 |
| Journalists protest against the increasing oppression of press freedom in Sudan. |
The press freedom laws in Sudan have changed a lot in the past years, but not for the better. Osman Mirghani the editor in chief of a local newspaper in Sudan says: “When we started working in the 90’s the [press] freedom was much more than it is now. There are a lot of regulations the government uses such as confiscating newspapers.”
Several newspapers have been getting confiscated before hitting the streets of Sudan. Editors say that national security agents and printing press houses confiscate papers containing news critical to the government and their actions.
Eight journalists were arrested by government officials after covering violent protests against a new government measures that increases the price of bread and other products. These journalists were recently detained and the people are fed up of the government who are directly imprisoning journalists without a proper court trial.
Najeeb Adam a press freedom activist says: “The right way to regulate the press is through the courts since there are laws… confiscating papers and things like that is not a good idea and journalists who are detained should be presented to court and if they have any fault they should bear responsibility but they shouldn't be put in jail without a clear charge.”
In addition to that the government is trying to deliberately pass a bill which would allow national security agents to shutdown newspaper, radios and TV station for 15 days without giving a reason. If this bill were to become a law Sudan’s press council could ban any journalist who expresses opinions against the government.
Journalists are concerned not because they're being charged for what they’re reporting on but being restricted from reporting in the first place. And the shutting down
Reporters without borders, an international organization ranked Sudan 174 out of 180 countries in terms of press freedom and it could only get worse if nothing is done to control this situation.
Historical connections: Before the 1989 coup led by military officers under Col. Omar Hassan al-Bashir, Sudan had a lively press, with most political parties publishing a variety of periodicals. But after that censorship became common and regulation on news became tighter.
Discussion questions:
- Should other nation or the UN get involved into the situation of the Sudan government officials unjustly detaining journalists without a fair trial?
- How could this law negatively affect the government, including their economy and etc?
- If the bill was to pass how could residents of Sudan get raw, uncensored news to know the truth about what’s happening?
Reference articles:
I think other nations should get involved if their journalists are the ones not getting a fair trial. I also believe that freedom of speech is important, but if UN countries gang up on Sudan's government, it could damage relations between countries and the UN would lose their chance of influencing more important issues in Sudan. This law is related to the economy, as reporters reporting about rising bread prices were the ones detained, but I am not sure how this law with negatively affect the government.
ReplyDeleteThis could negatively impacted their government mostly because of transparency issues. The press reports things about the government and the people read them, looking for information from somewhere other than the government. If the government shuts the press down, then the image of the government seems like someone trying to cover up something detrimental to society. This undermines the trust placed in the government, impacting things like the economy and the like thst basically run on trust.
ReplyDeleteAlthough logically other nations should get involved, the right to free speech is not a universal law in some countries. If the government decides to censor the press, then there is little other countries could do other than pressure them to repeal it. If things escalated to military use, then the inhabitants of Sudan would be greatly affected, and would most likely destroy any chance for negotiation. As it is, citizens of Sudan will most likely lose any truthful resources.
ReplyDeleteAllowing national security agents to shutdown newspapers, radios, TV shows for more than two weeks with no cause would negatively impact how civilians would view their government. People would cease to trust their government, leading to chaos and trouble. If the bill was to pass, then residents of Sudan would have very little access to information that would be unfiltered by the government, leading to less and less people being knowledgable about what is happening in their own country. I personally believe that other countries should get involved with the fact that journalists are being imprisoned without receiving a fair trial. However, I think that they should do so with caution, such as insistent urging, as military inference may only add more unnecessary violence to the ongoing situation.
ReplyDeleteAlthough I do agree with Abby and Charlotte that other countries should get involved, I also agree with Victor in that there is not much other countries can do besides economic and political pressuring. Military interference to enforce western policies has historically been morally dubious in retrospect (see "The White Man's Burden"). Freedom of speech may be a noble cause, but if other countries want to help, it may be more valuable to allow the discourse in Sudan to play out, let the citizens resist how they will. If worse comes to worst, Sudan's media and news will likely become completely state-controlled. The most the world can do at that point is contribute to Sudan's information black market like the US does with the North Korean USBs (Flash Drives For Freedom).
ReplyDeletehttps://flashdrivesforfreedom.org/
I agree with the comments above that passing the bill would negatively impact the government and economy. If there is no way citizens of Sudan can listen to the news or for any information to spread, it can lead to them losing their trust for their government. It would seem that they are trying to hide things, but people of Sudan should have the right to know whats going on in their own country or even outside. For 15 days, people in Sudan won't be updated and have to rely on information passed down from person to person, which can be really unreliable. Since journalists were arrested from protesting government measures that increases the bread price and other items, it could affect the economy by people boycotting bread or other products. Businesses lose money and people can't afford it.
ReplyDeleteThe UN should get involved with the government of Sudan unjustly detaining journalists. I believe that a truly free country allows the press to operate as they please and not get shut down by the government because the government doesn't want the press to spill the truth. If the government is censoring the media there is no way the people of Sudan to get an idea of what their government is doing, whether that be what the people want or what the government wants. If it is the government working for themselves and screwing the people over creates an autocratic system, even though the government of Sudan claims they are a representative democracy.
ReplyDeleteSource: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/su.html
I believe that the UN should get involved because it is extremely unjust & if the bill was passed, it would negatively impact the government. These actions that are being taken are only going to further cause havoc. Citizens will most likely lose their trust for the government & will only cause further damage, as the more the government restricts/tries to quiet the people, the more they'll speak out. The citizens have a right to their voice & have a right to know & understand what is going on around them/in their government. The more the government restrains the people, the more they'll resist & push back. Though I do believe that other countries should lend a hand, I believe they will have to do so cautiously & try not to further any problems or create more trouble.
ReplyDeleteSimilar to the responses of other people, other nations should have an opinion towards these press laws. It is not justified just because one country agree towards the law. Many countries need to agree to the bill before it should be passed. It will eventually negatively impact the economy, as well as the government in the long run. The law should be repealed and more countries should get involved.
ReplyDeleteI agree that passing the bill would have a negative effect on the government. Limiting citizens' ability to receive information without reason could cause them to not trust the government because it would seem like the government is trying to keep secrets from the people. It may negatively affect the economy as well because the citizens may feel like they have the right to know what is going on within the government, and if they do not receive the information they want, it may lead to resistance in the form of protests and boycotts.
ReplyDelete