IMO, president should immediately appoint a neutral commision to look into the matters of harrasment of these journalists. The free media of the Land of Pure should be under no circumstances, come under pressure from any quarter…
Pakistan: Threats to Journalists Escalate
(New York, December 3, 2003) – Pervez Musharraf’s military government is becoming increasingly intolerant of press freedoms in Pakistan, Human Rights Watch charged today in a letter to the Pakistani president.
In the letter, Human Rights Watch highlighted the case of Amir Mir, Senior Assistant Editor of the monthly magazine Herald, whom Musharraf reportedly threatened at a November 20 reception for Pakistani newspaper editors. Musharraf is reported to have condemned the Herald for being “anti-army” and working against the “national interest,” and argued that the time had come for the Herald and Mir to be “dealt with.” Musharraf’s comments reportedly included specific references to stories filed by Mir for the magazine. Two days later, unidentified persons set Amir Mir’s car ablaze outside his house. Mir later received a message purporting to be from the Pakistani intelligence services (ISI) claiming responsibility for the attack and warning that this was “just the beginning.”
I'd say there is much more to this story. Amir Mir is a good writer and he seems to have made some very powerful enemies, he's already been ousted from the editor job of one Lahore based paper, but I doubt Musharraf would be stupid enough to personally target him. Anyway it is not a good sign and the whole incodent needs to be investigated. Musharraf ahs pushed through some of the most pro Media policies of any government in Pakistans recent history.
Zakk ji, I absolutely agree with you, but this sort of bad press is in no way good for Pakistan or president himself. And to rectify this problem president himself needs to take personnal interest in the whole saga, and as I mentioned above, appoint a neutral commision which can find out exactly what happened, and who were the main culprits...
[quote]
President Musharraf is reported to have condemned the Herald as being anti-army in comments published in Mr Mir's stories.
[/quote]
Censorship gives credence to the assumption that the quote probabaly was correct. .. If this quote is correct, then the General appears to be quite insecure.
The whole issue is probably being blown out of proportion. I read that particular Herald issue and yes it was anti-musharraf and anti-military rule in a big way. If the media is quick enough to pin point Musharraf's annoyance then it should also be quick enough to point out that Musharraf, even being a military man has shown a lot more tolerance than earlier democratic govts. The issue was available freely from any and every bookshop in Isb and Rwp.
well as they say.. these days it's not just about the freedom of speech but freedom AFTER speech ;)
CHP I am a subscriber of the Herald, which issue are you referring too? Also while I appreciate Musharrafs work toward the press... freedom of the press is not a previlage but a right
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Zakk: *
CHP I am a subscriber of the Herald, which issue are you referring too? Also while I appreciate Musharrafs work toward the press... freedom of the press is not a previlage but a right
[/QUOTE]
October. Read some of the articles. Put yourself in place of Musharraf and notice how the article instigates your sub-ordinates against you. especially one particular general (i wont name). Read it and you'll see what i am talking abt.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ChthonicPowers: *
I read that particular Herald issue and yes it was anti-musharraf and anti-military rule in a big way.
[/quote]
any excerpts? i mean the general is pretty much all in all to decide what's 'offensive'.
Please, post the article in question. I don't have the article.
I am curious. And somebody said freedom after speech. That was
a good one.
The article is not available online. Give me sometime to post excerpts.
Newslines editorial on the recent targetting of the publication.
The Musharraf government’s honeymoon with the press corps seems to be over. Members of the journalists’ fraternity are increasingly being intimidated, threatened and, in some instances, even being subjected to violence to coerce them into toeing the line. In a chilling incident last month, an ‘errant’ reporter’s car was set on fire and a burning log of wood thrown into his apartment building.
At a recent post-Iftar press briefing in Islamabad, the man at the helm lashed out against the "enfants terrible" of journalism, among them Newsline. He maintained that they read like Indian publications, from cover to cover, and needed to be "sorted out"- said like a true general.
The first salvo was fired only days later, when Newsline was bumped off all PIA flights, until further orders- no explanations offered. Additionally, government advertisements booked for Newsline's December issue were pulled out at the eleventh hour- once again, without assigning any reason.Who signed the edict remains a mystery(or does it?), but the writing on the wall is clear: the army is off-limits to the press. And anyone who dares to trespass, runs the risk of being branded a 'foreign agent' (read traitor), working against the country's national interests.
The parameters within which a free press can operate are being narrowed down yet again, in the name of patriotism and national interest.
The moot point is, who defines the terms national interest and patriotism? Does a critical assessment of the impact of the Kargil operation on Indo-Pak relations, or the government's blow-hot, blow-cold policy towards the jihadis, go against national interests? Is questioning the army's growing business interests, or its penchant for prime property, indicative of a lack of patriotic fervour? If the army has chosen to instal itself in the driving seat, it must face the glare of the spotlight. After all, politicians have been subjected to intense scrutiny and criticism for poor governance, corruption and human rights violations - and not just by the media, but the army's own accountability cell. Surely the army does not expect to be revered like a sacred cow? Or does it?
The general professes to be the progressive, liberal head of a democratic state. And the first prerequisite of a democratic dispensation is a free, vibrant media that is allowed to play its watchdog role, without fear or favour. But generals aside, even politicians unfortunately have yet to understand and appreciate the merits of an unfettered press. Newsline has suffered the worst of times in times of 'democrats' like Ms. Bhutto and Mr. Nawaz Sharif. At the zenith of its power, the MQM attacked "the westernised Newsline women" virulently at public meetings, for exposing their misdemeanours in the publication. And then the wheels of fortune turned, and the MQM found itself out in the cold. Ironically it was Newsline that came to their rescue-with a scathingly critical story on the army crackdown against the party.
If today's kings and kingmakers were to ponder the prospect of becoming tomorrow's underdogs, they might be able to come to terms with the media's watchdog role.
For, at the end of the day, governments will come and go, but the press is here to stay.
Bad News. :nook: :nook:
Senior journalist Mahboob Hiraj says that journalists' organizations have been regularly pointing out incidents of intimidation of the press in Pakistan.
As he emphasizes, "The military has always considered itself a sacred cow and its actions above question. But since it has intruded into political life, it should be prepared for public accountability and criticism."
Interesting....
From many anti-Musharaff people living in Pakistan, I have heard that at least press has more freedom than they have had in decades. So, this news is new to me.
I think the topic that Herald discussed is in THE GRAY AREA.
Still the media's role as a watch dog must be encouraged.