| |
Back to Index
Compulsory
Accreditation of Journalists in Zimbabwe: An Opinion
prepared by
Tawanda Hondora for MISA-Zimbabwe Chapter
June 16, 2002
© reserved -
Tawanda Hondora June 2002
Download
the full document
- Rich
Text File (RTF) version (105KB)
- Acrobat
PDF version (50KB)
If you do not have the free Acrobat reader
on your computer, download it from the Adobe website by clicking
here.
Zimbabwean journalists
are now required, before practicing, to apply for and obtain a certificate
of accreditation from the Media and Information Commission [hereafter
referred to as the Commission]. This article examines the constitutionality
of compulsory accreditation, first introduced by the Access to Information
and Protection of Privacy Act [Chapter 10:27], [hereafter referred
to as AIPPA, or simply as the Act].
It is clear
from the provisions of AIPPA, that the legislation is the government’s
answer to the perceived evils of the print media in Zimbabwe. It
absolutely controls the activities and operations of journalists
and mass media service providers.
AIPPA was promulgated
into law on the 15th March 2002. In terms of section
93, all journalists not "accredited" by the Ministry of
Information previously, i.e. prior to the commencement of AIPPA,
are obliged to register with the Commission within three months
of promulgation of AIPPA.
Ordinarily reckoned,
three months calculated from the date of promulgation of AIPPA elapses
on the 13 June 2002. However section 33(6) of the Interpretation
Act, [Chapter 1:01] states that: "In an enactment…reference
to a month shall be construed as a reference to a calendar month."
Three months reckoned from the 15 March 2002, the date of commencement
of AIPPA, ends therefore, on the 30th June 2002.
Two issues are
considered in this opinion, whether:
- journalists
should in principle, register with the Commission; and whether;
- section 79
of AIPPA, which provides for the compulsory registration of journalists,
is constitutional.
Conclusion
There are several
courses of action available to the fraternity of journalists.
- Notwithstanding,
the dismissed Andrew Meldrum urgent court application, another
application, exclusively restricted to the issue of accreditation,
may be filed. And the application will have to be distinguished
from the Andrew Meldrum application. This means that the pleadings
have to be comprehensive, and convincing. The urgent application
will seek a declaration that section 79 of AIPPA is unconstitutional,
on any of the grounds raised above. In the mean time however,
in order to avoid arrest and persecution from the government,
the affected journalists will have to register. But to avoid the
effects of section 79, those journalists that feel strongly about
the issue may hazard and change their employment status to that
of consultants, or write under pseudonyms.
- The other
option relates to a point of law, which is yet to be decided by
the court: and that is the issue of the discriminatory nature
of section 93 of AIPPA. This option allows journalists to approach
the Supreme Court seeking urgent relief. It may contain a prayer
that pending the court challenge the State should be stopped from
arresting or persecuting them.
It is clear
that the opinion contained in this application is based on the belief
and statement that compulsory registration/accreditation of journalists
adversely impacts on media freedom, plurality of information and
the development of democracy itself. The licensing system has no
other purpose other than the control of information and the instruments
of information dissemination. This explains why the Commission is
appointed and enjoys tenure of office at the discretion of the Minister
of Information, and why the Commission is the licensing and disciplinary
authority.
Visit the MISA-Zimbabwe
fact sheet
Please credit www.kubatana.net if you make use of material from this website.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License unless stated otherwise.
TOP
|
