Wansolwara: 11 September 2000
MEDIA: HEROES AND VILLAINS IN KING GEORGE'S REIGN
Heroes and villains. Over the past four months the Fiji Islands has suffered from an overdose of villains. But genuine heroes were rare, apart from the hostages themselves and some civil society hardy souls - such as in the Red Cross. And some media heroes.
DAVID ROBIE: Fourth Estate Column
King George and the chooks.
Photo: Joe Yaya (Pacific Journalism Online - USP)
WHEN one of our graduates returned to the Solomon Islands after completing his bachelors degree in journalism last year, little did he realise that he would stir up a political hornet¹s nest.
Duran Angiki, 32, won USP¹s Storyboard Award for regional journalism and already had a media track record back home.
He also made a name for himself for his enterprising and pull-no-punches style of journalism at USP. He became ³prime minister² of the Solomon Islands in the annual SPICOL regional leadership training conference.
But on his return to Honiara, he was determined to make better use of his analytical skills and report the crisis in greater depth.
This set him apart from some of his former colleagues in the capital.
Confronted with a hostile environment, he decided to move with his family to Gizo, Western Solomons.
He was, after all, not of the right ethnic stock. He comes from Rennell and Bellona province ‹ not from among the feuding islanders of Guadalcanal and Malaita whose conflict have left more than 100 dead since 1998.
Four other journalists are in ³hiding² in the area too ‹ Francis Pituvaka (Solomon Star and a University of Papua New Guinea graduate), Donaldson Rusa (trained at New Zealand¹s Manukau Polytechnic), Sam Seke (former Solomon Islands Broadcasting Corporation news editor), and Bryan Beti (the government¹s former chief communication officer)
From Gizo, Angiki gave a fresh perspective on developments in the country for overseas media as diverse as Agence France-Presse, Gemini news service and Pasifik Nius website.
On September 13, a report from Angiki alleged government payments had been made to Malaita Eagle Force (MEF) spokesman Andrew Nori, a lawyer and key player in the June 5 coup, for his legal services. This report was published on Pacific Islands Report, Pasifik Nius, Scoop and other regional websites.
Warning: On 27 September, Andrew Nori demanded that Angiki issue a public retraction and apology for this report within one week. He was also warned to stop reporting on the Solomon Islands crisis.
If the demands were not met, Angiki¹s family would be at risk.
On September 28, both London-based Amnesty International and Paris-based Reporters Sans Frontières (RSF) distributed ³action alerts² expressing fears for the safety of Angiki and his family, and also his uncle, Dykes Angiki, in Honiara.
Pacific Media Watch also sent a protest to Prime Minister Mannaseh Sogavare over the threats, appealing for the government to ensure the safety of Angiki and his family.
However, on October 2, in a remarkable act of hypocrisy, the Suva-based Pacific Islands News Association (PINA), whose claimed role includes ³developing and maintaining freedom of information and expression², distributed a biased report on Angiki¹s case.
A media freedom organisation is obliged to make contact with journalists and get first-hand information. Amnesty International, RSF and Pacific Media Watch all communicated personally with Angiki in the course of their inquiries.
But PINA chose not to. It relied on an SIBC report of Nori¹s news conference when he denied the MEF threats.
It also said Nori pledged ³total commitment to media freedom². This was less than two weeks after the government imposed internal censorship.
It also made a rather weak dig about ³senior journalists² saying Angiki was in Gizo, far from Honiara. Since when did distance prevent a journalist with good sources reporting events? Fiji¹s crisis, for example, was covered for two days by BBC World¹s Wellington correspondent.
Why did PINA not get Angiki¹s side of the story? Of course, this would have little to do with Angiki¹s past criticism of PINA.
As Angiki says: ³I don¹t believe Nori¹s assurance for my safety is real or genuine. Nori has no control over the MEF criminals in Honiara, thus my family and relatives¹ security isn¹t guaranteed.²
Journalists are obliged by international codes of ethics such as the International Federation of Journalists¹ to ³defend freedom of information, comment and criticism².
The hypocrisy displayed by PINA over the Angiki case is by no means the first example. Aid donors should expect such an organisation to be working fairly in the interests of all in the region.
Early in September, for example, the role of PINA was ³lukewarm² at best over Agence France-Presse correspondent Michael Field being barred by Kiribati from the South Pacific Forum. It also lagged behind RSF in raising the issue.
PINA¹s stand over Field¹s ban from Tonga has also been hypocritical. And so was its position over Times of Tonga editor Kalafi Moala¹s jailing for contempt of Parliament in 1996.
It only took up the case after intervention by the Commonwealth Press Union, Pacific Media Watch and others on behalf of Moala.
In September 1998, PINA distributed a statement misrepresenting the USP media work permit affair.
More recently, on May 29, the University of the South Pacific closed the journalism training website Pacific Journalism Online, which effectively gagged news coverage of the Fiji crisis and the online newspaper Wansolwara (until the University of Technology, Sydney, hosted the USP reportage).
Once again, RSF and the New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists came to the rescue ‹ along with an assortment of global journalism schools and media groups.
Not a beep: Yet not a beep from PINA. Instead, its accolytes applauded the shutdown of the website ‹ a fundamental assault on media freedom.
It¹s about time the PINA secretariat in Suva has a rethink ‹ and takes a more global and even-handed view, rather than expedient parochialism.
Diversity and plurality is the way forward in the Pacific. PINA should encourage this, not stifle it.
o David Robie is a co-convenor of Pacific Media Watch