Referendum: Kibaki’s challenge to journalists

President Mwai Kibaki’s Madaraka Day challenge to media houses to play an objective watchdog role by naming and shaming those people who engage in hate speech, lies and negative ethnic persuasion, was a challenge to journalistic professionalism. Kibaki was obviously asking journalists in Kenya to take a professional stand. No sooner did the President make the challenge than the Daily Nation published a story on page five of Wednesday June 2nd’s paper headlined “Ruto: New law will legalize gay union”.

Keen observers wanted to test the Daily Nation’s professional standards vis-à-vis the President’s challenge. Ruto’s claim was definitely a lie but it was a newsworthy lie since prominence, proximity, timeliness, human interest and even consequences were its news values. It is a story no journalist worth his salt could ignore. The best way to handle it was to engage in interpretative reporting and the Daily Nation did so in the most admirable manner.

The story started by saying the Higher Education Minister William Ruto claimed gay marriages will be legal if the Proposed Constitution is passed into law. But the paper was quick to point out to its readers that the new constitution specifically outlaws gay marriages and quoted the Proposed Constitution’s Chapter Four, Article 45 (2) which says that every adult has the right to marry a person of the opposite sex. This manner of reporting, which actually obeys the ethical principle of accuracy, exposed Ruto as a politician whose utterances suffer from a serious deficiency in truth.

In his speech the President made quite a number of references to the Proposed Constitution. He said the road to a new constitution had been long and bumpy. Kenyans had, however, covered much ground and what now remained was the referendum vote on August the 4th. Kibaki wished to remind Kenyans that a new constitution meant change, in the personal lives of each one of us. The constitution would usher in a new order of social, economic and political interactions. As the referendum date approached, therefore, the President urged Kenyans to make an effort to read and understand the proposed law carefully.

He advised Kenyans to attend civic education forums where matters pertaining to articles in the proposed constitution would be explained. This would enable Kenyans to make informed and independent decisions during the referendum. An informed citizen, said the President, was an empowered voter who would not be misled by falsehoods that may be peddled on the proposed constitution. As the President spoke the Higher Education Minister William Ruto was already spreading a serious falsehood about gay marriages. He had the impudence of quoting from the Proposed Constitution and twisting it in such a manner as to suit his own convenience.

People who are out to cheat the wananchi and make sure their side would win at whatever cost can be very dangerous. These are the same people who caused a lot of trouble soon after the 2007 elections which led to the death of 1,500 Kenyans. No wonder President Kibaki this time says as debate on the proposed constitution continues, the rule of law must also be upheld. Kibaki correctly said campaigns have to be conducted within the law. The Government would provide security to all Kenyans, irrespective of their affiliation in the constitutional debate. The country must have totally backed him when he directed the National Integration and Cohesion Commission and all security agencies to take firm and decisive action against those who may engage in acts of violence, hate speech or other forms of lawlessness regardless of one’s status in society.

Apart from the lies being spread by the opponents of the Proposed Constitution, journalists must be particularly careful about hate speech geared to make people reject the Proposed Constitution on tribal grounds. Papers have already exposed the ganging up of politicians along tribal lines. The group that is dividing Kenyans comes from the so called KKK.

Authorities must therefore pay special attention to vernacular FM stations which are manned by people who have hardly been to any journalism school. The so called broadcasters in these stations know nothing about journalistic ethics and they don’t know anything about media law which is a core subject at universities where journalism is taught. Many of these untrained broadcasters will soon put their stations into a lot of trouble.

According to Section 13(1) (a) of the National Cohesion and Integration Act for example, a person who uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or displays any written material or (b) publishes or distributes any written material (c) presents or directs the performance of a play (d) distributes, show or plays, a recording of visual images, or (e) provides, produces or directs programme; which is threatening, abusive or insults or
involves the use of threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, commits an offence if such person intends thereby to stir up ethnic hatred, or having regard to all the circumstances, ethnic hatred is likely to be stirred up.

Section 13(2) says any person who commits an offence under this section shall be liable to a fine not exceeding one million shillings or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years or to both. And Section 13 (3) says in this section, “ethnic hatred” means hatred against a group of persons defined by reference to colour, race, nationality (including citizenship) or ethnic or national origins.

Because the law this time is stricter than during the 2007 elections it is the responsibility of people working for the security forces to be vigilant and arrest anyone who is planning to cause trouble during the referendum. There are unsubstantiated stories about hate leaflets being distributed in the Rift Valley in more or less the same manner as in 2007. Journalists must also do some investigative work to expose the people behind such leaflets if at all they exist.

The law this time is also clear about media houses that spread hate speech. They too can be prosecuted as they are not immune to the National Cohesion and Integration Act. Apart from that the Minister for information and Communications, Mr. Samuel Poghisio recently published Legal Notice No.187/2010 which ensures that no broadcasts shall contain the use of offensive language, including profanity and blasphemy. The Legal Notice also prohibits any broadcast that is likely to incite, perpetuate hatred, and vilify any person or section of the community on account of race, ethnicity, nationality, gender, sexual preference, age, disability, religion or culture of that person or section of the community.

Poghisio must have taken that step following the Waki report which said there were many wananchi who gave evidence before the Commission and condemned the role of the media in exacerbating the post 2007 election conflict. The Report says there were many people who recalled with horror, fear, and disgust the negative and inflammatory role of vernacular radio stations in their testimony and statements to the Commission. In particular, according to the report, they singled out KASS FM as having contributed to a climate of hate, negative ethnicity, and having incited violence in the Rift Valley.

Journalists this time have a specific responsibility to make sure they do not repeat the mistakes some of them made during the coverage of the 2007 elections. They should be particularly careful when covering political leaders in the Rift Valley including the former President Daniel arap Moi who was reported by the Kenya Times of May 19 as having predicted bloodshed and social instability if the new Proposed Constitution is implemented. Those in charge of security should probably have a quiet word with the former Head of State and make him stop inciting the people.