Author: Zamir Niazi
Publication: Dawn, Karachi
Date: October 1, 2000
KARACHI: Yesterday, I
read the disturbing item regarding the raid on Dawn's offices, and certain
instances immediately came to mind.
In 1974 Indira Gandhi's
government played the same drama when it imposed press censorship and restrictions,
during India's Emergency. Her government's first action was to disconnect
the electric supply to the Indian Express.
On reading the details
of the raid on the Dawn premises, I felt that this entire drama was being
re-enacted. Dawn and power theft? Unimaginable! What is the military
regime trying to prove? For the last two months I have been repeatedly
saying that the honeymoon period seems to be over, and something harsh
is on the cards.
Gen Ziaul Haq came to
power 21 years ago, and in his first broadcast to the nation announced
that although he had imposed martial law, there would be no press censorship
or other restrictions on the media. It only took nine days to impose
censorship, in the name of national interest.
Gen Musharraf, in his
first broadcast, while addressing the nation on Oct 17, 1999 had stated
that the media formed an integral part of statehood in the era of information
technology.
The general had further
said that he was a firm believer in the freedom of the press, and was even
considering a liberalization policy for the establishment of private TV
and radio channels. He had also mentioned that he had a great regard
for the media and was hopeful that the media would play a positive and
constructive role.
These statements were
repeated a number of times on different occasions by the general.
The honeymoon continued for a very long time. But the real reason
behind this support for the freedom of the press was that the outside world
was not ready to accept the new military set-up. Statements published
by foreign leaders expressed their lack of support for this government,
but were willing to give it a chance because the military regime had claimed
to support freedom of the press.
For six to seven months,
the entire press has been busy reporting the misdeeds and accountability
of the past rulers but the focus has now shifted. Criticism on the
activities of the government are regularly reported in the press.
Dawn published the excerpts
of the Hamoodur Rehman Commission Report and the public reactions to it.
Nur Khan's statement was commendable. I salute both Air Marshal (retd)
Nur Khan and the great heritage of the Quaid-i-Azam, Dawn. The raid
on Dawn's offices was a reaction to all of this.
The general during his
visit to Washington had talked about "Lifafa journalism" apparently on
the provocation of a news item by Shaheen Sehbai. Unfortunately the
government's press departments are not forthcoming with any information,
everything comes under the heading of "top secret". And then they
call it "Lifafa journalism". A new word has been coined, but what
exactly is "Lifafa journalism"? Who is responsible for it? In my humble
opinion it is the government who is responsible for it and further, "Lifafa
journalism" has been encouraged by the information ministry.
Given the changed thinking
of the military government, they can go to any extent to impose censorship
on the media. Attempts to muzzle a free press creates a furore in
the international world and there have been numerous queries from foreign
countries, asking for details about the raid on Dawn.
Imposition of any restriction
on the press will result in severe repercussions in the western world,
and as stated earlier the only plus point in the government's favour was
the so-called freedom of the press.
What is needed now are
newspapers that report factually and are not intimidated by the powers
that be. We must ensure that we are not internationally isolated.
The freedom of the press must be respected. No muzzling of a free
press can be tolerated. Nowhere in the world has the press toppled
any government, it is in their best interest not to stir the hornet's nest.
Governments come and
governments go, I have seen four martial laws, I have seen dictators and
democrats of dubious antecedents. But we also had some great leaders,
where are they now?
