Hi Ebrima!
 Thanks for forwarding the Media Bill. I have just finished going through it and I can understand your anguish. Simply put, this bill is nothing other than an attempt to tailor the news as the government sees fit. I have several issues with the Bill and they are:

- Determination of code of conduct for media practitioners and establishment of standards with regard to content and quality by a body in which private media practitioners are grossly underrepresented and a substantial number have no connection to the media.

- That the Commission considers and determines complaints by all against media establishments. Runs the danger of getting every Tom, Dick and Harry pressing charges and in effect bogging down media work. Libel and slander provisions in the Constitution should suffice.

- Ensure and protect rights and privileges of media practitioners. There is a conflict here as this very Bill runs contrary to the rights and privileges of media practitioners.

- Allocation of finance by the National Assembly (NA) without provisions to ensure that the NA will not use this as a means of unfairly influencing the Commission and without provisions to enable the Commission to appeal NA decisions with regard to finance.

- Registration issues - What criteria will be used for registration? Can applicants be rejected? Any control and appeal mechanisms?

- The constitutionality of legal powers conferred on Commission and the powers of punishment that can include shutting down media houses etc.

- Commission's entry, search and seizure powers.

- Adjournments and the possibility of using it as a means of delaying or otherwise disrupting the work of media practitioners especially considering the fact that documents, books etc. can be seized.

- Disclosure of news sources or risk of fines etc. This will greatly impact media in a negative light.

- The acceptance of evidence that does not meet basic requirements in ordinary courts.

- Immunity from prosecution given to witnesses. This means they can give false evidence detrimental to the interests of media practitioners without their being able to take legal action against them.

-  The prohibition of satire, which is an integral part of the media by basically prohibiting, cartoons, caricatures etc.

- The issue of false information and the requirement that media practitioners must verify any information before it is published. This is interesting because government has on several occasions issued gag orders on its employees. This means media practitioners will find it very difficult to get anything that has to do with government published. Employees will be afraid to speak to media because of consequences.

- Immunity of Commission members from prosecution. This means that commission members can wilfully commit acts detrimental to the interests of media practitioners with impunity.

- Supremacy of the media Act over other laws. This can be unconstitutional given that any law that goes against the provisions in the Constitution is null and void.

- The SOS making code of conduct and determining fees etc. This means he / she can make codes favourable only to government or set fees at unreasonable rates.

These are the issues I have with this Bill. The private media might as well just pack up and leave if this Bill becomes law. That is why many aspects have to be challenged in court and elsewhere because this Bill will spell the death of a free, vibrant press in our country. I wish you all good luck in fighting to maintain the democratic principle of freedom of the press. Thanks.
     Buharry.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface
at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
[log in to unmask]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~