7) Media in Palestine:

 Between the Hammer of the PNA and the Anvil of Self-Censorship

This is certainly not the first time we write about the issue of freedom of the press, yet it is the first time since the presidential decree regarding incitement, the decree that restricts general freedoms including the freedom of the press.

 We based our research on interviews with journalists who work in private radio and TV stations, in daily newspapers, in foreign news agencies, and with the Press and Publications Officer at the Ministry of Information.

 We also drew from a huge number of written articles and research on media topics inside and outside Palestine. Furthermore, there were several workshops on the issue, especially the one organised by al-Haq organisation in Ramallah under the title “Legislation of the Prevention of Incitement, and Ambitions to Build a Democratic System”.

 We faced some difficulties while conducting this research.  One such difficulty was the absence of lists of journalists who were abused (such lists were not available at the Journalists Association or the Ministry of Information) so we had to dig through the memories of the journalists to acquire details. Many of those journalists left the profession for another career. Others were afraid to mention the name of the security service that abused them, and some asked for some time to consider their testimony.

 And we wonder: Have violations committed by the Palestinian security organs against Palestinian journalists increased or decreased since issuing the Presidential Decree in October 1998? We noticed that two thirds of the violations committed against Palestinian journalists took place in the Gaza Strip, although the number of journalists and amount of printed material is larger in the West Bank. The security services demonstrated much negligence in disregarding the role of the Ministry of Information, and there were control measures taken, such as hindering the distribution of newspapers or closing TV stations and so on. The Ministry of Information did not even know about such measures.

 The PHRMG feels the seriousness of the increase in the self-censorship phenomenon among Palestinian journalists, which not only prevents publishing what is true, but also limits the freedom of thinking. This gruff policy hinders the development of our people in a time when we are approaching the 21^st century. Instead, we should safeguard these freedoms so as to become closer to what other nations of the modern world have achieved, and stop comparing ourselves with the undeveloped and undemocratic states. Our people deserve to have the freedom to think after all these years of suppression and subjugation.

 A) Print Journalism

Prior to the Israeli Occupation (of the Palestinian lands of the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem in the year 1967), the Palestinian press in Gaza was under the Egyptian administration, while the press in the West Bank fell under Jordanian auspices. Three newspapers were published in Jerusalem: “Falastin”, “Al-Difa’a” (defense) and “Al-Jihad” (holy war). After the Israeli Occupation in 1967, most of the Palestinian newspapers focused on the local situation and ended their affiliation with the Egyptian and Jordanian presses. “Al-Quds” (Jerusalem) newspaper appeared at that time as a result of the merge of Al-Difa’a and Al-Jihad. Some other newspapers appeared every now and then, but the Occupation authorities used to close them because they crossed the red lines which had been drawn for them.

All newspapers used to be sent to the military censor that would delete material classified as “incitement” or as potentially “harming the security of the Israeli state.”

The Palestinian newspapers sometimes succeeded in publishing some articles taken from the Hebrew press (which had been untouched by the censor) on the Israeli policy in the Occupied Territories.

The occupying power used to confront journalists who did not commit themselves to the rigour of the censor’s red lines. They were either arrested or deported, put under house arrest or prevented from traveling, beaten or even shot at with live ammunition.

Daily and Weekly Newspapers

Some newspapers were established before the coming of the PA. Some were daily, like “Al-Quds” (Jerusalem),  “Al-Nahar” (Daytime), “Al-Sha’ab” (the People) and “Al-Fajr” (the Dawn), while others were  weekly, such as “Al-Mithaq” (the Covenant) and “Al-Talee’ah” (the Forefront). Others opened and then closed principally for financial reasons. After the coming of the PA, three new daily newspapers appeared: “Al-Ayyam” (the Days), “Al-Hayat Al-Jadida” (the New Life), and “Al-Bilad” (the Country).

Other weekly or bi-weekly newspapers also appeared, almost all of which belong to the political opposition. These include: “Al-Watan” (the Homeland) and “Al-Risala” (the Message), which belong to “Al-Khalas Al-Watani Al-Islami” (The National Islamic Salvation Party), “Al-Istiqlal” (the Independence), which belongs to the Islamic Jihad, “Al-Masar” (the Path) which is a biweekly and belongs to the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine. “Al-Watan” was closed by the PA, but the other three are still working until present. What is obvious about these newspapers is that their political line widens according to the political position of the party they belong to.

B) Red Lines and Self-Censorship

A journalist in Palestine faces external censorship that restricts his freedom of opinion and expression.  He or she faces self-censorship that limits the initiative to think on issues that he or she believes may surpass the drawn red lines. This fact made the local press only look like parrots that repeat what is expected from them without asking or criticizing anything. We may exclude “Al-Hayat Al-Jadida” newspaper which started in June 1999 to publish reports and essays criticizing officials in certain institutions. But this is considered slander rather than constructive criticizing.

Isareli Censorship: At the time of Rabin and Peres, Israeli censorship was formal. It only cancelled reports on the Israeli Intelligence Service and some reports on the Palestinian opposition. But when Netanyahu took over, the censorship started to omit news and reports on both the Authority and the opposition. News and reports which are subject to censorship include those that talk about: settlements, Jerusalem, borders, announcements that may influence national emotions, any information on the Israeli military forces such as the names of officers who abused citizens, or the behavior of the army and police.

Palestinian Censorship: The red lines that the PA has drawn for journalists flex around such contexts as writing about the President and his family in a critical way, writing about the security organs or the security situation, presenting the ideas of the opposition, speaking about Hamas leaders wanted by the Authority or uncivil news about them, and other issues which may arise.

For example, the PA arrested the journalist Ala’a Saftawi after he wrote the lead article of al-Istiqlal newspaper about the deteriorating security situation, because they thought it dispraised the person of the President. And Dr. Ghazi Hamad was arrested and tortured for ten days, because he wrote an essay in al-Istiqlal newspaper on the relationship between the people and the security services. The journalist Taher Shreiteh, Reuters correspondent, was arrested for six days because he revealed a film that showed the Israeli soldier Nahshon Vaxman who was kidnapped by Hamas.

 

Tribal Censorship: Tribes and the logic of physical force are still dominating in many issues within the Palestinian society. This could be due to the weakness of the judicial system. Because journalists are part of this community, they are controlled by this judgement and false logic.

 

Advertising Companies Censor: Big advertising companies who regularly publish their commercial advertisements have great influence, as the newspapers refuse to publish any material that may harm the interest of these companies.  Taken into account are such subjects as essays on the bad effects of smoking, so that they don’t loose advertisements for brands of cigarettes, although it is universally known to be a bad habit.

 

 

 Self-Censorship: Self-censorship is considered more serious that external censorship because it not only prevents the journalist from publishing what he writes, but it also hinders his writing, thinking or analyzing.  He or she would not think of wasting time writing material that will surely not be published.

 

Forms of self-censorship

 We do not see much of the news and reports we read in the foreign press in our own press, such as the weakness in the performance of the leadership, or corruption, or analysis of political reports, and other issues.

 The Palestinian press focuses on reactions of officials in the Authority rather than on the action itself, which is usually more important. For example, when a prisoner dies in jail, they do not give details about the prisoner himself or the reason for his death, but they mention the reaction of certain officials on that issue.

 Avoiding giving the name of the security service that committed a violation, they just say “the security services," because they fear if they give the name, then they would be followed by officials of that service.

Some newspapers do not mention the violation committed by a security service.

 Self-censorship also takes hold when journalists hear of colleagues getting abused by the security services when they exceed the red lines.

 C) Private TV and Radio Stations

 Prior to the arrival of the PA there were some private TV stations in the north of the West bank. But after the Authority arrived and the official Palestine TV and radio started transmission, the Palestinians felt proud as some part of their freedom was achieved. But this positive feeling didn’t last long, as people recognized that the official TV and Radio only present and reflect one point of view: the official.

 There are 27 private TV stations and 8 private Radio stations, distributed as follows: 9 TVs in Nablus, 4 in Ramallah, 4 in Tulkarem, 3 in Hebron, 2 in Qalqilia and 2 in Jenin. I.e., 17 in the north of the West Bank, 4 in the centre and 6 in the south.

 All ideas and thoughts that opposed the Authority were supressed. The Palestinian society needed stations that reflected the emotions and worries of the people, so some private TV and radio stations were established. Minister of Information Yasser Abed Rabbo confirmed that establishing religious TV and Radio stations is a sole right for the PA. No one has the right to establish such stations without the agreement of the Authority according to the rules of the “Press law” until they have the “law for audio-visual media.”             

al-Quds newspaper on 21 April 1999

 

Conditions for obtaining a permit:

 

-Having a number of professional and experienced workers

-Having a studio with equipment that does not harm health and environment.

-Equipment should not disturb other working stations.

-Local programs should not cover less than 25% of the transmission time.

-A radio station should not have less than $60,000 US as capital, whereas a TV station should have $140,000 US minimum.

-A good conduct certificate for the head of the station and the chief director is needed.

-Agreement from the Ministry of transport on the technical aspects and the frequency.

(As mentioned by Hani al-Masri, director of the press department)

 

"In some areas there was actually a need for such stations, as in Bethlehem, where the people needed radio stations to meet their needs, especially as they approached the year 2000," said Ahmad Hammad the executive Director of Bethlehem 2000 Radio

 

Red lines and Censorship on Private Stations

 

Who is responsible? What are the methods in drawing them?

 

Red lines drawn for private stations vary from criticizing the Authority, to meeting with Hamas leaders wanted by the Authority, transmitting scenes with American and Israeli flags being burnt, to covering the workers’ strike, or even showing a comic play. Drawing of these lines could take place before the transmission by a communication made between officials in the Authority and the administration of the station, expressing their wish in not showing a certain event, or discussing it in a certain way.

 

Director and founder of Watan TV, Omar Nazzal, confirms that the security services have interfered in transmission in the past and continue to do so. He mentions a funny incident that happened one time prior to the closure of the station. He says, “This was before the third closure in September 1996, a police officer told me when I was on the air live of the decision to close the station. All the viewers heard that, and at that moment the director of the police called me and started to curse the officer also live on the air. All these incidents occurred during the tunnel actions." The station reopened after a closure that lasted three days on the condition that no political communiqué be transmitted without the approval of a person who was later identified as the “political and moral guidance” who has to see and approve everything before transmission.

 

 

The Israeli Role: Is there any Israeli interference in the work of these stations?

 

Israeli abuses may be summarized as follows:

 

Not accepting the Palestinian share in the use of the air waves and frequencies, which prevents the Authority from issuing permits for the stations, as they can’t decide on the waves from one side. The Israeli settlers use the air waves as well, which disturbs the work of the stations, and forces them to change frequencies. There is also some pressure practiced by Israel on the PA to close stations that oppose directly or indirectly the Israeli interest.

 

Law is absent: Is there a law controlling the private stations?

 

There is no law for the audio-visual media, but the Palestinian press law of 1995 is considered the reference to deal with the private stations, according to an administrative memorandum issued by the Minister of Information. Legislation of such a law is not possible before an agreement is reached regarding the Palestinian share in the airwaves and registering it in the International Telecommunications Association.

al-Masri told the PHRMG 

 

Many problems occurred because of the lack of this law:

 

-Permits issued for these stations were time bound

-There was conflict between the powers of various ministries regarding those stations

-Interference of the security services in the work of these stations and imposing vague red lines dependent on the mood of the security official in that area. If those were surpassed, the station would be closed as a punishment.

 

Gaza is also far

 

There is no private radio or TV station in the Gaza Strip, and this fact drew our attention as we heard rumors that the Authority is keen on keeping the official Palestine radio and TV the only functioning ones in the Strip. Therefore we contacted Maher al-Masri in the Ministry of Information who refuted this accusation. We also contacted one of the citizens who applied for a permit to open a private TV station in the Gaza Strip.

 

“We don’t have any official decision preventing the opening of stations in the Gaza Strip, and we are ready to study any application presented for this effect and take the right decision if the conditions are fulfilled “

Maher al-Masri told the PHRMG

 

In this atmosphere of competition, specialization in the work of these stations becomes applicable, although it is absent until now. The Western experience in having specialized stations is successful. You will find a station that specializes in sport, another in economy, a third in news and politics, a fourth in children programs, a fifth in religion, etc., thus the viewer will have more satisfaction for his needs and interests. But the question remains: Does the Palestinian community need this big number of radio and TV stations?

 

D) Violations Against Palestinian Journalists

 

Violations against Palestinian journalists for crossing the red lines vary. From 50 violations recorded by the PHRMG the percentages were distributed as follows:

- Injury from gun shooting:                                       2%

- Beatings:                                                              12%

- Breaking or confiscating cameras:                          6%

- Confiscating films or videos:                                   8%

- Summoning, stopping or detaining:              68%

(Note: rate is taken per accidents not per individuals)

 

These abuses were not limited to one security service, but several organs committed them: the police, the general intelligence, the national security and the preventive security. We should note that two thirds of these violations took place in Gaza Strip, and that the police forces committed a total of 38% of the violations in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

 

On 21 May 1996 the Palestinian Journalists Association sent an open letter to members of the Palestinian Legislative Council saying: “We, the Palestinian journalists, still suffer a lot while trying to obtain news and official information from our PA and political parties, and we still unfortunately discover that some of the officials, ministers and leaders, or those below them, prefer to speak to foreign or even Israeli reporters."

 

They also said: “We hereby register before you that the different Security Services have arrested or abused more than 25 journalists for reasons related to their work. We found that in most of the cases such action was unjust to the extent that some people now avoid working directly in the press. Others prefer to work in secret for the local security services in order to obtain news which is often harmful to our PA.”

 

Percentages of abuses by the parties responsible:

 

- The Police                                                38% Gaza         4% WB

- General Intelligence Service           22% Gaza         4% WB

- Preventive Security Service           6% Gaza           8% WB

- National Security Service               2% Gaza           6% WB

 

Percentages of abuses distributed in years:

 

1994                       6%

1995                      12%

1996                      30%

1997                      20%

1998                      24%

1999                       6%

 

We notice that there are no signs that point clearly to an improvement in the situation of freedom of the press. We see that those abuses reached their highest levels in 1996, then reduced in 1997, then were up again in 1998, then down a little in 1999 (until just before September). Yet the question remains: Is this indication enough, or have the abuses in past years taught journalists to censor themselves in advance so that they don’t surpass the red lines drawn for them?

 

E) Incitement

 

President Yasser Arafat issued a special Presidential Decree on Incitement on 19 November 1998, less than one month after of the signing of the Wye River Agreement. Later, a Palestinian-American-Israeli committee was formed called the "Committee to Prevent Incitement" aiming to monitor cases of incitement and to issue special reports and recommendations. The Wye Memorandum states that such a decree be issued and such a committee be formed.

 

 

The Trio-Committee for Incitement:

Its function, and some of the problems that face it

 It was agreed, according to Article 3B of the Wye River Memorandum, to form this committee, as mentioned above. The Palestinian side to this committee is headed by Arafat’s advisor Marwan Kanafani, and the task of this mission was limited to monitoring cases of incitement and issuing reports and recommendations for that purpose.

                  As mentioned earlier in Article 3 of the Wye Memorandum

 

The presidential decree has had some obvious and some hidden effects on the local press. Of the former, we notice the increase in violations and abuses against journalists who write about or meet with or show interest in the political opposition, especially on subjects which go against the U.S. and Israel or the peace process. The hidden influences include the increase in self-censorship among journalists. They began to reflect only the official point of view most of the time so as to avoid questioning and closure of the presses.

 

The major negative reflection of the decree was that it was itself flexible, and did not offer a clear definition of incitement. This gave the Authority the chance to use it to suppress the freedom of expression any time it wished.

 

The PHRMG has sent a copy of this report on the Palestinian Media to the Ministry of Information in order to get an official reply and comments. The response came from Mr. Maher al-Masri, Director General of Press and Publications Department, who said that the report judges the PA because of its practices against the media. He also said that the Press Law of 1995 is considered an achievement, and that in all countries there are subjects that are considered “taboo.” On the other hand, al-Masri said that the PA appreciates the important role that the human rights organisations take.