Letters between the Prince of Wales and the British government will remain secret after the Attorney General intervened to block a court order mandating their release.

Last month, a panel of judges ruled that seven government departments had to disclose correspondence they had received from Prince Charles. But Section 53 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 gives ministers a veto over such decisions. In a ten-page document that accompanied his decision , Dominic Grieve MP said that he was taking action to protect the political neutrality of the Crown.

One of the fundamental principles of Britain’s constitutional monarchy is that the sovereign must be politically neutral. By longstanding convention, the Queen only acts on the advice of the government of the day. However, she must be kept informed about the business of government, and she is free to share her views privately with ministers. The need to preserve the Crown’s neutrality is seen as so important that communications between the royal family and the government are treated as strictly confidential, although the Freedom of Information Act 2000 originally allowed certain documents to be disclosed if it was deemed to be in the public interest.

Throughout her sixty-year reign, Queen Elizabeth II has shown herself to be a model of political circumspection. She does not give interviews, and on the few occasions when she does not speak on ministerial advice, her remarks are scrupulously apolitical. There was a brief furor in 1986 when the Sunday Times claimed that some of Margaret Thatcher’s policies were causing the Queen ‘dismay,’ but the assertion was swiftly rubbished by the Palace.

Prince Charles, on the other hand, has gained a reputation for being rather more outspoken than his mother. He has not shied away from public comment on topics such as architecture and organic farming, and he is known to share his views with ministers from time to time. While his critics claim that he is exerting undue influence on the government, his defenders argue that, as the future king, he is entitled to discuss his views with ministers.

The present tussle started back in 2005 when Rob Evans, a journalist from the left-leaning Guardian newspaper, sought to use the Freedom of Information Act to force the disclosure of Prince Charles’ correspondence with several government departments. His request was opposed by the government, and he ended up having to fight it all the way to the Upper Tribunal of the Administrative Appeals Chamber.

Last month, the Tribunal ruled that the disclosure of the documents was in the public interest. In their ruling, the judges sought to draw a distinction between correspondence that allows Prince Charles to prepare himself for kingship and correspondence that advocates certain positions. While the former should remain confidential, the latter could be disclosed to the public.

But the Attorney General disagreed. “In my view, it is of very considerable practical benefit to the Prince of Wales’ preparations for kingship that he should engage in correspondence and engage in dialogue with ministers about matters falling within the business of their departments, because such correspondence will assist him in fulfilling his duties…as king,” Grieve said.

Grieve also pointed out that, although the letters could be “frank,” they did not cross the lines of constitutional propriety. But at the same time, their disclosure could make it harder for people to accept his political neutrality when he becomes king.

“The ability of the monarch to engage with the government of the day, whatever its political colour, and maintain political neutrality is a cornerstone of the UK’s constitutional framework,” Grieve concluded.

Rob Evans, the journalist who originally asked for the letters to be disclosed, condemned the Attorney General’s decision, claiming that “the public has a right to see these letters” in order to gauge Prince Charles’ influence on government policy.

The anti-monarchy group Republic chimed in as well. “The Attorney General’s decision is all about protecting Charles and the Royal family from scrutiny, putting his demands above the rights of the British people,” said Graham Smith, the group’s chief executive.

“Dominic Grieve has made it clear today that no citizen should ever bother trying to find out what the royals are doing behind closed doors: the government will never let the light in.”

In the future, it will be impossible to use the Freedom of Information Act to sneak a peek at royal correspondence. Under changes to the law that took effect last year, the Queen, Prince Charles, and the Duke of Cambridge now enjoy a blanket exemption from the act.

Image Courtesy of   The Great Photographicon

The article Prince Charles’ Letters to Remain Secret appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Paris, France – Ethiopia’s only ISP, state-owned Ethio-Telecom, has just installed a system for blocking access to the Tor network, which lets users browse anonymously and access blocked websites. At the same time, the state-owned printing presses are demanding the right to censor the newspapers they print. Reporters Without Borders is very worried by these attempts to reinforce government control of news and information.

Danger that printers will censor newspaper content

Reporters Without Borders accuses the biggest state printer, Berhanena Selam, which almost has a monopoly on newspaper and magazine printing in Ethiopia, and other state owned printers, of trying to impose political censorship on media content before publication.

In a proposed “standard contract for printing” recently circulated by state printers, they assume the right to vet and reject articles prior to printing.

“This contract could drag Ethiopia back more than two decades as regards media freedom, to the time of Mengistu’s brutal dictatorship in pre 1991 Ethiopia,” Reporters Without Borders said. “Allowing printers to control editorial content is tantamount to give them court powers. On what basis do these state-owned companies assume the right and independence to interpret the law? Does this reflect a government desire to suppress all criticism before it is voiced?”

“If this standard contract is adopted, we fear it could lead to widespread self-censorship, which is already very common, and to media subservience towards the government. Criticism, independence and media diversity would all suffer, and the vitality of Ethiopian democracy would suffer as well.”

Article 10 of the proposed contract is evocatively entitled “Declining to print content violating the law.” It says the printer has the right to refuse to print any text if he has “adequate reason” to think it breaks the law. It goes on to say that the printer reserves the right to terminate or cancel the contract at any time if he has “adequate reason” to think that the publisher “has a propensity to publish a content which entails liability.”

This article openly contravenes article 29 of the 1994 federal constitution, which guarantees press freedom and bans “censorship in any form.” Reporters Without Borders points out that only an independent and impartial judge should have the power to impose any kind of sanction or prohibition affecting media freedom.

Ethiopia’s privately-owned newspaper and magazine publishers reacted to the proposed contract by addressing a joint petition to Prime Minister Meles Zenawi urging him to recognize that it violates the constitution and to have it withdrawn. The response from a government official was to insist that it was “a strictly business-based decision” and to deny any desire to censor.

The printers are keeping up the pressure on the publishers, saying they will refuse to print any newspapers or magazines and, under an unlawful contract that is an extension of the new press law that has put liabilities on printers for print media content.

“We call on all media professionals – publishers, editors and journalists – to be brought into the process of negotiation and drafting of this printing contract,” Reporters Without Borders said. “The possibility that printers could be held liable for printed content must not be used as grounds for reintroducing prior censorship.”

As it stands, the proposed contract would add to the repressive legislative edifice that the Ethiopian government has built over the past three years. It includes the 2009 anti-terrorism law under which two journalists have been charged and sentenced to long jail terms. It is also liable to exacerbate the already poor climate between the privately-owned media and government.

Government steps up control of Internet, uses sophisticated technology

Government-owned Internet Service Provider Ethio-Telecom, the country’s only ISP, has for the past two weeks been blocking access to the Tor network, an online tool that allows users to browse anonymously and access blocked websites. To do this kind of selective blocking, Ethio-Telecom must be using Deep Packet Inspection (DPI), an advanced network filtering method.

DPI is widely used by countries that are “Enemies of the Internet” such as China and Iran. Blocking access to porn sites is usually the official reason given for installing and using it, but in practice it allows governments to easily target politically sensitive websites and quickly censor any expression of opposition views.

In installing DPI and blocking access to Tor, the Ethiopian government is probably taking a first step towards installing a sophisticated filtering system that will eventually enable it to intercept emails, messages posted on social networks and Internet voice conversations using Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) software such as Skype.

Use of VoIP hardware and software has just been made a crime by the new Ethiopian Telecom Service legislation, which was ratified on 24 May. Anyone violating this provision could be sentenced to up 15 years in prison.

The authorities say the ban was needed on national security grounds and because VoIP posed a threat to the state’s monopoly of telephone communications.

The new law also gives the ministry of communications and information technology the power to supervise and issue licences to all privately-owned companies that import equipment used for the communication of information.

The OpenNet Initiative has already reported cases of Internet censorship in Ethiopia, including the blocking of blogs, news sites and opposition sites. So far there have been relatively few cases, above all because of the low level of Internet use in Ethiopia.

“This new law and the possibility that a Deep Packet Inspection system has been installed mark a turning point in the Ethiopian government’s control of the Internet,” Reporters Without Borders said. “We fear that DPI will be misused for surveillance purposes by a government that already subjects the political opposition and privately-owned media to a great deal of harassment.”

“We urge the Ethiopian authorities not to install this filtering system and, as we already said when The Reporter news website was blocked, we share the view of the United Nations special rapporteur for freedom of opinion and expression, Frank La Rue, who recommended in a June 2011 report that restrictions to the flow of information online should be limited to ‘few, exceptional, and limited circumstances prescribed by international human rights law’.”

It should be noted that, a few days after spotting that access to the Tor network was being blocked in Ethiopia, the Tor Project posted a message on its blog explaining how to circumvent the blocking.

Image Courtesy of   World Economic Forum

The article Ethiopian Government Restricts Freedom of Information appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Paris, France – On 9 February, Isa Sa’idu, the Kaduna bureau chief of the Daily Trust, was threatened by Lieutenant-Colonel Abubakar Edun, spokesman of the army’s First Mechanised Division, for having reported that soldiers had manhandled journalists trying to cover the bombing of a division barracks in Kaduna on 7 February. His equipment was seized.

On the same day at the same location, Umar Uthman a cameraman with the private station African Independent Television and a colleague from government-run Katuna State Television both had their cameras confiscated.

On 7 February, agents of the State Security Service raided the offices of the Nigerian Television Authority in Abuja in search of video recordings that showed members of Boko Haram nominated to take part in talks with the government. The cassettes were taken away by the agents, who said they were acting on government orders.

On 5 February, the French journalist Jérémie Drieu, a reporter for the channel TF1, and a local colleague Ahmad Salkida, were arrested by soldiers in the city of Jos in Plateau State. They were forced to show all the material they had filmed before being forced to pack and leave the state at nightfall. They were apprehended when it emerged that a documentary on which they were working would be critical of the government.

On 4 February, the press centre at Murtala Mohammed International Airport in Lagos, opened 30 years ago, was closed by the Nigerian authorities on the orders of the head of the protocol department attached to the airport’s presidential wing, Alofabi Oduniyi. He was reported to have accused journalists accredited to the centre of writing articles that were negative and prejudicial to the interests of the president. More than 60 journalists have been prevented from recovering their equipment locked inside the centre.

Martins Ayola, general director of the station Adaba FM, which broadcasts in Ondo State, said there was a price on the head of some of its senior staff for broadcasting critical programmes and they were being hunted by contract killers. One of the station’s programmes, “Oja-Oro”, was ordered off air by the Nigeria Broadcasting Corporation for allegedly trying to turn listeners against the governor, Olusegun Mimiko.

On 1 February, Kayode Akinmade, the commissioner for information and strategy, launched a petition against the programme that succeeded “Oja-Oro”, entitled “Ela Oro”, alleging it was broadcasting negative perceptions of the government.

Also on 1 February, Goke Famadewa, a journalist for The Punch newspaper, was manhandled by police attached to the Lagos office of Shell Nigeria. The journalist, who was reporting on a dispute inside the company, was beaten up for taking photographs of the premises. The police officers deleted all his photos before releasing him after two hours.

On 25 January, newspaper vendors Okwudili Nnadi, Tochukwu Onuigbo, Ugwu Stephen and Martha Agbedo – who had her five-month-old baby with her – were arrested by state police in Nsukka, in Enugu state. All copies of newspapers in their possession were seized based on the argument that they stirred up popular unrest because they contained photos of the victims of Boko Haram attacks. They were released after several hours but they were unable to recover the confiscated copies.

Again on 25 January, Stanley Mijah, a journalist for The Scope published in Adamawa State, was indicted by a court in Yola for having in his possession sensitive articles which, if published, might disturb public order.

Abdullahi Adamu Kanoma, a journalist with Zamfara State Radio, was charged with criminal conspiracy, inciting public disturbance, illegal assembly and mischief by fire. He was arrested while on his way to the police headquarters to interview the commissioner after the fuel price protests of recent months. He was approached by police officers and told his name was a list of people to be arrested for taking part in the marches. His trial began on 6 February before the Zamfara State Sharia court.

Problems persist in April, two more suspicious deaths

Before April ended with the twin newspaper bombings in Abuja and Kaduna, there were two suspicious deaths of journalists. Reporters Without Borders is unable to determine whether they were linked to the victims’ work.

On 16 April, Chuks Ogu, a journalist with the station Independent Television, was shot dead by a gunman who burst into the apartment of a couple whose wedding he had been filming and opened fire. The circumstances of the murder are still unclear and it is not know whether the journalist was the target or simply an innocent victim.

On 3 April, the body of Ibrahim Muhammed, a film editor with the commercial TV station African Independent Television, was found in a pool of blood in his apartment in Kaduna. According to his family, he had been followed home on two occasions by unidentified people. An investigation was opened on 4 April, but there have been no serious efforts to find those responsible.

A Dangerous Country for Journalists – Part 1

A Dangerous Country for Journalists – Part 2

A Dangerous Country for Journalists – Part 3

The article Nigeria: A Dangerous Country for Journalists – Part 3 appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Paris, France – The body of radio reporter Nansok Silas, who worked for Highland FM, was found on 19 January in a stream under a bridge on the Zaramagada-Rayfield road, 200 metres from a military checkpoint, in Jos, northeast of Abuja. Nothing of value was taken from him and colleagues suspect he was the victim of a targeted murder, but the cause of death and possible motive are still unknown.

Originally from the Langtang North area in Plateau state, he had worked for Highland FM for three years and hosted a programme called “Highland Profile”. He had not received any threats. Reporters Without Borders has called on the authorities to carry out a thorough investigation and to do their utmost to shed light on his death, and to consider the possibility that it was linked to his work.

On 3 January, the Kano office of the Daily Trust was invaded by vandals who tried to smash up the premises and assault staff. Only one person involved in the failed attempt was arrested. He was charged with criminal conspiracy, assault, criminal trespass and mischief by fire.

Obstructing access to information and controlling the state’s image

There was glaring evidence during the first quarter of 2012 of the Nigerian authorities’ desire to control the country’s image and monitor what the media publish or broadcast.

The government demonstrated its resolve to hide the real extent of the population’s demonstrations of dissatisfaction, as well as the threat presented by Boko Haram.

It seems as if the obstruction of access to information, seizures of newspaper print runs and equipment, as well as threats and lawsuits against journalists are aimed at allowing the government to play down its own weakness and the difficulties faced by the country,

On 13 March, police and troops manhandled several journalists covering a visit to Ibadan, the capital of Oyo State, by the first lady, Patience Jonathan. Dare Fasuba, of The Vanguard, Akinwale Aboluade of The Punch, Gbenro Adesina of The News/PM NEWS, and Sola Adeyemo of Compass Newspapers were prevented from entering Lekan Salami Stadium, while others such as Bisi Oladele of The Nation were beaten when they tried to exercise their right to cover the event.

A few days earlier, Jude Obiemenyego, a journalist with the newspaper Zion Nationale, was arrested by an officer of the State Security Service, for having exposed a case of corruption involving the ex-wife of the former government of Delta State. He was arrested in the woman’s office and threatened with a gun before being taken to police headquarters where he was held for several days. Since his release, he has received telephone death threats from unidentified callers.

On 7 March, an unidentified journalist was assaulted by police officers deployed to break up protests by youths at the Stubb Creek oilfield in the southern state of Akwa Ibom. The journalist fled to escape further violence.

On 23 February, Misbahu Bashir, a reporter for the Daily Trust, was refused access to the headquarters of the Aguryi Ironsi brigade in Abuja and was forced to stay in his car for three hours by soldiers outside the building. The journalist was seeking information about the arrest by brigade troops of 99 passengers travelling in a truck that had been stopped on the Kaduna-Abuja highway.

He said he was detained after asking to see the brigade commander instead of the public relations officer, a captain, with whom he had originally requested a meeting.

The reporter was allowed to leave after he was made to write down his name, address and vehicle registration number.

On 18 February, Iyatse Joshua, of the radio station City FM, was arrested by Lagos police while he was covering a procession organized by human rights activists and organizations in remembrance of those killed by security forces a during the week-long nationwide strike and mass protest against the abolition in January of fuel subsidies. He and a number of activists were taken to the offices of the Special Anti-Robbery Squad. All were released several hours later on the orders of the chief of police.

On 14 February, Suleiman Isah, a reporter with the Daily Champion, was barred from entering the Niger State government headquarters by members of the State Security Service, despite having appropriate accreditation. The security officers threatened him before he was allowed to leave the premises.

Earlier, a Voice of America reporter was manhandled by security men in similar circumstances outside the Justice Idris Legbo Conference Centre, a few metres from the government building.

On 13 February, journalists from The Nation, ThisDay, The Punch, The Guardian and Nigerian Tribune were forced to leave by soldiers posted at the entrance to a hospital next door to the government headquarters in the northern city of Kaduna. They were reporting on an attack by some of the governor’s guards on an information ministry official, whom they mistook for a member of Boko Haram.

A Dangerous Country for Journalists – Part 1

A Dangerous Country for Journalists – Part 2

A Dangerous Country for Journalists – Part 3

The article Nigeria: A Dangerous Country for Journalists – Part 2 appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Paris, France – Following World Press Freedom Day on May 3, Reporters Without Borders takes a look at the breaches of freedom of news and information in Nigeria during the first quarter of 2012, turning the spotlight on one of the most dangerous countries in Africa for journalists.

For the first time, it has included the Islamist militia Boko Haram in its latest list of Predators of Freedom of Information, just published (http://en.rsf.org/nigeria-boko-haram-02-05-2012,42487.html).

The press freedom organization outlines all breaches of freedom of information recorded between 24 December and 24 March. It highlights the almost daily arrests and assault of journalists and the obstruction of access to, and distribution of, information, and describes the insidious atmosphere in which journalists have to carry out their work.

During the period in question, Reporters Without Borders recorded: the murder of one journalist, the killing of another with no proof that it was linked to the victim’s work, nine assaults, seven arrests, three journalists threatened, four instances of seizure of equipment or deletion of files, three cases of access to information being cut off, three court cases against journalists and news organisations, the closure of a press centre and a media outlet’s premises vandalised.

The report also covers disturbances in April when there were bomb attacks on the offices of two newspapers, in Abuja and Kaduna (http://en.rsf.org/nigeria-government-urged-to-protect-media-27-04-2012,42384.html)

Whether these abuses – obstruction of information and control of the government’s image, or gratuitous violence and threats – were carried out by the government or private organizations using armed groups, they confirm the authorities’ desire to silence journalists who try to report on the instability now gripping the country.

Nigeria embodies a paradox. On the one hand, it is a country where freedom of news and information is effective so far as the pluralism and vitality of the media are concerned, and on the other, it has one of Africa’s worst records for infringements of press freedom and a worrying level of danger for journalists.

Murder, threats and violence

Since 14 March, when it became known that talks were taking place between Boko Haram and the government, the freelance journalist Ahmad Salkida has received several anonymous telephone threats. The reporter, who has covered the activities of Boko Haram for several years, was accused among other things of being a member of the Islamist group and of being the instigator of the talks. He was also told that he and the group “are not supposed to exist”. The next day, he was followed by a white Lagos-registered 4×4 for several hours in Abuja.

In July last year he was forced to move away from the northern city of Maiduguri after receiving threats from people claiming to belong to Boko Haram. The threats followed the publication in the magazine Blueprint of an article he wrote on the Islamist group’s first suicide bomber.

On 11 March, Boko Haram threatened to take action against three newspapers, National Accord, Vanguard and Tribune, in a tele-conference in Maiduguri, capital of Borno state. The group said the newspapers attributed statements to the group which were not made by its members and showed bias against it in their reports. It said they portrayed the group in a negative light while praising government forces.

On 9 March, Boko Haram had threatened to “take care of” any journalist that misrepresented its views in an article. The Nigerian Tribune and Vanguard Newspapers were among those mentioned specifically by the group’s spokesman, Abul Qaqa.

On 13 February, six journalists from the New Nigerian, Blueprint, Aminiya, Voice of Nigeria, Hausa Service and the Nigerian Standard, and a Nigerian Television Authority cameraman were attacked by a dozen unidentified assailants in Katami village in the Silame local government area of Sokoto State, where they were covering the election campaign of the All Nigeria Peoples Party’s candidate for the state governorship, Alhaji Yusha’u Ahmed. The bus in which they were travelling was attacked by men armed with machetes, knives, cutlasses and sticks.

On 7 February, Akinola Ariyo, a photojournalist for the New Nigerian, was threatened by an officer who aimed his weapon at him and ordered him to leave while he was accompanying a group of people trying to negotiate the reopening of the press centre at Murtala Mohammed airport in Lagos, closed by the airport authorities in early February.

On 1 February, three security guards assaulted Hassan Adebayo, marketing executive with the Port Harcourt newspaper Daily Trust and Sani Musa, the driver of the company’s distribution vehicle, as the pair were delivering copies of that day’s edition to vendors in the area. The attackers, in a white Toyota Hilux with the registration number RV 96 AO1, first attacked the driver, who managed to escape, then vandalised the vehicle, smashing its side mirrors.

On 20 January, Enenche Godwin Akogwu, 31, the Kano correspondent of Channels TV, was shot dead while trying to cover Boko Haram suicide bombings, which killed at least 185 people earlier that day. The journalist was interviewing victims outside the Farm central police station, which was a target of one of the attacks, when an unidentified gunman fired several shots at him.

A Dangerous Country for Journalists – Part 1

A Dangerous Country for Journalists – Part 2

A Dangerous Country for Journalists – Part 3

The article Nigeria: A Dangerous Country for Journalists – Part 1 appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) has revealed that over half of its television schedule is comprised of repeat programming, sparking concerns over the efforts made by the Corporation to develop new and original material.

The Daily Mail first reported on this topic and showed that while the percentage of repeat programming is less on the BBC’s main television channel, BBC One, there is still data which proves that the percentage is growing during peak viewing hours. At present, 61% of the BBC television schedule consists of repeats, encompassing such classic shows as ‘Only Fools and Horses’ and ‘Dad’s Army’ as well as nightly repeats of the cult animated series ‘Family Guy’ and ‘American Dad.’

These figures were commissioned by Freedom of Information who made a claim suggesting that the BBC is failing in its duty to provide ‘original programming,’ an obligation which is a clear part of the Corportation’s Royal Charter – an agreement which establishes its duties in detail.

It is thought that increasing budget cuts are a part the reason for the number of repeats currently offered on any one of the BBC’s networks (at present this consists of: BBC One, BBC Two, BBC Three, BBC Four, BBC HD and BBC CBeebies). However, with recent additions to the corporation’s broadcasting services, namely BBC iPlayer, it is difficult to ascertain the exact number of viewers who have taken issue with this ‘repeat’ situation.

Regardless, this is not the first time that the BBC has come under fire for its failure to focus on developing new comedies and dramas. David Jason, the star of the long-running and frequently-repeated BBC sitcom ‘Only Fools & Horses’ publicly lambasted the BBC back in 2005 over its constant showings of past programmes:

“If I were in charge I’d not allow Only Fools and Horses to be repeated so often … British TV is too safe and too cheap these days. We’ve got to be careful not to dumb down for the audience. They shouldn’t be sitting at home on the sofa vegetating.”

In the seven years since Jason first made his feelings known, it would appear that the problem has only become more severe. According to the BBC’s figures released to Freedom of Information, “just 15.8 per cent of programming on BBC3 and only 21.2 per cent on BBC4 was new” over the last 12 months. While these two networks have significantly shorter broadcasting hours than the two main BBC networks, the fact remains that there is a clear imbalance at work in the way that the BBC creates its schedule.

Rival network ITV has already made one move towards addressing similar scheduling concerns by removing the Saturday omnibus edition of its flagship series ‘Coronation Street.’ Such a move has surprised audiences and those involved with the series, according to The Sun, but it is possible that the move towards digital viewing services has eliminated ITV’s need to re-broadcast an entire week’s work of episodes on its schedule.

The article BBC Schedule is 61% Repeats appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.