Print

Mail

wiki links

GIO's media ruling unconstitutional

It sounds too absurd to be true. But it is true. According to a report released by the The Government Information Office (GIO, 新聞局), its director-general has said that barring the government, political parties and the military from owning shares in media enterprises violates Article 11 of the Constitution, the Article guaranteeing freedom of expression.

She argues that the government is a legal entity and cannot be deprived of its right to run media businesses. Such a ridiculous statement reveals a lack of understanding of the Constitution.

For a long time, non-governmental organizations have called for the withdrawal of the government, political parties and the military from the media.

They wish to see media that monitors the work of government and provides a viewing platform between government and people. Through the media, people will express opinions and the government will open its policies to public scrutiny.

Media under the control of government, political parties or the military, cannot assume these roles because their objectivity is compromised, not to mention the fact that such ownership flies in the face of media ethics. It is a basic principle of mass communication theory taken for granted in every democratic country, that people who run media enterprises should not be involved in politics.

A clear separation of political power and media management is imperative to the development of the media and should not even need justification in law.

Under Martial Law, the government's manipulation of the media led to the White Terror, among numerous other injustices. These included serious violations of human rights, which were against the spirit of the Constitution.

As time goes by, however, the withdrawal of the government, political parties and the military from the media is being described as unconstitutional. The transition of political power seems to have confounded notions of right and wrong.

Since Britain's 13th century Magna Carta, constitutions have been regarded as a guarantee of the people's rights and the rule of law. Since the 18th century, enactment of a constitution has been taken as the standard for democracy in Western countries. Constitutions in democratic countries were all designed to prevent the abuse of power by governments and to guarantee people's basic rights.

They emphasise the separation of powers, a balance between power and responsibility, and other checks and balances are incorporated into the political system to prevent domination by any one arm of government and the abuse of power resulting from centralization.

A government is in control of the state and, hence, of a massive amount of resources. Its power is ubiquitous. But throughout history, there have been too many cases of government persecution of the populace and that's why people need a constitution to protect them.

Some constitutions even stipulate that people have the right to oppose government decisions. The second chapter of Taiwan's Constitution is: "Rights and Duties of the People." This is evidence that the Constitution does not exist solely for the sake of the government.

The government has many channels to promote its policies; it has specific agencies and spokepersons. The argument that the withdrawal of the government, political parties and the military from the media amounts to an infringement of the government's freedom of speech could not be more absurd.

Unfortunately, this is our government spokesperson's interpretation of the Constitution.

The media should be a public instrument and channels used by terrestrial TV stations should belong to the public. Many scholars have pushed for the establishment of public terrestrial TV stations to realize an ideal mass communications scenario.

President Chen Shui-bian's (陳水扁) media policy -- laid out in his election white paper -- is fully consistent in spirit with the stance of these scholars and non-governmental organizations. They differ only on whether to release their shares to private ownership or to transform them into public assets.

Turning them into public assets involves utilising the government's financial capabilities, managerial and marketing talents and so on. And full privatization of TV stations may encounter problems like excessively profit-oriented management and manipulation of content by large consortia. Any evaluation of the merits and demerits of private and state ownership must take carefully into account the development of the 3C (computers, communications and content) industry and the trends of internationalization.

Anyway, swift action to draw up laws to regulate media organizations, establish mass communication commissions, empower non-government organizations to monitor the media, and promote self-discipline within the media are all necessary supportive measures.

Before these are implemented, it is not wise to promote reckless media policies and seek doggedly to justify the rights of the government, the political parties and the military to run media enterprises. This would only repeat previous mistakes and cause irreparable damage.

Anyway, public TV stations are owned by the entire citizenry. They are based on a concept totally different from ownership by the government, political parties and the military. As a result, it is outrageous for the new government to confuse the concept of the two in a bid to hide its real intention of abusing power.

By saying the government, military, and political parties can maintain 30 to 49 percent of the stock at TV stations, Chen's administration still allows them optimum control of TV stations. It is not only ignorant but also horrifying for the government to justify its abuse of power by misinterpreting the fundamental spirit of the Constitution. The public misunderstanding about the Constitution caused by remarks from a government spokesperson is even more unforgivable.

He Te-feng is a professor in the law department of National Taiwan University and the president of Taiwan Media Watch Foundation.

translated by kathy chu
This story has been viewed 1829 times.