Jordan Times
Tuesday, December 4, 2001
Penal Code to guide Higher Media Council's mandate, says premier
By Alia Shukri Hamzeh
AMMAN — Prime Minister Ali Abul Ragheb has said the Higher Media Council, whose members are in the process of being named, will not seek to amend the latest media restrictions introduced in the Penal Code.
But he left the door open for a possible compromise in the future if the Jordan Press Association and journalists take action to ensure that some media abuses come to an end, including reactivating a press code of ethics.
“The Penal Code is one of the cornerstones of the Higher Media Council,” Abul Ragheb said during a visit to The Jordan Times late Sunday. “It was introduced to regulate the profession and deal with the irregularities and violations that occur,” he added.
A Royal Decree is expected to be issued soon to endorse the new draft law setting up the 11-member higher council. The new council is expected to draw up Jordan's information policies and supervise two regulatory bodies dealing with the press and broadcast media.
The council, expected to become operational by Jan. 1, 2002, will replace the Ministry of Information in line with a recent request by His Majesty King Abdullah.
According to Abul Ragheb, the council, which is expected to include some government officials, will work on regulating the profession.
Many journalists had hoped the council, whose members will be named by a Royal Decree, would look into revising the latest amendments introduced to the Penal Code, seen by many as a major step backwards for press freedoms.
Abul Ragheb, however, said the council will not amend or change the code, describing it as the only option to counter what he labelled as abuses by some in the media.
“The law is not a martial one, it is a matter of regulating the profession, considering the violations and abuses by the media,” said the premier, who was accompanied by Minster of State and government spokesman Saleh Qallab, and Minister of Tourism, Antiquities and Information Taleb Rifai.
He said the ball was in the court of the Jordan Press Association (JPA) and the media corps, to come up with alternative formulas as well as a code of ethics to ensure professionalism and better standards.
“The press corps is not dealing with the matter in a responsible manner,” Abul Ragheb declared.
The government endorsed amendments to the Penal Code on Oct. 8, introducing fines of up to JD5,000, prison sentences of up to three years, or both for press violations. It also stipulates the “permanent or temporary closure” of publications that carry “false or libellous information that can undermine national unity or the country's reputation.”
Local and international human rights activists and press freedoms watchdogs slammed the amendments saying they represent a return to the martial law era.
Many journalists said they feared they could be implicated, considering the code carried ambiguous and “sweeping” articles.
Meanwhile yesterday, the JPA, which earlier called for the repeal of the amendments, filed a suit against the government for endorsing what it labelled as “restrictive and backwards” amendments. The association, which filed its suit at the Higher Court of Justice, charged that the amendments to the Penal Code are illegal and unconstitutional. The case was registered by Jordan Bar Association President Saleh Armouti.
The code is seen by many lawyers and activists as a violation of articles 15 and 94 of the Constitution. Article 15 guarantees freedom of speech and reporting for the press, while 94 grants the government the authority to introduce temporary laws in the absence of Parliament, but under specific or extraordinary circumstances.
Violations of most of the articles in the code will be ajudicated at the State Security Court, instead of civil courts as was stipulated in the Press and Publications Law.
Abul Ragheb and government officials have repeatedly stressed that the changes were not aimed at the dailies but rather at a number of weeklies, which, they said, fabricated news and misquoted officials, insulting them and distorting their image as well as the image of the country.
Officials had said the amendments were made to protect the reputation of officials and the country at large.