Severo Portela
Media organizations, and journalists, mainly through the Macau Portuguese and English Press Association (AIPIM), have of late been voicing a degree of concern about the freedom of expression and journalistic independence in the Special Administrative Region. To clarify the context, it is one which encourages amendments to the new government proposals, definitely not a revisionist look at the integrity of the Press Law under which the local news apparatus has been operating since the inception of the MSAR.
To simplify and address the concerns prompted by the new government regulations mentioned above, we perceive a downwards scale or spiral of opacity beginning from the uncharted realm of the Cybersecurity Law, to a Civil Protection Law in which we may consider grey areas which are up to interpretation (the devil is in the detail; we have to look into the details to grasp the menacing elements hidden within), and then deep down to the boldness of an alleged directive that Secretary Wong Sio Chak gave to local media in the drive for positive editorial while covering the Greater Bay Area.
As we “speak”, both laws and the alleged directive have something in common, perhaps to some relief, they are still not in force, so there is still time to convince Chui Sai On’s government to ponder the consequences on the freedom of expression granted by article 27 of the Basic Law… if the proposals are enforced.
The fact is the proposed civil protection act is under consultation till mid-August; time enough to make the case against the idea of imposing sentences up to three years for somebody found guilty of spreading rumors. Not only is the felony poorly limited, its rationale ignores intentionality and it seems to call upon the wisdom of the courts to assess social stability. What is a rumor but a vague and hazy inconvenience to both the simple as well as the legal mind?
Anyway, when we address the issue of the civil protection framework we are talking about law. But what looks on the surface to be an additional set of editorial recommendations around the responsibility of the media and the Greater Bay Area project, could be menacing constraints to the freedom of speech and the independence of journalism… beyond of the law.
Representing the Chief Executive in the opening of the First Media Summit of the GBA, held in Guangzhou, Wong Sio Chak called on the media, “especially the main ones”, to take advantage of this historic opportunity and actively participate in its promotion. Up to this point, the Secretary for Security would have remained within the boundary of the politico; but he went further into the domain of journalism when he dared to present two (2) ways for the media to embrace the initiative. In the promotion of “this era”, the first one included news materials on which the media would achieve positive dissemination of the story. The second one did not mention news materials but recommended cooperation, innovation and joint presentation of ideas. We would say that despite the relevance and size of the GBA… perhaps it would be better to let journalists and media organizations decide for themselves the coverage of the GBA… untainted by propaganda.
A final note, on the departures of journalist João Fernandes, the unavoidable veteran of the printing media of the 80 and 90s in Macau, and the gentleman architect I.M. Pei who left us peacefully over 100. Macau owed him an explanation as to why it decided to waste Pei’s enormous talent on that modest Science Centre. And a final appropriate quote on freedom by Ai Weiwei: without freedom of speech there is no modern world, just a barbaric one.
No Comments