Broadcasting Act 2011 Act No. 17 of 2011 and Broadcasting (Amendment) Bill 2017
Dear Editor
THE Broadcasting (Amendment) Bill 2017 was conceived to eliminate the discrimination and inequalities that subsisted in the sector while simultaneously leveling the playing field and providing much needed clarity for regularization.
The Broadcasting (Amendment) Bill 2017 applies a number of remedies to gaps left by the Parent Act. The following must be noted: A clarification of “broadcasting service” from “a service providing broadcasting” to “a service providing broadcasting which includes (i) a television broadcasting service; and (ii) a radio (sound) broadcasting service.”
• While the Parent Act of 2011 spoke to the issue of public service broadcasts, it provided no definition. The 2017 Bill cures this lacuna (mischief). Within the 2017 Amendment Bill a public service broadcast is defined as “a programme produced for the purpose of informing and educating the public, and promoting policies and activities of the Government that benefit the public as a whole.”
• The Parent Act in section 18(i) and 18(k) respectively, provides the following:
“The Authority shall…require licensees to carry information on any programmes issued by the Civil Defence Commission, the Guyana Police Force, Guyana Fire Service and or health services, and certain other programmes as public information deemed appropriate and necessary in terms of national security, emergency and disaster as a public service at no cost…[the Authority shall]…require licensees to carry a certain percentage of public service broadcast or development support broadcast as public information deems appropriate as a public service at no cost.”
• The 2011 Act and the 2017 Amendment Bill both speak to public information (whether implicitly or explicitly governmental) as material to be included in public service broadcasts at no cost. However, the 2017 Bill introduces a cap and thereby removes the existence of a wide and untamed application for public service broadcasts. It is a myth, a falsehood that the 2017 Amendment Bill has introduced the public service broadcast of government information at no charge. This has always been the legislative position. The new Bill sought to delimit and clarify that position and not leave it open-ended. It is important to note that in the region, both Trinidad and Tobago and Barbados have put the cap on 2 hours and more daily on public service broadcast for information the government believes to be of public interest. Guyana now has a cap of sixty minutes where there was a limitless opportunity before.
• Classes of broadcasting services have been introduced thus, “(a) commercial class, (b) non-commercial class, or (c) community class” so that applicants must apply for a broadcasting service licence of one of these classes. The machinery of classification was absent from the Parent Act.

• The new Bill provides for zoning thus, “(a) primary broadcasting zone; (b) secondary broadcasting zone, (c) tertiary broadcasting zone”. This machinery allows for broadcast licences to be granted to persons to carry out a broadcasting service in one or more of the broadcasting zones, and was also absent in the Parent Act. The Guyana National Broadcasting Authority conducted consultations with broadcasters and the issue of fairness regarding fees that applied across the board with no recognition of the correlation between population density and profits, was found to be unfavourable.
• Fees were increased for broadcast licences by 1000% across the board under the former administration without consideration for market forces constraining categories of large and small broadcasters. The 2017 Bill provides for various base fees commencing at the sum of $300,000 Guyana dollars instead of the flat, across the board broadcast licence fee of two million, five hundred thousand dollars imposed by Regulations made under the 2011 Act.
• The 2017 Amendment Bill precludes the broadcast of hate speech, racial incitement and terror threats, thereby offering further and specific human rights protections that the Parent Act did not.
• There is provision for a broadcaster to register an official complaint, and activate a process of inquiry and corrective measures, where that broadcaster has signed an international agreement to broadcast a programme or channel and another operator broadcasts same without such an agreement.
• The Amendment Bill provides existing broadcasters with 30 days to apply to continue broadcast services. The 2011 Act did the same.
Under the PPP various blatant infringements to press freedom occurred. Notably:
• Kaieteur News was disallowed State advertisements;
• Stabroek News was disallowed State advertisements for almost two years to facilitate the operationalization of the Guyana Times Newspapers;
• Mr. C.N. Sharma was repeatedly banned from broadcasting for several months;
• Reporter was banned from State House;
• Reporter was banned from Office of the President;
• The University of Guyana was denied a broadcasting licence;
• Television stations were prevented from expanding operations across Guyana and the National Communications Network was the singular entity allowed to so do;
• Licences were given to Clement Rohee and family, associates and friends of Mr. Jagdeo with no requirement for application fees at that time;
• The Alliance for Change was repeatedly denied the option of placing ads on NCN;
• Mr. C.N. Sharma was removed from channel 12 to channel 6 and forced to purchase costly equipment to operate with weaker frequency;
• Vieria Communications Network was stripped of the lottery broadcast and the broadcast was given to the National Communications Network;
• Journalist and social commentator grotesquely assaulted with faeces;
• Journalist and social commentator denied state services.
The Broadcasting (Amendment) Bill 2017 which benefited from consultations with the broadcasters, the National Frequency Management Unit and the Guyana National Broadcasting Authority is a collaborative and modern document that seeks to improve the broadcasting landscape and allow for information, equity, choice and access for the benefit of all Guyanese.
Regards
Earl Hamilton