[t4b-ticker]

NBC Should Rescind Gagging Order

Home Archived NBC Should Rescind Gagging Order

Recent disturbing developments that compelled NBC top management to effect a change of format regarding its phone-in programmes, flies in the face of our hard-won democracy, whose main pillars include spontaneous freedom of speech. True, there has been a firestorm of debate directed mainly against the Founding Father of the Nation, ex-President Sam Nujoma, and others. It is also true that some of the views expressed during the phone-in programmes bordered on defamation. But there were also views expressed on these programmes that were constructive in that the callers discussed nation-building. They talked about under-development in certain parts of the country and, in the process, they faulted leaders who, upon being installed in office, pledged to be accountable to the electorate whose votes put them in their positions. And the essence of the various mediums, vis-ÃÆ’Æ‘Æ‘ÃÆ”šÃ‚ -vis the phone-in programmes, ensured that our politicians are held accountable if they fail to deliver the goodies. Likewise, this vital communication tool facilitated the all-important direct communication between ordinary folk and the rulers and ensured there isn’t a communication gulf and that the two are directly in touch. Our independence was earned the hard way with thousands of patriotic Namibians paying for this freedom with their lives while thousands others were maimed. One of the reasons why tens of thousands escaped into exile was because the brutal minority South African regime not only disenfranchised blacks on the basis of skin colour, but it murdered and maimed people merely for expressing opposing views. The regime did not brook debate on fundamental issues. With independence on March 21, 1990 came freedom and a slew of other liberties, notable among them freedom of speech. This aspect of our freedom is an inalienable right. It is among a set of liberties that are firmly entrenched in our constitution. While other parts of this supreme law are amendable, Article 25 cannot be changed, come rain or sunshine. Save for the other laws that could be amended, Parliament or any other subordinate legislative authority shall not make any law, and the Executive and the agencies of Government shall not take any action which abolishes or abridges the fundamental rights and freedoms conferred by this chapter. Therefore, by taking this action, the NBC could be treading on holy ground. With programmes such as the original “Talk of the Nation”, “Open Line” and the “Chat Show” and, prior to the current retrogression, Namibia was a giant, a leading light on the continent when it came to freedom of expression. Other countries were awed, and admired our bravery and for being a tolerant nation where citizens could speak freely without having to look over their shoulders. NBC’s tzar, Bob Kandetu, and his top lieutenants should immediately and unconditionally reverse the decision to stage-manage free speech on NBC radio. They should rather facilitate and not muzzle the nation that funds the public broadcaster in the first place. Failure to do so would mean the broadcaster would have to contend with an already negative perception from certain quarters of society who claim the NBC is biased and renders a disservice to the public at large by dancing to the tune of a group. The decision to gag the majority under the pretext some loose canons abused their right to freedom of speech by insulting others, is flimsy. The NBC could have directed its controllers to strengthen existing internal control measures. Surely, there must be better ways to deal with abuse of the airwaves. One does not right one wrong by making a wrong decision such as disbanding what is widely regarded as the last bastion of free speech. The NBC action is tantamount to collective punishment. Among others, the Windhoek Declaration was adopted on exactly today’s date in 1991, taking cognizance of the existence of a free, vibrant, pluralistic media in Namibia. Freedom of expression may have its pitfalls, but surely its pros outweigh its cons, and “silencing” opposing views would not enhance our priceless democracy.