|
Back to Index
Election Watch Issue 6 - 2012
The Media Monitoring Project Zimbabwe
June 01, 2012
Download
this document
- Acrobat
PDF version (1.42MB)
If you do not have the free Acrobat reader
on your computer, download it from the Adobe website by clicking
here
State
media distort UN rights chief's findings
The official
visit by UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navanethem Pillay
to assess Zimbabwe's human rights situation ahead of anticipated
elections - the first of its kind by a UN human rights commissioner
- was the most significant political development in the media
in a busy month.
Pillay held
a Press conference in Harare at the end of her historic five-day
visit on Africa Day, May 25th, during which she made damning observations
about Zimbabwe's human rights record and its democratisation
process since the formation of the inclusive
government in February 2009.
Her concerns
hinged on the continued existence of various forms of repression,
persecution and the lack of respect for the rights and freedoms
of Zimbabwean citizens.
These undemocratic
tendencies included the "misuse" of legislation by state
security agents for "political purposes"; the involvement
of the military in the country's civilian political affairs;
the persecution of human rights defenders, journalists and political
opponents on frivolous grounds; discrimination and criminalization
of minorities, such as gays and lesbians; the "strong political
bias" of the state media and these media's systematic
denigration of human rights defenders "simply going about
their job of trying to help promote and protect the human rights
of ordinary Zimbabweans"; and the reluctance by the Broadcasting
Authority of Zimbabwe to open up the airwaves to private players.
While the media
reported on Pillay's Press conference,
this was mostly in a selective and fragmented fashion. There was
no attempt to give their audiences a holistic, point-by-point summary
of the issues she raised in the full context of the country's
socio-political crisis.
The state media
particularly, failed to report her comments in context by failing
to present the facts in a fair and balanced manner. Instead, they
censored a number of Pillay's observations, including her
advice to bring those responsible for serious political violence
to justice, the state media's bias and the need for genuine
media reforms, among other issues, and deliberately distorted her
positive comments about Zimbabwe's existing "legal framework"
as an "admission" that endorsed President Mugabe's
demand for elections this year with or without a new constitution
(The Sunday Mail, 27/5).
Other state
media also paraded her call on the international community to lift
sanctions against a small selection of individuals and Zimbabwean
companies at the expense of her condemnation of several issues relating
to Zimbabwe's human rights record.
The Herald (26/5),
for example, tried to obfuscate Pillay's unflattering observations
on the country's democratic processes by giving prominence
to a "lot of positives" the country had achieved in
such fields as women's rights, the acquisition of land by
"many small farmers" under land reform, economic stability
and government plans to ratify the international Convention Against
Torture and Inhuman Treatment.
Even then, the
full picture on the "positives" was not totally captured
as the story selectively reported these and omitted crucial qualifying
statements Pillay also made.
For example,
despite reporting Pillay as expressing satisfaction that many small
farmers had been given land, they censored her concerns over how
the land reform process had "also caused a great deal of misery,
not just to former owners evicted without due process or compensation,
but also to tens of thousands of farm workers who lost their jobs . . . and
in many cases were reduced to total destitution overnight".
There was no
mention either of her recommendations for land reform to be conducted
"transparently and with clear criteria that are in full accordance
with international norms and standards", saying: "There
is, after all, no merit in taking sizable quantities of land from
one elite, only to give it another. Under the GPA,
the parties also agreed to ensure that all eligible citizens who
want to have land can do so, and that each individual will be considered
without bias. I urge the Inclusive Government to take further steps
to carry out these and other key reforms laid down in the GPA."
Similarly, The
Sunday Mail (27/5) used unidentified "analysts" who
claimed that Pillay "shocked many when she called for political
reforms, which are not part of her human rights remit", in
what the paper said was an "unmistakable if not embarrassing
echo of the election manifestoes of the two MDC formations and their
US, UK and EU donors which seek regime change in Zimbabwe".
One of the "analysts"
who were identified, ZANU PF's Jonathan Moyo, was reported
saying: "While Pillay's Friday Press statement was full
of understandable but misplaced sentiments of those who help her
pay her bills and whose malicious agenda against our country is
now public knowledge, it is notable that she tried to safeguard
her integrity by acknowledging that the Constitution
of Zimbabwe contains internationally sound provisions for holding
free and fair elections but that the challenge is only with the
proper implementation of those provisions".
Instead of reporting
Pillay's statement in its own right, The Herald report of
the following day (26/5) only did so in the context of Justice Minister
Patrick Chinamasa dismissing her observations as "off the
mark" and "unfair". The private media's
coverage of Pillay's visit and her Press statement was more
informative, though they too failed to provide a succinct summary
of her critical Friday statement that included advice to establish
a truth and reconciliation commission.
Download
full document
Visit the MMPZ
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
|
