SADC tribunal inaugurated in Windhoek.
Nine judges were sworn in at a ceremony in Windhoek, seven years after SADC agreed to set up a regional court whose rulings will be binding and which will also offer legal advice to heads of state. "As regional integration gains prominence, the peaceful settlement of disputes through instruments of mediation like this tribunal becomes an important tool in Africa for SADC", said SADC executive secretary Tomaz Salamao. Namibian Judge President Petrus Damaseb said disputes over the use of water, for example, could be addressed by the Tribunal. "Namibia and South Africa have not yet agreed on the common border of the Orange River," Damaseb told reporters, adding: "this can now be settled at the tribunal." Judge Luis Mondlane of Mozambique was appointed Chairman of the Tribunal. -Nampa-AFP
SADC A new Tribunal that will rule on disputes among member states of the 14-nation Southern African Development Community (SADC) was inaugurated in Namibia on Friday.
Controversial Consensus Maintains Internet Status Quo
The document was hailed late Tuesday with a half-hearted standing ovation. The discontent arises because the Internet status quo has been maintained, allowing the US-based ICANN (Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers), a non-profit private entity working under an agreement with the South Africa's Thembe Phiri, who had pushed for multinational governance of the Internet, said "a spirit of compromise prevailed", but added that the South had not given up on its quest for a stronger voice in the future of the Internet. The outcome is likely to further upset civil society groups who have In the compromise document follow-up discussions on Internet governance -- one of the most fought-over issues since the summit's first leg in Geneva two years ago -- is left to independent fora, whose decisions will not be But, as was in evidence in arduous preparations for the Summit, the North-South Divide prevailed over future management of the tool that civil society calls "a global public Yet, on the eve of the 173-nation summit, it became apparent in a morass of last minute give-and-take among harassed delegates that the South's viewpoint would not hold sway. Despite a determined push by South Africa, Iran, Venezuela, Cuba, Brazil and others from the developing world, the developed countries, the United States and Australia in the main, held firm against any action that would have transferred powers from the US-based ICANN. The corporation manages "the domain name system" (DNS) enabling millions of computer users around In fact, there is much more to the Summit than Internet governance, although that topic has overshadowed others. Scores of companies have come to show off the latest in information and communication technology. Over 300 "parallel events" and roundtable debates are being held, and partnerships between private business and local communities in making Internet access cheaper and more available in Asia, Africa and South America are being showcased. One project has solar Hilmi Toros, IPS, 15th November
The World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) kicks off Wednesday with a compromise document approved unanimously after several months of fruitless negotiations.
US government, to remain as the main governing body of the global computer network.
"Very happy with the result," Ambassador David Gross, US coordinator of International Communications and Information Policy, told Terra Viva.
gathered here and have found themselves frustrated by intimidating security measures which have isolated foreign delegates, journalists and non governmental organisations from local groups.
Developing countries, the European Union and civil society groups had wished for a compromise on opening up ICANN to more international control. The body is widely seen as being under US tutelage.
binding. The first such forum is to be held in Greece next year, the US official said.
Proposed as "the solution", the World Summit on the Information Society is accentuating the problem: the North-South political impasse in tackling the North-South Digital Divide. All agree that the Internet has enormous potential for development in general, including in health, commerce and governance among a host of critical issues.
space that should be open and accessible to all on a non-discriminatory basis".
"The internet … must be seen as a global public infrastructure," says The Association for Progressive Communications (APC), an international network of civil society organisations. "In this regard we recognise the internet to be a global public good and access to it is in the public interest, and must be provided as a public provision."
the world to communicate with each other.
UN Secretary General Kofi Annan has characterized the Tunis Summit as "unique," because it will consider "how best to use a new global asset" rather than focusing on global threats, as most world summits do.
energy supplying the power for computers in places where electricity generation is expensive.
Yoshio Utsumi, head of the International Telecommunication Union and Secretary General of the Summit, is pushing for a $1-billion project called Connect the World to enable 800,000 villages to access the Internet.
M’MEMBE Editorial: Levy exhibits foolishness, stupidity and lack of humility
Levy's reaction to Dr Kenneth Kaunda's humble advice makes us question this man's suitability for president and his capacity to think and reason in a more sober, logical and rational manner. There is something seriously defective about Levy's character. We say this because it is extremely difficult for us to understand how one can erupt like a volcano when simple, humble and honest advice is given to him. Yes, Levy has the right to have issues, differences or even to be bitter with Dr Kaunda. But surely, is there any need for him to exhibit this anyhow anyway? Was that the right platform or issue on which to launch a scathing harangue of Dr Kaunda? "I was in a similar condition when I was head of state on the crisis of the constitution. But I called for a meeting of all those involved such as the Church including myself, we met and resolved it. I am hoping that the issue will be resolved. We need that answer from the President himself." This is basically what Dr Kaunda said. Can a reasonable person react to such advice in the manner Levy did on Saturday? The answer is a categorical no. Only a stupid fool can react to such humble advice in that way. And is it not a matter of fact that the 1991 Constitution amendments were a product of negotiations involving the opposition, the Church, the labour movement and indeed the UNIP government? Is there anything that Dr Kaunda said in his advice that was not factually correct? We appreciate that Dr Kaunda made many mistakes - small and big - when he was in office. We also appreciate that Dr Kaunda is not Saint Kenneth. And in fact, Dr Kaunda admits this himself. He even admits the many mistakes his government and himself personally made and feels a lot of things they did with his comrades could be done better today; and the mistakes they made should not be repeated by later generations of leaders. It is sad that not very long ago - on February 23, 2005 - Levy had to apologise to Dr Kaunda for the same conduct, the same language he was using against him on Saturday. Levy said he was sincerely sorry for the hard stand he took on Dr Kaunda and he said: "All of these people, I give them so much honour because not only are they elders but they are statesmen. Now I am only a human being and some of these things upset me and at certain times I speak out perhaps speaking more than I should. I apologise for the hard stand I took on Dr Kaunda a few days ago although what I said was true. I should not have said them in that manner; it's only that I was angry because I have done so much for my father (Dr Kaunda). I feel sincerely sorry for what I did. I also want to say sorry to the Catholic bishops. There has been a lot of debate in the nation and I briefed the bishops when I met them in Lusaka...I will invite the Catholic bishops so that we can reconcile and they should tell me the way we should proceed." Levy is increasingly showing the nation that he is not trustworthy. He is a hypocrite who sometimes tells lies and does not mean most of the things he says. We are also witnessing one side - one very negative side - of Levy's character. Levy has no bit of humility in him. He is so full of himself and obsessed by the fact that he is President. And he thinks being President makes him everything and puts him above every other citizen. He is a know-it-all. But we know what Levy's abilities and disabilities are. Even at law, Levy is not the most brilliant lawyer in this country. He is not in the class of the Matthew Ngulubes, Ernest Sakalas, Muna Ndulos, Patrick Mvungas or even Edward Shamwanas. There is nothing Levy has done as a lawyer that today forms part of our legal studies in Zambia. His results at UNZA where he did his Bachelor of Laws degree were very modest and are there for all to see. Levy has no writings to show on any serious legal matter - worse on the constitution. But he wants to carry himself as the best lawyer this country has produced. We know this is not so, it is a lie, a falsehood. Even at politics, he is a nobody. Levy is not a political heavyweight. Even being President of the Republic of Zambia has not helped him much - he is still a nobody. Levy will never get anywhere near what Dr Kaunda is politically, here in Zambia and internationally. Even Frederick Chiluba, despite the corruption of his regime and other misdeeds, still has a much higher political standing than Levy. So what is Levy so full about? Anyway, we are not surprised. Nobodies always behave that way - they try so hard to make everybody feel they are in charge, they have the power. And this issue of Levy bragging about having done this and that for Dr Kaunda is nonsense. Levy has no right or power to dispense favours from state coffers to Dr Kaunda or anyone else. What Dr Kaunda gets from the Zambian government is and should be only that which the law entitles him to receive. If Levy has been dishing out favours to Dr Kaunda using state resources, that is corruption for which he should be prosecuted when he leaves office. And because whatever Dr Kaunda receives from the Zambian government is not Levy's money, then he owes Levy no gratitude for it. And it would be foolish and stupid for Levy to expect consideration from Dr Kaunda over what is not his. And it would be equally stupid, foolish and corrupt for Dr Kaunda to stop saying what needs to be said, to stop criticising Levy publicly simply because certain favours have been extended to him by this gentleman. Even if such favours were out of Levy's personal money, it would still be stupid, foolish and corrupt for Dr Kaunda to be bought with such presents into silence over serious national matters that affect the future of our country, the country whose independence struggle he had the privilege to lead. Levy says leadership is not about appeasing people even when what they want is unattainable. Yes, this may be so, but leadership - good and democratic leadership and not dictatorship or autocracy - is about respecting and meeting the people's wishes, desires or aspirations. And this doesn't mean that the people's will, desires or aspirations end with casting their vote for a particular candidate. The people's wishes, desires or aspirations are continuous. Levy says Dr Kaunda is asking him to listen to all stakeholders but government will not always do what stakeholders say. What will government do if not what the stakeholders want? Is government constituted to do what Levy wants or what the people want? What is Levy's job? Doesn't this gentleman understand that his job involves, inter alia, serving the wishes, desires and interests of the stakeholders? Levy's concept of being President of the Republic of Zambia is seriously faulty and needs urgent correction. If he continues on this path of arrogance, conceit, lack of humility, his ending will be disastrous. And even if he gets a second term, Levy should realise that the term will only be of five years, after that it will have to come to an end and the state powers that he is hiding behind will not be there to protect him - he will have to personally and directly face these same stakeholders he is today scolding and belittling. Anyway, if Levy was capable of learning, he would have grasped something from Dr Kaunda and Chiluba's lives after leaving State House. But it seems expecting to learn something from these two former presidents is asking too much from Levy - he is incapable of learning from other people's examples and that's why today he has difficulties appreciating Dr Kaunda's humble advice to him on the constitution review process. We have no doubt Levy will continue to the end of his presidency with this arrogance, lack of humility and sometimes stupid and foolish outbursts until he crash- lands. And Zambians should therefore brace themselves for the challenge that having this type of president entails. Source: http://www.postzambia.com/post-read_article.php?articleId=2757
The foolishness, stupidity and lack of humility exhibited by Levy Mwanawasa in Livingstone on Saturday is something that one can never imagine to come out of the mouth of a president of this country.
We have read over several times what Dr Kaunda's advice to Levy was. Dr Kaunda's advice essentially went like this:
Again, this is where Levy's logic provokes Homeric laughter. To suggest that the mistakes Dr Kaunda made or the wrong things he did during the time he was in office should totally disqualify him from commenting on the political processes going on in our country today is really being stupid, foolish and shortsighted. If this logic of Levy was to be followed, no human being on this planet today would qualify to advise another or pass judgment on another's conduct. This is because only God Himself, his son Christ and angels would be blameless. The rest of us, at one point or another, we have committed a transgression of one sort or another. But we know that still more human beings advise each other and pass judgment on each other's conduct. What is wrong with telling a brother or a sister: "please don't fall in this ditch in which I had fallen; take another safe path"?
But listen to what Levy was saying on Saturday, not only about Dr Kaunda, but also the Catholic leadership. Does this man and his contradictory language inspire trust and confidence? No. It instead inspires contempt, mistrust and lack of confidence in this man.
African Free Expression Organisations Establish A Network
Held at the Conference Hall of the Noguchi Memorial Institute for Medical Research from October 28 to 30, 2005 the meeting brought together 42 participants from 33 major local and international free expression advocacy organisations including the International Media Support (IMS), International Freedom of Expression Exchange (IFEX), Article 19, Index on Censorship, International Federation of Journalists and representatives of over 20 continental free expression advocacy organisations from Northern, Southern, Central, Eastern and West Africa.
During the conference, participants reviewed the state of freedom of expression on the continent. They also discussed key issues and challenges facing freedom of expression advocacy organisations in Africa in recent times and how to address those issues.
There were discussions also on the current most critical freedom of expression issues in Africa. The participants identified lack of access to information, arrests and detentions of journalists, inadequacy of legal expertise, clampdown on media organisations, lack of independence of regulatory bodies and lack of independent judicial systems among others as impeding the development of freedom of expression on the continent.
Participants also assessed in particular, freedom of expression in Ethiopia, Somalia, Sudan and Zimbabwe and developed strategies for lobbying the African Union, ECOWAS, Southern African Development Community (SADCC) and other inter-state bodies on the need to reform laws obstructing free speech and expression and ways of developing proposals for common legal standards for free expression legislation in Africa.
At the end of their deliberations, participants established a network that would seek to improve over the next decade the environment for freedom of expression in Africa. The newly created Network of African Freedom of Expression Organisations (NAFEO) issued a communiqué containing collective issues that African constituencies would be informed of.
In attendance also at the meeting was the Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression in Africa, Commissioner Andrew Chigovera.
The Media Foundation for West Africa (MFWA), Media Rights Agenda (MRA), Media Institute of Southern Africa (MISA) and Journalists en Danger (JED) collaborated to hold this conference with sponsorship from UNESCO.
Issued in Accra
October 31, 2005
Communiqué
We, 42 participants from 33 organizations dedicated to freedom of expression and media freedom in Africa, met at a conference sponsored by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) in Accra, Ghana, from October 28 to 30, 2005, and hosted by the Media Foundation for West Africa (MFWA), in partnership with Media Rights Agenda (MRA), Media Institute of Southern Africa (MISA) and Journalists en Danger (JED);
Agreed to establish a network that will seek to fundamentally change over the next decade the environment for freedom of expression in Africa called the Network of African Freedom of Expression Organisations (NAFEO).
To this end, we agreed:
1. To form a coordinating committee that broadly represents all constituencies, comprised of JED, MFWA, MISA, MRA, the International Federation of Journalists Africa office (IFJ/Africa), the West African Journalists Association (WAJA), Organisation des Medias d'Afrique Centrale (OMAC/OCAM), All Africa Editors Forum, and groups from North Africa, East Africa and the Horn of Africa.
2. To invite the MFWA to serve as the host organization.
3. To invite the coordinating committee to designate a convening organization, on an annually rotating basis.
4. To build and strengthen the capacity of regional and sub-regional organizations, especially in the Horn of Africa, East Africa and North Africa.
5. To put in place a rapid response mechanism to deal with crises that seriously impact on freedom of expression in Africa.
6. We agreed to address the following issues:
6.1 Legal And Institutional Frameworks
* strengthen and harmonize continental and sub-regional protections; and
* at the national level, work for the repeal of criminal laws affecting the media (e.g. sedition, defamation, insult, false news); reform and reduce penalties associated with civil laws; reform broadcasting laws to promote pluralism; transform state media into true public service bodies; reform media regulatory bodies (build/strength their independence).
6.2 Media Issues
Work to stop violent attacks on, and detention of, journalists; stop financial pressures on the media (e.g. manipulation of government advertising and price of newsprint); and improve working conditions of media practitioners.
6.3 Access to Information Laws/Practice
Work towards the enactment of democratic access to information laws in all African countries over the next 10 years.
6.4 Training
Including for journalists on legal issues/professional standards, especially with respect to privacy and accuracy and avoiding defamation; and for lawyers on international freedom of expression standards.
7. To address these issues, we agreed to develop campaigns, mechanisms and methods of engaging the international, regional and sub-regional structures, and to involve international freedom of expression organizations.
8. In particular, we agreed to identify a few major campaigns on which to focus each year; and to also launch campaigns to address urgent issues as they arise.
9. We agreed to establish specific structures (issue-based coalitions) to address specific issues, e.g.:
a. For work at the African Union (AU), including the Executive Council, the Summit and the African Commission on Human and Peoples Rights (ACHPR), on issues including the drafting of a Treaty on Freedom of Expression in Africa, and to respond to country reports on freedom of expression.
b. To issue a resolution on strengthening of freedom of expression in Africa.
c. For work at regional bodies, including the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), the Southern African Development Community (SADC), East Africa Community and others.
d. For work at the international organizations, including the United Nations (UN) and UN Human Rights Commission or Council (media and freedom of expression violations), UNESCO (communications, culture, language), the Economic Commission for Africa, ECA (information and communications technologies, ICTs), the European Union, EU and the European Commission, EC (trade impacts on freedom of expression), the United Nations Development Programme, UNDP and the World Bank (role of media in development and the Millennium Development Goals), the International Labour Organization, ILO (rights of media workers), Red Crescent and Red Cross (visits to journalists in detention).
e. To address detention of journalists in particular countries, e.g. in Eritrea.
f. To take advantage of summits and other regional and sub-regional high-level meetings.
10. The methods of action should be designed to maximize effectiveness, including making legal challenges, submitting papers, launching protests (letters, visits, petitions, and demonstrations), targeting scheduled meetings, and convening consultations, workshops and conferences.
Host Organisations
1. Journaliste en Danger (JED)
2. Media Foundation for West Africa (MFWA)
3. Media Institute for Southern Africa (MISA)
4. Media Rights Agenda (MRA)
Participating Organisations
African Organisations
5. AFMF: Africa Free Media Foundation (formerly NDIMA Network for the Defence of Independent Media in Africa)
6. AMDISS: Association for Media Development in Southern Sudan
7. CNLT: National Council for Liberties in Tunisia
8. EFJA: Ethiopian Free Press Journalists Association
9. FAMEDEV: Inter-Africa Network for Women, Media, Gender Equity & Development
10. FXI: Freedom of Expression Institute
11. HornAfrik Media
12. NGE: Nigerian Guild of Editors
13. OMAC: Organisation des Medias d'Afrique Centrale
14. OTM: Observatoire Togolais des Medias
15. PIWA: Panos Institute West Africa
16. SCFE: Somali Coalition for Free Expression
17. TAEF: All Africa Editors Forum
18. URATEL: Union des Radios & Televisions libres du Togo
19. WAJA/OJAO: West Africa Journalist Association/ Union des journalistes de l'Afrique de l'Ouest
20. CREDO: Centre for Research Education & Development of FOX & Association Rights
Non-African Organisations
21. ARTICLE 19: Global Campaign for Free Expression
22. Free Voice
23. IFEX/AMARC: International Freedom of Expression eXchange/World Association of Community Radio Broadcasters
24. IFJ: International Federation of Journalists
25. IMS: International Media Support
26. Index on Censorship
27. OSI: Open Society Initiative - Network Media Program and Justice Initiative
28. CHRI: Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative
Ghana Organisations
29. AI: Amnesty International, Ghana Section
30. GCRN: Ghana Community Radio Network
31. CHRAJ: Commission on Human Rights & Administrative Justice
32. Ghana Bar Association
33. Ghana Journalists Association
Invited
34. ACHPR: Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression in Africa, Commissioner Andrew R. Chigovera
Unbundling Botswana’s State Media
Very little has changed. The Ngwato tribal elite extended its influence to its cousins and relatives in Molepolole, Maun, Ramotswa. It did not meet with equal success in Kanye and Mochudi, which have wavered between the opposition and Domkrag in recent years. The government media was - and it can be credibly argued that it continues to be so - a mouthpiece of the ruling party and the bourgeoning propertied class represented by the large cattle barons and sections of the prospering merchant and retail business community. The state press was - more conspicuously in the past than in recent times - singularly devoted to the articulation of the interests of this small group of Batswana. Mmegi was the first to attempt an alternative approach to journalism. Patrick van Rensburg, registered the modern Mmegi in 1988 with the primary aim of promoting the community based brigade movement and the ideology of education with production. Mmegi has now been thoroughly commercialised and it would be difficult to distinguish it from the unapologetically profit-driven private press pioneered by the British ex-soldier, William Jones, who is now identified with "The Echo". In 1983, he established the Botswana Guardian. The Guardian revolutionised modern Botswana's nascent information industry and gave louder meaning to the notion of 'freedom of expression and speech'. Soon after its birth, it reported the Idah Ngope High Court case in which she alleged sexual waywardness of Botswana Democratic Party Secretary General, Daniel Kwelagobe, and then Bank of Botswana Governor, Festus Mogae. Unprecedented! Unheard of! Reports on the 1984 general election followed. The Guardian exposed 'untruths' that suggested that Botswana National Front leader, Kenneth Koma, then standing against Vice President Peter Mmusi in Gaborone, booked into a hotel in Mafeking, where he plotted with enemies of Botswana to undermine the country's security. Mmusi lost the by-lection after the 'Tshiamo ballot box' was exposed, fuelling suspicion that the ruling party was in the habit of lying its way through elections. The Guardian reported corruption and mal-administration at the Botswana Housing Corporation leading to the resignation of six members of the board of directors. The private press had unveiled the Muslim woman, and the monopoly that the ruling party held over the influence of public opinion. The woman was not so pretty after all. The opposition brought six members to parliament and inspired the international community and academics to start talk about a credible alternative government. The private press had demonstrated the ability to influence national events by equipping the public with 'the other side' to information that was propagated by the state. Since then, many events have exposed the shortcomings of the private press in the way that it measures up to social responsibility - otherwise called 'the public interest' - and the pursuit of 'truth', which support citizen consciousness and action. It misread the issue of the Basarwa claim to land in the central Kgalagadi. It misunderstood the significance of the U.S. war on Iraq. It carries 'business' news in abundance and it limits labour news to times of industrial strife. The aim of this discussion is to propose a fresh view of information use. It proposes the public press. When the state press gets fat with advertisements three things happen: - There is a distortion of the dynamics of the advertising market and the economics of the information industry. It destroys the appetite of the private press for doing business. That is antithetical to the basic philosophy of capitalism which thrives on private enterprise and the pursuit of profit. It gives the false impression that the state is better suited than the private sector to do business and to promote the best ideals of democracy, private enterprise and good social values. The state press uses taxpayers' money to cushion costs that are dictated by the real market place, resulting in delivery of information commodities at deceivingly cheap rates. Where costs exceed revenues, the citizens must pay, but they benefit little or nothing from financial gains. Real costs and gains are hidden and lost in the massive volumes of unkept government books. Each advert that goes to the Daily News, RB II or Btv means that there is one less that goes to the private newspapers, radio stations and GBC. This is a disincentive for organisations that would otherwise be able to operate gainfully. Civil servants work 'office hours'. The private sector works the hours that are necessary to produce a competitive product that will fetch profit at the market place. 'State capitalism' as practised at the government information services is a contradiction in terms. The capitalists generally believe that the state is a bad businessperson. They use that belief to argue against what they call the 'command economies' of the socialist countries. The public press seeks to temper the excesses of the private and the state media. It disallows advertising that might compel it to bow to pressure from rich advertisers who will invariably want to manipulate 'the truth' to their advantage. The public press denies the politicians the privilege of editorial interference which has become so endemic that it has taken on the dimensions of tradition. Kutlwano can be kept as a public relations tool of the government. RB II should be completely privatised or abolished. Radio Botswana, the Botswana Press Agency (BOPA), Daily News and Btv should be transformed into public enterprises. * By RAMPHOLO MOLEFHE
Their employees are information officers whose first mission is the promotion of government policies. Given the country's post independence politics, and the pervasive influence of the Ngwato tribal aristocracy epitomised in the Khama name, the information services were practically at the service of the ruling party and its founding father, Seretse.
When the state press goes public, it will have to be carefully unbundled depending on the levels of commercialisation of each of its parts.