With the hunt underway to replace the late head of the Association of Editors, Melhem Karam, and drafting set to begin on a new media law, Executive sat down with Minister of Information Tarek Mitri to discuss press associations, legal loopholes and the future of Lebanon’s media industry.
- We’re seeing a lot of new media associations, both local and international, setting up shop in Lebanon at the moment. Who is supervising the legitimacy of these groups, and what are your thoughts on them?
I don’t know them all, but some come and visit me and those I’ve seen have reported rather fairly. So I have no particular reason to be suspicious of any of them, or to raise the question ‘who are these people?’ I make the bona fide assumption that they’re legitimate, and I haven’t had any unpleasant surprises — I disagree with some of the things I’ve heard, but mostly minor incidences.
- What are some of the things you disagree with?
I think what I tend to disagree with is the way outsiders, if I may call them this, perceive freedom of press in Lebanon. They come with a number of criteria and end up with an assessment that in relative terms the press is free, but it’s not as free as the Lebanese claim it is. I’m not in full agreement with this; I think the problem is that you need to make a distinction between the freedom of media organizations and the freedom of journalists.
Media organizations are free, they’re probably more free [here] than anywhere else in the world. There is a law that is rarely enforced, so that makes them even more free than the law we have allows, and our law is [already] pretty liberal.
Where there is a deficit of freedom is the area of relationships between individual journalists and publishers or owners of media organizations… a more appropriate key to understanding the media scene in Lebanon is to look at independence rather than freedom. I think media in general is not that independent because media organizations are dependent on those that finance them, and more importantly dependent on the political forces that they support or they defend. And then individual journalists are not that independent; either they conform to what they consider to be the policy of their media organizations and therefore are into self-censorship, or they’re subject to pressure.
I always try and focus the attention of people to this problem. And the other focus that’s needed — and I’m still referring to those visitors that we have — is that in many countries where you have authoritarian regimes when you speak about freedom of press you talk about relations with state, the state is the repressive entity so to speak. In Lebanon that’s not the case; it’s non-state actors that [are repressive].
- Such as?
Political movements, armed groups, whoever — I mean, the journalists that have been assassinated, they’ve been assassinated by non-state actors that we don’t know of, I’m not accusing anyone in particular, but it’s not the secret police of Lebanon who kills journalists as in Argentina under dictatorship.
So, some of these people that come from Western countries to investigate freedom of press say ‘but you say press is free but journalists are being killed!’ and I say I know, but they’re not killed by our secret police.
- Why has there not been a professional association created for TV and radio journalists?
That’s a good question. There are two layers to the problem. One is that many of those who are into audiovisual media are also journalists in the written press. But the other fundamental problem is that there is a vacuum in the current law with respect to organizing the media profession, starting with a definition: ‘Who is a journalist?’ is not a question satisfactorily answered by the current law. I sign press cards for members of the union and every time I do this, I wonder what am I signing? What is this card about? And then the important question — why is it that it takes some people 10 years to get this [membership card], some people don’t get it at all, and some people get it who don’t seem to qualify as journalists… I have no proof but I’m tempted to think there are people who are members of the association who are not journalists and there are journalists who are not members of the association.
- Let’s talk about the replacement of Melhem Karam at the Association of Editors — there seems to be quite a heated debate at the moment between editors as to who should replace him, and rumors that you’ve also been involved in the discussion. What are your thoughts on this issue?
The important thing is to state unequivocally that I’m not interfering in this process, it’s none of my business and I’m not going to give anybody a reason to claim that political authorities are putting pressure on this. But as a minister and a private citizen I receive journalists, from the two sides let’s say, and it’s my duty to listen to them and from listening I realize there is a problem [at the Association of Editors]. One of them is what we’ve just said, that there are people who are members who should not be and people who are entitled to be members who are not.
The second, more specific issue is that according to the bylaws of the association, the members of the board should not be publishers or responsible editors. I’ve been told that six out of nine members of the board are either owners or publishers of magazines — non-political ones though — or are responsible editors, so they should not be where they are. My wish both as a minister and as a private citizen is to have an inclusive journalists association — that’s not the case now — in which all journalists who are entitled to be members of the association are members. And at the same time, I’m not pleased with the way the profession is organized now, which is why I’m trying to make a new law.
- Tell us about the new law — what does it entail, what’s new about it, and how will it improve the situation?
We have two problems with the existing laws. First, there is no code of media, there are bits and pieces of legislation; there are laws that contradict each other and then there are those that are old and need to be updated in view of the changes that we’ve seen. There are areas in media that are in a ‘grey zone.’ Look at the electronic media, there’s no law that regulates electronic media, and cable services are also in a sort of grey zone.
Take television stations that rebroadcast from Lebanon using a satellite; they don’t have a license here, they’re registered in the Cayman Islands or Panama, or who knows where. [If I receive a complaint] I have no way of identifying them, and even if I do find them I have no juridical instrument to hold them accountable.
You need a law that covers these uncovered areas. I have to admit that legislating everywhere in the world takes time, but in Lebanon it takes more time than elsewhere; not just because of the political situation and the slowness of the decision making processes, but also because the technical work of drafting a law should be accompanied by a public debate. So, I’m listening and talking to people and hoping to start the process of drafting in the near future, maybe in early autumn.
There is a resistance in parliament to the drafting of a code for media — to have all the laws relating to media in one place — this is something that quite a few legislators don’t like.
- Why not?
I’ve not been able to really make sense of their arguments. They say it’s the ideal way of legislating, but this is not the way we do it in Lebanon. They’re happier drafting a law on media crimes, drafting a law on censorship, drafting a third law on something else, rather than saying look, media law is so interconnected and even the same people that write in print media work in broadcast media. There are so many problems in common, such as libel law and defamation.
- So in the draft law, you’ll be harmonizing all the different areas?
Harmonizing, updating and then adding what needs to be added. It will cover areas that still need to be covered — I’ve given you two examples, electronic media and the rebroadcasting channels. And when you update, it also means taking into consideration technical developments that we’ve had.
Ideas and information circulate more freely today, making censorship absurd. But I’m not sure everyone knows or accepts that it’s absurd, so it needs to be stated in the law that there won’t be any censorship, neither before or after [publication], but anyone who chooses to do so can take any journalist to court, or any media organization. So it’s the judiciary that looks at crimes, not the political authorities, nor the security services. So that’s one major change that needs to be confirmed in a new law.
Another example of some importance that I’ve not made up my mind on yet is that of licensing. If you want to start a daily political newspaper in Lebanon, you can’t. By law, the number of daily political newspapers is limited to 22, so we don’t give licenses any more. If you want to start a daily you have to buy an existing one, and it costs some half a million dollars to buy a license.
The Ministry of Information has given 1,900 licenses for non-political media, a huge number. These are very easy to give, but where do you draw a line between what is political and non-political? Suppose I have a license for an economic publication and I write an article about the economic vision of the government, is that political? This distinction is absurd, but if abolished, which is my intention, then those who have licenses to sell will protest, and they’re very influential.
- Lebanon has traditionally been considered to have the region’s leading media industry. What is the ministry doing to make sure Lebanon keeps this pioneering position and develop it further?
A new media law is a necessary though not sufficient condition for promoting the regional role that the Lebanese media has always had. But we’re losing that role, and we’re losing it for structural reasons, I think. Even in countries that have more repressive regimes than we have in Lebanon, because of new technology you can enjoy greater freedom [there] now.
In the Gulf countries, the need to read the Lebanese press or listen to the Lebanese media to know what is happening is not what it used to be. They now have their own television [stations], good publications and good access to information.
They are also investing more — there is probably an economic dimension to this. Think of Al Jazeera in Qatar, and the amount of public money that has been invested in it — no one in Lebanon or elsewhere for that matter can compete with this. Thirty years ago if a Qatari wanted to start Al Jazeera, he would have done it in Lebanon. But they were able to start it in Qatar, and then probably get some of the Lebanese to work for them. It’s easier now to disassociate between Lebanon and the Lebanese — you can use the Lebanese wherever you are without having to come to Lebanon.
It’s a question worth exploring more thoroughly, and we need to face the fact that we can no longer work on the assumption that most Lebanese made in the past — that this country is the hospital of the region, the university of the region, the bank of the region and the media organization of the region. It’s no longer the case, for all the sectors mentioned above, not only the media.
