Interview: New Laws Threaten Press Freedom in Tanzania

Tanzania’s general elections in October are expected to be especially contentious, as the ruling party—Chama Cha Mapinduzi (CCM), which has been in power since independence—may face a united opposition for the first time. There are growing fears that the government will attempt to warp the campaign environment in its favor by stepping up control over the media.

This spring, the president signed two laws, the Statistics Act and the Cybercrime Act, that will have a significant impact on the media’s ability to operate freely. Two other restrictive bills, the Access to Information Act and the Media Services Act, have recently been put on hold.

Such legislation follows a worrying trend in the region, where Zambia’s president is currently stalling on a much-needed access to information bill, and South Africa may soon implement the contested Protection of State Information Bill (POSIB), which grants state agencies broader authority to classify information.

To assess the implications of the new laws for press freedom and democracy in Tanzania, Freedom House spoke with journalist Damas Kanyabwoya of the Citizen, one of the country’s leading newspapers.

How do you interpret the introduction of these laws so close to the October general elections?

The timing is certainly questionable. The ruling party’s failure to reduce poverty, improve social services, and overhaul the infrastructure, combined with a corruption scandal, have reduced its hold on power. For the first time the party is bracing for the possibility of losing the election, especially if the opposition succeeds in fronting a joint presidential candidate. To protect itself, CCM is trying to silence the media from drawing attention to its shortcomings.

These laws would effectively increase government control over what the media can or cannot say. The Statistics Act, for example, criminalizes publication of data and figures from any other source without the approval of the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS). This means the government can control data being published and avoid any figures that would be a mark on its record. Even more worrying, there were no consultations before moving the four bills—Statistics Bill, Cybercrime Bill, Access to Information Bill, and Media Services Bill—to Parliament. They were all tabled in Parliament under the certificate of urgency in an attempt to avoid scrutiny.

How will the laws affect your work as a journalist?

I can see it becoming almost impossible for journalists to operate under these laws. Under the revised laws, if you were to write about mismanagement in public funds in a rural clinics construction project, you would be required to go to the NBS for verification and approval of your sources. Why would the NBS, a government agency, approve the publication of information that negatively reflects on the government when it is a part of the government itself? The most likely scenario is that they would come up with the pro-government version and force it on journalists. The laws will, in effect, turn independent media into government mouthpieces.

Is self-censorship common among journalists in Tanzania? Do you see the new laws making it worse?

Self-censorship is widespread in Tanzania because of the existing of draconian laws that were created in the 1960s and 1970s. Unfortunately the new laws and bills carry over the same draconian spirit, and ironically, they introduce harsher jail terms and financial penalties. For example, Section 36 (c)(i) of the Media Services Bill provides a penalty of $10,000 or five years in prison, or both, for a journalist who publishes any statement deemed threatening to the interests of defense, public safety, public order, etc. If it becomes law it will most likely encourage even greater self-censorship.

What do you consider to be the biggest danger of this legislation?

The Media Services Bill will curtail both freedom of speech and freedom of the press. The bill purportedly regulates the media industry by promoting professionalism, but it would do the exact opposite. First of all, it abolishes self-regulation of the media by making the Media Council statutory and, essentially, a government institution. Its operational expenses will be set through Parliament, and its chairman appointed by the president. This is a step back because it will allow the government to have more control over the media than the current independent Media Council. Furthermore, the Media Services Bill requires licensing of newspapers and of journalists. The Media Council is given powers to deregister journalists, which is against best practice.

The Access to Information Bill is superficial. It allows “information holders” (government institutions) to publish or make public information that they think is for the public interest. But the same bill prevents information seekers from making public the information that they receive from these institutions. This means a journalist can access information but cannot publish it. If she or he makes it public they may go to jail.

Critics have noted that the new cybercrime law gives excessive power to the police. Can you elaborate?

Heads of police stations can issue orders to junior officers to enter any premises and seize computers without a court warrant. Police officers may also be ordered to force people to disclose information stored in computers or computer systems, or the content of e-mail communications. As a result, these powers can be abused to harass and intimidate journalists and activists. Under the law, the police officer has only to satisfy himself that the computer or a computer system contains data or information that is relevant to an ongoing investigation, or can serve to provide witness to an ongoing case. This will certainly encourage the targeting of journalists who do not follow the government line.

The act also gives the junior police officers the power to demand information from internet service providers and mobile-phone network providers. The police officers are also empowered by the law to intercept e-mails and “collect or record the computer data through technical means.” This is a violation of people’s privacy that has never been seen in Tanzania before.