PRESS CONFERENCE ON COMMITTEE TO PROTECT JOURNALISTS REPORT

Five of the top ten countries where press freedom had deteriorated the most over the last five years were in Africa, Robert Mahoney, Deputy Director of the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), told correspondents today at a Headquarters press conference.

Briefing the press on Backsliders, a new report released by the Committee to mark World Press Freedom Day (observed annually on 3 May), Mr. Mahoney was joined by Joel Campagna, CPJ’s Senior Middle East Program Coordinator.

Topping the list was Ethiopia, which had conducted a massive press crackdown in 2005, the Committee noted.  Three of the top five were in sub-Saharan Africa, with two in North Africa.  The Committee hoped to publicize the “very severe deterioration” of press freedom in those countries and stop -- or reverse -- the downward trend.

While last year’s report focused on the most censored countries, which included Myanmar and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, the 2007 survey highlighted countries that were often democracies, strategic United States allies and which had slipped off the radar of most press freedom organizations.  In Thailand, Morocco and Pakistan, which had a vibrant press, conditions had worsened.  In the Russian Federation -- a democracy and “Group of Eight” member -- journalists who crossed a line were killed.

Discussing the situation in Egypt, Mr. Campagna noted that a journalist had been sentenced to six months in prison for working on a documentary for Al Jazeera on torture in Egypt, and that more than 90 criminal prosecutions against journalists had occurred in the last two and a half years.  That “troubling pattern” of prosecutions, which also saw the first blogger sentenced to prison, had coincided with an increasingly assertive print press.

A rolling back of press freedoms had also been seen in Morocco, often cited as a leader in the Middle East, with newspapers openly critical of the Government and the King, he stated.  In the last two years, courts had banished three of the most independent editors in that country, including the editor of Le Journal, who had been forced to pay $350,000, in the largest libel suit in Moroccan press history.  Morocco also had tied with Tunisia as the leading jailer of journalists in the Arab world, having imprisoned three journalists.

Taking a question on why Zimbabwe had not been captured in the report, Mr. Mahoney said that Zimbabwe had been a difficult place to be a journalist before CPJ started its measurement five years ago.  The 2007 list had tried to measure the degree of deterioration, rather than the “absolute awfulness” of press conditions, and highlighted countries where regression might be halted or reversed.  Countries such as Zimbabwe, Eritrea, Myanmar and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea were not included, as conditions there were bad even seven years ago. 

Asked whether the United States could increase pressure on countries to improve press freedom, Mr. Mahoney said it was no coincidence that some countries had been shown latitude due to post-9/11 geopolitical considerations, noting that Morocco and Pakistan were critical United States allies.  The Committee hoped countries themselves would prosecute those who killed or attacked journalists.

Mr. Campagna added that comparing Morocco’s position to the rest of the region was dangerous in that press freedom had actually eroded in that country over the last five years.  It was extremely important to call out countries where there was a margin of press freedom, and to work to preserve it.   Morocco had been a model, and the fact that it had slipped was a “troubling sign for the region”.

Asked whether the CPJ had analyzed the subtle erosion of press freedom in Western democracies, Mr. Mahoney said the Committee examined all countries all the time, noting that the killing, jailing, threatening and harassing of journalists were criteria used in developing its report.  Further, the Committee had taken up the case of Josh Wolf, a video blogger in San Francisco jailed for eight months, and cases of those detained by the United States military in Iraq and Guantánamo.

Blunt media repression was becoming less doable for Governments, thanks in part to international scrutiny, Mr. Campagna added.  However, use of civil defamation suits had increased in countries like Morocco that lacked an independent judiciary, and exorbitant damages had been levied against the most independent journalists, essentially putting them out of business.

Taking questions on Iraq, Mr. Mahoney said Iraq was a conflict zone, where there was no conventional governance or news gathering, and it, therefore, served no purpose to place it on a list of backsliders.  The Committee had developed a separate Iraq report and had highlighted every case of attack on a journalist, Mr. Mahoney said, adding that 100 journalists had been killed in Iraq since 2003.

As for the exclusion of countries that had made progress regarding press freedoms, he said those countries would be included in next year’s list.

On the CPJ’s policy toward paying ransom to kidnappers, Mr. Mahoney said the Committee did not advocate anything that would complicate the situation for other journalists in any given area.  While the Committee did not comment on individual situations, it had, in the case of Italian journalist Daniele Mastrogiacomo, issued a statement stressing that the situation in Afghanistan would become difficult for other journalists working there.  At the same time, it would not criticize any family wanting to do whatever possible to see the return of a loved one.

Pressed as to whether the Committee supported the decision by most institutions not to pay ransom, Mr. Mahoney said it was important to address situations on a case-by-case basis under the policy just outlined.  Mr. Campagna added that the Committee had often spotlighted the journalistic credentials of journalists accused of being spies or of being unprofessional.  The group’s role was to express support and solidarity in those cases.

As to how the United Nations could address backsliders, particularly those hosting United Nations peacekeepers, Mr. Mahoney said that freedom of the press was a “main plank” of any democratization process, and the CPJ would welcome any help or pressure the United Nations could bring to bear on Governments. 

Asked whether the United Nations as a whole should become more engaged in press freedom issues, Mr. Mahoney noted that Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon last Friday had expressed support for the Committee’s work and solidarity with journalists in conflict zones.

The United Nations could be involved in a country-by-country basis, in some cases sending special rapporteurs to those countries where press freedoms were under siege, Mr. Campagna added.  Statements of concern from the Secretary-General and United Nations officials were important in shedding light on abuses.  In Morocco, the CPJ had met with the United States Ambassador and had exchanged research with European Union embassies as it investigated press conditions, he continued, noting that Morocco was to be a recipient of Millennium Challenge grants, which were to take into account human rights and press freedom indicators.

Asked about how the Committee counteracted the use of false information or acts of provocation, and specifically about the relationship among Estonia, the European Union and the Russian Federation, Mr. Mahoney said the CPJ defended local journalists, should they come under pressure to stop or censor their reporting, or be attacked.  They had the right to gather and disseminate news and opinion.  The Committee did not, however, comment on the editorial content of their reporting.

Mr. Campagna added the use of State media to target independent journalists was a common occurrence, citing cases in Morocco where journalists feared for their lives after State media had targeted publications that had reproduced or published commentary on the Danish cartoon of the Prophet Mohammed.

Returning to how the Committee classified countries, Mr. Mahoney reiterated that criteria included the killing of journalists, threats, imprisonment, judicial harassment, criminal libel prosecutions to silence and formal censorship.  Staff in New York and stringers around the world gathered and analyzed data to deliver an informed opinion that was not based on a scientific method.  He also noted that a country’s entire press situation was taken into consideration, not simply the high-profile cases.

Mr. Campagna added that the Moroccan cases had involved the most independent journalists.  Those journalists had eventually been amnestied, but only after spending many months in jail, something that had not been seen in the rest of the region.  It was troubling that they had been sentenced to jail for expressing their opinions.

Regarding Cuba’s failure to provide visas to international journalists, Mr. Mahoney said the denial of accreditation issue in Cuba had been included in the report.   Cuba was on the list for its 2003 jailing of up to 29 journalists and ongoing media repression, he continued, noting a worsening of the situation after Fidel Castro became sick.

As for the global press freedom situation, Mr. Mahoney said it was “becoming increasingly dangerous to be a journalist, especially a foreign correspondent”, noting that a press pass today was a liability.  Journalists were being targeted precisely for their profession.  It was the Committee’s duty to publicize the marked deterioration in global press freedom, he said, noting the killing of journalists in the Philippines, Mexico, Colombia and the Russia Federation.  Moreover, the rate of impunity was enormous -- 85 per cent of cases involving the killing of journalists were not prosecuted.  Seven out of ten journalists were murdered, meaning they had been deliberately targeted, including by Governments and criminal gangs.

Asked whether the Committee was in a position to challenge court systems, Mr. Mahoney said the CPJ followed prosecutions around the world.  In Turkey, he attended as an observer the trial of five journalists accused of insulting the State.  In cases where journalists did not receive due process of law, the CPJ highlighted the fact that the courts had failed.  In some countries formerly part of the Soviet Union, it was difficult to learn that trials were taking place.

Mr. Campagna added that the Committee examined principles for freedom of expression, and drew attention to incompatibilities between national law and international standards on civil and political rights.

Taking questions on hate radio in Rwanda in 1994, whether there had existed a totally unfettered Western press and the prosecution of American journalist Judy Miller, Mr. Mahoney said the Committee drew the free speech line at incitement to violence, noting that the Rwandan case represented propaganda designed to incite violence.  Absolute press freedom did not exist in any country, as the concept was relative and national laws curbed civil libel and slander, he said, adding that the Committee had visited Judy Miller in jail.

On the Committee’s effectiveness in countries where tyranny rules, Mr. Mahoney said success was measured by whether the CPJ could push a Government to repeal a repressive statute, induce the release of a journalist from jail or remove a journalist from danger.  In Turkey, the CPJ had helped to stop the prosecution of five journalists who had addressed the Armenian issue, and had pushed the Mexican Government to appoint a special prosecutor for crimes against the press.

Mr. Campagna added that even authoritarian countries like Syria and Libya were sensitive to how they were perceived.

Taking a question on China, Mr. Mahoney said that country had more than 30 journalists in jail today, including a number of cyber dissidents.  The Committee was constantly monitoring the situation and talking with major United States internet companies including Google, Yahoo and Microsoft to create a voluntary code of conduct for that industry in China.

* *** *

For information media • not an official record