The Judicial Commission’s appointment to investigate into the Saleem Shahzad’s case and other related issues is by itself a welcome development that, in a way, may discourage those who are in the habit of intimidating media. While Saleem Shehzad’s case is a testing case for investigating agencies to unearth the truth and an exceptional opportunity to break with the culture of impunity, there are other related macro issues that need to be deliberated upon to pre-empt such heinous crimes and uncalled for confrontation between the media and the government and its security agencies.
The case, besides criminal investigations, should be evaluated in the broader context of a pattern of intimidation, arm twisting of media (persons and organizations), freedom of expression, right to know, security of whistle-blowers /messengers/ reporters / analysts, especially covering or commenting on conflict, professional hazards of conflict reporting and media-military relations.
Being a journalist and media rights activist, the objective of my appearance before the Commission is not to malign any person or any security institution whom I regard the most pivotal bulwark of our national security, but to help the Commission to look into the broader picture and recommend ways to avoid such controversies, safeguard the journalists and sanctity of their profession, on the one hand, and help various government agencies, if you so permit, evolve a modus operandi that is lawful, useful and honourable and in conformity with fundamental human rights, civil and political rights and Johannesburg Principles (1995).
Two lessons are to be drawn from this muddy
experience: One, the journalists should seek information from wherever it is coming, but should neither become the part of, nor spy for one warring group or the other, including security organisations and militant outfits. They must adhere to their professional code of conduct while taking all safety measures. But it still remains a professional hazard to report conflict objectively, fearlessly and impartially.
Two, the security and intelligence agencies should also draw a clear line not to exceed their lawful limits which brings a bad name to their professional institutions. The ISI must deflate its larger than life image, focus on its mandated job and evolve a transparent policy in its relationship with the media.
It should drastically rethink its media-engagement policy and stop keeping an army of pseudo journalists on its payroll who have proved to be good for nothing. It must stop those elements within who indulge in any manner in unlawful acts of harassing citizens and journalists that brings a bad name to an otherwise most effective arm of our national security. I hope the ISI under General Pasha’s able and credible leadership will take all possible measures to cleanup his institution of all unscrupulous elements and stop dreaming to control the uncontrollable – the media of the new cyber age.
I propose the following: Besides investigating Saleem Shehzad’s case, the Judicial Commission must expand its mandate to address the pattern of intimidation of journalists, media-military relationship, secret funds to manipulate the media, issues of freedom of expression and right to know, security of and insurance coverage for media-persons, some institutional arrangement, such as an ombudsman, to provide protection to journalists under threat. The Commission should open its proceeding to public.
All cases of target killing of journalists should be investigated and the culprits must be brought to book. The Commission must supervise the investigation into the kidnapping and murder of Saleem Shahzad and probe all alleged suspects with the cooperation of various agencies.
The ISI must clear its name in Saleem Shahzad case in its enlightened self-interest and investigate into the conduct of its often named media handler, Rear Admiral Adnan Nazir, and others who have been threatening the journalists. Other agencies, including IB and Navy’s, must also explain their conduct regarding media.
The armed forces, paramilitary forces, and their intelligence agencies, the IB and other secret agencies must evolve a clear policy and code of conduct of embedding journalists and keep out of the business of controlling the media. In their own institutional interest, they should critically rethink media-military relations while respecting freedom of expression and right to know. There are better ways to do things rather than adopting rough and counter-productive tactics.
The Media Code of Ethics must be observed by the journalists in reporting conflict.
The journalists should be provided risk and life insurance coverage by both the government and the media employers. Training in conflict reporting, safety measures and kits, besides security to be provided by the security agencies, are some of the measures that should be undertaken.
Freedom of expression must be respected in the light of Johannesburg Principles (1995) and all state functionaries be sensitized about them. Proposed Freedom of Information draft should be presented before the Parliament for approval and rules may be framed immediately.
Ombudsmen may be appointed at federal, provincial and FATA levels with the powers of Supreme/High Court Judge to entertain all complaints regarding harassment and killing of journalists.
Similarly, all media organizations must also appoint an autonomous and effective ombudsman in their respective organizations to entertain all complaints against media-persons.
The interference of agencies in the media profession must be stopped by the leadership of the armed forces and complaint cells be created in all security agencies to entertain the complaints of citizens against the excesses of their officials.
All secret funds held by Information Ministry, other ministries and secret agencies regarding media should be regularly scrutinised by a joint committee of the parliament.
