bottom-line.

A. Mr. Swapan Dasgupta: It is a very good question. The first response to that is that I sincerely believe that there is no such thing as objective journalism.

49 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

We are all subjective in one way or the other. We pretend. We have a degree of subjectivity, our own believes, systems, prejudices, call it whatever you want to. Our entire mental conditioning means that what seems objective to me might seem subjective to you. The old adage about ‘one man’s terrorist being another man’s freedom fighter’, is there. There is always the thing about what constitutes an appropriate response.

Here, it is also, in many cases, the appropriate response is determined by our national conditioning. I am being very honest. There is never going to be like that. It is highly unlikely in the foreseeable future that there is going to be a united South Asian perspective on what constitutes terrorism.

Murtaza made some very pertinent points. I could find certain force to that, in terms of rational discourse. But that is the perception which he sees from the perspective of Pakistan. It he is sitting in New Delhi then he sees it in a slightly different way. That is inevitable and unavoidable. At that level, there is unlikely to be any global standard. Really are we committed to one basic point? Are we committed to the fact that we want a lessening of violence, whether it is State violence or it is non-official violence, terrorist violence or whatever you call it? If you are agreed on that basic conditioning or basic objective, then the way in which we approach this question is different. There is no prescription. There is no formula. There is no recipe. It cannot be. That is what I am saying. But if that basic humanitarian consideration is just kept in mind, it just allows us to be marginally more sensitive to what should be our priority.

Mr. Ashraf Ali: You have said that reporting of armed conflict is very risky and dangerous. There is no doubt about it. My question is whether media houses give incentives to the reporters who cover the incident and if the reporter dies in the battlefield, what media organizations do about the reporters?

Panel: In fact, we have a session this afternoon. This is a very good suggestion; stay there and you will know everything about it in the next session. Tomorrow morning also we have 2-3 good interventions on these, the State response, the employers’ response and the journalists’ response. So, you will have all these.

Mr. Mahbubul Alam: Talking about this morning’s subjects - ‘Glamorizing violence, impact of media on society while reporting violence and the impact of society on media while reporting violence, torture reporting, etc.’ are all very interesting subjects. Subjects which we discuss in our private conversations, subjects which we write about in newspapers, subjects that we try to bring in the TV talk-shows. So, these are very important subjects in the present context.

50 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

We have discussed about conflicts. There are various ways of conflict resolutions - internationally recognized ways, how violence can be contained, etc. There are various reasons as we have heard from the presenters. We have violence but we should all try objectively. Mr. Dasgupta does not think that there is anything called objectivity. But as far as possible, by sacrificing our subjective judgment on an issue, we should try to be objective and report on facts that help people, that help our readers, that help the society and that help the country to contain violence. I do not know whether it is possible to do away with violence altogether in the foreseeable future.

This discussion has been very lively although I did not find any heated debate or any fireworks which shows that our audience is very peaceful. I thank you for all the patience that you have shown.

51

Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence SESSION – 2

MEDIA AND PROTECTION – WHAT DOES THE LAW SAY ABOUT IT

Mr. Mahfuz Anam (Chairman and Moderator) Editor, Daily Star Newspaper Bangladesh

This session is titled ‘Media and Protection – what does the law say about it’. Or what do the laws say about it. There is more than one law that is there on this. So, it is a very provocative topic and a very interesting one. We can have the session in two ways – protecting the readers, the viewers and also protecting those who provide news, the journalists.

Mr. Farid Hossain, Bureau Chief Associate Press (AP), Dhaka, Bangladesh

Topic: Price of truth – Media persons are dying to tell the truth

Let me begin with a Bangla sentence – spoken in Bangla, meaning ‘always speak the truth and never tell a lie’. I am quoting it from Agosto Lipi. Most of us have forgotten that there is a book called ‘Agosto Lipi’. That is an ideal book that most children in our times and also when the Chairman of the session was a school- going student, I guess, must have read the book. It was seeking to lay the foundation that we should always be telling the truth.

For journalists also, telling the truth is a virtue. It is not only a virtue it is more than that. What journalists do is that when they are telling the truth, writing, or telling objectively, they are fulfilling the professional integrity and also telling the truth is their bread and butter. I say bread and butter because if we cease to tell the truth or if we fail to tell the truth, nobody is going to read our newspapers and nobody is going to listen to us. That is very important.

Usually in societies, for telling the truth and for doing this sort of virtues, you are rewarded and you get trophies because you just simply demonstrated honesty. But there are societies including Bangladesh and also in many countries worldwide, journalists are dying or getting killed because they are just telling the truth. That is very unfortunate.

In Bangladesh at least 13 journalists have been killed in the past five years. During that period, nearly 40 journalists have been jailed. If I break up the figure, from May 2006 to April 2007, four have been killed in Bangladesh and 158 were wounded. A total of 498 journalists suffered various types of harassment

53 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence including death-cases, filing of false cases against them by police or those upset by their reporting. Many were attacked during the political turmoil in October 2006.

The journalists who have died were great journalists and among them are Sanzulur Rahman, Manick Shah, Humayun Balu, who, by no means died for a cause and they were there, because of their profession. I take this opportunity here today to pay my tribute to those souls who died for a cause. 140 journalists were killed in 2004 and 2005 and that made this period, the deadliest, since the war started in Algeria over a decade ago. 47 journalists were killed alone in 2005; that is the latest figure we have, more than three quarters of whom were murdered to silence their criticism or punish them for their work.

Journalists are losing their lives because they are doing their job and nothing else. What are the jobs that they are doing? It is to go to the war-field, conflict-zone or to any other place, where news is being created, and to cull out those information and disseminate it for the readers or for listeners. They are doing it truthfully because of that they are being killed. If we look at Iraq or the conflict zones like Afghanistan, Sri Lanka or any other place, maybe, there is an impression that the journalists are being killed because they are falling in line of the crossfire. But if we analyze, as the international media journalists have analyzed, the facts speak differently. Three out of four journalists around the world have been singled out for murder and the killers are rarely brought to justice. The figure is three out of four journalists around the world are singled out for murder. So, they are deliberately being killed. Inaction of the government has led the warlords and the criminals dictate news that citizens can see and hear. The governments have failed to protect the journalists; they are letting warlords; they are letting corrupt elements and they are letting mafias to kill journalists; in some cases, even the government. I mean, the police are also killing the journalists. This is the situation worldwide.

What picture does this give? The journalists are not protected and they are risking their lives on their own and are being killed. It is everywhere and more so, in countries where there are tyrants and there are unresponsive government. One feature that is common here is that those who murder journalists or those who are doing these crimes, go unpunished. There is this impunity. In about 90% of the crimes, which were analyzed in 2005, the murderers have gone unpunished. Despite that the journalists worldwide including Bangladesh are doing their jobs.

Since it is the Conference of Senior Editors, I just wanted to mention one thing. While the journalists are doing their job and are becoming braver and braver, they need support from the editors too. You do not get great reporters if you do not have great editors. Great reporters can not really show that they are great reporters, unless they have exceptional editors to protect them. 54 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

Here I want to conclude with an incident that had happened during the Vietnam War. The AP team in Vietnam was writing truthfully. They were telling the truth and the American Administration at that time under the President did not like that. So, the administration was using other friendly newspapers to criticize the AP team and tried to say that they were actually not reporting correctly. Then the AP editor at that time went to the President himself and charged him saying that ‘are you criticizing my boys who are there in Vietnam, Mr. President?’ So, the way the editor put it to the President of the USA, he was puzzled and he became nervous. He said, no, I am not doing that; your boys are doing a fine job.

So, if we have editors like that, the journalists and the reporters can better get protection.

Mr. Lankabaarage Anura Solomons, Deputy Editor, Foreign News and Feature Editor, Daily Divaina, Sri Lanka

Topic: Violence against journalists is increasing with passing years

I am going to speak through practical knowledge and experience gained as a reporter. Those attached to the Security Services and Intelligence Services become the targets of such criminals, enemies and rivals. I have seen with my own eyes, such victims being killed on roads in daylight. Apart from that, the next group facing the danger of such crimes is the media profession.

The multimillion businesspersons in the Asian region are able to hire a contractor for a small fee to stab journalists who criticize them. And at the same time, the powers that are there in the Asian region where I live, can go and drag a journalist belonging to a newspaper or TV who describes and exposes how the former exploits the country. The people enjoying luxurious life with families and henchmen, sometimes with underground security dumping journalist into a van, taking him to a lonely place and smash him into pieces. The journalists of the day, irrespective of whether newspaper or TV, are subjected to more than one type of terrorism. First these comes from the private sector – what I mean by private sector dealing in narcotic, heroin, opium, etc. A menace spreading fast out of the world, brothel owners, businessmen seeking government contracts, etc. When the wrong-doings, misdeeds and other rackets are exposed, they come straight to journalists, when he pays no heed to the contract killers.

The next is the state of terrorism. When the politician is criticized by a journalist, the former gets wild and decides to get rid of the journalist. He entrusts the killing job to his underground contractors. Thus the Sri Lankan journalists more often face threat from the underground. When the criminal alliance between politicians and the underground gangs are exposed, the journalists get enormous threats over the phone. The next threat comes from the Tiger terrorists. They burn 55 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence down newspapers publishing news unfavourable to them belonging to their own race.

The violent history against the Sri Lankan journalists began from 1970. The United Front led government that came to power in 1970, sealed and closed those newspapers that did not support them and used the state radio and newspapers for their own purpose and suppressed the free media. The next United National Party’s Rightist government came to power in 1977, treated the state media as the political heritage and moved further in that direction. The then Prime Minister became the Executive President by amending the Constitution. He started imposing unofficial restrictions. Once he wanted to punish a newspaper publishing company, the paper where I work, did not obey him. He ordered state controlled institutions to refrain from giving advertisements to that media establishment. When a private bank was pressurized not to give the advertisement to my paper, the bank boldly refused and the owner of the bank was threatened.

Richard Zoysa was a journalist; he was a talented, prominent, brave Sri Lankan Youngman. He was also an actor and a TV presenter. The government that came to power in the year 1989 did not like Richard Zoysa and his way of journalism. There was a rebellion led by the Leftist Militant Organization called JVB, comprising of youths against the government in 1988. The government suppressed the uprising by using army, police and also by arming and financing a killer contract organization. In the counter operation, not only the JVB members, but also other opponents were killed too. The dead bodies were seen burning on the roadside almost every morning. The faces of dead bodies were burnt first so that they cannot be identified. In this manner, about 40,000 people were killed. Those who disliked the journalism adopted by Richard Zoysa kidnapped him on the 18th of February 1989. His body was found lying on a beach. The mark on the body showed that he was killed after torturing. His mother had even identified the Police Chief who abducted him, in that night. Richard Zoysa was not killed, as a JVB suspect; he was not a JVB-ian. He was a humanitarian campaigner. He was much concerned about the youth massacre since 1988. The government suspected him that he would provide information to the other countries and generate public opinion on that matter.

The President in power today who was the Member of the Parliament at that time too was appraising foreign countries regarding human rights violation in Sri Lanka. The President escaped because he was a Member of the Parliament; if not, he may have faced the same plight.

Daniel Pearl is a person known as a journalist to everybody present in this hall. When he went to Pakistan, few years back, some extremists kidnapped him and

56 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence killed him; he was beheaded, cut into pieces. Why was Daniel Pearl murdered? The accepted version is that it was because he was an American journalist of Jewish origin. However, according to Bernard-Henry Lévy, a leading French philosopher, Pearl was killed because he knew more about the nuclear power in Pakistan and he knew more about the connections of the gorillas. According to Lewis, the suspect who assassinated Pearl, Omar Sheik was the person who served Islamic extremists and served the Pakistan Intelligence Service as a double agent.

I am calling upon you present here, to bring pressure on the states all over the world to do their utmost to stop these barbaric crimes meted out to journalists. I also place before you the need to prevent misreporting carried on by certain press organizations in regional countries including Sri Lanka. The ideas and the needs of the people should not be repressed. When such repression and opposition prolongs, it transforms into sharp nails and pierces your feet. Thank you very much.

Mr. Amitabh Roy Chowdhury, Senior Editor, Press Trust of India, India

Topic: Who kills journalist and why? What are the protection measures for them?

The topic given to me is ‘who kills journalists and why, what are the protection measures for them?’ The first part of the presentation has already been generally covered – who kills journalists and why. Therefore, I will concentrate on the protection measures.

There are different aspects on the kind of protection available for journalists. I will not touch the legal aspects of it. The practical experiences of my colleagues and myself are more relevant. There are a lot of experiences that we have had over the past few years. Some measures, which a journalist who has been sent to a war- zone or to an insurgency-ridden area can adopt as protective measures to protect him or herself.

I have a brief thing in writing. I will just read it out partly and elaborate certain points. The pursuit of news has become more dangerous today than ever before. The risks associated with the job have grown substantially with situations so developing that fair and accurate coverage of events become more and more difficult. The growth of terrorism and insurgency, especially in almost all parts of Asia, has led the media to face all kinds of threats from all sides in gathering and distributing news. During the coverage of a conventional war, one gets a perception from only one side of the conflict zone, like in the Kargil conflict, we were on the Indian side and my friends from Pakistan have been on the other. 57 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

It is impossible to cross over to the other side to balance a story in such cases. However, the practical scenario in the war zone tells you from which direction the bullet or the shell is coming from. So, you know the direction of the potential threat or danger and where the enemy is and how you should save yourselves. In the Kargil conflict, most of us did not even know how to tie a bandage properly. But we were just asked by the army men to lie down as soon as you hear a whistling sound coming from the top of the mountain on the other side. The whistling sound was the shell cutting through the wind and coming towards you and you just lie down. Then the shell explodes somewhere; you do not get up for two minutes until the dust settles and the splinters fly across.

You get up only after this. These are the bare minimum, which the good army men taught to us in the war coverage. However, in an insurgency situation, the battle-lines are totally unclear. There is always an element of surprise. You do not even know who is a militant and who is a security person because the latter also many a times operate in plain clothes. There is another aspect of news coverage in these troubled areas.

Many a time, the terrorist outfits threaten scribes with dire consequences, to ensure that their views get into print or are circulated through the newswires. They come to your offices, they place the gun on top of the table, give you a press handout and ask you to push out the news. This has happened with us, in the PTI, during the early-80s, when Punjab was burning, in Kashmir and in the North East.

This is one part of the problem. When you put out the story under pressure, you also inform the office headquarters that we have done this under pressure. The headquarters may kill that story and not use it. But for the consumption of the terrorists outfit back home, you have issued the story. However since you have issued the story, the state machinery immediately wakes up and starts asking questions as to how and why was the story or statement issued.

There have been several examples or instances earlier when there were major bomb-blasts in Delhi. After that, the terrorist outfits used to call us up, call the PTI because we have a large national and international network, to get the maximum mileage out of these blasts. They would say that I am so and so, representing such and such organization and we take responsibility for this bomb blast. You immediately put out a story saying that this organization has claimed responsibility. But out of your story, the terrorist outfit also gets a lot of mileage.

As my colleagues were talking earlier, murder has become a major factor. It has become the easiest and the most effective way of stopping troublesome reporting.

58 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

I have had friends, who have been shot dead, including one Mr. Parvaz Ahmed and I think, Mr. Surinder Oberoi who is now with ICRC was a colleague of ours in Kashmir; he himself had been abducted while reporting in Kashmir. We have seen our friends being killed or shot dead at point blank range. There is no way you can escape that kind of a situation.

In such a scenario, the government, the military and the security agencies have a role to play; they cannot just stand in silence and issue statements condemning the attack. I would just say that the UN has adopted a resolution 1738, urging countries to become more aware of the role of the journalists and the need to promote and ensure their safety in conflict situations. This resolution has broadly outlined the parameters to be followed by the government and the military. There is also the Geneva Convention which gives broad outline of the role the government and the Military has to play.

Lots of figures have already been given. I have the recent study of the Brussels- based International News Safety Institute, which is a coalition of global news media organizations and human rights groups. According to it, Iraq topped the list of the countries where the number of media persons were killed. In the past decade, till 2005 as many as 138 media persons were killed in Iraq, the tally was followed by Russia which had 88 scribes killed; Colombia had 72; Philippines had 55; India stood 6th in the list with 45 killed, after Iran which had a tally of 54. However the Iranian tally was higher because out of the 54, 48 had been killed in an air crash when they were going to cover the war exercise in December 2005. In our region, according to this Institute, Pakistan had recorded 29 deaths, Bangladesh19, Sri Lanka 16 and Afghanistan 13. These figures, though old, are only indicative of the volatility of this region. Overall, 147 of our colleagues have lost their lives in 2005; their number has grown to 167 in 2006. Now, what measures can be taken to avoid the risks associated with news coverage and conflict zones?

As I had said earlier, these are borne out of the first hand experiences of the journalists having covered such situations. I have listed out a few; maybe, there may be more; some can be discounted also.

A) Always carry your credentials, Press Accreditation Cards or Identity Cards or Security Permits when you are working in such areas. Never represent yourself as someone other than journalist. Do not hide your identity during coverage in such situations.

B) Never carry arms and avoid traveling with journalists carrying weapons. Though practice of armed personal guards has come into vogue in some parts of the world like Chechnya where European journalists, or the media organizations have provided armed security guards to the journalists; it is

59 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

still a debatable issue as is being embedded. During the Kargil conflict, I want to mention, we were not embedded as the journalists were in Iraq. Though we had to get permission from the military authorities, we were free to roam around anywhere in the war zone, of course not in the operational areas. The only help we may have taken from the military authorities, apart from permission, was transportation because there was no other means of transportation. Of course, some of us had our own vehicles, but those were not suited for doing the running around the high mountainous terrain.

C) In insurgency-ridden areas, avoid competitive pressures and work in a group if possible, collaborate with your colleagues. Avoid the tendency of getting the news first and rushing out alone in the dark to file the story.

D) Do not do anything provocative. Generally be low profile. However, there could be circumstances when showing your identity and becoming a little high profile may help.

E) During exchange of fire, it is preferable to try to be behind the frontline of the security forces; hide behind the armoured vehicles or cars. But if they are blown up, then of course, it can’t be helped!!

F) It is helpful to be able to communicate in the local language, particularly when operating in hostile areas. Journalists not knowing the local language should be with the colleagues or the interpreters who know the local language. The journalists should at least be able to communicate in the local language and tell the local people that we are from the Press or that we are journalists.

G) Develop an emergency response system or a contingency plan before going into a conflict zone like Daniel Pearl case which came to light only after a time gap. Make sure that at least one person in your organization, preferably the editor knows where you are going, whom you will meet, how will you get there and the estimated time of your return. This could ensure that if your return is delayed significantly, then the emergency button can be pressed by the editor.

H) In insurgency or terrorism hit areas, avoid using government military vehicles, as these are soft targets. I am distinguishing this from the war zones. I am talking about avoiding the use of government vehicles in insurgency-hit areas; this is a little dangerous. It is safer to be on own your with your vehicles prominently displaying the word ‘Press’. If you can consider using 60 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

military vehicles in war scenarios, where no other means of transportation is available, that may be all right. However, this could have a flip side too. You can get abducted or taken hostage like Mr. Surinder Oberoi. Before arriving in a conflict zone, try to get the feel of the area. The work experience in these areas and the overall political scenario, the local contact or local journalists can be of immense help in this regard.

These are some of the suggestions borne out of our experiences. There can be different scenarios and these suggestions may not work everywhere. But generally speaking, these suggestions/recommendations are borne out of the experiences of journalists including myself. I am throwing all this open for a discussion.

Mr. Dharmendra Jha, News Editor, Annapurna Post, Nepal

Topic: Freedom of Expression and dangerous assignments

Nepal has a lot of problems from the last 12-13 years and still, we have problems, although Nepal Communist Party (Maoist) came to power.

Freedom of Expression is a fundamental human right that has been enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights ratified by the United Nations in 1948. Countries adhering to its principles are morally under pressure to guarantee the Freedom of Expression of their citizens. But as the subscription is not legally binding, countries, especially illiberal democracies have gone on record violating the Freedom of Expression of their citizens.

One need not go too far to assess to which degree Freedom of Expression is being guaranteed throughout the world. To talk about our own region, except for India, which has a reasonably good track record of guaranteeing the Freedom of Expression of their citizens, other South Asian countries like Pakistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Nepal and Sri Lanka have always been pushed into controversies while being scrutinized for their commitment to uphold Freedom of Expression.

These nations have always had a number of deaths of journalists taking up dangerous assignments despite the fact that their respective constitutions guarantee Freedom of Expression.

The Nepalese media underwent a historical change with the introduction of the communication policy in 1992, two years after the restoration of democracy. The media industry, which was a government dominated sector, got a scent of fresh air with the charting out of the policy.

Positive changes in the media sector came about even before 1992 after the democratic constitution guaranteed Freedom of Expression. Freedom of Expression is guaranteed also in Interim Constitution of Nepal -2007. Provisions as such have 61 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence not been able to find place in the Constitution of many other countries, where the press is still battling for its independent existence.

Apart from raising the issue of press freedom, we also must bear in mind that freedom and responsibilities go together. Though we have several regulatory bodies instituted by the government and the private journalist groups, none of them seem to be much concerned about whether the media players have been living up to their responsibilities. The regulatory bodies could also lobby for the protection of press freedom during difficult times.

The role of the Press Council is confined to categorizing different newspapers. This apart, it has not been able to coordinate with other independent bodies to oversee the functioning of the press. The Council might have been hesitating to monitor the press, as it is a government body. But it could invite private parties to make its task easier.

The Federation of Nepalese Journalists (FNJ) also has been trying its best to ensure free press in Nepal. FNJ is actively involved in protecting the rights and privileges of Nepali journalists. FNJ, Nepal Press Institute, Freedom Forum, South Asian Free Media Association (SAFMA) Nepal Chapter, Nepal Press Union and Press Chautari continue to play crucial role to promote free press while protecting the constitutional right of the Freedom of Expression. Recently, the Parliament approved Working Journalist Act, 2007 and Right to Information Act, 2007 thanks to their mounting pressure on democratic government.

Though we have nearly 1680 newspapers registered in the country, only 180 are being published on a regular basis. Likewise, we have FM radios. We have more than 200 FM stations that are licensed, but 86 are in operation.

Those publishers who are sitting idle must be asked to either get down to work, or should not be allowed to idle around with the license. The content that appears in newspapers is far from satisfactory. Newspapers, especially vernacular weeklies that spread rumors, which tend to spark confusion and sensation in the society have not been noticed by the concerned regulatory bodies like the Press Council and many other press bodies. It would be hard to protect the freedom of the press, of its pivotal role, fourth-estate is totally forgotten. Hence the regulatory body comprised of all journalist associations could work towards monitoring the performance of the newspapers apart from joining hands to fight against possible infringement upon the press.

The other issue that has been sending ominous threats to press freedom is the confusion regarding the absorption of journalists into the job market. So far, nobody has bothered to discuss the criteria that ought to be set to recognize

62 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence people as journalists. Even a tenth-grader seems to be going around with a press pass, attending big press conferences and asking absurd questions. One can well imagine the quality of the reports to be filed by such ‘journalists’ who do not know even the basic of journalism. People who are watching the media from outside have a feeling that the undergraduates disseminate immature information, as they are not capable enough of comprehending different social and political issues dominate the journalistic domain.

Thus if we are to ensure the glory of the Nepali press and work in a healthy environment, the concerned bodies – government and private – must work towards forming a joint regulatory body to chart out different policies aimed at setting the criteria for those aspiring to be journalists apart from working to safeguard the freedom of the press.

To look at the situation of Freedom of Expression, we can measure the state of this fundamental right of the Freedom of expression after 1990 and 2000. After the promulgation of the first democratic constitution of 1990, Freedom of Expression was enshrined in the Constitution as historic Article, which would empower individual citizens and of course the press to speak freely.

Citizens did enjoy this right substantially. The relatively more democratic constitution unlike in the Panchayat era encouraged people to open up new media outlets and the nation witnessed a spur in media activities with more newspapers, TV and FM radio stations coming to the forefront.

The Freedom of Expression of the citizens, which remained almost unhindered for quite sometime faced a drawback in February 2001, when King Gyanendra imposed an emergency and suspended certain Articles in the Constitution including the Freedom of Expression of individual citizens.

The press was intimidated beyond the point of tolerance. Army personnel were deployed in Newsrooms ‘to censure media content in most of the private media outlets’ and the constitutional guarantee of Freedom of Expression was nothing but an issue to be mocked at by both the national and international communities.

The media kept on struggling for their rights when finally the Supreme Court issued orders that the media should be allowed to function without any hindrance.

Following the restoration of democracy through the Popular Movement-II in April 2006, the media has enjoyed reasonably high level of freedom. But still the private media houses have become targets of Maoist affiliated trade unions that went all out to stop the publication of newspapers and broadcasting of FM radio. Due to their activities, Annapurna Post (the Nepali daily), the Himalayan Times (English daily), Nepal Samacharpatra (Nepali daily), Kantipur (Nepali daily) and the 63 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

Katmandu Post (English daily), nation’s leading broadsheet papers were compelled to stop their publication for some days.

The problem was addressed through dialogue between the concerned parties and since then problems have arisen in those media outlets. A recent assessment of media freedom and Freedom of Expression in Nepal by some international agencies has reported that press freedom in Nepal has improved by 20 indexes compared to the previous year. Still the rights movements in the Terai triggered by some dozen of armed groups clamped down the press freedom. This, however, did not last for long.

Recently, there was uproar in the legislative Parliament over the abduction of journalist Birendra Kumar Shah by the cadres of CRN (Maoist) in Kajaiya, Bara, about 200 km Far East of Katmandu. Although the government has formed a Parliamentary panel to trace the whereabouts of Shah, nothing much has become known so far.

In last three months, there are many journalists attacked by identified and unidentified groups. According to Mahendra Bista, General Secretary of FNJ, during the period, one journalist Prakash Thakuri from Far Western region was killed and in last three weeks Sanjay Santoshi Rat, Vice President of FNJ, Pappu Gurung, Nimesh Kamar, Bhim Prasad Gurung and many more were attacked by various groups. According to Bista, after April Movement of 2006, some 1400 incidents of violation of press freedom have been recorded.

Majority of such attacks and death threats were made by criminal groups. The state is not found responsible for those incidents but we are seeing that it has failed to ensure the protection of the press from such criminals. Interesting event is that the criminal groups have been whitewashed with political colour.

Dr. Mizanur Rahman Shelly, Chairman for Development Research, Bangladesh, Editor Asian Affairs, Bangladesh

Topic: Civil Society view of Media persons and their protection

I was reminded of some things that happened; the first one, I will relate right now and the second one, at the appropriate stage of my deliberation. The first one was about a senior person who was really civil and polite. I was a student of first year, B.A.(Bachelor of Arts) Honours in the University of Dhaka when I first met him and I started calling him Yusuf Bhai, the elder brother Yusuf. After three years, when he was in second part M.A.(Master of Arts). He suddenly looked at me and asked why you call me Yusuf Bhai? I said that is how you are. My name is Kalim. I said, but for the last three years, you did not object or you did not protest. He said that would

64 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence be impolite. Here, we have a very strong chairperson, who does not care whether it is polite or not, he would stop you short, if you cross the ten-minute line!

This brings us to the question of civility. Is the civil society possible? That is what I have been entrusted to speak on. What does the civil society think of the media persons? The civil society’s view of the media persons and the media persons’ protection – I do not know why I was entrusted with this task because I do not either belong to the civil society or to the world of media completely. But it seems, I trade on both toes. I have had a long association with the media in a marginal position and also having given up my status as a civil servant, the member of what was once called the “Heaven-born service” of the sub-continent. I resigned 22 years ago just ahead of my retirement. Perhaps that is the reason why I am considered as a part of the civil society.

Now, how does the civil society view the media and what is the linkage between the civil society and the media? Can you really compare the two – the civil society and the media? In those days, it differed from place to place, from society to society; they are not situation specific phenomenon. In a way, they are because the kind of civil society that you would tend to get in what is known as industrially, technologically or economically developed country may not be the same as what we obtain in a less stable situation or a developing situation as it is called, in the developing media. So, there would be differences, but they are also universal because there is a close link between the two. There is inter-mingling, interlink and interface and one is not different or separate from the other. In a way, the civil society contains the media and maybe, it stands at the very heart of the civil society. If eternal vigilance is the prize of liberty, it is media which makes that vigilance possible and therefore, liberty is there, as far as it can. So, there is always this exchange or the flow between the two of life, shall we say, or of the energy that makes the society watch it. Although there are differences, one also can see that there are many universals involved here. We all know what the civil society is; it is not the government; it is not necessarily the NGOs, but the NGOs certainly have things to do in the civil society. As we have said, the media and the civil society act and interact so that a society can grow as a probing one, as a thriving one, a society where there is freedom of expression, where there is protection to those who speak the truth, whether they are in the media or elsewhere.

So, what are the civil society’s views likely to be, of the media persons? To my mind, the media persons are poets and I do not use the word ‘like’, not in a dreamy fashion. I borrow from my illustrious name-sake, B C Shelley who says that poets are the unacknowledged legislators to the world. Poets are the unacknowledged legislators to the world, so are media persons. Because what they write and what they do is not just reported. What happens in reporting? It is also 65 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence analyzing and interpreting, what is the meaning of those happenings? As I myself started my half-career, shall I tell that way, the university correspondent of a daily paper, The Observer, here, in the early-60s. We were told by a number of mighty editors, that the task is to tell people about the events in their entirety, start by answering the questions, ‘what, when, where, how, etc.’ But that is not enough. Then, as I said, like the poets, what the writer writes moves minds, moves human beings to the very core and they are enthralled; they are inspired; they are encouraged to do new things; you have to set new standards; you have to set new goals; you have to build a new society. That is what the media persons do or at least that is what it looks like from the perception of a member of the civil society.

A media person is not only a poet. He is also a messenger. The messages he brings forth are ones which makes life worth living because they also reflect the reality of life. Here comes the question of protection because here, we are all inhabitants of a restless world. The world is no more what it used to be as a very famous advertisement for a Scotch whisky sale in TV, in the West. Tradition is no more what it used to be. Even tradition changes and the world has changed before our very eyes. The cold war era has gone. The bipolar world is no more and instead of two camps confronting each other, fighting one another with cold arms with balance of terror, now we have many terrors spread all over the world! The worst hit are the common citizens and the worst among the worst are the media persons who go around, as we have seen from our distinguished speakers’ version, from their presentations, they go from danger to danger; they confront unlined or undefined borders, unmarked frontiers that mark the life and time of societies fraught with the threats of insurgency, fraught with the war that grip the entire humanity with their restless behaviour.

So, these persons who are poets and messengers, who are the harbingers of our hope, who bring future to our very doorsteps need to be protected. How do we do that? We have from Mr. Amitabh Roy Chowdhury, a very wonderful description of the details of what the media person should do – lie low when the missiles are flying high, try not to get on to a government vehicle in an insurgency-infested areas. These are details. These are good for personal protection. But what do we do to ensure that atmosphere where media persons can go freely doing about their duties?

For that, you need to change the mindset. For that, like the creators, the authors of the Geneva Convention did, we need powers that are properly motivated. ‘Powers’ do not mean only those who are in control of a state, but people who control government, people who may be called insurgents, who are today the terrorists, maybe, tomorrow they will turn into liberators, it does not matter. But they also are hard-wielding powers. Here, what can the journalist do? Should he 66 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence be equipped or armed with camera and pen and only that be the protection against mighty forces? So, the mindsets of those who are controlling the government need to be changed. For that, I would suggest and submit that there has to be a worldwide movement.

I congratulate and thank the ICRC, the PIB and the Dhaka University all of whom have combined together, in this venture to do exactly that. We have to change the mind of the people. These messengers – the poets or the media persons – are doing a job that has always helped save humanity; that is the real one that will certainly save the humanity in future.

Therefore, one has to take note and act right now.

Mr. Mahfuz Anam: Moderators concluding remarks:

Just to provoke you into thinking, why are we talking about journalism? More and more people are talking about media media’s role, media’s impact, the role of journalists, etc. In other words, we are on focus. We have to understand that. Those of us who are in the profession, those of you who are observing us or interested in coming to us because the media deals with – what I would say – some of the most profound qualities of human life. We deal with freedom; we deal with diversity – diversity of views, diversity of cultures, diversity of religions, and all the diversities that make civilization so worthy, so immensely rich. Journalism, directly or indirectly deals with it. It deals with the right to differ. That is a very important concept. In that lies the soul of creativity. Now, you have freedom, you have diversity. You have the right to differ, if you like, on the ethical side. But on the practical side, journalism deals with accountability – accountability of the institution, of the government, of big corporations and also individuals. It deals with ensuring transparency of activity. So, you should take it in a group. You are talking about a whole range of intellectual activity in which journalism lies at the heart.

And it is because it lies at the heart that so many people are talking about it. All these features that I have told you about, have existed for a long time. But in the 21st century, our capacity, the journalism’s capacity, the media’s capacity to do all the things as underlined, have increased many fold. So, not only are we involved in some of the most fundamental features of what makes us human beings, we are able to do it far more effectively than ever before. Our power, if you like to call it, has increased enormously. With the increase of power, has come the question of responsibility. Our capacity to do good to society has increased thousand-fold and so, has our capacity to damage. It is in that absolutely enormous, challenging, enriching beautiful dichotomy, we are placed today. That is the point in time, when you are asking these questions. Thank you.

67 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

Kindly introduce yourselves and then ask questions.

Q. Mr. Bazuler: Unfortunately, I am a lecturer in the Media and the Communications Dept. of the Independent University of Bangladesh.

I am tempted to ask the veterans that journalists were supposed to be the vanguards or custodians of truth, impartiality and neutrality. How far the South Asian veterans engaged in the field of conflict zones, armed conflicts are maintaining it, and how much news are we receiving from the world and conflict zones, and how much it is State-sponsored propaganda?

A. Mr. Amitabh Roy Chowdhury: To begin with, different situations have different kinds of solutions; I can talk of my personal experience. It is not just a black and white saying that this is government’s propaganda and this is others’.

I will give an example of Naga (Nagaland) situation that is going on. I have visited their camps also on a guided tour. I have also covered extensively the talks which are going on between the government and the Nagas. There have been situations earlier - when they were in conflict mode, as I have already explained-when they would come with guns and ask you to put out stories. On the other hand, the government will ask you why you put it out. At times, funny things have happened. Our technicians in the PTI are also very innovative. They have used their mind to take it out this way – we have the teleprinters which circulates the news. They have taken out a plug from one teleprinter and put it on to the other and explaining to the terrorists and saying, ‘look, I am typing this here and this is appearing on the other teleprinter also, which means that it is going to Delhi and also all over the world`, but actually, it was not being circulated throughout. We have done that also to fool them.That has been one of the tactics which has been used.

Mr. Mahfuz Anam: His question was how much of war journalism is authentic?

Amitabh Roy Choudhary: Yes, I am coming to that. In this kind of a situation, when the two sides – I am not talking about war, I am talking about insurgency, which has progressed to a level – have grown to a level when they are holding talks. Particularly in the case of Nagas, there are some points which are genuine; there are others which are genuine from the point of view of the government. What I personally have been doing or a lot of people who have been covering this is that we have taken a very balanced approach; we have not said that this is correct and this is not. What we have done for example, if they are saying, look, we want a greater Nagaland or we want some more autonomy. We have taken the reaction from the government also and put the views of both sides in perspective.

68 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

In the Kargil war, it was not possible; and even it was not possible for us sitting in India to judge what is actually happening and what damage was caused on the other side. Though finally the Indian troops had captured all the mountain peaks which were taken over by them earlier and it was a victory for the Indian troops, but I was just speaking to my friends in Pakistan; the journalists from that side of the border were not at all allowed to go to the war scene. That had been a major grievance, though they were taken on a guided tour for a day and after some briefings, they were brought back. So, for them as well as for us, it was not possible to give an overall objective picture. During the war situation, the national media should take care of it.

Mr. Mahfuz Anam: The patriotic drums beat very loudly!

Mr. Surinder Singh Oberoi: I was a working journalist earlier. Now, I am with ICRC. I would like to add some comments of mine to what Mr. Amitabh has just mentioned; especially the question that you rephrased and asked - what are the responsibilities of a war correspondent or journalist while reporting?

It is duty of the media persons to be responsible as his reporting has repercussions in conflict area. Media person should use a tool of what I call it as an ‘IV fluid” – ‘I’ means investigation and ‘V’ means verification. The more number of times you investigate or verify the information collected by you through officials, eye witnesses, sources, the more reliable and credited story you file. It is an old saying that diplomats or official spokesperson sometimes deliberately whisper into the ears of the media persons the information that they want to circulate and then, in the cocktail circles/parties in the evening, spread around the same information quoting the newspaper. So, they are able to disseminate their information through media. It is again the responsibility of the media persons to investigate, verify the story and then report it. It is better to be second and right than to be first in reporting and wrong.

Mr. Shamushul Islam, Associate Prof. and Acting Chair of the Dept. of Journalism and Media Studies, Istanbul University, Bangladesh: As I understand, the theme of this session is ‘media and protection – what does the law say about it’. I was looking for a more specific presentation and some specific recommendations in terms of legal reforms and legal aspects. Unfortunately, the deliberations were more or less about media’s normative role and other statistics. We understand that all of us know about the statistics. Is it possible for us to sit together and specify the specific legal and policy measures – case by case – individual case studies, and devise policies and policy measures to protect journalists in South Asia in general and Bangladesh in particular?

69 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

Mr. Mahfuz Anam: It is a valid observation. Collectively, we have failed you. But we have enriched you in other ways. But let us see, if our panelists respond to that.

Answer from the Panel: I would add that Mr. Amitabh Roy in his presentation, mentioned the UN Resolution which had very specific suggestion or provision incorporated. Probably that and the elaboration of what the Geneva Convention may do for protecting the journalists together, might build up answers to that question and maybe, this Conference should be acting on that.

Mr. Mahfuz Anam: If I may add, the whole new worldwide trend towards enacting the Right to Information Act, which empowers citizens to seek unhindered information from the government and from other bodies. And also, it gives protection to some extent, to the journalists; that also perhaps could be something that we look into. But I think, as the Dean of the Journalism School, he has pointed out a very correct thing. Maybe, you can think of new legislations. But UN Resolution and some of the existing legal frameworks do provide us with good guidelines to do something in Bangladesh.

Dr. Mohammad, Mass Communication & Journalism Dept., Dhaka University: Mr. Farid Hossain said about the price of truth. Truth is the main feature of journalism. Many journalists have died for telling the truth, but are there any journalists who have been tightened for telling lies, writing false statement or report? It is rare that journalists criticize themselves. Why?

Mr. Farid Hossain: I do not really agree with the statement that journalists really do criticize themselves. We do criticize ourselves a lot. There have been lots of talks about that; we do stand against the journalism that you mentioned. That is how you look at it – at times, when things are going on like that, it should be done that way.

Your answer to the second question, most of the killings or deaths are straight murders. They can be tried under the normal law of the land. The unfortunate part of it is that in many countries including ours, those things are not done. That is why you have seen that in none of the cases, in which the journalists have died or killed; the trials have ended or the punishment is given. So there are laws but do we implement it?

Mr. Mahfuz Anam May I just add one more thing - I am not sure whether the question was addressed only to the journalists of this region or journalists all over the world. If it is for the world, then there are several examples, for example, in Great Britain, there is a news weekly or the weekly called ‘The Private Eye’ which reports on the misdeeds of the journalists themselves. So, somebody should think 70 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence of initiating such a venture here, if one had the courage and the money to do that. That is one part.

The other part is that protecting journalists against attacks by the States or by powerful persons may be okay, or they may as well be protected by having laws, written laws, more detailed laws than the law that operates. But what about the situation of insurgency, and what about the war situation?

I remember a story and I could not tell it then. It was in 1962, when we were participating in the anti-Ayub movement, the autocratic regime prevailed in the Dhaka University. One day, we just took refuge inside the campus. At that time, the police did not venture to come to the campus, for whatever reason. But then one of our senior students shouted at one of the bearers at the canteen; asking him why didn’t he go out and see whether they are still shooting. The bearer said, “how can I go? The police are still firing”. Senior student told him that the bearer was not a student. However, the bullets will not distinguish between students, non-students, journalists and non-journalists. Laws alone would not be of much help there.

Answer from the Panel: If I may add here, yes, we criticize ourselves, but the question from the student of the university is very valid. In Bangladesh, we do lack authentic media watchdog bodies – ‘authentic’ is the operating word here. Many people are watching the media, but they criticize it from their own angle. If you are hitting a vested interest, they will say that this journalism or this paper is bad, etc. But it is all arising from vested interest. But really authentic public interest based media watchdog body would be quite appropriate to have in Bangladesh and it would add to the quality of journalism.

On the question of protection of journalists, if the normal law works. If a journalist is murdered and a common citizen being murdered, law is really no different. It is just murder and if a murderer is apprehended, then obviously the law is upheld, but unfortunately in many countries including ours, the murderers are not always apprehended. If it is in a political environment, then if you are on the right side of politics, then not only that murder is punished, he is even protected. A democratic society which is actually established under law follows the law, respects law, then a well-functioning legal system is good enough to protect the journalist because freedom of press is guaranteed in the Constitution, freedom of press is guaranteed by law. That guarantee plus my security as a citizen – if not sufficient – maybe, close to sufficient. We, the journalists, do not want privileged laws, just meant for us. We just want to be able to do our job in a democratic environment where the Constitution guarantees the freedom of the press.

71 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

Ms. Pamela Philipose, Indian Express, Delhi: Mr. Jha can perhaps tell us because Nepal is a very good example of how legal empowerment and recognition of journalists in the 90s - when journalists and journalism was recognized and the media had emerged as the pillar of society and democracy - there were certain case laws; the judges have passed certain pronouncements. There was a case law established on the protection of journalists. Then, after that, if I may continue a little bit longer, as you went into the insurgency period, again there was a lot of disappearance of the journalists. Again the courts very often stood up and pronounced and after the King took over, there were moments when the courts stood out for the protection of the journalists. So, it is very interesting to take note of. Perhaps he should talk about that.

Mr. Dharmendra Jha: I am not prepared for that. But whatever I know, I will try to answer. After 90s, till now, we have a lot of different situations. During 1990- 2001, there existed one type of constitution and then after the King took over and after 2006, especially we have three kinds of political scenarios in Nepal. In that, we have different kinds of problems; during these times, we cannot forget the impact of Maoists. Now, they are in power, but yesterday, they were in the jungle and a lot of journalists were attacked by both the sides – Maoists and the State. Mainly after 2001 February incident, we have very difficult situation and in that time, we can say that the King resigned. The King and his government attacked the media; I have tried to mention in my paper also. There are some examples. Many media outlets were attacked by King and the Army. At that time, I was working for Himalaya Times, another vernacular daily. At that time, one Army Major came and dictated me saying that this way I can write and this could be published and this could not be punished, etc. But we tried – not only me, but many journalists tried - and they published whatever they got. But one incident is very important concerning Kanthipur FM and the Sadharnatha FM. The technical parts of FM were mooted by the King. The King’s army or the Information Ministry was there and after this event, 2-3 months later, the court gave a verdict that nobody or no rule should be a hindrance for FM and then, the FM came into existence. Thereafter, we have the Right to Information Act. Still we are having problems – we do not know when the elections are going to be held. So, the political parties are in trouble. I think, they do not have actual power because they are not elected. They underwent difficulties. So, let us see what is going to happen.

Mr. Gopal Guragain: Regarding judiciary’s intervention for media protection, we have many cases in the judiciary. In 1992, Nepal adopted a new communication policy under which the private organization can have access to the radio frequency. That was the policy, but the government denied the license, nearly 7 years later. Lastly the private organizations’ group went to the court and the court ordered

72 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence to provide license. The news was banned in the beginning. Again, the group, lawyers and the media persons went to the court and the judiciary ordered the government not to stop news in private radio stations. That was the first one.

During the insurgency and the King’s regime, there are many cases concerning media protection. For the protection of journalists, the Federation of Nepalese Journalist’s Association, Mr. Tara Dhar, who was the President at that time, gave a statement against the royal coup. That was the first public announcement, saying that it is the royal coup and it is against democracy. They were detained by the military or police. The court gave verdict that the government cannot detain journalists because of those statements. There are many cases in the judiciary in Nepal.

Mr. Mahfuz Anam: If the judiciary stands besides media, then it will be a very powerful mix. In any society, where the judiciary has stood by the media, in that country, freedom of media has expanded enormously. From those of us from Bangladesh who have not really followed the Nepal story, it has been a magnificent example. Nepal media’s struggle against the monarchy and ultimately coming of democracy has been an enormous struggle for freedom in which the journalists themselves have played an absolutely glorious role. All of us in Bangladesh have not been fully aware of the tremendous role that media has played in that evolution.

Q. Mr. Mahbabullah Usmani, Student, Mass Communication and Journalism, Dhaka University: Mr. Amitabh told us about the protection for journalists. Do you think that an international law is needed for their protection?

Mr. Amitabh Roy Chowdhury: There are laws. I did not go into the details, though I had already mentioned. I wanted something to come out of our experiences in the field. I am not carrying any document about what these parameters are, which have been laid down by the Resolution 1738. Anyway, we can pass it on later. ICRC can help us in doing that. But laws are to be implemented. There are laws already in existence, as the Chair has mentioned; laws are not of much help in this kind of a situation. You have to face it on your own, when you are in the field. In that situation, the alertness of your mind is the only weapon which will safeguard you.

Mr. Mahfuz Anam: You must be conscious of the limitations of the international law because as of today, still sovereignty lies with the nation-states, and the international law is of limited applicability. If you are talking about war zone where hardly anybody respects any law and if it is an insurgency situation then an insurgent is essentially straggling against the established State and 73 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence so, breaking the law is basically a part of the ethos. So, it is a very complex situation and journalists need all the support and sympathy from any quarter possible.

Q. Mr. Shafikur Islam, Lecturer: What type of security measures are taken for those journalists who are killed or injured in the battlefield?

Answer: I know about AP, BBC and the international media. They send their reporters to an organization called Centurion. It is a London based organization, run by some former military official. They do train journalists who are sent to war zones. They teach in two weeks almost everything in preliminary – how to deal with the first aid, helping the colleagues, what you have to do when you are covering a country where there are lots of mines and how you deal with the situations like in Iraq. I can tell you about AP, all its journalists all over the world are already trained by Centurion. They do it, on their own accord. Anyone who has not gone through this training is not sent to places like Iraq, Afghanistan or some other conflict zones.

Mr. Zakir Hussain: AP and other organizations do have that strength to send people to Centurion but those who do not have that ability, they can visit CPDA website. This site has very well written text as to how to cover a trouble zone, especially conflict zone.

Mr. Mahfuz Anam: That is very valuable information.

Mr. Finn Ruda: I was to just comment on what we have been discussing this afternoon. This concerns the legal protection to the journalists, the law which is or which is not in place. IHL pertaining to international armed conflicts, the Geneva Convention and the Additional Protocols I and II contain certain of them. My colleagues here might tell me that I should be a little more affirmative. But I would say that they contain certain limited protection for journalists engaged in dangerous missions.

I want to raise one point – one thing is international law and then there were also some comments on the ability of international law to regulate the way we function. ICRC conducted, over five years, a study, together with a number of States on what we call customary law norms of IHL. These are registration on state practices, whether or not a State has ratified or signed international treaty obligation. And interestingly, among the 600 rules that came out, reflecting international law and protection issues, it said about journalists, and I quote here: ‘civilian journalists engaged in professional missions in areas of armed conflicts must be respected and protected as long as they are not taking direct part in

74 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence hostility’. So, there are legal norms in international law and we can go into the details tomorrow.

But I would also like to caution because States today are discussing, what constitutes participation and active participation in hostilities. Merely thinking about it, writing about it, might in certain extreme cases, is part of the deliberations.

75

Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence SESSION - 3

THE MEDIA AND THE LAW OF ARMED CONFLICT

Mr. Bazlur Rahman (Chairman and Moderator), Editor, Sangbad, Dhaka Bangladesh

As you all know by now that the law of conflict of war is also known as international humanitarian law. What is international humanitarian law? This is a state of law which seeks, for humanitarian reasons, to limit the effects of armed conflict. It particularly protects persons who are not or are no longer participating in hostilities and restricts the means and methods of warfare. International humanitarian law is also known as the law of war or law of the armed conflict. International humanitarian law is part of the international law which is the body of rules governing the relations between States. It is contained in agreements between States, Treaties and Conventions, in customary laws, which consist of State practice considered by them as legally binding or in general principles.

International humanitarian law applies to armed conflicts. It does not regulate whether a State may actually use force or start a war. This is governed by an important but distinct part of international law set out in the United Nations Charter. We know that this does not stop States or conflicting parties from waging war or conflict, but it seeks to limit the ill effects of war or conflict, particularly non-combatant people. Fortunately, we in Bangladesh do not have any international war, inter-State war, involving Bangladesh, but we have seen certain insurgencies. Some time back in the Chittagong Hill Tracts an insurgency continued for quite a few years, but fortunately that has been settled by a Peace Treaty known as Chittagong Hill Tracts Peace Treaty signed by the Bangladesh government and the armed insurgents fighting for their rights. Now, we are faced with another kind of insurgency. These are Islamic fundamentalists. They do not believe in man- made laws or State’s sovereignty, people’ sovereignty. They try to change the system of government from this type of governance to a Shariat State where the laws of Shariat will prevail and will supersede all other laws. The Government is trying to stop it, and with some success I must say. But our journalists are endangered by certain other things which do not come under the International Humanitarian Law.

We are all more aware, more familiar with human law, human rights, but this international humanitarian law is different from human rights, and this involves particularly people who are affected by armed conflict and those who are not directly involved in or participant in conflicts. I will only say that today, though the

77 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence scope of the discussion is very wide, we will mainly restrict ourselves to the type of dangers journalists face in covering these armed conflicts and what is there in these international humanitarian laws to protect journalists, to what extent and how successfully.

Mr. Nurul Kabir, Editor, New Age, Bangladesh

Topic: Journalists engaged in dangerous professional missions in areas of armed conflicts – State response

I was telling my TV audience last night that every institution in our country at the moment is claiming that it has become free. Election Commission claims that it is free; Anti-Corruption Branch says that it is free; Government says that it is free; Army is operating freely. Who is not free is our people! I mean, their fundamental rights, constitutionally guaranteed rights have been taken away and that too in the name of improving the democratic system, in the name of democratizing the society and the State. As far as I understand History and Politics that is a stupid idea that you can improve on democracy with the fundamental rights of 140 million people keeping suspended. So, when the State organs are free of the accountability of the people, State always develops the tendency of being fascist because any democratic State is supposed to be subjugated under the general will of the people. When the people are not free, nothing is free. Only stupids can claim that they are free with their people not free.

I would be very brief. I know that distinguished speakers are here. Perhaps I will feel comfortable to receive questions and interact. I will just outline certain things. Our issue is how State responds to journalists or reporting, whatever you say, in areas engaged in armed conflicts. So, we have two-three issues here. One is conflict, reporting and State’s response. Well, State, to put it in one way, consists of politically organized people. State, as a machine, is coercive. It thrives on its coercive forces, but at the same time, it cannot continue to exist without some kind of consent of the people. Consent is manufactured; good or bad. So, what kind of State responds to what kind of conflicts depends on the nature of the conflict and the nature of journalism that is involved in reporting any conflict. If it is a Nation State, as I do believe and it has been empirically proved in many parts of the world, it excludes the minority groups, ethnicity-wise. As the Hon. Chair of this session pointed out, when we organized as a Nation State, the Nation State of the Bengalis, the people living in Chittagong Hill Tracts, particularly belonging to smaller ethnic communities, they were excluded. And excluded people have grievances, which are being solved in many ways. The dominant group tried to address the grievances militarily. Their response was a military one. So, conflict occurred. Now, how the mainstream Press covered that? That depends on what particular newspaper or TV channel and what particular reporter is reporting. His or her mindset, how he 78 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence or she looks at it is important. If a journalist is a national chauvinist, it is only natural that he or she will be covering the conflicts from the point of the Bengali interest. If he does not believe in national chauvinism, he or she will have some sympathy reflected in the reporting or writings about that conflict. The consequence or response is directly proportionate to the attitude, to the angle, that one reporter or a newspaper takes in the editorial stand too.

In our case, mostly what happened was that the State intervened militarily. So, those who supported the idea were the blue-eyed boys of the Government of the time. Those who did not subscribe to this idea became enemies. Now, how does the State do it in different ways? The first thing is, in the Nation States, you have national security laws, and the first thing that the State does is giving bad names to that which is not considered patriotic. Second thing, legally speaking, it tends to implicate the reporters legally under the national security laws. That happens in Nation States like these. If the conflict is between religions, what we have seen in Gujarat in India, the State authorities of Gujarat have found those reporters and journalists sympathetic to the victims of the pogrom as not patriotic. State always loves to see embedded journalism. In Maldives, which is a male chauvinistic State by Constitution; the Constitution says some top-level posts like President, Speaker, or Prime Minister cannot be held by a woman. That is constitutionally obstructed. It is only natural that journalism that does not like this idea is bound to be legally and constitutionally implicated in the entire State. They are not supposed to be appreciated by the State. In Sri Lanka, we have been witnessing for years. The mainlanders are Sinhalese. Whenever they talk about some genuine causes of the opponent group, they are either intimidated in different ways or are given bad names. Only the other day, Myanmar, in our neighbourhood, when State targeted the monks, the Junta stopped the dissemination of the whole information system.

The point that I am trying to make is how State will respond depends on the nature of the State. If the nature of the conflict is between two Nations, is between two ethnic groups, is between two religious groups - you have different kind of responses, mostly intimidating and coercive. But one thing is common that State always has dominant ideas on which it is based on as regards the consent of the people is concerned. When they cannot do it, the States fail to intimidate or fail to stop objective journalism, or fail to stop the views sympathetic to the victims, eventually they coerce or harass. This is perhaps common everywhere.

I do not think I have much more to say about it because I do not think that there can be some other angles that I have not covered. It will be interesting for me to respond to queries. So, I stop here by saying that the nature of the conflicts, nature of the State, nature of the reporting are inter-related. State has a coercive apparatus. Primarily they want to pursue the journalists who act in the way they

79 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence act. If they do not, they first intimidate, harass, give bad names or even kill them. There are a lot of examples in our part of the world.

Mr. Bazlur Rahman: I will tell you a short story, my own personal experience. One of my reporters in Nagamatti was kidnapped by plain-clothes people in broad daylight. His only fault was that he was a little sympathetic to the struggling Hill people. So, we moved to the highest authority in the State, including the Chief of Defence Intelligence. He assured us that this man was not in their custody. But after two years, he was produced in a court on a stretcher. The plea was that he left for India and while coming back, he was arrested from the border. The proof was that he has a ten rupee Indian note in his pocket. So, years later, when one of the Commanders in the Hill Tracts asked me, “Why the relationship between civil and military personnel is so strained in Bangladesh?”, I told him this story and asked him, “Do you expect that after this experience, any of my reporters will venture in reporting the truth?” I do not say sympathetically; even truth is not allowed if the State is chauvinistic as Mr. Kabir has said, or if the State is authoritarian and not accountable to the people. It is very easy to sway public opinion in the name of Nation, in the name of State, in the name of Religion. So, people really did not know what was happening in the Hill Tracts.

Mr. Gopal Guragain, Managing Director of Ujyalo FM and Satellite Channel, Katmandu, Nepal

Topic: Journalists engaged in dangerous professional missions in areas of conflicts - Employers’ response

I am not a professional manager. I am still a journalist. I would love to produce radio programmes, besides reporting. I have been given the topic of ‘Employers’ response’. I will try my best not to disappoint you. Mainly I will share my experience based in Nepali Media, particularly in the new media of Nepal – we call it ‘Independent Radio’. I have a question to you before speaking on the topic. Why people invest in media? In most of the developing countries, people invest in media because there is the prestige and there is privilege, there is profit and there is power and also propaganda. The power factor seems quite strong in the newly developed democratic countries, like Nepal and also in Bangladesh. I do not know more about Bangladesh, but it is so in Nepal. There is power in politics, contracts for the business, and the power to influence the heart and minds of the bureaucracy as well as the people. Besides political parties; particularly the insurgent groups run their media organization in Nepal for the propaganda purpose. I must say that the new political party, before April, 2006, was the insurgent group – CT and Maoists – which runs five radio stations up to now. Most of the political powers always want to have their own media organization for propaganda. 80 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

What I am asking or why I am putting these points is because I want to enter into the debate on the management part of the media organization which has to respond to the conflict reporting.

In Nepal, before April, 2006, there were nearly 14-15 people killed each day in the armed conflict and more than 20-25 people were being wounded, and more than 50 people were being displaced from their homeland, from the war place. It was the data as obtained before April, 2006, when there was no movement, and there was armed conflict all over the country. When the conflict spread all over the country then the media owners, whatever may be their interest in investing, they had to respond to it in any way. In the beginning when the conflict had to be responded to by the management, we realized and seen the crisis of confidence at different levels, that is within the news team, production team, etc. There was crisis between seniors and juniors and between pro-democrats and pro-leftists. If someone is close to the insurgent group or with the security forces and who are reporting on such bits, they may be suspected by the management or by the other groups. So, it created a crisis of confidence in the team and also in different departments within the organization. The crisis of confidence is also seen in the Board of Directors, shareholders because of differences of opinion and also because of their need to secure their investments. We have seen that type of syndrome in Nepal.

So, another factor we have seen and observed is crisis of credibility. Credibility is the heart of any media organization. Most of the media organizations start losing their credibility and their audience because they cannot respond properly to the issues or the events. There is also crisis of credibility among States. There is fear in the management always because they think that their licences will not be renewed or their stations will be closed. I am basically talking about Radio only. The management also loses risk taking capabilities, when the conflict spreads all over the country. There can be crisis between organizations, like the journalists’ organization, the entrepreneurs’ organization. It can be some sort of crisis of credibility, and the crisis starts from that point. The situation becomes worse when there is a total failure of rule of law, and the democratic institutions are halted from working. The risk bearing capacity of the management becomes worse. They hesitate to take risks against insurgent groups and the authoritarian State. There is the factor of losing any one of the things that is - prestige, power, profit, propaganda or privilege, etc. It is observed that the management is always sandwiched between insurgent groups and the State, between own team members, and between their Directors or the shareholders.

When the conflict spreads all over the country, we have seen that the market resources are limited for the media. The first strike is to halt production and

81 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence transportation of product so that marketing becomes very slow. The investment is stopped; basically, new investment is stopped. The on-going projects are obstructed. The government expenditure on social sector development is also halted and is shifted to be spent on security. So, it reduces the income sources of the media organizations which come basically from advertisement. It also gets reduced due to competition between media organizations – between radio and TV, between TV and print, between electronic and print media.

When the armed conflict is spread, the management always looks at the expenditure and financial aspects of it. The expenditure increases due to security reasons. Differences increase due to uncertain political future. Crisis of confidence increases due to lack of risk bearing capacity. Investors feel insecure in all forms. Then, the main sufferers are the journalists in Nepal, most of the time. In those cases, in Nepal, what we have seen is that the journalists are the trouble-makers within the management. That was seen during the emergency period when King took the power. First of all, the radio stations reduced their teams and fired journalists first.

Coming to another point in regard to this crisis management, as far as radio is concerned, let us see the whole environment. Radio is a new media in South Asia, particularly FM media is a new media in South Asia, and it is so in Nepal. We have only ten years of experience in having an independent, private radio. Nepal does not have much skill in regard to broadcast management, that is media marketing, particularly the broadcast marketing and content management. We have history of the print for nearly 100 years, but radio is very new for Nepal, particularly the private and the independent broadcast is being exercised only from the last seven to eight years. So, content management is another area lacking in skill. The technology is very frequently being changed in the radio. There are other factors which management has to deal with. There is always pressure. When a new radio station was started in Nepal in 1998, that was Radio Sagarmata, the first community radio in South Asia, the armed conflict started after two years. Then, that created pressure – by the armed group and by the security forces. We have many incidents where the armed groups asked us to broadcast revolutionary songs on the radio station, and the State asked us as to why we were violating the broadcasting law. The radio had to respond to that.

Another factor is the pressure from the audience. The audience always needs good things to listen and quality content. There was another pressure factor which was the trade unions. Particularly these days, some of the trade unions are very active in closing down some of the print media as well as radio stations. After democratic movement of April, 2006, nearly half a dozen of the media organizations have been closed for a day, two days, seven days and up to 15-20 days, due to these unions. This is another pressure which the management has to handle. 82 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

We could say about the new Nepali media, that is FM radio, that there is no protection from the State before the new interim Constitution was promulgated. Before that, any time, the government can come and close down the FM radio station. That was the main threat. Another factor which management has to respond to is tax. The tax in respect of Nepali radio is so high. It is more than what it is on tobacco and liquor companies. You have to pay four per cent royalty, whatever income you may have. Another factor is the renewal fees which are quite high.

These are the factors which the Nepali radio has seen and the Nepali broadcast managers or the employers have faced during the armed conflict. Even under such a harsh situation, the Nepali media are getting strong support and going well, in my opinion because of the support from professional groups to have good content, the audience support for the quality content, and the support of the civil society for its freedom and freedom of expression, and the strong support of judiciary when we went to the court. For example, our organization was closed down first by the King. It was ordered to close down by the King because we were doing the news thing all over the country and sending it through the satellite. Nearly 22 radio stations were broadcasting the news live from Kathmandu all over the State, including the remote areas. Then, the King’s government thought that if they close the source, then all radio stations would not have news. When there is no news, the radio will be useless. They did it. We went to the judiciary, and the judiciary has given a lot of courage to the management as well as the reporters when they were in crisis. Also, the Nepali media organizations and the media people got support from the legitimate political parties and advocacy organizations. So, we are doing well. Thank you.

Mr. Amit Barua, Foreign Editor, The Hindustan Times, India

Topic: Journalists engaged in dangerous professional missions in areas of armed conflicts – Journalists’ response

Before I move on to my brief presentation, I would just like to inform my friends from Nepal that you might have had only ten years of experience as far as news on radio is concerned. In India we have none because the State has imposed very strict controls on news broadcasting. So, this is something which we in fact might learn from your country as to how to go about the business of having news on radio which I think will be a major frontier for India as and when our government decides to relax controls on radio.

Now, I will move on to the subject that is given to me. But before I come to the South Asian context, I just would like to make a few general points about conflict reporting and what one sees internationally in the region. I know Iraq and 83 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

Afghanistan were touched upon yesterday by some of my colleagues who spoke from here. I think the work of journalists in conflict situations is becoming increasingly difficult even as the means to report are becoming easier because the conflicts themselves are becoming more complicated and more difficult to understand. I think there are situations in which not enough is known before we actually go into the field and begin reporting. While there are in international war situations, norms and rules, but if you look at a country as simply like Iraq, you see huge ethnic, sectarian and religious divisions. So it is becoming more and more difficult for a reporter who goes from outside and wants to report. Sticking with Iraq, what do we see, reports from there? We see that according to the ‘Reporters without Borders’ about 65 journalists were killed last year in Iraq. Interestingly, of these 65 journalists killed, 63 are Iraqis. What does that show? That shows that increasingly Western media organizations have to depend on Iraqi stringers and Iraqi locals to report the news. As we all know that those who carry the camera are always at a greater risk than people like us who are from the print medium.

I would only like to point out or share a small quote of a woman, Maggie Okeene who is the Editorial Director of Guardian Films. She has been quoted as saying and I quote, “Usually we are only as good as our local fixers.” That is about Iraq. Now, this is the situation that the international media finds itself in. It is interesting to see that these are organizations with huge resources. They also, in Iraq, put in place a new system of private contractors actually protecting journalists. So, we are in a situation in a sense that we in South Asia do not understand or do not comprehend because these are hugely resource rich organizations. The way they are reporting that conflict is very different from what we have previously seen. It is arguable that are we getting the full picture from there, for instance, basic things like electricity in Baghdad, is it better now than it was in 2003. I think all these are issues for the Western media to debate and discuss.

I would now move on to the South Asian context. If you all permit me, I would share some of my few experiences as a reporter who has reported from some conflict situations in India and has been posted in Sri Lanka and Pakistan. When I started visiting Jammu and Kashmir in December, 1989 as a young reporter, I quickly understood in the next few months that I went there with the kinds of pressure that you work under. And I am glad that there are some students of journalism here. It is a pretty simple logic. When I started going to Kashmir, where you stayed was important. For instance, when you landed in Srinagar, if you decided to stay at the Centaur Hotel, you would be easily marked as a person who is living under the protection of the security forces because the Centaur Hotel at that time was under the charge of the security forces. So, my Kashmiri journalist friends immediately told me that I should not stay there and they gave me an excellent advice because in a sense by the very choice of where you stay, you would be

84 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence defining not may be for yourself but for others the kind of reports that you might put out. I think credibility is clearly very important. So, in a sense, it was a kind of informal embedding, if you like. Because obviously your movements would be restricted by your very decision to stay, where you are living, how you are reporting and how these things are happening. In fact, I must share with you that when the first ICRC delegation went to Kashmir, I gave the same advice to the then Head of the Delegation because all these things are very important in conflict situations.

My larger point is that it is important for individuals to build up their credibility. In Kashmir, I went there between 1989 and 1995 for The Hindu and the Frontline where I must have spent five or six months. I think in conflict situations, finally, for journalists, it is your credibility which matters most. Your credibility is important because it impinges on your security. These two are absolutely linked because people see what you are writing. People know what you are writing. They are seeing on a daily basis the kinds of reports that you are putting out. In conflict situations, it is pretty easy because you really have no protection if someone takes umbrage. I must say here that I was lucky that I was living in New Delhi and reporting and going to Srinagar and coming back, but for those people like Surinder Oberoi who was living there actually, it was quite a different situation. It was a ball game because you were all the time targeted. That is one point that I wanted to make about Jammu and Kashmir.

Then in 1995, I was posted to Sri Lanka. It is a different milieu. It is a completely different kind of a conflict. It is a conflict which has taken thousands of lives and we had two of our colleagues from Sri Lanka who spoke yesterday. But I would just like to share with you a couple of incidents that happened there which shows the kind of threat that you work under. In Sri Lanka, while I was there, there were two major attacks – one on the Central Bank of Sri Lanka in Colombo when the LTTE drove a truck full of explosives into the Central Bank building; the other was an attack on the oil tanks, the only storage facility of oil in Sri Lanka. That happened at about 12.30 at night. When we reached the spot, obviously, we wanted to talk to few people. There were thousands of people, who were fleeing at that time, and there were three or four other journalists who had gone at that night and we all wanted to get a complete picture from the eyewitnesses. Even as the oil tankers were burning, we managed to go inside to see what was happening. In retrospect, I realize that was a major mistake because 15 minutes after we left the spot, a BBC Correspondent was shot there. We were lucky that we had moved out because all this while after the LTTE had used the RPGs to attack the oil tanks, they were actually sitting inside the facilities and they not only shot the journalists, they killed 17 Air Force personnel that day. These are the kinds of pressures that you often work under. The BBC Correspondent came back with a flak jacket which he

85 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence could not really use in that kind of a situation. But that is the response of journalist organizations usually.

In terms of providing resources, it may be fastidious to suggest that a flak jacket might not be very useful while you are reporting from Colombo, but the fact of the matter is that in our South Asian context, resources are very limited. So, whether we are talking about internal conflicts or people being posted abroad, I think the key as far as journalists are concerned that to do their job, they must have adequate resources, they must have adequate training and they must have, most important, support from their organizations. That is something which I found in Pakistan. I must give credit to the organization that I worked previously for, while I was posted in Pakistan for the kind of support that I got from them.

I would like to reveal a small story which I have written about also is that while I was posted in Islamabad, one day, the Indian High Commissioner called me and the Press Trust of India Correspondent. There were only two Indian journalists based in Pakistan, and there were only two Pakistani journalists based in India. That is the current situation as well. When he called us, we thought it was for a chit-chat. But he went on to reveal that they had received some intelligence information that a militant group might want to kidnap an Indian journalist. So, he put us on notice. He said that we must inform him as to where we were going and what we were doing. Given the fact that a senior functionary of the Government of India was alerting you, you have to take it seriously. He told me that I must keep in touch with our High Commission. He said that they would designate a particular officer to which I said no. I am just trying to tell you that what I did there. I had two or three choices. First, I informed my office that this was the kind of information that we had received and I also added a disclaimer that these bits of information often come. Finally, what happened was that I stayed there. I did take some precautions like informing my wife who was with me about my whereabouts or being in touch occasionally with some of our officials. Essentially, the larger point is that we had no protection. If for some reason, somebody had taken umbrage to something that you had written, you have actually no protection. You could have been whisked out of your house in Islamabad and you would have crossed the border into Afghanistan and not much might have been known about you. The larger point I am making is that for a journalist to do their jobs, you must have presence of mind in difficult situations. That is something which comes with experience, with knowing the place where you are living in. So, these are the larger kind of problems that you might face. Since I have had the privilege of working in both Sri Lanka and Pakistan, which were quite different situations, I think the only kind of generalization that you can make from this is as far as journalists’ responses are concerned - I am going to be brief and end here - that support from your organizations is critical. You must be in a position to pick up

86 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence the telephone or send an e-mail or talk to your editors and you have to get support from them. I told another colleague from a different organization that either you can grapple with the situation that you are facing or you can grapple with the organization. You cannot do both at the same time. That is really very clear. So, as far as journalists’ response is concerned, what do we want? We want to be in a position to be able to do our job well, to be able to report as freely and as fairly. I must say that in the three-and-a-half years that I spent in Pakistan, there were some issues, but I reported without hindrance and without fear. There were times when there were some pressures from the State organizations because the nature of your visa can be changed. We had some limited exits and entries. So, there can be issues and there can be pressures. But by and large I must say that I was able to report quite freely and including the times that India and Pakistan were at war including the mini-war that we fought in Kargil in 1999. I happened to report from there. Perhaps, the job became easier for me because officially Pakistan was not at war; it was the Kashmiri guerrillas or insurgents who were fighting that war. But I was able to report first-hand what has happened there, the kind of situation that existed in Pakistan.

I always told myself that I had two jobs. One was to report from there and the other was to ensure that my successor would be able to come. So, you are also responsible in a sense for the organization. You do things for the organization. As a print journalist, other thing that I did was never speak to television because you never know what kind of stuff they might carry. So, essentially it was important that if you were thrown out for some reasons from there for reporting, it was for a story that you wrote for your own newspaper. You could be responsible for what you had written or what you had not written.

I am going to just make a couple of brief points and say that information is the key that when you enter a situation, when you go to a foreign country or you are going into a conflict area. I think, journalists today have the tools at their disposal to be well informed about a particular place before you go in. I think information is key; support from your organization is key; and thirdly, your logistics are very important in conflict situations. If you are able to get your logistics right, where you are travelling, who you are meeting, who you should be meeting or who you should be avoiding to meet, these are only things that you learn on the spot when you are there in a difficult situation. You can always draw upon the experience of people who have been there. In Pakistan when I reported from there, I think it was clear to me that without the support that I got from my Pakistani journalist friends, I would not have been able to do my job. I think that is also very critical. You must be able to interact with people and understand the situation from their perspective. I am going to end here and I would be happy to take any questions on larger issues as well from the audience. Thank you very much.

87 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

Mr. Surinder Oberoi, Communication Officer, ICRC, Delhi

Topic: Journalists in danger – a new law needed for their protection?

First of all, I will try to fit myself in the shoes of a scholar, a Vice-Chancellor, that I am not. At the outset, let me confess, when I was a journalist working in Jammu and Kashmir and in other different areas, I did not know anything about international humanitarian law. Now, I repent – as I would had given better treatment to my stories when I was covering Kargil war or situation in Jammu and Kashmir. I would have had given some different angles to my stories. That is where I would suggest, especially to the journalist students, that it is very important for you to know at least the broad parameters of the International Humanitarian Law. You do not have to become lawyers to know the same. We do not even have to go by the definitions of the law. But if we are aware of some sort of a law that speaks about a particular situation that you are witnessing it definitely will help you to built up the story you are working on. As a journalist, I covered several different situations for the last fifteen years before joining ICRC in 2003. Couple of times, as a journalist, I was kidnapped by different stakeholders and once beaten up badly by police. But if you are credible, and you file your stories objectively, as several speakers mentioned in their presentations, chances are you will be respected by all the sides and there will be less dangers against you. So the first law for a journalist present in the conflict area is to maintain credibility and neutrality.

Dear friends, as such, for a journalist, there is no obligation to be present at the spot. In other words I would say, there is yet to be any law where it speaks that a journalist must be present at a particular situation. It is a profession which a journalist has choosen and his professional ethics demand that he should be present on the spot and that is why he is present there.

Presently, the journalists are facing lot of difficulties while reporting from the field. As mentioned yesterday by Mr. Amitabh and today, by Mr. Amit that how many journalists were killed while performing their professional duties in the last couple of years. One of the international institutions dealing with the media issues recorded that in ten years, more than a thousand journalists and their associates belonging to 91 nations were killed across the globe. Imagine the difficulties that the media persons are facing while bringing in the news that you read every morning in your newspapers or watch them on TV.

The media persons and media organizations are rethinking whether their fraternity can have some laws that can protect and save them while reporting. Presently, there is limited protections available to the journalists. Media persons working on

88 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence dangerous assignments in some of the countries even do not have any protection. It totally dependes, where you are working or covering the story in which situation. You are at the mercy of the local laws and local authorities. As such, the general global protection for the media person is still not there.

Next part of our presentation is that what does law speaks about the protection of a media person in a conflict area. Is there any law that protects a journalist?

Special Rapporteur, UN Commission on Human Rights in January 2006 took the issue very seriously and they said, “Press Freedom is one of the pillars of a democratic society. Consequently States have the primary responsibilities to ensure protection and security of journalists and are responsible for ensuring that crime against media professionals are brought to justice”

Here, UN commission on Human Rights very strongly asked the state governments to provide the security to the media persons. However, there was as such not much of the suggestion to have an international treaty or convention to safe guard media interests for which several media organisations are fighting today.

Some of the organisations like Emblem campaign for the media are asking for a specific emblem for the working journalists to be recognised internationally so that they like aid workers are recognised and are not attacked or killed as a collateral damage.

The World Press Freedom Committee in 1987 drafted a charter for a free press asking for the freedom of the media in all circumstances. UNESCO passed a resolution condemning violence against journalists. In 1997. It called all member States to refine legislation to make it possible to prosecute and sentence those who instigate the assassination of persons exercising the right to freedom of expression.

The Universal declaration of Human Rights Article 19 meanwhile is one of the laws in peacetime and wartime that allows media person to express his or her opinion without prejudice or fear. It says, “Everyone has the right to the freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media regardless of frontiers.”

Security Council Resolution 1738 passed in the year 2000 condemns attacks against journalists in Conflict situation and emphasised that journalists in a conflict situation shall be considered as Civilians.

89 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

Additional Protocol 1 Article 79 considers journalists engaged in dangerous professional missions in areas of armed conflict shall be considered as “civilians,” It further says, “They shall be protected as such under the Conventions and this Protocol provided they take no action adversely affecting their status as civilians…”

However, mind you several of the countries including India, Pakistan, United States, China, Russia and several other important countries have not signed the additional protocols of Geneva conventions.

However, according to Geneva Convention III, article IV; “accredited war correspondents if captured during international armed conflicts are entitled to prisoners of war status. Persons who accompany the armed forces without actually being members there of, such as…war correspondents”

The armed forces are obliged to issue ID card to the accompanying media persons as was mentioned yesterday by Mr Swapandas. Journalists are to be afforded all the protection due to combatants. Their equipment can be seized but they are not obliged to respond to the interrogation. The sick or wounded journalists are to receive medical treatment and if they are detained, they are to be treated humanely.

Therefore, media persons accompanying the troops must carry the identity card issued by the concerned authorities. Here, war correspondents can even wear the uniform of the army but cannot carry a weapon even for your own protection. If a journalist carries a weapon, he can be a target of the opposite party.

In addition, let me make it clear that there is no obligation in international law for journalists to report or monitor genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity. It is a profession as such that media persons choose and thus become obliged to cover the stories in conflict area. Then they need to take care of some of the obligations which are: That they must not take active part in the hostilities, must not engage in espionage or spying, must ensure that they do not humiliate or degrade any person, must ensure that they do not hold Prisoners of War to insult or public curiosity, must not incite violence against civilians in situation of armed conflict, must not incite genocide, war crimes or crimes against humanity.

War correspondents and other journalists covering the conflict may be required to disclose their confidential sources before international criminal tribunals in circumstances where the evidence sought is of direct and important value in determining a core issue in the case, and that evidence cannot be reasonably obtained elsewhere. Most of these are general obligations and one should strictly

90 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence follow the rule. For example in Rwanda case, seven of the journalists are facing war crimes and are in jail.

These are some of the media laws that media person while covering conflict must know about. Now I leave the floor open so that we can debate and suggest as to whether we need a new law for media persons protection. Thank you.

Ambassador Farooq Sobhan, President, Bangladesh Enterprise Institute, Bangladesh

Topic: Civil Society view on media and the danger they face in conflict reporting

As we all know, the two pillars with which we are most familiar with as members of civil society – one is the right to information. I think it is very heartening that this important pillar has today been adopted by civil society in Bangladesh quite vigorously and is being pursued vigorously. The second and of course much more established pillar has been the freedom of the press and that too has been very much a matter of attention and priority as far as civil society is concerned. A subject which I think does need to be adopted, in pretty much the same way that these other two pillars have been adopted, is the subject of the protection and upholding the rights of journalists because in a sense this right flows directly from these other two pillars which I spoke about; more so, in recent years, where the journalists’ profession particularly in our part of the world has become quite hazardous or risky one. Of course, this is most notable in the case of the media’s coverage of armed conflicts, but in fact, as we all know, particularly in Bangladesh, this extends even beyond the coverage of armed conflicts. In our case and perhaps we can also argue this point that combating terrorism is a form of armed conflict and, therefore, falls within purview of our discussion of this subject today. The media that has been covering this subject in Bangladesh has been exposed to considerable danger and risk.

A further aspect of this, and this is true I suspect not only in Bangladesh but in other countries in our Region in particular, has been the manifestation of what I would only describe as acute politicization. It too has posed a major risk in press coverage of political events and we have many examples of that here in Bangladesh. What we do know is that the profession of journalism has today expanded into many areas because it is not simply the print media that we are talking about, but television and radio. Both of which now play an important role, particularly we have seen on television the coverage of the current events in Iraq and Afghanistan and, of course, Palestine and Israel, which has been a major, if you like, a theatre of conflict for many years now, almost going back to the creation of the State of Israel in 1948. 91 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

Closer to home, as we see, virtually all the countries of South Asia starting with my own Bangladesh, India, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Pakistan have today become areas where the role of the media is of great importance but where there are clearly dangers that have manifested themselves. I do not know what is the exact figure of the number of journalists who have been victims in pursuing their profession in South Asia, but we do have a figure and I stand to be corrected that whereas the number of journalists who were killed in covering armed conflicts in 2005 was 63. Last year, the figure was double and was 120. So, we are also seeing that the risks have increased enormously. Iraq of course is now cited as the most obvious example of this, but we know that covering conflicts in Africa and other parts of the world have proved to be equally hazardous.

I have been asked to speak today on what should be the role of civil society in addressing this problem of the dangers faced by the media. First and foremost, I think it is important for civil society to recognize the fact that the media’s role is changing and that the media does need further protection both legally and I think perhaps more important than legally because we have seen some of the inherent weaknesses in the application of laws, particularly in our part of the world. But I would say much more important would be the voice of civil society in speaking up in support of the media and the ability of the media to carry out its role without hindrance and with adequate protection.

I want to cite here a case with which I happened to be familiar with first hand experience. Many of you will recall that years back during the time of the Awami League Government we had a major incident of flare up on the India-Bangladesh border in the North East. There were several casualties and indeed overnight a very tense situation developed between India and Bangladesh arising out of this incident. What was interesting was that the media coverage of this in India radically differed with the media coverage of this event in Bangladesh. There were two very conflicting versions of this one incident. It was only when the Times of India sent its then Foreign Editor, Mr. Varadharajan, to Bangladesh with the task of finding out what was actually happening on the ground and he made his way to the border through Bangladesh, having first met and talked to a number of people on the Bangladesh side including myself. I was one of those who urged him to visit the border and see for himself what was the situation on the ground. I must say at considerable risk because this as I explained was an extremely tense, and I would even call it a volatile situation, he made his way to the border and I would say putting himself at considerable risk he reported back on what were the actual facts of the case. It was his report that did make an important contribution in easing the tension between India and Bangladesh at that time because what he reported was, as he saw it, the actual facts and getting this from an Indian reporter, who enjoyed a good reputation, it carried much more weight than perhaps voices

92 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence or reports from other sources. So, first hand reporting does have a major role to play.

Of course, we need to end I will be brief in trying to, from my point of view, identify what I think are some of the most important, if you like, tasks in reporting in areas of conflict, but I think it is also important to understand what the dangers are. What we do know is that the reporters and the press have a very important role to play. Sometimes it is through their reports, as I have just mentioned that tensions can be eased and there can be a better understanding of what is happening. Very frequently, it is reporters who can also provide indications of an oncoming conflict and thereby create if you like the possibility of resolving these conflicts. They can also play an important role through their reports in promoting certain confidence building measures. But perhaps most important of all is the importance of credibility and accuracy in their reports. We know of course that there are many dangers also in reporting conflicts. Often journalists find themselves working in a situation where there are problems not simply of a political nature but ethnic problems, religious problems, which make it that much more difficult for them to provide an accurate coverage of events. When journalists from different communities chose to trust only the sources of their own cultural and political tradition, and base their analysis and comments on these statements, they can clearly become victims of partiality. Often, journalists find themselves playing dubious role in highlighting the views of human rights by one side whilst disregarding the voices of the other side. Accuracy, balance and context are critical in every story as the media can be particularly influential in reporting of conflicts. Lower standards can lead to the media stoking the fires of the conflict. Now, of course, what has become extremely important, as I am sure all of you are aware, is the role of the Internet. So, side by side, with television, the Internet plays an important role, and many of you are, I am sure, not simply familiar with blogs but contribute to them. That has become another important source of not simply information, but commentary and opinion making.

What should be the role of civil society in mitigating these dangers? First and foremost is the need for civil society to stress the importance of protection of journalists. Equally important is the need for them to speak up in protection of journalists vis-à-vis any arbitrary acts which might be taken by the government of the day to infringe on their right to independent reporting. So, the media cannot and should not be considered as a legitimate target even though sometimes, and this has been very much in evidence again in our part of the world, that frequently one or another group is very unhappy or resentful.

Journalists should be provided with protection. Well, certainly, legal protection is one of them. Earlier, we just heard about the importance of both the Additional Protocol 1 of the Geneva Conventions, and the need for us to ratify these Protocols 93 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence which will, we believe, provide some additional protection. Then there is also the issue of protection of the equipment of journalists. According to the 1977 Protocols as well as in the Rome statute of the International Criminal Court “media equipment” should be considered as civilian objects and, therefore, should be afforded protection. We believe that in covering of armed conflicts, it is an obligation on the part of the combatants on both sides to provide whatever protection is possible to the journalists. Of course, it is very important, we believe, that for the media to play a credible role that they should try and be as objective as possible in their reporting and should avoid intemperate language and sensationalizing their reports.

Now, just to conclude, I feel that in the same way, the civil society today is actively pursuing both these twin pillars which I referred to initially, namely, press freedom and the right to information. The civil society should be very active in promoting the rights of the journalists insofar as protection is concerned, and equally important to protect them from arbitrary or intimidating action on the part of not simply the government, but political parties and other players in society. I believe also that in the same way that we now see a very vibrant civil society within South Asia come together on important issues such as human rights and the freedom of the press, the civil society in the region itself should speak up in support of the rights of the journalists and to accord them the necessary protection to carry out their duties and responsibilities in covering armed conflicts. Thank you.

Mr. Bazlur Rahman: I now declare the floor open for questions/answers.

Q. Mr. Mohd. Shamsul Islam, Associate Professor and Chairperson of Dept. of Journalism and Media Studies, University of Bangladesh: First I would like to take the opportunity to congratulate Ambassador Farooq Sobhan for his very thought provoking and insightful presentation. In fact, he has broadened the scope of our discussion by including two very important aspects, that is, media reporting of terrorism and media reporting of political violence. My specific question to him is, “How media can play a positive role in combating low intensity conflict where the armed conflict is not there?” In fact, we are not witnessing here that type of armed conflict in Bangladesh. Media definitely can play a very positive role in combating political violence, in combating terrorism and in combating low intensity conflict which we are witnessing. So, please enlighten us by giving your positive suggestions here.

Ambassador Farooq Sobhan: Well, in response to your question, clearly these are issues which first and foremost need to be addressed within the country by the government, by civil society and most important of all by the media itself. As we know, and I think the media can rightfully take credit for this, in Bangladesh, the media has played a very important role in highlighting the problems in respect 94 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence of acts of terrorism and the sources of these acts of terrorism. Also as we know the highlighting of the emergence of (Jamiat-ul-Mujahideen, Bangladesh) JMB and Bangla Bhai in Bangladesh was primarily thanks to the work of the media. Even though initially these reports that came out in the media were denied, the media did continue to press ahead in its coverage and reporting and sometimes at great danger. We do know that many journalists did suffer as a result of this. So, it is very important that the government of the day, the political parties within the country, recognize this important role of the media. But equally important I think is that the voice of the civil society must be heard loud and clear in support of what I would consider to be a credible role played by both print media as well as the electronic media in the coverage of these events. We do know and there have been cases of violence and attack on journalists particularly in the districts in their coverage of certain, what I can best describe as political crimes and various actions taken by politicians outside the law. I think the media did make an important contribution in exposing some of these through their reports. And they suffered. I think it is equally important to recognize then that the civil society in all its manifestations did make its voice heard in support of protection of journalists and people in this profession. This is a role which I would say should continue. I think civil society must impress upon the government of the day to afford the necessary protection as well as support and that support also must be complemented by civil society. I would also here like to stress the importance of those two pillars which I think are of fundamental importance and that civil society must continue to play an important role in support of these two pillars, namely, the right to information and the freedom of press. I believe this should extend not simply to the print media but also to the electronic media and we hope that in the very near future the government will open up both radio and TV to the private sector and for government itself to back away from this role in trying to control the media and in using Bangladesh television, BTV, as if you like, government controlled bodies. I think the independence of these bodies is going to be of critical importance.

Nadeem from the audience: I understand that Ambassador Farooq Sobhan, and we know that from the civil society and also from the State, the media is showered with the praises that we are to have a very vibrant and courageous role in reporting conflicts and violence. When Surinder Oberoi was talking about the international covenants or rules, we also know that even in our Constitution, the freedom of media is there and our rulers, whenever they get time, they claim that we are free and protection will be given. But I will refer certain cases to show how vulnerable we are when the question of performing our duties comes. You, Ambassador Farooq Sobhan, may remember, all of us here who are from Bangladesh know that, and I want to refer to our friends from other countries, particularly Amit, he is speaking how he acted in the conflict ridden areas. Bangladeshi media is not

95 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence particularly accustomed to reporting on conflict; mainly, as you have mentioned, political violence we have reported and we are used to it. How vulnerable are we? For example, in Mymensingh, when there was a bomb blast in a cinema hall, a journalist who was then acting as stringer for Reuters and also he was a staff of the National News Agency, BSS, Mr. Inamul Haq Chowdhury, he was involved that he was a party in the blast and how rigorously he had to face the consequences as we know. When he was not producing himself before the law enforcing agencies, his wife was taken to the custody first and then he was compelled to surrender before the law enforcing agencies and he had to undergo rigorous interrogation, even physical torture. Only recently, after five or six years, his name has been dropped from the charge sheet. Now the question is that, “Who is going to protect and give compensation to his five years of this exhaustion and the trial and the agony – mental and physical? Another example is that, you know, two journalists of Channel 4 of BBC came here. Local stringers, as Amit was mentioning, that he had to sometimes when he is reporting in a foreign country, to get support from the local reporters. Some of the local reporters here accompanied the Channel 4 people just showing them around as a professional colleague and how badly they were treated by the intelligence agencies, we all know. There were the charges that they were involved in espionage. So, the question is, when the State becomes more and more a perpetrator, rather than giving the protection and involving the media people in facing the charges like espionage or anti-State activities, then it is obviously the role of the media unilaterally to face the consequences. There, of course, the civil society response is to make the issue more and more highlighted, and that will give more encouragement to the media to perform their duty. This is my observation. Thank you.

Mr. Ghulam Rehman, Dept. of Journalism and Mass Communication, University of Bangladesh: I have an opinion and on this opinion, I want to make a comment to elicit the reaction of Mr. Amit Barua. When we usually see reports on the small conflicts, particularly small armed conflicts or the ethnic conflicts taking place in a country like Bangladesh or any other place of our neighbouring countries; those reports that come out in another country, may be some problem with the hill people in Bangladesh or Chittagong Hill Tracts, and that report comes out in the newspaper of India and these reports are not appreciated in Bangladesh. The same thing happens vice versa. So, my impression is, the responsibility of journalists should be such that it is not a biased report and there should be objective journalism. Many a time, it is the interest between two countries or two nations, and so the quiestion is whether objective journalism can stand beyond the borders, beyond the frontiers. That way, the responsibility lies on the journalists who cover the inter-State or the international disputes and conflict/issues. May I ask Mr. Barua to comment on this issue and how the journalists can overcome the situation covering the inter-State problems?

96 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

Mr. Amit Barua: I think you have raised a very important issue in the sense that what is fact and what is truth. If you are looking at an issue from a Bangladeshi perspective or an Indian perspective, often, the facts differ and the truth looks different. So I think here the responsibility of the individual correspondent or the writer is immense. Do you get the other version? I mean, Ambassador Sobhan was referring to the fact that an Indian journalist came here and reported from here. I think it is key that we report from all sides of the story. I think it will be too much to expect that an Indian journalist will give a completely Bangladeshi perspective or a Bangladeshi journalist will give a completely “Indian” perspective. But I think for a report to be wholesome, both sides of the story need to be in the report. I think that is absolutely critical. Because if you give only one side of the story and often there are situations, say, for instance, in Sri Lanka, I was sitting in Colombo and reporting what is happening in the Jaffna Peninsula a few hundred kilometres away, and you might as well have been sitting in New Delhi and reporting on it. So, what do you do? If you cannot report it immediately, then you try to get versions of people which come in later. As far as India and Bangladesh are concerned, we do have difficult issues between us, but I think the key thing is that what kind of pains we take in reporting both sides of the story. For example, if we have a flare up on the border or something has happened, you get the version of the Border Security Force, it is absolutely important that you get the version of the Bangladeshi Rifles as well or of the local people. To me what would be more important is that can you talk to the ordinary people on either side because we know that State agencies have an obvious interest in pedaling ‘A’ line or ‘B’ line. I think that we need to rise above these so-called patriotic or national issues and look at questions from a humanitarian perspective and here I must share with you something which I hope has stopped now. Many years ago, back in 1988, I covered a situation in the little Rann of Kutch in Gujarat of all the places. You know, often, we have people who come in from Bangladesh into Indian Territory and often they are picked up by the Border Guards here and they thrown on the Pakistani side. This is a game which is played often by the Border Security Force and Pakistan Rangers. Unfortunately, these 50 people were thrown across by the Pakistani side finally and they walked in the little Rann of Kutch and 50 of them died – first the young children died, then the women died. No State was prepared to take responsibility for these people. Finally, I happened to go with the assistance of some people to report from there. But the fact is that humanitarian issues, I think, compassion, if I can use that word, are often missing in our journalism. I think that is a function of the daily violence that all of us see in South Asia. I deliberately did not raise the issue of political violence, but clearly it is a major question in our reporting in different South Asian countries. As we look around at South Asia, I do not think you can find a really conflict- ridden area in different places, in different States. I think in one sense, Bangladesh is perhaps fortunate that it does not have any major intra-State

97 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence conflicts in the sense right now, apart from what the Chairman had referred to earlier in his opening remarks.

Q. Maj. Gen. Munir Zaman, President, Bangladesh Institute of Peace and Security studies: I am addressing this question to Mr. Barua and, perhaps, anybody else from the Panel can also answer. In my understanding, it is perhaps the understanding of the conflict itself which is the best safeguard for a journalist. Some recent studies have indicated that many of the deaths and casualties of the journalists in conflict areas have occurred for the lack of understanding of the conflict. Some of them have been naïve in entering into areas where they should not have been. The example you cited about entering the Colombo scene is also perhaps bordering on naivety. Therefore, in many cases, there are instances where journalists are not well equipped to report the conflict they are reporting because the business of violence has become complex and it has become too deadly. Therefore, I think that we need to train our journalists before they go on to reporting conflicts and also to make a distinction between the wide ranges of the conflict that we can involve in. I see that your reporting concerns conflict in a very general term, but I would reckon that reporting low intensity conflicts (LICs) and reporting total war are two different businesses altogether. Or even in the case of reporting a total war, reporting from an armoured column and reporting from a static defence is altogether a different business. It is important that journalists themselves have to understand the business of conflict better so that they can have their own understanding and their own safeguards before they go on to reporting conflicts. The other comment I would like to make is that the new dimension of reporting from the new media of Internet is somewhat blurring the lines between mainstream reporting and non-mainstream reporting. If you would recall the ‘Baghdad Blogger‘ during the Iraq War, it was perhaps his Blog which was giving the most authentic report of the war that was raging around Baghdad. So, how do you consider this to be a complementary role that they play with the mainstream? Do you think that they are somewhat marginalizing War Correspondents in the field because this is a dimension that we will increasingly be living with and we will have to understand how the dynamics of the Internet, the Blogs, the broadcasting, the web casting, together play in reporting war from the front and where it is happening. Although Ambassador Sobhan has left, but I would also like to make a comment that there is no universally accepted paradigm on the global war on terror. Therefore, reporting on terrorism cannot be lumped together with reporting on armed conflict which is covered by Geneva Conventions and international conventions.

Mr. Amit Barua: Well, I think, I will treat most of what you said as a comment, but yes, you are absolutely right that there is a major difference between reporting a war, a hot war, and reporting a low intensity conflict. I hope we do not see War

98 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

Correspondents as such because it is not a very pleasant duty. But one thing I would like to say is that we have seen over the years the reduction of Inter-State conflicts and we see more internal conflicts within States. Just to give you a small figure, since the end of the Cold War, we have added almost 30 countries to the list of United Nations’ Sovereign Nations. I think that is a lot, you know, if we look in terms of numbers. So, essentially, we are seeing a lot of internal conflicts, we are seeing an occupation in Iraq, we are seeing a conflict in Afghanistan, obviously these are very important. You are absolutely right that journalists often stray into areas where they should not be going. But usually what happens is when you talk about War Correspondents or when you talk about embedded correspondents as we see in Iraq, who are actually going with armoured columns, I think they get only a partial picture. So, as far as reporting the truth is concerned, or reporting with integrity is concerned, I think the moment you travel with a particular force, what happens is that your reporting becomes limited. Then it is the job of the media organization to not just go by what the embedded correspondent is reporting but taking other versions from hopefully other people in that country or in the field and putting together a whole comprehensive story because that is I think what we lack in conflict situations. For instance, the kind of reporting that should come out of Iraq on, say the number of refugees that are outside Iraq’s borders today. You see very little of that kind of reporting because the Western media obviously has a perspective and it is the occupied nation’s media which is carrying most of the stories, and for them the story is one or two of their soldiers being killed as opposed to the general suffering of the ordinary Iraqis living in Baghdad and other parts of the country. I hope that is a sufficient response.

Q. Mr. Mufazir Rehman, Dept. of Journalism and Mass communication, University of Dhaka: My question is to two practical men we have from India, Mr. Amit Barua and the other one, Mr. Surinder Oberoi. Maybe, my question echaes with the comments made by the experienced elderly man. My question is that the short term desire of the media is to inform about the facts, what is happening in the society and in this context the conflict or violence. But in the long run, if you consider the long term considerations of the media, it is to keep the society sort of in order as the covering of this kind of issue, armed conflict and violence have different effects. One is that it may glamourize the conflict itself. How to make a balance covering the issue and to keep the society in order? That is a specific question. The complementary question to Mr. Amit Barua is, did you receive any parameter while you went for covering conflict areas in Kashmir, Kargil? Are there any parameters in the journalism field to say where to start and where to end, and what to do in conflict areas?

A. Mr. Amit Barua: I will take the second question first. No, there were no parameters. But as I told you that there were some special situations which often

99 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence created issues, but we were able to report quite freely and I cannot talk about all sections of the Indian Press, which reported in a particularly difficult time from Jammu and Kashmir. But there were several people who reported without fear or favour. There were obviously pressures from the State for us to report in a particular way. I think many of us resisted those pressures. So, as far as my organization was concerned, there were really no parameters laid down as far as reporting is concerned. We reported pretty much what was happening on the ground in Jammu and Kashmir. Often we got into quite serious trouble on account of it from the authorities because there were places they did not want us to go or there were people whom they did not want us to speak to. But I think overall, the Indian Press did a reasonably good job of reporting from Jammu and Kashmir and presenting the people side of the story. Not just of the security forces or the militants, but what ordinary people were facing.

Your other question is about covering the issue and keeping society in order. For instance, what is happening in Nepal? The fact is that the Maoists were initially in Parliament and then they became a guerilla force and then again they came back. I think, institutional memory of journalists, and that is where experience counts, should be able to put incidents in their right perspective, in the right context. I think this is a job all of us need to do, and this is without necessarily editorializing in our news columns. I am one of those who believe that most of us are subjective creatures. I do not think there is anybody who is objective, but at the same time, your very subjectivity breeds certain understanding. If you are biased in a particular direction, you can take greater pains to ensure that the other side, the other inside view is also reported properly and in perspective. So, as far as society is concerned, I think, the key thing is that we draw lessons from the conflicts. We do analysis of what is happening, what are the things that we have seen and we are able to write pieces later which are more analytical, which are more thought provoking and which would perhaps provide an input into general civil society and to the government to address key conflict issues that grip many of our societies.

Surinder Oberoi: I will just add a little to what Mr. Amit said. You are talking about forgotten conflicts or situations which are important. Here is where the role of a teacher of a mass media communication, like you, becomes very important to teach students as to how to maintain the objectivity of the stories and how they have to follow up the stories so that humanitarian issues continue to remain in the newspapers. If you analyze the journalists who have won Pulitzer Awards, it is because of their hard work and continuing investigation into the forgotten stories that they brought on the front burner. In a conflict situation, there are two parties fighting against each other. That is the biggest constraint for the media person as to how to get the information from both the sides. That is what Mr. Amit

100 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence was mentioning about that you have to get the version of both the sides, may be through more than one journalist on a story. The challenge for the media persons in such situations is between the truth, the information he needs and the security concern of a particular party in a war or a conflict. This is where the media persons have to be very smart, develop their own network and of course be honest with their own reporting.

Mr. Nadim Qader, Freelance Journalist: We have talked about balancing of the news and getting information from both sides, being accurate and objective, but I think there is also the other side which is the perceptions of the governments and institutions which also comes across when you are reporting. Most of my life, I have been reporting. I just want to mention one or two incidents because it came up during the discussions. It was about the India-Bangladesh border conflict. When the first information, I was still working with AFP at that time, went out, I was luckily talking to the DG, Bangladesh Rifles (BDR) at that time about the situation and he gave me the update and it was quoted. Then, we had a photographer who went to the scene and he returned with pictures and definitely other inputs that we updated. Our New Delhi Bureau was putting in what the Indian side was saying. But even then, this was not taken as accurate or objective because it is a problem of perception of the government on that side because the casualties were pretty high for the Indian Border Security Force (BSF). On the other side, the perception was why the news went out so fast. It should have been bit slower, by the time the two governments had talked over. There is the problem of perception and that brings about a threat. When you speak about going to the spot and the Times of India Correspondent coming, fine, but for that moment, it just did not seem that the government in New Delhi had any trust in the reports that were coming out from AFP with balances from both Delhi and Bangladesh; and Bangladesh had on-scene reports with visuals. What have you to say on that? I also want Mr. Nurul Kabir to comment on this issue because I am sure he has been following that incident very closely.

Mr. Nurul Kabir: I agree with the observation that you had put forward. That is a problem. I tried to make it a point when I was addressing the audience that the nature of the State, the nature of the government whether is chauvinist or not, is a Nation State or not, is an authoritarian State or not, that is the problem of the government. What is important is, in your case, if the AFP released the story, then the job of the journalist is done. That is one thing, as far as reporting is concerned. Whether a government will take into account the reporting seriously, that does not always necessarily depend on the objectivity of the report, rather than on a particular government’s foreign policy towards the countries involved in a conflict with. That is number one. Second, I would take this opportunity to address one issue raised by Stanford University Professor. Some of us have already addressed

101 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence it. Terrorism and political violence and conflict, there are certain subtle issues in that. For instance, the Palestinians are being called terrorists for last 40 years. It is very important for journalism professors and journalism students and practicing journalists to ponder over whether you can call them terrorists. We were called terrorists in 1971, while we were fighting for our national independence. The people fighting for the autonomy or separation in North Eastern India are called terrorists by many establishments in India. It is important to see whether we can call them terrorists or not, and these are very important issues. We have to see whether it is terrorism of the strong and terrorism of the poor or the weak, whether it is a reaction to terrorism. These are issues that are being debated across the world today, and the journalism students and would be journalists should be aware of these things on one hand. Armed conflict, what do we mean by that? When students throw stones at police, is it not armed conflict? Is not a piece of stone or brickbat an arm? At that moment, if the students had sten-guns, would they not have fired? These are issues which are very important. What we call armed conflicts, there are relative terms. Once again, as far as reporting is concerned, all of us have said that giving the perspective of all the sides involved in the conflict is the most important thing for us, the journalists. Whether a government or the conflicting parties involved, politically or otherwise, agree to that or not is a different issue. Our responsibility is to feed the people with informed opinion.

Mr. Amit Barua: I would only agree with Mr. Kabir. What you did was absolutely the right thing to do. Whether New Delhi or Dhaka thinks that your report is incorrect or correct, I think that is a matter for the State to deal with and tackle. The journalists’ job is to report what they see. How the State responds or how it does not respond or it wants to colour that report, I think, that is pretty much a different thing. I am in complete agreement with what he said. Often, let us also be very clear that we are not infallible. We are doing instant news. You are getting some information and you are reporting it; often, you can go wrong. This is one version that you got. Maybe, a few hours later, you report will be something else. Nobody should take this as the final truth, and you are always in a position to refine your stories to give more information as time goes ahead. As we know, in these days of competition, being first is important. So, that is clearly a pressure, whether you are in a news agency or in a television channel, or in a newspaper or working for website. I think these are all pressures that journalists work under. Often, you may not get the whole truth. But the idea is, it is the intention. I think the intention should be to report correctly. You may go wrong. We also must have important corrective measures in place in our own media organizations that we correct stories if we get wrong. Or we say that what we got yesterday is different from what we have got today and we update ourselves. I think that is quite critical for the credibility of all media organizations.

102 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

Q. Mr. Mohd. Faizul Haq, Department of Mass communication and Journalism, University of Dhaka: My question is, does the panel think that credibility and better understanding between inter-State journalists can reduce risk in conflict reporting, especially in border reporting? Anybody can answer, especially Mr. Amit Barua who is experienced.

Mr. Amit Barua: Well, I think that to expect that national perspectives will disappear, that would be hoping for too much. I think for all of us in South Asia, given the kinds of friendships and contacts and bonds that we develop, I think those are sometimes more important than formal contacts between organizations. I will give you an example. When I was in Pakistan and reporting the Kargil War, I was seeing from the Indian side all these reports in our Press that Pakistani soldiers are so well-equipped, they have the latest equipment, they have got all the snow equipment that was needed to be there, and the fact that they have been provided with high altitude food which has high energy. Later, a few days after the conflict ended, a leading Pakistani MP, he spoke in the Pakistani Senate, Etezaz Ahesan, who is a leading lawyer as well, and revealed which came as a shock to me that actually they conducted post-mortems on the bodies of some Pakistani soldiers that died in Kargil and they found after the post-mortem that grass had been found in their stomachs. That is what they were eating. This is what I am telling you about truth. The fact is that as journalists, we need to move beyond State parameters. I think, the approach should be to put people first. The sufferings of ordinary people for journalists should be the important thing. Of course, as journalists, we have to report what our governments are saying, what our police force are saying, what our intelligence agencies are saying, but it is critical. I am happy that I was able to report this fact also from Islamabad for an Indian newspaper and it was carried quite prominently. The critical point that I am making is that we need to move beyond looking at the State and the police forces as our primary sources of information and depend on individuals, members of civil society, for our information as well.

Journalist from the audience: I have just a comment on Mr. Amit Barua. You are saying that media should go beyond the national parameters. Is it really happening in truest sense of the term? It is not. We, the journalists, sitting in India and here in Bangladesh and also in Pakistan, we are acting. The media is affected when the question of national security or the State interest comes in, by what our foreign office or security intelligence people are saying. We are acting that way. For example, take the border issues. Here, in Bangladesh, we are saying that BSF people are shooting down our Bangladeshi people. Similarly, on the Indian side, they are writing opposite. You are saying that from both the sides it should be corroborated. But are we really doing it? For example, take the question of the Padua incident in Mymensingh that brought the two countries to the highest tension point. What

103 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence happened during those days? If the government, as Mr. Nurul Kabir has said, is chauvinistic, then their approach is different. But at that time, that was a different government. We know that within the government, there are forces which are acting beyond the knowledge of the government to create this type of a situation. Padua incident was like that. During that time, the photographs, those which were fed to the newspapers here which created tension, those are not taken by the real journalists. Those were fed by the forces who wanted to create a situation. We know the Kargil situation. Nawaz Sharif was a victim of the situation because he did not know that his own intelligence forces are creating this Kargil conflict and the government was sitting like a lame duck, and it had to pay the price. So, the question is, we the journalists are talking that we should go beyond the parameters of the State, but still, then the question comes, sitting in Dhaka, I am to write according to the Foreign Office version or the Intelligence people’s version. You, in India, may be one or two exceptions are there, but the mainstream journalists, they are going by the Nation State concept and that is where we have to take the self-introspection.

Mr. Nurul Kabir: I will take half a minute dealing with the question that the journalism student has come up with and our Senior Editor, Iqbal Shoban Chawdhury has said. We are talking about the same thing and perhaps we are of the same opinion. The challenge remains how to get over that. I mostly agree with Mr. Amit Barua’s point. India is not one India; Bangladesh is not one Bangladesh. That is related to the concept of politics of identity. Bangladesh or any country for that matter has not one single identity. Bangladeshi Government, of course, is Bangladesh; Bangladeshi civil society is, of course, Bangladeshi civil society; people are Bangladeshis; of course, political parties are Bangladeshis, but they have their conflicting interests as well. So, there is not one India or one Bangladesh or one country. What angle or whose purpose a particular news organization or a particular journalist will serve depends on once again how one looks at it. What is his or the organization’s attitude towards life, towards politics, etc.? And politics of identity is one of the most complex issues that the contemporary world, including the global intelligentsia is confronting with. One thing that I agree with him, in this complex world, a journalist is not supposed to be an expert on all these crucial issues. If people remain our focal point, we can solve many problems. We can go beyond State, Governmental interests, interest of the intelligence agencies of different countries, this and that. If people’s interest remains the main thing, we can face many a challenge that we come across everyday.

Mr Bazlur Rehman: No war is just and no law is adequate to give protection to journalists. So, we are working within these imperfect situations. We are trying to get as close to perfection as possible, but we must remember that we are imperfect people, imperfect nation, and our legal system is also imperfect. About this conflict

104 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence between BDR and BSF, I like to recall that some time back, we were in Delhi; we were sharing the same platform of ICRC in Delhi. Then, Varadarajan of The Hindu was narrating how the Indian Press was befooled by the security forces and by foreign office people to report in a particular way and I narrated how Bangladeshi journalists were befooled and hoodwinked to report in a particular way. But it took days before the other point of view was printed in our respective newspapers. So, we should try to stick to truth and objectivity and not colour our reports in the name of patriotism which is another form of chauvinism. We must stick to objectivity which is the first and last word in journalism.

105

Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence SESSION – 4 WAR/CONFLICT TIME RESPONSIBILITY OF MEDIA

Mr. Iqbal Shoban Chawdhury (Chairman and Moderator), Editor of Bangladesh Observer

Dr. Hafiz G.A. Siddiqi, Vice-Chancellor of North South University, Bangladesh

Topic: Civil Society view on media responsibility in conflict reporting

As a layman and as a member of the civil society. I do not have the ability to discuss how the journalists report during armed conflicts in wars, but I will try to give my impression about the reporting in conflicts from outside war zones within the country. There are many situations, there are conflicting situations, there are dangerous situations where reporters have to work and do their job.

I have been asked to discuss the media responsibility in the context of conflict reporting with special reference to war situation. But I want to take liberty to deviate from reporting armed conflict like reporting from Iraq or Afghanistan Wars. There are some conflicts which occur outside war zone, but these are not necessarily less problematic as far as reporting is concerned. I want to focus the views of the members of the civil society on the media reporting on conflicts outside war zone.

In this world, modern media plays perhaps the most effective role in changing economic, social and cultural behaviour of a country. Thanks to electronic media, news travels globally instantly. The contents of the news and views of the journalists have tremendous impact on readers and viewers. Therefore, media has great responsibility whether reporting from the war zone or from a country that is going through various kinds of violence, for example, against minority by the majority. Media has the responsibility to inform the public news of public interest. The news must be presented in its true perspective. By implication the analysis of the background of the events reported calls for investigative journalism.

The goal of professional journalism, as I understand, goes beyond simple dissemination of news. In addition to presenting news, views, commentary and articles are published that often carry important messages for the governments, bureaucrats, corporate/business sectors and society as a whole. One responsibility of the media is to present constructive criticism of the government policies and useful recommendation for rectification. For example, how to promote or restore

107 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence democracy and institutionalize democratic practices in government decision- making. Why it is necessary to ensure fundamental and equal rights for the religious and ethnic minority? maintain transparency in the government decision-making, ensure gender equity, poverty eradication, healthcare services, education for all. In case of failure in law and order situation, how to improve the law and order situation; environmental sustainability and several others; it is almost endless. But the journalists have to take up all of them when the time comes.

The ultimate objective of journalism, however, is to contribute to national development, peace, harmony and prosperity. A civil society constitutes a pure voluntary organization whose members do not work exclusively for the interest of their family or they do not form part of the State machinery, but voluntarily try to advance common societal interests through advocacy, social mobilization and other peaceful, non-violent ways. Some examples of common societal interest may be, to influence public policy, promoting human rights, empowering citizens including women, promoting awareness against child abuse, etc. Globalization has increased the importance of the role of civil society. In Bangladesh, the emergence of civil society is relatively new. However, they have recently gained very high visibility through their advocacy programme.

Civil society’s view on media responsibility needs to be examined with reference to the social role of journalism and the conditions under which the journalists conduct their investigations and report on incidents and events. It is to be noted that there is little agreement about what is the optimal relationship between the media and the public it seeks to serve. However, there are similarities between the roles of civil societies and that of the media. In my view there is one big difference between them. Media runs for and with financial gains, but civil society is voluntary, its members do not get any personal financial benefits. Journalists generally perform their jobs under various economic and political constraints. In the process, the journalists experience problems, sometimes, life threatening problems while digging out true information and publishing the stories. These problems are particularly acute in the case of investigative journalism which serves the public best. But occasionally it runs the risk of embarrassing or inviting anger of the powerful people and tends to generate conflicts between journalists pursuing what they see as their professional goals and the media owners and controllers of the vested interested groups.

Most of the goals the civil societies want to achieve coincide with the professional goals of journalists. For example, development goals like promoting democracy, eradicating corruption, women’s participation in mainstream political activities, exploitation of workers, pollution free environment, pure drinking water, health,

108 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence nutrition, education, opportunities for all, women empowerment, etc. Media’s support for promoting the goals of civil society and cooperation between them will certainly create win-win situations. As in other countries, in Bangladesh also, quite frequently, media groups join civil society as its partner to implement a common programme for creating social awareness on various issues, namely, environmental degradation, corruption, human trafficking, drug addictions, etc. Globalization has added a new dimension to the role of civil societies as well as the media. Because of globalization, the operation of media companies and trade in media products takes place increasingly on international level. The traditional concept of State regulation is giving way to international pressure for ensuring press freedom. In the same vein, the role of civil society is exerting changing influence on the media operation. The issue of programme production and trade, the international reach of satellite services and social meaning of the migration of programme formats are matters of concern to the civil societies on the arguments of cultural subversion. Many civil societies argue that cross border satellite services have created opportunities to televise programme that subvert local culture. They mobilize social movement against such media products. The overall goal is to reduce tension.

The civil society is a part of the public in general. The difference perhaps is that the civil society includes mostly, relatively enlightened group of general public. Their expectations from the journalists are more or less the same as that of the general public except that the former can assess the role and behaviour of the journalists better. They can articulate their thinking about their right to know in a better way so that they influence the role of journalists to present the truth without inflaming the people’s passion. The case of conflict is not limited to war only, like Iraq or Afghan War. It may be a case of religious and ethnic conflict. In South Asia, persecution of religious and ethnic minorities is quite common. The unethical journalism or intentionally badly designed headlines can easily fan and inflame the passion of the aggrieved or the aggressors. On the other hand, responsible reporting can help mitigate social tension.

Reporting on underground crimes and large scale violence are not substantially different from reporting from war fields. It is the journalists who would be the judge to decide what and how much information the public should be given in a specific circumstance. However, in such a case, one important ethical question stands out. The right to know the truth of the civil society or the public at large is ignored if only the censored news is published - self-censored or State-censored. Why all the details giving the true picture should not be reported or published? Neither self-censorship nor State-censorship is desirable on the ground of ethics. Another example would be reporting the cases of violence against minority and women. It is true that to stop minority oppression, the media must report the

109 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence happenings in its true perspective. But some times, unscrupulous, dramatizing of minority oppression with motivated headlines and stories does not lead to social harmony, rather it aggravates the conflicts that may be as devastating as a war.

In Bangladesh, I am giving some examples of the partnership between civil society and the media. The role of Centre for Policy Dialogue (CPD) for example has a representative of civil society to create awareness about democratic practices in the election process at a national and local level with the help of news Channels I. It has been appreciated by the public. The Channel I and CPD jointly organized televised programmes of advocacy and social mobilization programme. The goal was to educate the general public and exchange views with them about how to identify potentially honest law-makers, namely, the Members of Parliament and discard or reject corrupt politicians.

Another example would be the BBC televised “Shangla” in different districts in Bangladesh which has educated many people in Bangladesh about democracy, political reforms, different dimensions of corruption. Such effective partnership of civil society and media is always welcome. Press freedom is a pre-requisite for democracy. But occasionally, the journalists face both external censorship and self-censorship. The public expect that presentation of information, editorials and stories must be supported by objective analysis, but objectivity has some problems. As I understand, most people believe that there is nothing called hundred per cent objectivity. One cannot go beyond personal biases and prejudices. To the extent such biases and prejudices are built in the personal character, it will influence the journalist’s reporting.

Lastly, we must reiterate the fact that the investigative journalism often invites life threatening danger. In Bangladesh, many journalists have been killed because they wanted to publish or actually published reports that went against some vested interest groups or individuals. This is a very unfortunate situation. Unless the journalists get assurance of protection from the State machinery, they will not be able to perform their duties without fear or favour. Therefore, we the members of the civil society want full protection for the journalists. Otherwise, we will not have free press without which sustainable democracy cannot be achieved.

Before I withdraw, I want to point out one negative aspect. This is globally true that occasionally, there are allegations that the journalists take money to report in favour of or against some individuals or group of people. I hope in Bangladesh this kind of thing or in South Asia, these kinds of things will be at its minimum. Thank you.

110 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

Ms. Pamela Philipose, Senior Associate Editor, Indian Express, India

Topic: Competition and infrastructure leapfrogging - A bane or boon in conflict reporting

I have been told to look at this question: War/conflict time responsibility of the Media – that is our broad theme today. My theme is ‘Competition and infrastructure leapfrogging: a bane or boon in conflict reporting?’ Competition is a word that we are all familiar with, of course since news is, above all, about “new developments” in the world. Since “breaking news” on 24X7 TV has become the meta-narrative of our lives, one of our major preoccupations is to be first with the news and comment. Competition is thus built into the very fabric of our profession.

When we talk of infrastructure leapfrogging, it is a difficult word. This is a new word that has been thrown at me and I am trying to make sense of that to you. Infrastructure leapfrogging, in contrast, is less understood. Leapfrogging suggests a vaulting over the constraints of time and space, without going through the intermediary steps of an earlier era. Take the cell phone, for instance or Internet – both have helped us hugely in terms of being able to communicate in a very short time. In India cell phone use has exceeded that of landline use.

So what do we gain and what do we lose by competition and having access to “leapfrog technologies”? The benefits are immense and obvious. Reporting from the battlefield can be done almost in real time - as we have seen so dramatically time and again in the recent past. It has also improved, immeasurably, access to the various theatres of conflict. Communal atrocities, forcible displacements of whole communities, ethnic conflagrations, which allowed those in power to exercise the politics of repression with impunity, and which were earlier screened from public view are now being played before us on Prime Time TV. It has deepened general understanding of human rights violations, helped in the articulation of outrage and resistance to such indefensible attacks and often resulted in important corrective action through the delivery of justice.

We recognize, of course, the unique power that the modern media today has to defend the greater common good in times of great human trauma that is an intrinsic aspect of the scenario of conflicts/war. The question is whether they do, in fact, do this. There are two reasons why they do not. I would argue that they have not done it adequately and there are two reasons for it. One is the nature of media content in today’s world, both in war and peace. The other is the manner the media have come to be used and deployed in the world of real-politic.

Coming to the first aspect, a few social philosophers including eminent French sociologist, the late Pierre Bourdieu, have attempted to understand the unique 111 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence nature of media content, especially television content. In a world of allegedly shrinking attention spans, where media practitioners are ruled by the anxiety, that is the anxiety of boredom, of boring people, like I am at the moment feeling very anxious whether I am boring you with my discourse. So, boredom is a big fear that Media practitioners have today. There is a tendency to shut out anything serious, anything that requires detailed comment or investigation, and instead go with the formula that “less is better”.

Current events, which also presumably include wars/conflicts, are then reduced to one small item in a whole list of stories that we hear. Among other things we hear about Iraq, fashion shows and about something else, election, etc. It is one big package that is thrown at us. This is interesting because as Pierre Bourdieu has tried to explain. He says that as a result, the sequence that you see from the war zone remains dehistorisized and dehistorisizing, fragmented and fragmentary. This of course is a world-wide trend. Over a period of the last decade or so, there has been a very conclusive shift from serious journalism to purveying of information as entertainment. When information becomes entertainment, it changes the nature of information.

Bourdieu tries to find the implications of such coverage disturbing. History is viewed as an absurd series of disasters and violent events which readers/viewers can neither understand nor influence. People fed on such truncated, one-sided coverage of a war end up with xenophobic fears and a worldview that fosters fatalism and disengagement. He then goes on to provide an example of how the relentless competition for an ever-larger audience share almost brought about a war between Greece and Turkey in the late eighties. The way we look at war has changed over the years. We have to understand how the Pentagon came to control the images of war; that is where the whole thing started. If Pentagon can do it today, many other government. can do it tomorrow.

From coverage of the Vietnam War to the Pentagon directed coverage on the Iraq war, the US media has done the full circle. Many have pointed out to Walter Cronkite, on the Vietnam War, who said at one point of time that it has become a bloody stalemate. He said that President Johnson who was present at that time, ‘he has lost the war for us’. When he articulated it over Prime Time TV meant that he really put it in the public sphere and that changed the discourse. President Johnson and others realized that this was happening and before long, they had to think of pulling out of Vietnam.

But while the media perhaps did not learn the right lessons from Vietnam, the Pentagon and the US government certainly did. Recently there was a conversation with a lot of people including the Pentagon and the US Establishment. They tried

112 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence to understand the nature of media coverage. They stretched out and one Military spokesperson told that we have to keep the people with us, if we have to win the war. The Assistant Secretary, Victoria Clarke is on record saying that the lesson from Vietnam the Pentagon learned was “never (to) let reporters do that again”, that means, gain free or independent access to the theatre of war. They did not want independent reporting.

Many models were experimented with. During the First Gulf War in early 1991, the Pentagon policy was clear: censorship. Military personnel cleared reporters’ copy and information otherwise delivered through the generals’ televised briefings. But some got away. Peter Arnett, for instance. Interestingly, that war saw new satellite technology bring the action on battlefield to viewers the world over for the first time in history in real time. The Iraqi government saw CNN as a useful conduit to present its side of the story and allowed it to stay on in Iraq and “report from behind the enemy lines”. As Arnett observed later, he faced a unique dilemma - of having to process “enemy information” before putting it across. “We’d have to carefully explain and qualify everything we said. Pressure of the (US) government was very strong at the time. The back story was that having a credible American news organization in an enemy capital would be harmful to the national war effort. It got to the point where CNN actually considered closing down. That was in the early-90s. But since then, a lot of things happened. In fact, in 2000, military personnel from the psychological operations unit at Fort Bragg were working as “regular employees” for CNN. After 9/11, the control regime then worked towards closing the gap between the media and the military. This was of course justified by many people. Lot of people said that this is what we need to do, including those in the Media.

This convergence of military operations and media coverage, threw up the new model of “embedded journalism”, officially inaugurated in the Iraq War of 2003. It was very interesting. Reporters were allowed to cover the war from the very scene of the fighting subject to two conditions - never to jeopardize troops or the mission. The US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld called it “total immersion” strategy on the part of the US Establishment. At that time, war itself had become hi-tech. There was no blood and as so many people said, the number of conflict of troops was much less than the civilian killings. So, it was very easy to control the images that were put out. ‘Smart’ bombs, computerized surveillance systems and digital simulations and of course a strategy of aerial bombardment rendered the war relatively “bloodless”. It looked good on domestic television screens and caused no great alarm on the ground. The American media and the American public too, did not see anything terrible about Iraq, till very recently, when the body counts of soldiers started rising and that is when, the alarm bell starting ringing. Till then, it was a perfectly acceptable war on Prime Time. James Der

113 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

Derian termed it a “virtuous war” - virtual technologies are combined with the claim that the war itself has a humanitarian motive.

As media practitioners, we need to understand the implications of this great convergence of power - the power to execute war and the power of expression. On the one hand, the media have the power to make ordinary people understand the nature of the beast, the value of human life and counter misunderstandings and mindsets that cause wars. On the other, there are enormous pressures placed on them to distort or ignore the truth and justify, even embody conflict and not just in theatres of conflict like Iraq, but right here at home. Although war has not got to be quite the same hi-tech, embedded effort in these parts, the media here too have played their role in whipping up tensions. We have heard about this in earlier sessions today and yesterday.

After the attack on the Indian Parliament in December 2001, we saw the amazing 11-month eyeball-eyeball confrontation between two nuclear powers across the India-Pakistan border. War did not break out, fortunately because of some political maturity on both the sides, but no thanks to innumerable media commentators on both sides of the divide shrilly advocating direct action. We have had so many examples of that. If they had, in one moment, managed to capture the instincts of the establishment, it would have led to a very serious war again. It is important to understand why we need to see these things in perspective.

I would like to end with a comment from Asma Jehangir – I know, she is not very popular everywhere, but when the novelist, Amitav Ghosh interviewed her, this was just after Pokhran. Everyone was talking about the nuclear fallout. She said, in response to a question, is nuclear war between India and Pakistan possible? She replied, “Anything is possible because our polices are irrational. Our decision making is ad hoc. We are surrounded by disinformation. We have a historical enmity and we are fatalistic nations. Our decision making is done by few people on both sides.” We may not completely agree with what Asma says, and in fact fortunately the threat of war between Pakistan and India has receded considerably and more and more people now talk about peace. But what she said about ad hoc policy making is an important point which we need to understand. And as Media Practitioners, we have to report what we see and hear. But we should use our powers of expression and interpretation to make sense of the mess, sometimes; remember, it is not just plain reporting. There is also a comment that we do as the media does. We have to provide clarity to the causes and effects of conflict and which demand a rational resolution at the highest level possible.

With that I end. I hope we can have a further discussion on this.

114 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

Mr. Kesara Abeywardena, News Editor, Daily Mirror, Sri Lanka

Topic: Is self-regulation necessary for media in war without borders?

The world at large is plagued by relentless war on terror today. This war is fought both at a macro as well as at a micro level. What I refer to as micro are the wars ranging within countries where legitimate governments are engaged in fighting movements that engage in using terror tactics to achieve their targets. The macro level I referred to is the larger war on terror mainly fought by the United States of America and its allies against a very illusive and unspecific enemy. What could be referred to as the war without borders that is being fought today is this larger war on terror as defined by the US and its allies because wars against terrorism at the micro level had been there all the while. As, we, in Sri Lanka have experienced during the last three decades where successive governments have been fighting the rootless terrorist organization, the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam or the LTTE. This war against terrorism at the micro level has also achieved a new dimension at present because of the larger war on terror and the capability of terrorist organizations to function globally effectively using the modern telecommunication and transport networks as well as forging a link between most of these organizations.

While speaking on the larger war on terror which is fought without borders, it has created a dichotomy between the West and the rest of the world. While one faction is hell-bent on eradicating all forms of terrorism, the other faction questions the validity of such a stance and the means employed in doing it. The invasion of Iraq which succeeded the 9/11 attack has created a new type of stereotype in the West that has led to the discrimination of the Muslims. This discrimination and the abandoned support of the global media networks, which are basically of the West, for the war on terror in its initial stages highlights the powerful ability of the media in creating an ideology in the minds of the people. Fuelled by the sense of patriotism in fighting for the rights of the land of the free, the manipulation given to the righteousness on the war on terror at its initial stages has now resulted in the people being felt duped by the media, especially in countries like the US where sentiments are changing. The public that once supported the war on terror has now come to realize the gravity of their mistake. The changing attitudes of the public, positive and then negative, were made possible by the media and the coverage given to the so-called war on terror. However, enough damage has been done in creating stereotype images in the minds of the people in the West. The influential power of the media has probably never been more universally felt than now.

It is in such a backdrop of events that one feels the need for self-regulation in the media. But what is the self-regulation is the vital question that needs to be asked. 115 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

Is it a form of self-censorship? All media practitioners and all of us, we know, have experiences in this regard at various levels when placed in tight situations by the governments or the influential persons as well as media managements. However, the foremost role of the media as all of us know is to act as a watchdog and not merely pay a lip service to policies adopted by those in power and bring into life the abuses and excesses committed by all.

The term self-regulation raises many questions as well. They are self-regulation for whom and under what capacity? Any form of regulation is aimed at suppressing facts and truth. As it is said, truth is the first victim of war, self-regulation of the media in the backdrop of a war has always been called for after the media has highlighted abuses and excesses relating to the war effort. Citing such information as a threat to national security, the authorities often call for legislation and regulation of the media. The terrorist organizations on the other hand will use the terror tactics against the journalists as we have seen where many journalists have been killed.

Recently, the Director General of the Media Centre for National Security – this is a new outfit that has been established several months ago to disseminate information about what is happening in the conflict areas in the country because most of the journalists who are based in Colombo do not have access to those areas – one Mr. Lakshman Hulugal made a statement which created some ripples in the media in Sri Lanka. He had said that all those who criticize the armed forces and the defence establishment on whatever, may be human rights or any other grounds, are traitors of the nation as they undermine and demoralize the troops. The backdrop of this statement is quite interesting because the statement was made after the media highlighted financial irregularities and dubious transactions relating to billions of rupees spent on the purchase of Russian MiG fighter jets to the Sri Lankan Air Force with allegations aimed at the highest levels of the government. The media is hounded by those in power and are called to exercise caution when they there needs to be something suppressed. This happens most often when it comes to human rights abuses as well. Yet, the media as a sentinel of society has a responsibility to inform the public about the actions of the government and the armed forces that are being deployed for the alleged safety of the public.

There are always two sides to every story: what is being said and what is not being said. It is always what is not being said when said that creates an upheaval and questions what is being presented as the façade. The abuses committed by the US soldiers at the Abu Gharib Prison were brought to light and the perpetrators punished following the media highlighting the abuses and giving wide coverage to the story. If the media exercised a form of self-regulation, they would have

116 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence suppressed the story on the grounds that it would bring disrepute to the armed forces of those countries, thus preventing the culprits from being brought to book.

Any form of regulation would invariably be abused by the powers that is to suppress matters that would embarrass them and finally even totally unrelated matters to national security would be categorized as a threat to the nation and suppressed. On the other hand, self-regulation would mean that the media is abdicating its role as the watchdog and the conscience of the people. In an era where democracy and human rights are hot topics debated and given wide publicity, the media’s role of disseminating information to the public has never been more vitally important than the present. Therefore, why should the media hold back from keeping the people/public informed about a war, wars that are being fought in their name? The people have right to know and it is the job of the media to safeguard that right. Thank you.

Ms. Faida Farouk, Senior Journalist, Maldives

Topic: The relationship between Media and the security forces during conflict

We are happy that we do not have violence, but what we have experienced in the past few years, since the introduction of political parties in the system is a conflict of another sort, political conflict. This is a very healthy sign but only up to the point that it does not involve any violence which leads me to my topic, “The relationship between media and the security forces during conflict”, or more specifically, “How do the police handle media personnel in urban disturbances?”

In a small Island State like Maldives, news has a unique way of travelling around. Some times, urban disturbances catch the media’s attention faster than news such as arson as a result media personnel arrive at the scene before the police and place themselves strategically to cover these events right from the thick of it. By the time the police arrive, there is no way of identifying the media personnel or activists or perpetrators of peace. Such is invariably the case in most occurrences. In countries where human rights are not respected, the police would break up gatherings simply at their whim and fancy, but in our region much has changed.

The Maldives police established a media unit and since its inception the communication gap between the media and the police seemed to be narrowing day by day. Gone are the days when providing information about criminal cases were considered taboo on secrecy grounds. The police hold regular press conferences to brief the press on on-going cases or, in the case of serious incidents, the police immediately informs the media by means such as SMS. Yet, again, informing news of crime is not an easy affair even in the world’s most seasoned 117 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence democracies. For example, there was a recent case in Sydney, Australia, where a baby was found murdered and dumped in a garbage collection area. The police line drawn was such that it was not possible for the media to take a photo of the shed the baby was found except from a helicopter. Whilst this information is dispatched with utmost transparency, it is at times used to discredit the police force. Nevertheless the police through the national radio and television wrote in Q&A sessions to inform the public as well as the press.

In a controlled situation, there can only be verbal lashes between the media and the police, if any. However, if the media personnel are caught up covering a civil disturbance, there have been incidents where they have blended amongst the peace breakers and as a result have been taken into custody and detained until the police confirmed their identity. In the Capital Male, usually most demonstrations take place at one primary location named Mercury Light. When a confrontation arises, several media personnel come in the way of harm. In a recent confrontation between some religious extremists and security forces in one of the Island, Himandu, the police advised the media to travel out of the Island. Unfortunately, this incident left several servicemen injured including one who was taken hostage and believed to be still in critical condition. Consequently, this particular incident did not receive due media attention.

Some countries assign special duty media staff to cover certain kinds of incidents similar to those who cover war zones. An interesting element that surfaced in the Maldives was the fact that the police invited the journalists to visit a jail simultaneously while conducting special operations following a jail break earlier this year. This was an encouraging sign to all human rights activists and was much appreciated by the media.

As for how much access the police grant media to crime scenes depends on the seriousness of the situation. Recently, reporters who rushed to the scene of first ever bomb blast in our Capital in a place called Sutton Park, the police had to cordon off the reporters zone further away from the crime scene upon discovering that remnants from the bomb were in fact scattered to a larger area than they originally believed. The police are reportedly working on a media policy. Maldives is currently in transition to a more meaningful democracy with far reaching reforms including the drafting of a whole new Constitution which will incorporate major institutional changes. Until such time a police law is drawn, I would like to strongly recommend that when the Regional Home Ministers convene their Conference at the SAARC Ministerial level, countries of our region adopt a unified position on how the police should act upon the media personnel in urban disturbances. The effectiveness of policy should not be undermined in the light of how the media influences the public opinion. Thank you.

118 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

Mr. Iqbal Shoban Chawdhury: Thank you Ms. Faida. Coming from an Island State, she has given us an insight about the role of the security forces, particularly the police and the media persons. She has said that most of the times the police come at a time when neither the perpetrators are there nor the media people are there, the incident is over. It reminds us, particularly the traditional Indian film- making, where we see that police comes last when the incident is over, and the Hero is rescuing the heroine from the incident. In our country, however, police is ever vigilant. Before the incident occurs, they are there, and they baton charge both, including the media people who are covering the incident as an innocent duty bound people. Last of all, she has referred that Maldives is emerging from the threshold of a long Presidentship to a democratic transition. Let us all hope that one day real democracy dawns on this Island and we particularly encourage our media people there because we know that some of the media people had to go for imprisonment for voicing the people’s aspiration for democracy and fighting against the long Presidentship. We believe in democratic transition not only in Maldives but would like democratic transition to be a real article of faith in all the countries in the subcontinent.

Mr. Reazuddin Ahmed, Editor, The News Today, Bangladesh

Topic: Do Journalists continue to be impartial observers in present conflicts?

As my subject is, “Do journalists continue to be impartial observers in present conflicts?” I want to start by saying that the ethical standards demand that journalists remain impartial in reporting any event. This is the ethical standard. But with the ethical standard, there are certain responsibilities also. There was a story saying that one photographer was witnessing an assailant attempting to stab a person. So, the photographer was positioning his camera in such a way that he could get the closer view of the gruesome killing and he got the picture. He put it on an exhibition expecting that he would get a prize. The judges said that the photograph was one of the best, but they could not give him the prize because he did not save the life of that man; he could have saved the man, instead of taking the photograph. That is the underlying responsibility of a journalist in reporting conflicts. If only reporting is done about people being killed or dehumanizing the sufferings, my observation is that is not ethics with responsibility.

There are three stages in conflict reporting. The origin of the conflict, how it starts - the media has a role to follow. If you look, back as to how the conflict was created in Iraq before the war started, it was the weapons of mass destruction plea that prompted the Pentagon and the US Administration to create a ground that Iraq should be attacked; there should be a war. The western media and media

119 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence elsewhere followed the Pentagon’s stand, which was unfortunate. The western media reported, including The New York Times and The Washington Post, they were reporting that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, so Saddam Hussein should be taken care of and Iraq should be attacked. Media could have played a role at that time when the Chief Inspector/Weapons Inspector, Mr. Hans Bilks said that he did not find any weapons of mass destruction. The media did not go along with him. I have mentioned it because the area of conflict or the cause of conflict was created on a false ground. So, the media there failed to defuse the tension; defuse the conflict before it turned into a war. When the war started, what happened? The other panel speakers have said that the reports were not objective. It is very difficult to report objectively from a war field because everyone knows that the first casualty in a war is truth. This is because of two reasons – one the warring parties go for propaganda; the propaganda model that was set by Goebels in the Second World War to say that Hitler was winning the War all over the world and finally he ended up committing suicide in a bunker; the propaganda did not help. In the modern Goebellian propaganda, it was the Iraqi Information Minister, if you remember, during the War, the day Saddam Hussein was fleeing, Baghdad was falling, his statue was being pulled down, and the Information Minister was saying that they were winning the War. That was the greatest joke. So, this is the propaganda strategy. The second reason why truth is casualty is because the journalists or the reporters cannot reach the spot because of travel restrictions and safety grounds. In that event, the reporters depend on leaked information given by different agencies. Here, I think the most accurate information can be given by Red Cross in a position of conflict where Red Cross has a mandate to have safe access to the places of occurrence. Thirdly, in a conflict, conflict resolution should be strived for. Media should help in conflict resolution. In these three stages, the media’s ethical standards should remain impartial in any conflict, present or past because objectivity is the lifeline of journalism. The basic principle to be followed by the media practitioners is to report objectively. But these days, as part of Track-II diplomacy in the sideline, media should create opinion in favour of conflict resolution. The media thus should play an important role in creating an opinion in defusing the tension between the countries locked in the conflict.

What I have stated is the role of media practitioners, but the practical aspect is a little different from what the journalists should do ethically and morally. Journalists in most cases, war or conflict, take nationalist position that undermines the independence of the profession. Unfortunately, independence of the media has been a major casualty since 9/11 war on terror. Objectivity and impartiality have given way to partisan and so-called patriotic journalism. Media is now-a-days more polarized than before and has been unfortunately toeing the establishment’s stand.

120 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

If we look at Iraq War, reports filed by the US and the British journalists embedded with their troops narrated only one side of the picture of war in Iraq and Afghanistan. The true sufferings of the people, destruction of the properties and real situation in the war field was never stated either due to journalists taking a nationalist position or their inability to reach the places of occurrences due to various restrictions including travel restrictions on safety grounds.

I had the opportunity to cover the initial days of the Gulf War conflict in 1991. I was in Dhahran where the Pentagon’s headquarters was situated. Journalists were there, and we needed accreditation from the Pentagon. So, we approached them, they gave us a form to fill it up and they gave us five conditions that we could get the accreditation if we accept the five conditions which included that we must not ask the number of troops in and around the area of conflict, we must not ask about the types of weapons being brought for the war; we must not ask for the permission to go wherever we like. These were the conditions which were given to us and we had to accept those. That was the censorship, restrictions on the media. During the Falklands War, if you remember, BBC had a difficult time to report correctly the war situation when Argentina sank the warship of the United Kingdom in the Falklands War. During the War, the media faces restrictions. But then it is being overcome.

In South Asian situation, it is no different from what I have stated in case of Iraq and Afghanistan. The States in South Asia are confronting internal tensions, unrest, political hiccups, civil wars and fights for sovereignty and democracy. Right now conflict has emerged as the biggest challenge in our region. Every South Asian country is dealing with the conflicts at some level, be it Tamil demand for a separate homeland in Sri Lanka, separatist movement in North Eastern part of India, religious extremism in some parts of Bangladesh and Pakistan, Maoist insurgency in Nepal or Taliban fear in Afghanistan. In this given scenario, the role of media remains under question.

Is the media playing an impartial role in these conflicts? One can genuinely ask this question. Close scrutiny will reveal that the media is divided and take partisan positions either within or outside the respective country both in reporting the events or making comments on the conflict. The question here is, “Should journalists continue to be impartial observers in the present conflicts?” Well, this is a difficult question to answer. Ethically, as I have stated above, journalists should be impartial observers in any conflict and report objectively whatever happens. But these days, the question is raised, “Should journalists finish their responsibility only reporting the events or should they play an advocacy role in ending the conflicts?” In my opinion, the journalists should report the events in a conflict objectively to uphold the ethics of journalism but if the conflict or war is poised for an unjust cause, to

121 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence satisfy the whims of any vested group, then the journalists should take a position to create public opinion to end the conflict.

The American journalists who took a nationalistic position initially in the Vietnam War finally mounted pressure on the US establishment to end the War as it was an unjust war. Same situation may arise in Iraq and Afghanistan. In South Asia, already journalists are raising loud voices for ending inter-State conflicts. Regarding Kashmir, journalists are pleading for to go ahead with pressing cooperative agenda in South Asia, pushing the core issues like the Kashmir issue on the sidelines, which could not be resolved in 60 years. The journalists in South Asia should take up the position for peace and mount a pressure for ending the conflicts.

As mentioned by the Chair, the South Asia Free Media Association or SAFMA, the apex body of the journalists in the region has been playing the role of peacemaker since its launching in the year 2000. While the members of SAFMA are reporting events in the conflicts either in Kashmir, Sri Lanka, Afghanistan, and Nepal or in Bangladesh and Pakistan, its members are also mobilizing public opinion in South Asia to end the conflicts between and among the SAARC members. It remains true that whole South Asia has been bleeding for the last six decades due to rivalry between India and Pakistan. It is rightly said that South Asian cooperative efforts have been hostage to India-Pakistan rivalry and conflicts. These two countries have developed nuclear weapons that remain a danger to the whole region. South Asia has become the cockpit of tension due to nuclearisation of the region by India and Pakistan. In this context, the journalists should play an impartial role or should not take a nationalist position, especially the journalists of the nuclear power countries. Journalists in South Asia have been playing the role of pressure builders to de-escalate tension in the region by pursuing Track-II diplomacy alongside the professional responsibility. The journalists in the region, editors in South Asia. I met in the past, suggested developing some sort of institutional mechanism to force establishments and hawks in the region to listen to voices of reason and take united stand against such forces. In this context, it may be concluded that journalists should not remain only impartial observers in the present conflicts, but should take a pro-active role to end conflicts. Thank you very much.

Mr. Iqbal Shoban Chawdhury: Thank you, Mr. Reazuddin. He has given a new dimension to the role of the media personalities. He has said that some times the media people continue to be the reporters; they should also try to be peacemakers and help in resolving the conflicts, particularly in South Asian Region. These days, new words are being coined like CBM (Confidence Building Measures), civil-military relationship, conflict resolution, etc. Mr. Reazuddin Ahmed has added one more

122 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence word, that is, the media people should also try to be peacemakers. Last night I was listening to one of the ICRC officials. He was saying that we should also try to be the humanitarian diplomats, that is, when there is a conflict, there should be humanitarian diplomacy to save the victims from the consequences and the effects of the conflict. While Mr. Reazuddin Ahmed was telling about the conditions put forward when they were asking for accreditation from Pentagon, it reminds me of a story. A father was telling to his grown up son that well, now as you are grown up, you are free to move anywhere. Use your discretion where to go and where not to, but remember, if you are in trouble, you alone will be responsible, as a father, I am not going to take the responsibility. State is also behaving with us like that. Whenever there is a problem, they say that media is free, but if the problem is there, then the State is not taking any responsibility or is not giving any protection to the journalists. As one of my senior colleagues said, you have to know how to swim in a crocodile infested water and you have to learn how to live in a jungle where the man-eater tigers are there.

Now, I open the discussion and question and answer session. The floor is open to you.

Mr. Mohd. Shamahul Islam, Dept. of Journalism and Media Studies, Standford University, Bangladesh: My question is on self-regulation during peace time, not in war time. We know that there are different models of self-regulations, as far as media is concerned. There is a Press Council, there is Press Complaints Commission and, in fact, in UK, there is Press Ombudsman as well. The Guardian has appointed an Ombudsman to give guidance for free and fair practices in the media industry. So, my specific question is, especially to the journalist leaders, how can we develop the mechanism of self-regulations. As we know, in Bangladesh, the Press Council is government backed, and we do not expect fair play when government is involved in such regulatory bodies. How can we develop different self-regulatory models and which would give us guidance not only in war time but in peace time also?

Answer from the Panel: I do not agree with you that the Press Council and Complaints Commission in UK and Ombudsman in any newspaper, not in UK only, there are Ombudsmen in Indian newspapers too.

Ethical judgment in treating news in the newspaper or publishing news in the newspaper is that it should not hurt anybody, or encroach upon the privacy of an individual. So, these institutions – you have mentioned – are the watchdog organization to protect the privacy of the individuals, the rights of the individuals so that media cannot cross the limits. There is a saying that if you fail to impose moral restrictions, legal restrictions will be imposed to discipline any field – be it media or society. For example, if the newspapers or the TV channels continue to

123 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence report irresponsibly, encroaching the rights of the individuals, encroaching the privacy of the individuals, then probably there will be a demand for legal restrictions, legal protection of the individual rights, which caused the Cr.P.C. 500 which protects the rights of the persons.

So, Press Council is not a government organization. This is a quasi-judicial body headed by a person, either a Supreme Court retired judge or a person qualified to be a Supreme Court judge is the Chairperson and members are drawn from journalists’ union, editors’ council, owners’ association, bar council, university grants commission and Bangla Academy, etc. So, these nominations are independent of government nominations. The associations nominate. But unfortunately in our country, all institutions have been politicized, so is the Press Council. It no more – I agree with you – enjoys the reputation of being a quasi-judicial, impartial body. But Press Council is not an organization that imposes censorship or restrictions in publishing news. Freedom does not mean anything you wish to do, you can do. There was a case in UK. One gentleman was traveling in a bus. He was moving his hands here and there. Then, he hit the nose of a person. He filed a case and the judges heard both the sides and ruled this way. This gentleman said I have not intentionally hit his nose; I had the freedom to move my limbs as I wish. I can do it. So, the judge ruled that your freedom ends where his nose begins. That was the response, which is exactly what the Press Council does.

Audience: My question is to Pamela of Indian Express. You put the issue in a different perspective; the issue has been discussed in the context of state, journalist and others. But you put the issue in the context of the audience. That is interesting, but that has not been discussed in the panel discussion. You have also outlined the issues with the theory of Pierre Bourdieu and it is fantastic. You mentioned two points – boredom and nature of information. As we understand, the audience is becoming bored and there are serious issues; on the other hand, to raise circulation and get the benefit of investment, you need to lighten the issue; that is the challenge. Could you comment specifically what to do in that context?

It is in the context of this – you are bound by the investment maybe to lighten the issue; on the other hand, issue itself deserves serious coverage and serious language, which may bore the audience. But your aim is not to make the audience bored because then you will lose the circulation. What to do in that context – whether you should go easing the audience while reading the news in the newspaper or you will just lighten in the light of the management instruction? What to do in that context?

Ms. Pamela Philipose: Clearly, every journalist and every media person has to do both – hold the attention of the person you are addressing as well as expand on

124 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence his or her world view – the power of being informed. This is where, the professionalism comes in. I would appeal to young journalists-in-the-making that it is very important to be professionals; have your professional talents, well tuned to the requirements of the day. That would also include creativity and the ability to do it in powerful and new ways. As we notice, there is a lot of overlap of what we have to say even on this subject. The important thing really is to capture the imagination of the reader. You can do it in different ways. The very fact that you are producing information is an important social function that you are performing and here, I would like to quickly make the link between right to information as freedom of expression – both are used synonymously but actually they are two sides of the same coin. In the sense that you could have the right to expression, but with no information is of no use to you. You can have information, but your power of expression is not good, then you cannot convey that information. So, as media personnel, our job is to bring the two together. It is a task. You are asked to do the job. I would say that you must take whatever you are doing seriously as young students, develop the ability to be able to communicate with influence and with information.

Answer from the chair: It is a comment on what somebody said earlier that violence and conflict is a boring issue. This person should not be in the media, if he thinks so. Conflict and violence is a sensitive and vibrant issue in journalism.

Mr. Shamim Raza, Lecturer, Dept. of Mass Communication, Dhaka: I have a question to the journalist from India. It is regarding reporting the conflicts or violence; it could be the low intensity violence. What the newspaper is trying to do or should do is to make a balance. Can I then read it like this that, you try to make the owners happy on the one hand and on the other hand, you are catering to the audience so that they are not unhappy with your report? The question would be like this – in such a situation, for example, when you are asked to maintain the national interest such as Kashmir issue, the national interest at the same time is elite interest, and on the other hand, there are peoples’ interest, like the people in Kashmir or maybe others in the audience, who have their own interest which may not be compatible with the national interest or the elite interest - as a journalist what is your suggestion in that case? Should you really care for what the elite or the government wants you to do? Or should you really care for the minority segment of the people which have a conflicting interest and at the same time, if you can kindly comment, what is the general trend in the Indian media?

Ms Pamela Philipose: Very often, it is the national interest that dominates unfortunately. But like we have heard in the morning session, it is important that the national interest is tested against the public interest. It is important to bring

125 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence something that addresses the national interest, that is, in terms of reporting on the voices from the ground as well. The best journalism really combines both. I am talking of mainstream journalism. There could be sectional interest and sectional journalism which caters only to the public interest but I am talking as a mainstream Indian journalist in which case you have to combine both very often because we do not function in a vacuum. But it is important to test it against the public interest. Recently we had the case of disappearances in Kashmir. It had been happening over the last decades of the 90s. Really 90s particularly was bad but then, we had the election in 2002 and after that, disappearances became more accountable. There was a government in place and therefore the impunity of an earlier era was not so much on display. The Indian Press in fact highlighted the issue and we had the parents of disappeared sons and daughters coming to the capital and there was a fair amount of coverage. That also gave a hint of how civil society organizations need to break the barriers of silence as well and do it in ways perhaps that do not threaten, but really make use of public spaces that are available to get their voices across and that is possible. Again, it demands application of mind.

Q. Audience: If I play the role of an advocate, may I ask you, what competition eventually means? Is it ideological state apparatus? What exactly the role you (media) played? Did you play the people’s interest or ‘nation state’ interest or ‘regional peace and harmony’ and what eventually competition means in Indian context?

Ms. Pamela Philipose: Normally in a war situation, it is national interest that comes into play. Under that umbrella, it is difficult to speak out. Definitely the constraints of the requirements of the day and very often, the Media – Indian Media included – would represent the main voices of the establishment. But competition, at the same time, very interestingly does break out in various ways. We have had, even within the constraints of war coverage, interesting stories coming out, of treatment of prisoners, etc. It has happened and the point is that, the Indian Media, I know, is very often criticized for not being democratic enough, often voicing the establishment’s perspective. That is also true. That is because there is a lot at stake for many of the big actors, the big media houses, etc. So, they do that and they represent that. There is that overarching promise of democracy. Even though it is not often achieved, there is that promise and you have the laws. So, it is important to have at least certain systems whereby you can use the system to get the information and the Indian Press, on occasions, has been able to do that.

Mr. Shami Imam, Dept. of Mass Communication, Dhaka University: One can conclude that impartiality in journalism in the international conflict is nothing but

126 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence a myth, as you have said; nationalism or national interest and impartiality come together.

Ms. Pamela Philipose: There is a difference between a myth and a principle. The principle is there and it is an important principle that needs to be defended and extended. So, I do not want to say like that about the great Indian Press. I believe that the Indian media has suffered from many constraints. So, I do not want to say that. It is very important that we make use of the laws that we have to extend the depths of the freedom. That instinct is still there and people are constantly doing that. So, it is not a myth. When young people say that it is a myth, I feel sad about it because it is still be a myth. There shall be a principle and it should be something that you have to fight to get and once you get it as a principle, you defend and extend as much as you can, within your constraints.

Answer from other panelist: Just to add to what she said, it should not be considered as a myth. Any right is not to be gained, but it is to be asserted, and media is doing that part. Particularly when we were discussing about the media’s role in a nation-state concept. You said about Kargil, we said about our border clashes and in Pakistan, they talk about Kashmir. Media is fighting to follow the national perception on security issues, most of the times, the Media try to sound like patriotic. But there are Media which are really trying to fight back which costs because if something is written at least in national perception, then there is a risk that they will be initially misunderstood, not only by the government machineries, but also by the confused people that they are trying to take some stand. For example, in border clashes, if there is any media in Bangladesh which is saying that the media has made a mistake, then there is a risk that that particular media will be treated as pro-Indian. Similarly on Kashmir issue or Kargil issue, there are perceptions from the Indian side and the Pakistan side. In-between these two lines, there are media trying to be more and more assertive and more and more independent. What is to be done by the management part and the independent journalism? There are incidents when a journalist has not reconciled with the policy of the management and they have left the organization. They could not just surrender their conscience. There are cases, on many occasions, many journalists left their own organizations because they could not reconcile with the policy of the owners. There are these cases; I particularly believe that young people like you would be more free in your mind and in your fight. We want that some day, you will bring a new dimension to the fight for a freedom of a journalist. Here again, I said that there is a myth – freedom of media or freedom of journalist. Freedom of media means the freedom and independence of the owners, but we, as professional journalist, want freedom of journalist because there, we may assert our own position.

127 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

Comment from the audience: If I may add something to that, circulations are dropping in most of the places because people want information to move into entertainment; there will be more circulation. So, more than a crisis of the media, it is a crisis of the society and I do not think media in any country exists within a vacuum. It is just a reflection of the society as in many other cases. You can make a change in the society through the media but the media cannot all of a sudden impose things on the society. If the public wants more of entertainment, then the media is compelled to deliver that. At the end of the day, the media depends on public. As long as the public buys the newspaper, the newspapers exist. If the newspapers are not bought, then what is the use? We can write and write, and read for ourselves. It is the same case with TV also. They may broadcast, if there is no viewer, they would not get revenue. The challenge before the media organizations is to strike a balance between these two.

Comment: With today’s infrastructure development and technological development, if I could understand you, you said that many newspapers are dying because of laptops and Internet. At one stage, there was a threat to print media when TV was developing. It was said at that time that the print media will disappear but it was reverse. Then when Internet was there, particularly in the US and the western world, they were scared that the newspapers will die because people are getting news sitting in their drawing rooms and with their laptops. But finally it has been said that the print media is going to survive that is because of the credibility of print media. Printed words have the lasting effect on the minds of the people. This is the biggest weapon in the hands of the print media. Whatever you see in the visual screen, on TV, disappears in a moment and it has no lasting effect in the thought process. Similarly if you enter the Internet, you enter the jungle of unedited and obscene news that cannot survive in a sensible society. In the print media, as an editor, we see that the news is accurate and it serves the public interest and it is not obscene. So, these are the things with which the editors have to take care. Whatever you get in internet is an unedited news. They may be rumours, they may be unfounded information. They may be propaganda; there may be personal slandering. That is why, eventually, the credibility of the print media will remain above ‘images’ like the TV and Internet Journalism. I agree with you and I have definite information that internet affected circulation of Wall Street Journal in the US. I visited that office two years back and they said that they were trimming the newspaper. They said that they were trimming the strength of journalists. Finally they discovered an alternative journalism, they brought out a newspaper called ‘Free Press’. Free Press does not mean freedom of Press, free Press means – they say – that they distribute the newspaper freely. About half a million free press, newspapers published by Wall Street Journal group are distributed free of cost in the US and that paper has become profitable because that attracted more advertisements than the Wall Street Journal itself. So, in the

128 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence competition of technological warfare like Internet, TV, print media is surviving because of its credibility, because the printed words have the lasting impact on the humans. That is the strength of the print media.

Mr. Iqbal Shoban Chawdhury: I remember, last year when we were in a similar type of a conference, the former Chief Justice of India, Justice J S Verma said that most of the conflicts arise out of the mindset of people; that is the root of the conflicts; they are in the minds of the people. So, the people’s mind, whether they are in the policy making or they are the perpetrators of conflicts, we must, from the media side, see that the mindset is changed. I believe that nowhere the conflicts really brought any benefit to anyone. No violence led to any constructive development. From the media side, our role is to report objectively, reflecting on the situation and at the same time, try to reduce the causes of tension, which ultimately leads to the mindset, which leads to conflicts or violence. With this, we conclude the two-day session.

129

Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence VALEDICTORY SESSION

Mr. Finn Ruda (Chairman and Moderator), Head of the Mission of the ICRC, Bangladesh

Dr. Shaikh Abdus Salam, Prof. and Chairman, Dept. of Mass Communication and Journalism, University of Dhaka

During the last two days, distinguished personalities, experts from various fields, luminous and eloquent speakers had the opportunity to debate about variety of issues on the topics ‘Media Reporting, Armed Conflict and Violence’. 22 topics were covered during these two days. Along with our very renowned journalist- friends from Dhaka, former civil servants, members from civil societies, academics, 22 foreign editors from eight countries participated in this eventful and meaningful event in Dhaka.

We have heard about media which was covered by 4-5 main topics. Some panelists here were telling that media is really powerful; media is for privilege; media is for profit; media is for propaganda, etc. Through these functions, what media does is that it reports and reflects the society before us. Media actually discusses many evil things, but it again prompts us to go beyond many things with a vision and mission to have a nice and finer scenario. Thus, the media can play a role both positive and negative.

During these two days, we have heard from 17 panelists and they had addressed the issues as how would the media face the situation during emergencies and during the situation when the arms are triggered for creating turmoil and turbulence. How the media should deal with the conflict situations? We have attempted here to find the difficult answers in difficult situations through the practical experiences narrated here by the participants. In fact, the present situation is difficult for any organization – including media or even on the part of the government or a country – however, we have to face these situations objectively and with responsibility.

We are delighted from the discussions of our panelists during the last two days that have taught us and given a chance to learn, the tricks of the trade – how journalists should face the explosive and disastrous situations. They are indeed the diplomats or ‘humanitarian diplomats‘. Journalists have their roles beyond that. So, during disasters or during crisis or even during the normal times, we all understand that the journalists have their own role to play. The other agencies of the society have their own role and as a citizen of the society, as a member of the humanity, we have our separate role during a crisis or during good time.

131 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

Thank you for trusting us as partners of ICRC in the extremely important event for the journalists. We were extremely benefited.

Ms. Mridulla Bhattacharya, DG, Press Institute of Bangladesh

During the last two days, we had lively debate and panel discussion. The questions that were agitating the minds of the participants were answered by the experts. At the beginning of the conference, we expressed our hope that this Conference of the Senior Editors of the South Asian Region will make the powerful media at home and abroad aware of the need to remind the readers of forgetting the conflicts, their sufferings due to untold violence and the international law governing the same. Many of us are aware that there is IHL which forms major part of public international law and comparative rules which in times of armed conflicts, seek to protect people who are not taking part in hostilities and to restrict the methods and means of warfare employed. More precisely, the international treaty or customary rules are specially intended to resolve matters of humanitarian concern arising directly from armed conflicts.

In this conference, different sessions marked with liveliness and opinions, views and personal experiences of the participants made us more aware, clearer and more precise about its essential rules and fundamental principles, ratification, accession, reservation and succession. It may be recalled here that the ICRC is spreading the knowledge of Geneva Convention of 1949 and the Protocols of 1977 which marked a major advance in the development of humanitarian law. Today all the world States are parties to the Geneva Convention.

During the last two days’ deliberations, different sessions discussed on the media – violence and torture, media and protection – what does the law say about it, media and the law of armed conflicts, and War/conflict time responsibility of the media. The broad topics were discussed, analyzed and debated from different angles.

The speakers and audience tried their best to go deeper and deeper into the topics. They expressed views on the safety and security of the journalists and their protection while they are in dangerous mission in areas of armed conflicts. Civil society views on media and many more made the audience and the media, along with people, be aware of real situations with remedies or protective measures.

The Bangladesh Press Institute feels proud and honoured to be the joint organizer of this august Conference. It also expresses its gratitude to the ICRC, Bangladesh for making PIB partner of this timely and important conference of the journalists in Dhaka.

132 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

We also thank the Dhaka University, Dept. of Mass Communication and Journalism for their cooperation as partner of this conference.

I also extend my heartfelt thanks and express my gratitude to the senior editors and journalists of the South Asian region and from Bangladesh for sparing their valuable time and attending this conference, thus making this a successful conference, by sharing the knowledge, experiences and views during deliberations over the last two days.

We hope that the outcome of this would help PIB in formulating or chalking out our training programme for our local journalists as a training unit and also as a research organization. It makes the media persons and others more equipped to work anywhere in the media world, in any challenging situation by using their mighty pen!

Finally, I invite the participants of this programme to visit our Press Institute of Bangladesh, which is located in the heart of Dhaka at their convenient time. Thank you all once again. Thank you.

Guest of Honour, Mr. Fida Kamal, Attorney-General of Bangladesh

I am sure you have had a very useful meeting of the minds on several critical issues, which you have explored, debated and discussed. During the last two days at this international conference, jointly organized by the ICRC, the Dept. of Mass Communication and Journalism, University of Dhaka and the PIB, ‘Media Reporting – Armed Conflict and Violence,’ inherently entails dangers for occupational journalists in the discharge of their duties, dying to tell the truth, disseminating information so as to help the formation of informed public opinion and also providing a judgment on events relating to armed conflicts and violence.

The media is also capable of causing considerable damage, when one is mindlessly welding it all. Ideally the media is supposed to have a reasonable mind of its own and operate according to professional codes of conduct. But its culture of professional and financial instinct can drive the media, in practices of being obsessed with violence and influence opinion in socially destabilizing ways. Under the less than ideal conditions, media bias in accuracy and sensationalism can generate phobia and violent conflicts. In media, there is however another side to this sword. It can be a simple instrument of conflict resolution, when it responds well to its own professional influence and peace building.

It can present alternatives to conflicts. It can enable citizens to make informed decisions, in their own best interest, which if freely exercised, is less likely to be a violent process. Armed conflict and violence are avoidable man-made disasters.

133 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

Such manmade disasters can surely be resolved peacefully. Peace and security are so essential in the field of development and progress of all human activity. Violence begets violence and must be avoided at all costs and armed conflicts sooner or later must be resolved through dialogue, discussion and debate.

I am sure you have had a wonderful meeting of the minds, sharing experiences during the last two days, which you will usefully employ in your discharge of duties.

Before I conclude I would like to thank Mr. Finn Ruda for kindly reminding me of my association with the ICRC, at a time when we emerged as an independent sovereign nation in the early 1972. But prior to that, I may also share with you a feeling of camaraderie with the journalists here because I also happened to be a university correspondent in the university days, with The Observer, which then was called ‘The Pakistan Times’. They were lovely memories of working as a Junior Journalist, a Correspondent perhaps. And it is a pleasure to recall those early days when I was much younger and hopefully, a little more enterprising.

Now, coming back to this international conference and this Valedictory Session, it is time to say farewell and it will be soon time for you to return to your professional duties, work places and homes. You will take home, I hope, happy memories of this international conference, having met old acquaintances and perhaps made new friends with whom you hopefully will have relationships, enduring relations of lasting value.

Thank you very much for your patience and good luck to all the delegates visiting us. Take back very happy memories.

Dr. Iftirkher Ahmed Chowdhury, Advisor, Ministry of Foreign Affairs

I was afraid, I could be incoherent in the beginning because I had just been back from a long drive; and prior to that long drive, there was a long night, the previous night. But the persuasive powers of the organizers Mr. Finn Ruda and Mr. Shoban Chowdhury were such that I had to come. Thank you very much and thank you for the opportunity.

Distinguished guests, Guest of Honor, Barrister Kamal, my good friends on the podium, distinguished journalists, members of the media, ladies and gentlemen - It is truly a matter of enormous pleasure for me to be amongst you this lovely evening. I also deem it an honour and privilege and beholden to the organizers for inviting me; also thereby allowing me this opportunity to interact with some very fine media minds belonging to our part of the world, South Asia, the Sub- Continent.

134 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

Today, our countries are linked together by the spirit of SAARC. You, the members of the media, are the principal conduit or the connectivity of minds that we in our part of the world are aspiring to. I have no doubt that through your deliberations in the last two days you would have reached conclusions that would facilitate these noble goals and aspirations that we set for ourselves.

Let me now speak on the subject of the conference – ‘Media reporting - Armed Conflicts and Violence‘. The task of reporting under conflictual circumstances is inordinately difficult, especially because of all types of different demands that are made on the media, but the fact remains that the media remains and must be, must for ever be, the bastion of reason. It is the venerable Fourth Estate. It is the voice of conscience of the society, citizens’ count on a responsible media. It is just for news you know that. It is for views, guidance and assurances as well. The media’s task is therefore, not always easy. It has been aptly said that journalism is a bit like history on the run, but unlike the historians, it cannot wait for future interpretation. It confronts, the media does daily analysis. Indeed, in these electronic times, analysis and judgments are often instantaneous.

At all times and costs, the media must have the sense of responsibility as the primary guiding principle. For that society and the State must also ensure their fullest freedom. But again, as has been famously said, this freedom does not include the right to shout fire in a crowded theatre.

In the ancient times, war correspondents reported conflicts from far flung battle fields. Julius Caesar wrote at length on wars and preceded it with chronical battles. But the details took months and even years to reach the reading public which again was very limited. Closer to our times, when Ted Coppler and Peter Jennings were able to bring bloody battle scenes from the desert storms to our living rooms, it was instant and the audience was vast. They helped shape minds, influence policies and create values - all this, immediately also.

There are three factors that contributed to the massive transformation that reporting on violence and conflict has undergone today. First is democracy. Governments today are under constant pressure to justify blood, tears, toil and the sweat of war. The media is courted upon to defend or denounce a conflict. The second factor is technological advances and competition. The advent of satellite communications and Internet has fundamentally altered reporting both in style and in content. Vast amount of information must be shifted almost minute to minute. The public wants to know what happened now and not yesterday, and not even earlier today. The third is the scale factor. Conflict today engulfs not just uniformed fighters, as in the past, but also the civilians, often innocent women and children – all this calls for greater awareness and immeasurably more dedication than it required in the past. 135 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

As you have been told, I have spent almost a decade as this country’s permanent representatives to the UN both in Geneva and in New York. In the course of that long stint, I had the privilege to be the Chairman of the UN’s Information Committee, with its Secretariat headed by Shashi Tharoor, whom some of you may know and who too comes from our region.

We endeavoured to bring together a consensus of global values for journalism. A universal, even through information regime, a compact that will protect the journalists, particularly in periods of conflict and I am sure, his or her right to access news and transmit it.

Mr. Finn Ruda made a mention of my role, a modest one, in crafting the concept of responsibility.

It is the duty of every State, of every government to protect its own individuals. In case, the state or the government is unable to do so, then using the instruments of the UN, the responsibility to do so devolves on the international community. So, therein is the major role of the journalists in order to point out where the failures in discharge of responsibilities have occurred. In South Asia, we often say that we are proud of our intellectual resources. It is a matter of great satisfaction that the journalistic profession of which you are a part in our countries has been able to mind those resources and reach those products to our public.

That is why today within the structure of SAARC we are doing everything possible to facilitate your work. The shared values of South Asia must be redeemed in what you say and write. The power that you wield with pen or laptop in hand must be used to advance the common interest of our society - to eradicate poverty, to empower women, to educate our children and to build a lasting culture of peace and harmony among our nations.

In my own country, our government places a great value for the press. We have called the media our parliament. The vibrancy of our talk shows is already there. What mainly comes through in all these is the sense of balance and moderation that is the essence of Bangladeshi ethos. At legislative levels, we are working towards the Freedom of Information Act. This will be yet another instrument that will add to the institution building that we are involved with in Bangladesh at this time, to render our sense of pluralism sustainable for all times to come.

I hope our guests had a chance to taste of our traditional hospitality. We are in the midst of a beautiful season, the mild winter that Bangladesh is famous for. Do enjoy the rest of your stay here and savour also the calm and tranquility that pervades our country and society at this time and which will hopefully be the case for all times to come. Also, see for yourselves our efforts to create this new 136 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

Bangladesh where we all have undertaken to satisfy our hopes and aspirations. Thank you.

Mr. Vincent Nicod, Head of the Regional Delegation, ICRC, South Asia

First, I am very pleased to be in this place. This same hotel, at that time was the Inter Continental Hotel, has a very symbolic value in the Bangladesh history, as it was one of the neutralized zones in Dhaka, put under ICRC protection, during the struggle for independence. As I was discussing with Mr. Mosud Manan, Director of the International Organizations at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, that was one neutralised zone which was well respected by both the sides in the country. To a certain extent, it is still a landmark in the ICRC Humanitarian Mission in the region.

I have just arrived from New Delhi, where we just conducted a Moot Court Competition with teachers and students from six countries of the region. Last year, Bangladesh had won that competition and then went further to Japan and Hong Kong to compete with teams from all over Asia where they fared very well. This year, India won just ahead of Sri Lanka and Bangladesh; Pakistan being number four, the other participants were Nepal and Iran.

The second event that we organized shows that IHL is very lively and is still a preoccupation in the region; Landmine and Cluster Ammunitions Workshop in Central and South Asia. Six countries were represented again: Cambodia, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Afghanistan, Nepal and India.

Back to Dhaka, I am very grateful to senior editors having accepted the joint invitation by the PIB, the Dept. of Mass Communication and Journalism of Dhaka University and the ICRC, to share ideas, contribute thoughts and debate on the sorry state of the humanitarian affairs in the world today. As opinion makers, it is important that you let us know how you see the world under the humanitarian angle, under a perspective which can feed our reflection and help us find ways on how best to assist and protect the victims, of what we call the manmade disasters and non-violence.

As members of humanitarian community, we must grasp a better understanding of the world situation and its impact on those who are left defenseless by the new world order or marginalized by globalization, and you, as information providers, must help us a lot in this regard. The power of information comes with responsibility. This is why, the ICRC is proud to have been associated with the proceedings of the conference by mobilizing your thoughts, experience and teachings as senior editors.

137 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

I can see that we have many students here. You will help both the humanitarian community and the future journalists in the country to understand the need for all of us to shape the public perspective with an informed and impartial opinion where Humanity will be the first priority in the reporting.

Your past two days of debate should not remain a unique experience. We should capitalize on your invaluable thoughts to develop teachings based on the role model that you are playing in your respective countries to put the human being back in the middle of the world, whatever shape the world is taking in so many different situations that you have been evoking in front of us, from the Himalayan countries of Nepal and Bhutan to the shores of the islands of Sri Lanka and the Maldives.

We are living in a world marked by armed violence, intolerance radicalism and conflict, but also marked, in this region,by democratic processes. In the middle of that, we have to keep Humanity in the forefront.

The outcome of this Conference will be the publication of a book, collecting the proceedings of these two days. I hope that this book will be widely distributed to major schools, Depts. of Mass Communication, Political Sciences, etc. of different universities in South Asia, and maybe, further across the world.

As young students, junior journalists, we learn, reflect, debate and create an opinion based on reflections expressed by the senior editors in the conference. We, therefore, are grateful for the high level of debates and the quality of discussions. These will feed the participants with solid elements to make them more aware of the happenings in the world today. In Delhi, my colleagues are currently exploring the idea of setting up of a resource centre for journalists in collaboration with the Press Institute of India. The idea is to offer South Asian journalists, reporters or editors, a nodal place to gain knowledge about reporting armed conflict and situations of violence. The centre will not only teach or train, it would also be a reference centre where researchers would get instant information about IHL, the evaluation conflicts, ideas or stories limited to armed violence and so on. It will possibly feed a reflection on what alternatives do we have to violence to solve problems at political, economic or at socio-economic level.

If these ideas go in the right direction, we could apply the same recipe in a country like Bangladesh where the vibrant media community is part of the country’s development.

I hope that journalists will give more space in their articles on reporting on humanitarian topics such as suffering of the victims of the forgotten conflicts. Do 138 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence not let the major news companies of the world get the exclusive rights to decide who are the good victims of events unfolding in the world, who deserves international attention and support and who are the ones who will simply remain anonymous figures in the world statistics.

You can help us give a face to all those in need of protection and assistance. You can do it in three different ways – first, the denunciation method. It is necessary to denounce the violations of IHL, violations of Human Rights laws and any other law for that matter, domestic or international, in order to counter the growing culture of impunity flourishing in many countries. Almost all the major developments of IHL came after the media denounced abuses. Think for instance about the impact of the pictures taken in Abu Gharib.

In 1977, with the experience of military tactics used during the struggles which led to the decolonization of major parts of Africa and Asia as well as other tactics used during the Vietnam War - still fresh in mind, thanks to rich press coverage, the international community adopted two additional Protocols to the Geneva Convention. In this regard, the contribution of the media in the advancement of IHL was important.

The second way to make things move is the mobilization method. It is necessary to remind the world about the existence of forgotten conflicts, in order to gather support for the ICRC mandate of protection and assistance to the victims of conflicts and for any other humanitarian organization involved in various humanitarian efforts for the victims of disaster.

The third is the persuasion method which is less known and less public then the two previous ones. It involves direct contacts between the humanitarian community and the authorities, trying to convince them on taking measures to solve problems.

The media is again a special tool in this context. Reading the news, political leaders will start inquiring about the behaviour of their troops involved in conflict situations. Social activists, NGO workers, prominent personalities will produce statements about the need for all parties to violence to respect basic humanitarian rules. Military commanders will have to exert authority and responsibility over their troops, MPs and government circles will have to listen to the voice of the people, relayed by the media.

To persuade, to mobilize and to denounce – this is the role we want the media to fulfill in honesty, based on solid and credible information.

Knowledge is power but information leads to knowledge. The power of the media

139 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence should therefore help us reasserting the power of the humanity, as a tool to change it in the right direction.

I therefore thank you very much for your contribution to the debate, for your patience and for your active participation and I present my thanks to the organizers of this Conference; the Press Institute of Bangladesh and the Dept. of Mass Communication and Journalism of Dhaka University.

140 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence Profile of the Speakers for the Senior Editors’ Conference (28-29 October 2007)

Mr. Swapan Dasgupta is a senior journalist, author, political commentator based in Delhi. He is consulting Editor of the Pioneer, and writes regularly political column for Sunday Times of India, The Telegraph, The Pioneer, and New Indian Express and Free press Journal and several other newspapers and periodicals including Wall Street Journal.

Swapan Dasgupta entered journalism in 1985, has worked in a senior capacity in Times of India, Indian Express, and was managing Editor of the India Today for more than four years. He was a member of Indo UK Roundtable setup by the Indian Prime Minister from 1999 to 2004.

Mr. Ugyen Penjor is from Bhutan and is deputy editor of Kuensel newspaper, Bhutan’s national Newspaper. He covers political beat and social issues in his newspaper and is one of the youngest editors of the newspaper.

Mr Murtaza Razvi is from Pakistan and Magazine Editor of the Dawn Newspaper. Mr Murtaza is a veteran in Conflict and political reporting and one of the leading voices and credible journalist known for his bold writing on current political situations in Pakistan and neighbouring countries. He has been working in Dawn for quite sometime at different senor positions. His articles appear in several Indian and Bangladesh newspapers. He started his carrier as a young reporter in Frontier Post and since then he is escalating upward on the ladder of journalism.

Mr. Abdul Aziz Danesh is from Afghanistan and is editor of a leading local news agency, Pajhwok Afghan News. Several of the international media are presently dependent on this news agency as they have a network of reporters spread across Afghanistan. Danish earlier was working with Kabul based “Institute of War and peace Reporting” as an editor. He had a string with television reporting and did some exclusive coverage for NBC TV.

He has co-authored a book on the state of journalism in Afghanistan. Mr. Danish is well versed with Dari, Pashto, Arabic and English and hence has access to all sides in war-torn Afghanistan

Mr. Philippe Stoll is the Communication coordinator of ICRC for India, Bangladesh, Bhutan and Maldives. He has worked for the ICRC in Sierra Leone (Africa) and in Israel and in the Occupied Territories. He holds a master in journalism and worked as journalist back in his home country (Switzerland) for 6 years.

141 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

Mr. Farid Hossein is an ace reporter, famous for breaking several stories in Bangladesh. He is the Bureau Chief of the Associated Press, Bangladesh and his stories were published in nearly every important newspaper of the world. In addition, he is a part time fraternity teacher at the journalism school in University of Dhaka.

Mr. Lankabarange Anura Solomons is from Sri Lanka and Deputy Editor of Daily Divania newspaper. He is a specialist in feature writing and international politics and has covered the conflict in the Island for the last 20 years.

Mr. Amitabh Roy Chowdhury is a senior editor from India and is working on a senior position with India’s largest news Agency, “Press Trust of India”. Mr. Amitabh has an experience of over 25 years in covering conflict and day-to-day situation in India. He has covered Kargil War, Kashmir and Northeast and has widely travelled covering stories on International political and social issues.

Mr. Dharmendra Jha is a senior journalist from Nepal and is Editor of Annapurna Post, a widely circulated newspaper in Nepal. Mr. Dharmendra has been writing on several issues related to the conflict that exists in the Himalayan kingdom. He has written extensively on Human Rights and welfare of the media community.

Dr Mizanur Rahman Shelley is a social scientist, educationist and litterateur Dr Mizanur Rahman Shelley is presently Chairman of the Centre of Development and Research and Editor of Asian Affairs. He is former professor, turned bureaucrat, former minister and a pioneer in civil society movement who has been raising issues related to daily life of common people. Equally, he has an eye on International politics and much experienced in his analysis on the day-to-day situation across the globe. He contributes regular columns in national media and has travelled extensively across the globe. He has received several awards including highest Polish Order of Merit in 1991.

Mr. Nurul Kabir is an editor of New Age, English daily from Bangladesh, termed by his admirers and friends as the “new voice of the new age of Bangladesh”. He is a vocal and fearless journalist who keeps no bound in raising the issues related to the common person and their rights.

Mr. Gopal Guragain is the Managing Director of Ujayalo FM and Satellite radio channel in Nepal. His radio journalism continues to remain one of the most important methods of spreading the news in South Asia and has a reach to the remotest corner, where even the newspapers do not reach.

Mr. Gopal makes number of programmes for Radio Nepal. One of his famous programmes called ‘Haki Haki,’ which initiates development debate, was quite

142 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence famous amongst the listeners. He has been producing daily news digests for regional stations and has spread his network in nearly all the districts of Nepal.

Mr. Amit Baruah is Foreign Editor of the Hindustan Times, a leading Indian newspaper published from New Delhi. He is one of the most experienced journalists who was always posted in conflict areas. He was earlier working for The Hindu newspaper and was their correspondent in Islamabad, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and then in Singapore.

Mr. Surinder Oberoi is presently working as Communication Officer for the ICRC, New Delhi. He has an experience of 15 years as a journalist working as the correspondent of Agance France Presse (AFP), India Today magazine and Star News. He was a fellow at Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Chicago University and L. Henry Stimson Centre, Washington DC, a think tank dealing in conflict situations. As a journalist, he has covered Punjab and Kashmir extensively.

Ambassador Farooq Sobhan is President and the Chief Executive of Bangladesh Enterprise Institute, an independent think tank, which does research, and advocacy work. Sobhan was a special envoy to the Prime Minister and former foreign secretary to Bangladesh government. He has over the years served on number of international panels and advisory committees and is presently a member of the International Advisory committee of the Asian Society in the Unite States. Sobhan is author of several books and writes regularly for newspapers and journals.

Mr. Reazuddin Ahmed is editor of the News Today. He has worked in different capacities in different newspapers like Bangladesh Observer and also writes columns for international newspapers, Financial Times, International. Herald Tribune etc. He was former president of the South Asia Free Media Association, National Press Club Dhaka and member of several boards and management related to the films and media. He is also recipient of several awards.

Ms Pamela Philipose is from India and is one of the senior most editors of the Indian Express newspaper. She is famous for her critical and satirical columns in India. She has a wide experience and knowledge on political and social issues and has written volumes on both the issues.

Mr. Kesera Abeywardena is from Sri Lanka and a senior news editor of renowned Sri Lankan newspaper Daily Mirror. He has witnessed and written on violence in the islands for the last 15 years.

Ms Faida Faruk is a senior journalist from Maldives who has worked for both the media and the government. She writes regular columns for several newspapers in

143 Media Reporting: Armed Conflict & Violence

Male and was working for ten years in Maldives Television Station. She has worked in several senior positions in the media department of the Presidential office in Maldives.

Dr Hafiz G A Siddiqui is Vice Chancellor of the North South University. Dr Siddique is a scholar par excellence and has 35 years of experience in research and teaching at Dhaka University, UK universities and US. He is in addition member of several advisories groups and author of several books.

144

www.icrc.org

International Committee International Committee of the Red Cross of the Red Cross 47, Sunder Nagar 42/3, Block-H, Road #7, New Delhi - 110003 Banani, Dhaka-1212 India Bangladesh