http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=21262

Sri Lanka 9 March 2007

International mission findings: The Struggle for Survival

In mid-October 2006 a delegation from the International Press Freedom
and Freedom of Expression Mission undertook a fact-finding and
advocacy mission to Sri Lanka to assess the current media situation in
the country and the impact of the escalation in fighting between the
Sri Lankan Government and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE)
on the media.

While the International Mission examined the current situation of the
Sinhala, Tamil and English language media, it paid particular
attention to the repression of the Tamil language media, which has
come under heavy and sustained attack, especially in areas affected by
the fighting. This situation has restricted the free flow of
information in the North and East hindering public awareness both
within these areas, as well as throughout the country. This also
leaves local communities vulnerable to rumours and language that
excites hostility, which in turn fuels instability and conflict. In
the LTTE controlled areas, media practitioners are prevented from
reporting freely and as a direct consequence press freedom and freedom
of expression are severely restricted.

Findings Relating to Safety

The International Mission found that there has been a serious
deterioration in the security situation for the Sri Lankan media with
threats, abductions and attacks committed by all parties to the
conflict, and particularly paramilitary and militia groups. Nine media
practitioners have been killed since August 2005 and there have been
numerous death threats and incidents of harassment, including violent
attempts to stop the distribution of newspapers. Moreover, even in
cases where evidence exists of the identity of the alleged killers,
the relevant authorities had apparently taken little or no action.
Those supporting a negotiated settlement are often labelled as
"traitors" and supporters of one or the other combatant parties and
there appears to be a widespread acceptance of the use of threatening
language to intimidate or endanger individuals. As a consequence, many
media practitioners are in hiding, some for up to six months, while in
other cases threats have been made to the families of media
practitioners.

Findings Relating to Informal Censorship

The mission found that censorship exists, although it is applied
largely through indirect means. Those refusing to toe the Government's
line may be labelled as spies or traitors. The willingness of
politicians and others to denounce the media reinforces
self-censorship and makes the free expression of opinion a life
threatening activity. In August, the President reportedly told editors
that the military were keen to censor the media and a letter sent by
the Ministry of Defence to media institutions on 20 September 2006,
requesting that "news gathered should be subjected to clarification
and confirmation", has been viewed as an attempt to impose censorship,
whether or not this was the intention. Furthermore, the provision of
official information to media outlets is often conditioned upon the
extent to which they support the Government.

The closing down of satellite television services as a result of
Government actions has hindered public access to foreign news
programmes. The selective banning of films and television dramas,
obstruction of films being shown abroad, and interference in
certification processes is of serious concern for freedom of
expression.

Findings Relating to Media Policy Reforms

Emergency regulations established on 18 August 2005 give the
Government wide powers of prior restraint against the media, although
these are yet to be applied. The Official Secrets Act (OSA) makes it
an offence to disclose "official secrets," which are loosely defined.
In addition, the Press Council Law 1973 (PCL) prohibits the disclosure
of cabinet decisions, cabinet documents, certain defence and security
matters, as well as a range of fiscal issues.

In June, the Government approved the reintroduction of
state-controlled regulation of the media through the Sri Lanka Press
Council, although this has not yet been enforced. On 6 December, the
Government introduced the 'Emergency (Prevention of Terrorism and
Specified Terrorist Activities) Regulations', which have been widely
criticised by civil society for their impact freedom of expression.

The Government has yet to enact a freedom of information act, despite
having approved a draft version of the law at a cabinet meeting in
2003. The legislative framework for broadcasting in the country fails
to ensure independence of both public and private broadcasters. Public
broadcasters lack editorial independence and are not required to serve
established public service values. Although the Government has been
urged to broadbase or otherwise divest itself of ownership in the
print media sector, and despite several committee reports reflecting
this view, it retains control of the Associated Newspapers of Ceylon
(also known as ANCL or "Lake House").

Reply via email to