Dev Raj Dahal, FES - Nepal

Growing violence in the nation continues to dehumanize the Nepalese people. It has even propelled the eviction of journalists from conflict areas, inflicting the violation of their rights and undermining their pursuit. In the context of a brutal contest for power and control, reporting objectively is not easy. Any attempt by journalists to project the visibility of victims is, therefore, pregnant with the potential risk to their profession, life and liberty.

Eviction of journalists means the condition of people of those areas is made meek, voiceless and invisible. A lack of voice and visibility deprives the Nepalese citizens of their constitutional right to know and participate in critical decisions. Journalists’ withdrawal from conflict-prone areas, accommodation to the expectation of oppressor, self-induced paralysis of the moral will, error of reporting, conspiracy of silence or false contentment mark a very ugly trend for the development of fair journalism.

Undemocratic forces do not want to hear news that is at odds with their basic beliefs, memories and interests. They attempt to bottle up information so that they are answerable to no one. Who does the surveillance of the socio-political environment then when there is an absence of media personnel? Who informs the civilized community about the spiraling human rights crises? What does the neutralization of media power convey? Addressing these problems is by no means easy given the complex nature of conflict in Nepal.

Free and independent media exposes the corruption of power and lends a voice to the citizens’ resistance. But, there are many political actors who do not value openness and transparency in public life. They tend to stifle those media that attempt to peddle knowledge to the public, stimulate open discourse and highlight the causes of structural injustices for policy attention. The sense of injustice is largely human-induced, not born. Without proper communicative condition between the people and political forces, Nepalese society cannot be rationally shaped and social condition cannot become a subject of critical reflection and reform. Victimhood of journalists saps their duties in supplying information necessary for informed participation of citizens in public affairs and reflecting feedback to the institutional mechanism of power. What are the innovative ways to reach to those people who are made voiceless by fear of violence? Under condition of monopoly of news by powerful actors in conflict-prone areas how diverse peoples’ concerns and needs are articulated? How are they made conflict sensitive? Are there alternative resources available for media pluralism?

The initiative of International Press Institute-Nepal National Committee (IPI-N) to address the problem of eviction of journalists from conflict affected areas demonstrates a good example of how journalists, media houses and institutions are willing to work in civil peace, restore justice to the victims and renew their watchdog functions. This also mirrors their ability to effect professional solidarity and solve the problem of collective action. This is, however, not a sustainable solution of the problem of eviction. It is merely a short-term relief whereby victimized journalists are provided some opportunities to have some of their immediate needs met.

The press is neither context-free nor free from the constitutional framework and the code of media ethics. It can not shy away from the fundamental issues facing the nation either. Given the everyday deepening political crisis and corresponding media socialization of Nepali people about political uncertainty, protection of individual journalists requires a collective will to solve the particular problem of their fellows and general problem of the ordinary people. The public realm of journalists is embedded in the general life of people, where all members are attached to the same subject, but from dissimilar positions and diverse perspectives. Journalism reflects diversity of political life, often in comprehensive political detail. If, the conditions under which freedom is constrained by fear and oppression, problem of eviction of journalists remains. What is the way out of it?

First, victim journalists’ needs and rights should become central to the rehabilitation program so that they will be able to continue with their duty of independent and informed reporting, liberating people from ignorance and contributing to public good. Information itself is public good. Once information is made public, it cannot be reverted to secrecy to the benefit of special interest groups of society. A little care by media associations and journalists and their collective rational voice can enable individual journalists to continue their work on, in and around conflicts, defend the freedom of conscience and enable the people to live in civil coexistence. Justice to the victim is a precondition to peace. Second, building a coalition of journalists across political spectrum for collective action and making the violators of human rights accountable to law and people. But, socially responsible and ethical journalism should attempt to avoid a culture of revenge. Revenge causes a deadly spiral, incompatible with the civilized society and democratic principles that respect opposing beliefs. They should, however, continue to challenge the complacent belief in an unjust world, discuss about the suitability of a particular kind of peace and mobilize public opinion in its defense.

Conflict resolution by eliminating opponents (muscular peace) did not prove feasible in the country. Conflict resolution by satisfying the powerful actors (hegemonic peace) tried in 1950 and 1990 too did not yield durability. It did not help the nation achieve structural stability of the polity, economy and society. The only rational option before the nation appears now is democratic peace which is expected to address the root causes of the conflict, become socially inclusive and transformatory in nature.

Democracy requires the removal of the barriers to the channels of communication between media and its audience, debunk hidden truth about the irrational operation of power, discipline and socialization and help to restore the order of human freedom and justice. Only in such a just world, journalists can set themselves free from the politics of fear, shape public opinion and contribute to democratic will formation and peace.

Note: This article has been published in The Telegraph Weekly (5 May 2004)