The media council bill is being discussed in the parliamentary committee from today.
We use Google Cloud Translation Services. Google requires we provide the following disclaimer relating to use of this service:
This service may contain translations powered by Google. Google disclaims all warranties related to the translations, expressed or implied, including any warranties of accuracy, reliability, and any implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, and noninfringement.
The bill brought by the government to keep the media council under its control is seen to narrow the right of full freedom of the press given by the constitution. The bill has been drafted in such a way that the government has the upper hand in the appointment and dismissal of officials including the chairman of the council.
It is seen that the autonomy of the council will not be maintained by this provision. Press and freedom of expression, communication rights with the protection, enhancement and promotion of the journalist code of conduct and its implementation. The role is that of the Council. But since the officers of the council are accountable to the government that appoints them, it is seen that they are not in a position to work independently and differently from the wishes of the government.
The then Minister of Communications Rekha Sharma registered the Bill in the National Assembly on 13 Baisakh 2081. There is a provision in the bill for the government to appoint the chairman and members of the council based on the recommendations of a three-member committee consisting of an expert member appointed by the government under the coordination of the secretary of the ministry and a joint secretary of the ministry.
Advocate Baburam Aryal, an expert in media law, says that the process of appointing officials in any organization shows the independence of that organization. He said that since the recommenders are all government people and the appointing government is the government, the appointed people will automatically be accountable to the government. "The main objectionable provision is the appointment process," says Aryal, "The role of the quasi-judicial body is the council, its appointment process should be trustworthy and beyond the control of the government, but here it seems that the government intends to control it." "It will also make it difficult to exercise normal liberties," he says.
The National Assembly passed the bill on 28th January 2081 and sent it to the House of Representatives. The National Assembly has changed the name of the proposed 'Media Council' to 'Massanchar Parishad'. Apart from that, no attempt has been made to make the council autonomous and independent. The National Assembly has introduced a provision to directly appoint the government of Nepal by removing the secretary-led recommendation committee introduced by the government in the bill. Similarly, the proposed 11-member council has been reduced to 13 members and the bill has been passed.
The upper house has not addressed the question raised by the concerned people and the press about the independence and autonomy of the council. The bill is currently under discussion in the Education, Health and Information Technology Committee of the House of Representatives.
President of the Federation of Journalists Nirmala Sharma says that when questions are being raised about decent and accountable journalism, the council should be an organization that works autonomously and independently. She said that the federation has been giving its views and suggestions regarding the autonomy of the council, its appointment process, and its work duties for a long time. "We have a serious interest in the bill, we give our suggestions to the committee, further discussion, pressure and campaign for reform," she says.
There is a provision in the bill that a person who has qualified to be a judge of the Supreme Court or who has obtained at least a bachelor's degree from a recognized university and who has made a special contribution in the field of journalism with at least 15 years of experience. The National Assembly has not changed it. In the existing Press Council Act, 2048, there is a provision that the Chairman shall be a retired judge of the Supreme Court or a senior advocate or a person who has made a special contribution in the field of newspapers. In the past, retired judges from the Supreme Court, senior advocates or established persons in the field of journalism have been the chairman of the council. But as journalists close to parties and political parties become presidents and members, the reputation of the council is being questioned.
Rajendra Dahal, the former chairman of the council, says that the bill has been introduced to fulfill the desire of the ministers to appoint their own people and keep the authority in their hands. "It seems that the government wants the person sent with vaccination to stay there and work under the instructions," he says. In the past, there was a dignity of the council, it was declining, now a bill has been brought to end it even more.''
There is a provision in the bill that the government can remove the chairman or member of the council due to lack of working capacity, bad behavior or not fulfilling the official duties. For that, the ministry is said to form a three-member investigation committee headed by a retired judge from the high court, including two other experts. On the recommendation of the same committee, there is a provision that the ministry will take the proposal to remove the chairman or member to the Council of Ministers. Similarly, when the position of chairman is vacant or suspended, the joint secretary of the ministry, who is an ex-officio member of the council, will chair the meeting.
Shiv Village, the former president of the Federation of Journalists, comments that the provisions in the bill seek to make the council a branch of the ministry. He said that the media council bill is retrogressive with provisions such as the recommendation by the secretary, the appointment by the government, the government's ability to dismiss the post whenever it wants and the joint secretary to preside over the council meeting. "An organization that has to play the role of guardian and guardian of press freedom cannot question the functioning of the government," he says.
The government has rejected the drafts of the bills submitted to the government by the federation and the council several times in the past. Both organizations proposed the formation of the council so that it would not be controlled by the government. Earlier, there was a similar provision in the Media Council brought by the then Communications Minister Gokul Baskota in 2076. After strong opposition from the stakeholders including the federation, the government and parliament could not move forward with the bill. The bill, which had been passed by the National Assembly, sat in the House of Representatives for a long time. And, with the expiration of the term of the House of Representatives, the said bill was inactive. The government led by Maoist President Pushpa Kamal Dahal, formed after the elections, also registered the bill keeping the old provisions.
The Federation and the Council have suggested that Parliament participate in the appointment process and create a structure where the Council is accountable to the Parliament. It is mentioned in the draft submitted by those organizations to the government in the past that there should be a recommendation committee for the appointment of the council chairman under the coordination of the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the Speaker of the National Assembly or the chairman of the parliamentary thematic committee. Similarly, it was proposed that the member of the Council should be one of the members of the House of Representatives appointed by the Speaker and one of the members of the National Assembly appointed by the Speaker of the National Assembly. It was proposed to keep the council separate from the shadow government by putting various provisions such as the council submitting its annual report to the parliament. In India, there is a committee headed by the Speaker of the Lok Sabha to appoint the Chairman of the Council. Similarly, there is a provision that parliamentarians of Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha will be members of the council. The former chairman of the
federation, Village, says that there is no person of the height that should be in the body that examines the work of editors and journalists. He says that the bill carries the intention of creating a recruitment center for workers, so that a law should be made to correct it. "Council's autonomy and independence could be increased if the parliament could be involved from the appointment process," he says.
Aryal, an expert lawyer in media law, says that since the Council is a quasi-judicial body, it should have appointments that believe in the judicial process, promote it and follow the principles of natural justice. He says that it will increase trust in the institution. In a discussion held by the
council on Friday, senior journalists and stakeholders expressed their concern that the Media Council Bill has been introduced to be more government controlled than the current arrangement. The council also suggested that a discussion should be held with the parliamentary committee immediately on this matter.
The former chairman of the Dahal Council says that if the bill is implemented, the outside world will not accept the legal and structural freedom of the press in Nepal.
The Education, Health and Information Technology Committee of the House of Representatives has been discussing the bill since Sunday. Chairman of the committee, Ammar Bahadur Thapa, said that discussions have been held with the parliamentarians who proposed the amendment and now discussions will be held with experts and stakeholders. "We have heard concerns and concerns that the council will be under the control of the government," he says, "we are serious about that, we will work to keep the council out of the control of the government."
