[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 87 (Friday, July 1, 1994)]
[House]
[Page H]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: July 1, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
          THE GROWING THREAT TO PRESS FREEDOM AROUND THE WORLD

  Mr. PELL. Mr. President, I am concerned that, despite the perception 
that we live in a global village in the age of information, exchange of 
information, which ought to be free and open, instead is becoming 
increasingly restricted.
  I have recently been made aware of some alarming statistics that 
reflect this trend. According to the Committee to Protect Journalists 
[CPJ], last year around the world, a record 124 journalists were 
imprisoned, 56 journalists were killed in the line of duty, and there 
were more than 700 violations of press freedoms. As astonishing as 
these numbers are, they are believed to be an underestimate.
  Some countries responsible for assaults on the press are, 
predictably, authoritarian regimes such as China which has the largest 
number of imprisoned journalists. Other violator countries, such as 
Turkey, are multiparty, constitutional governments.
  What the 27 violator countries have in common, as described by CPJ, 
is that their governments ``openly assert their right to control the 
content of reporting on politics, economics, national security, 
cultural and religious tensions, and myriad other topics,'' and that 
``the press in almost all of these countries is more cautious about 
challenging authority as a direct result of these prosecutions.''
  Attacks on journalists demand our attention because they are 
increasing in number, lead to intimidation and self-censorship, and, 
inevitably, challenge the open exchange of and access to information.
  In many countries, threats to press freedom, and to reporters, result 
from the collapse of civic authority and from the growing power of 
religious extremism and competing national and ethnic groups.
  Some journalists are killed in the crossfire of opposing forces in 
armed conflicts, and we have come to recognize this as an unavoidable 
risk of the war correspondent. However, the deliberate targeting of 
journalists because their news reporting is judged by one group to 
serve the interests of an opposing ethnic group or extremist faction is 
an increasingly common and dangerous phenomena.
  According to CPJ, ``Bosnia is proving to be even more hazardous for 
war correspondents than Vietnam. Europe and the republics of the former 
Soviet Union had 21 fatalities, the year's largest number.''
  In much of the world, a free press is the exception, not the rule. A 
controlled press, operated directly by the government or indirectly by 
self-censoring journalists, is the norm. Information in these countries 
is a means to control, rather than to inform.
  In Rwanda, the twisting of information via the Hutu government-
controlled radio ``Mille Collines'' has been used to incite genocide 
against the Tutsi minority and continues to broadcast a message of 
``ethnic cleansing'' while the death count climbs to half a million.
  In Turkey, newly enacted laws give the government sweeping 
authorities to restrict the media. After a series of aggressive court 
actions, the alleged torture and beatings of news staff, the 
disappearance of a reporter while on assignment and the murder of three 
others, the government and police have finally forced the closure of a 
major newspaper representing a pro-Kurdish viewpoint.
  In Bangladesh, criminal charges were filed against a prominent 
independent secular journalist, Taslima Nasreen, and her editors for 
allegedly publishing materials to which some religious leaders took 
offense. Ms. Nasreen has gone into hiding, and the Bangladeshi police 
are conducting a nationwide hunt to arrest her.
  In Somalia, rebel gunmen killed four journalists covering the U.N. 
intervention--A.P. photographer Hansi Krauss, Reuters photographers Hos 
Mania and Dan Eldon, and Reuters sound technician Anthony Macharia. 
Their murders virtually brought to a halt to any television or on-the-
spot coverage of the conflict.
  In an egregious act of censorship, the government of Indonesia on 
June 21 revoked the publishing license of three of that country's most 
respected news publications, allegedly for sowing discord and 
threatening national stability. In response, hundreds of people joined 
in peaceful demonstration in front of government offices, many were 
beaten by Indonesian security forces, and more than 50 people were 
arrested.
  In our own country, where a free press is taken for granted, three 
Haitian journalists have been murdered since 1991. Serge Simon, a 
Haitian journalist who fled to the United States after being beaten for 
a report on military corruption in Haiti, said:

       The murders did what they were meant to do--intimidate pro-
     Aristide supporters in the United States. We expected 
     something different in the United States.

  While we cannot compel other Nations to adopt the guarantee provided 
in our Constitution's First Amendment, or to live up to their 
obligations under Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human 
Rights, we must forthrightly and repeatedly send the same message to 
heads of state, rebel strongmen, and religious zealots alike--that the 
censoring of news and the threatening of lives of journalists are not 
legitimate forms of State authority.
  Persecution of journalists and violations of press freedom cannot be 
tolerated by the international community. The cause of journalists in 
prison must be joined to that of political prisoners in general, and 
their release should be pressed for with equal vigor.
  The muscle of international condemnation must be brought to bear 
against those responsible for these policies. Those who kill 
journalists must be brought to justice, whether in Indonesia, Turkey, 
Rwanda, or elsewhere, as well as here in the United States.
  A news article in the June 28 Washington Post headlined: ``Reporter 
Who Fled Zaire Starts a New Life in U.S.'' tells us of the persecution 
of one brave journalist forced from his homeland for chronicling the 
repressive acts of his government. The United States has provided 
asylum for this man and his family who had fled from Zaire to save 
their lives.

  This country can do more than address the aftermath of injustice. As 
it works to promote democratic values around the world and to develop 
closer political and economic ties with our allies, the Clinton 
administration should support the free and open exchange of 
information, and forcefully condemn information censorship and assaults 
on the press.
  Governments should be urged to take sustained action to protect free 
speech. Senator Dennis DeConcini, Chairman of the Commission on 
Security and Cooperation in Europe, in a speech in the Senate, June 23, 
proposed such steps to the government of Turkey. Among Senator 
DeConcini's eight proposals were: abolish restrictions on free 
expressions, and lift constraints on dissemination of Kurdish language 
television and radio broadcasts, point, music, and other mediums.
  Symbolic gestures by the administration, such as an invitation to the 
White House, or a simple one-line statement of regret from the State 
Department, as was the case for Indonesia, are simply not sufficient to 
register our concern and are likely to be ignored by violator 
countries.
  Offenses against the press should be considered serious human rights 
violations, to be dealt with by high-level pressure and other 
appropriate remedies. We can begin at the World Bank's Consultative 
Group meeting of bilateral donors in July by calling for an end to 
International Financial Institution [IFI] funding for Indonesia unless 
action is taken to rescind the banning orders issued by Indonesia's 
Information Ministry.
  Mr. President, before there can be a global village, we have to 
secure freedom of the press and information and protection for 
journalists at the level of the local village. The technological 
advances that make possible the new information age will remain a dream 
and disappointment for millions of people unless information freedom is 
made secure at the local and country level.

                          ____________________