THE OBSERVER

A few days ago, the prestigious international organisation, Reporters Without Borders, published their annual report which ranks countries for their adherence to press freedom, or lack thereof.

Guyana is ranked 39 out of 175 countries surveyed, moving up from the 88th position last year. This represents an upward jump of 49 places. What is interesting is that, by being ranked at position 39 this year, Guyana’s press is freer than that of two notable countries – France and Italy.

These two countries are members of the elite league of rich nations – the G8. The other members are Germany, Japan, the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada and Russia.

This group can be considered as the major contributor of funds used for international aid and as the bastion of democracy. Democracy and the adherence to democratic principles are the hallmarks of this group’s individual and international policies. The United States especially, is seen as the leader and defender of the free world.

Over the years, the individual members of the G8 have generally tied international aid to democracy. Recipients must adhere to acceptable democratic principles. If there is a deviation from this stringent requirement as stipulated by donor countries, it’s based on humanitarian grounds as evident in parts of Africa and East Asia.

Prior to 1992 under the PNC dictatorship, some international donors withheld funds to Guyana following that regime’s propensity for undemocratic norms.

The action by the donor countries was as a result of sustained efforts by the then Opposition, the PPP, to sensitise the international community about the atrocities perpetrated by the PNC regime.

The actions of the PPP and others, led to the 1992 General Elections being scrutinised by the Carter Centre headed by former President of the United States, Jimmy Carter. The results of that Election led to the rebirth of democracy after an absence of almost three decades.

Subsequently, as development flourished following the return of international aid and prudent management, the said Carter Centre used Guyana as a model country for democracy and related advancement. Countries are therefore aware of the democratic conditions that are necessary for the accessing of international aid. Simply put; no democracy, no aid. One of the pillars of a democratic society is press freedom. This returned to Guyana following the 1992 Elections.

It would be remiss if what obtained prior to 1992 is negated from this article. Then, only two major newspapers existed; the Guyana Chronicle and the Stabroek News and four television stations of which two were well established, WRHM and VCT. CNS 12 was new and GTV 10 had little presence. Today there are some 21 television stations and a multiplicity of cable providers. Two other major newspapers; the Guyana Times and the Kaieteur News have since been established.

Guyanese here learnt about the internet under this administration. Surfing the net, which is now an extremely easily accessible medium, has become an integral mechanism for communication and debate. The Press Association has been resuscitated and is as vibrant as its counterparts.

In addition to this, Guyana’s media is permeated with columnists and commentators. Every newspaper and television station has a multitude of columnists and talk shows, the vast majority of which freely and openly articulate anti-government sentiments on a daily basis.

These rabid diatribes often transgress into the realms of sedition. Character assassination has become a norm for some columnists and commentators. Some of what is written in sections of the press here may not even be tolerated in the protector of the free world; the United States.

Yet, these columnists and commentators continue to spew their hatred and wild accusations unabated. When on one occasion, action was taken against Channel 6, the owner and his cohorts in the media and the Opposition screamed suppression of freedom of speech.

The incident involved a tape of a live programme, in which a threat was made against the Head of State, being played continuously on the said channel.

The owner presented the frivolous excuse that one of his junior staff was responsible for the tape’s subsequent screening. This was ludicrous since the said threat was made on the live programme hosted by the owner!

The action taken against the station was not for what transpired on the live programme; it was because a recording of the said programme was played over and over again.

Why didn’t the owner instruct that the threat be edited out? The fact that it wasn’t, and that the recording was played many times after, shows blatant disregard for the safety of the Head of State. That was tantamount to sedition.

The owner of Channel 6 continues his verbal assault everyday; the same for Freddie Kissoon.

Articulations by their associates are facilitated by many media houses including the Kaieteur News, the Stabroek News, Capitol News, Channel 9 and many other talk-shows with similar anti-government sentiments. Gordon Moseley has been banned from covering assignments at the Office of the President and State House for publicly making disparaging remarks against the President. Moseley is not banned from covering any other assignment that may involve the President.

The President has the right like any President to decide who enters his office or home, based on actions perpetrated by those who are deemed disrespectful. It is therefore, malicious for the Channel 6 and Moseley’s incidents to be used, as they were and still are, to suggest that the press is being muzzled in Guyana.

The related lobbying by these Opposition-oriented individuals and the Guyana Press Association created the false impression that press freedom was threatened. The reality is that no newspaper here is prevented from importing newsprint and from publishing what they want irregardless of their skewed, inaccurate and anti-government analyses.

Television hosts are not told what and what not to say. The indecency that passes for debate on the internet is unrestricted.

The President and his Cabinet can be easily accessed by media operatives. Every week the Head of the Presidential Secretariat hosts a Cabinet related press conference to which all media houses are invited. Questions are not restricted to Cabinet matters. Given all of this, yet some sections of the media which are aligned to the Opposition, desperately try to convey both locally and internationally, that freedom of expression is non-existent. They have conveniently forgotten what obtained under the PNC dictatorship.

Guyanese know different; the same for Reporters Without Borders. Their independent survey has vindicated the administration and has dispelled the false notion of an opportunistic politically-tainted few in the media who serve as mouthpieces for the Opposition.

The fact that the report rated Guyana so high, speak volumes for this country’s adherence to the principles of press freedom. The fact that the donor countries, including those in the G8, continue to provide assistance to Guyana, speak volumes for its adherence to democracy and democratic principles.

The fact that Guyana ranked higher than Italy and France, speak volumes for the commitment to democracy by the government and the PPP. Is it therefore a coincidence that the report in question was ignored by a vast majority of the media houses alluded to? Is it a coincidence that it was not given prominence by the two that reported on it? Just an observation.