The Federation of African Journalists and three exiled Gambian reporters have filed a legal claim before the Court of Justice of the Economic Community of West African States to challenge the pervasive culture of persecution, violence, and injustice towards journalists in The Gambia.
They argue that their right to freedom of expression has been violated, including through the use of criminal laws that prohibit criticism to be made of the government. These laws, which have their roots in colonial times when they were used to suppress dissent, are now specifically used to target journalists and human rights defenders. The applicants have asked the Court to make a declaration that their very existence violates the right to freedom of expression. In addition, some of the applicants argue that they suffered torture as a consequence of them exercising their right to freedom of expression.
This marks the first time that The Gambia’s criminal laws have been challenged before an international court. The case has been brought with the support of the Media Legal Defence Initiative.
Since President Yahya Jammeh seized control in 1994, journalists in The Gambia have suffered arbitrary detention, criminal prosecution, and even torture at the hands of public officials.
Three of the applicants are Gambian journalists who have all fled the country. They have been charged under the country’s false news, criminal libel and sedition laws in relation to publications critical of President Jammeh and his regime. Whilst in custody, one of the applicants alleges that he was tortured by government authorities on multiple occasions, including to extract information from the journalist.
The experience of the three applicants is not unique; over 110 Gambian journalists have fled the country since 1994 for fear of similar prosecutions whose roots lie in the very existence of a set of criminal laws that are easily abused to suppress dissent. A judgment in the applicants’ favour would set an important precedent because of the potential impact on these laws in The Gambia, as well as similar laws elsewhere in the region.
In recent years, the Court of the Economic Community of West African States – better known by its acronym, ECOWAS – has proved to be an influential forum for human rights issues. Last year, the Court found that the Gambian government had failed to conduct a meaningful investigation into the death of journalist Deyda Hydara. The Federation of African Journalists supported that case also, and Maria Luisa Rogerio, Interim President of FAJ, commented that “FAJ has experienced first-hand the effects President Jammeh’s oppressive media laws have had on journalists in The Gambia. The ECOWAS Court has already criticised the impunity witnessed in the Hydara case, and we hope that that they will continue in this vein by handing down a strong precedent criticising the criminal laws that are currently being used to persecute, intimidate and harass journalists in The Gambia and compel the country to maintain an environment where journalists are able to perform their duties without impediment.”
The Nigerian human rights lawyer Noah Ajare, who acts for the Applicants in the present case, said: “It is our hope that this application can benefit from the precedent of the Hydara case, since the ECOWAS Court is continuing to expand its work on human rights abuses in the West African region and has recognised the important role played by journalists in a democracy. The ECOWAS Court is carrying out a vitally important role in holding West African states to account for their human rights abuses. Thus the applicants are convinced that their right will be protected and preserved by the Court, despite the fact that most of them are not guaranteed justice before their national court.”
MLDI’s support of this case follows its involvement in two other precedent-setting African cases regarding journalists’ rights and freedom of expression. In 2014, Legal Director Nani Jansen co-represented a journalist from Burkina Faso before the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights. The Court ruled that imprisonment for defamation violates the right to freedom of expression. In addition, MLDI assisted the Burundi Journalists’ Union in bringing a case to the East African Court of Justice earlier this year. In its first ever judgment on free speech, that Court ruled that restrictions on the press imposed through Burundi’s 2013 Press Law violated the right to press freedom and the right to freedom of expression. The current claim at the ECOWAS Court builds on the precedent set by these two cases and invites the Court to align itself with the courts’ reasoning that criminal laws cannot unnecessarily restrict the right to freedom of expression.
Nani Jansen, Legal Director at MLDI, said: “The Gambia’s maintaining of these criminal laws constitutes a wide-ranging violation of the rights of journalists, media outlets and the recipients of independent news in the country. A favourable judgment from the ECOWAS Court would set an important precedent for journalists and independent media in The Gambia and would oblige the government to meet its responsibilities under international human rights law. It would also have a positive impact on other ECOWAS nations, where similarly restrictive laws are being used to prosecute journalists.”
British barrister Can Yeginsu, part of the team presenting the case at the ECOWAS Court, said: “This is a case of great public importance: it presents the ECOWAS Court with an opportunity to uphold the importance of the right to communicate opinions and ideas without fear of government retaliation or censorship. That right is, of course, of particular importance for the media which plays a special role as the bearer of the general right to freedom of expression for all. Society as a whole will suffer if journalists are persecuted by public officials with apparent impunity.”
Notes to editors:
The Gambia is a Member State of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS). The mandate of the ECOWAS Community Court of Justice is to ensure “the observance of law, and of the principles of equity […] in the interpretation and application of the provisions of the Revised Treaty of the Economic Community of West African States.”
The Application referred to in this press release was filed at the ECOWAS Court on 7 December 2015.
There are currently four Applicants: the Federation of African Journalists (FAJ) and three Gambian journalists who currently live in exile outside of The Gambia.
FAJ is the African chapter of the International Federation of Journalists. It comprises of journalist trade unions and associations which came together to form a continental body of journalists’ trade unions in the media industry in Africa. FAJ’s common objective is to work to improve the social and professional rights of its members; it is now the most representative, independent and democratic journalists’ movement in Africa.
The Applicants argue that the continued maintenance, by The Gambia, of its criminal laws on sedition, defamation and prohibiting the publication of ‘false news’ represses press freedom and violates its citizens’ human rights. Among the relevant provisions of the criminal law being challenged are: provisions of the Criminal Code of 2009 which establish criminal offences relating to sedition; provisions of the Criminal Code of 2009 which establish the criminal offence of unlawful publication of libel; and provisions of the Information and Communications Act (as amended) which provide for the criminal offence of publication of false news or information.
For more information, please contact:
Nani Jansen, Legal Director, Media Legal Defence Initiative: [email protected], tel. + 442037525549
Noah Ajare, Lawyer, Victory Chambers: [email protected], tel. +2348033975746
Gabriel Baglo, Head of the Secretariat, Federation of African Journalists: [email protected], tel. +221-33 867 95 86/87
Trumped-up Anger – The Making of a Monster (with tiny hands)
When I decided to write this piece, my initial thesis was to write why I think Americans should vote for Donald Trump in the Republican Primaries. Yes, I know that sounds crazy coming from me but there’s a method to my madness so please bear with me. Why Trump? Well, I thought it would be fun to watch the GOP completely destroyed by the monster they (unintentionally) created. I think if Trump gets the most votes but not enough to win outright, the establishment, who clearly cannot stand him, will usurp him at the convention. This will in turn further anger (there’s that word again) his supporters enough for them to break away from the party causing irreparable division and handing the elections to the Democrats. This, I thought, would be the perfect reward, and a historic lesson to the GOP for the hard work they did in creating this monster!
What monster and how is the GOP responsible?
In what everyone agrees is the craziest election cycle in the history of the US, one of the common themes I hear as explanation of all the madness is that “the people are angry”. I hear it (more) from the Republicans, the pundits, the media, heck, even the Democrats! With what we’ve seen, it’s impossible to dispute there is anger. However, I had to pause and ask myself “what exactly is the cause of said anger?” I suspect you then want to ask me how I can give credit to the GOP when we’ve had 8 years of a democrat in the White House?
To understand it, we’ll have to rewind a bit to 2008 to compare the states of affairs people say is the cause of anger – mainly national security, foreign policy, the economy.
1.September 11, 2001 had taken place under president George W. Bush’s watch. Several terrorists had entered the country, hijacked US airlines and flown them into buildings killing over 3000 innocent people.
2. Seven years after taking responsibility for the horrors of 9/11, Bin Laden was still running around and releasing videos more frequently than the Kardashians on Snapchat.
3. Five years after the US had been (mis)led into 2 wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, it was now clear there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and America was losing thousands of lives and resources fighting what would become the longest war in US history.
4. The economy was on the brink of collapse with the great recession. Millions had been lost with the collapse of the housing market and the financial industry and the auto industry needed a bailout by the federal reserve.
If there was ever a time for anger, i thought that would have been a perfect time for it. Why then, was anger not a huge part of the elections/campaign rhetoric in 2008? Instead, Obama and the democrats campaigned on a message of “HOPE and CHANGE” – appealing to the positive human values to aspire to becoming better.
Fast forward to 2016
1. Since 2008, we’ve had the San Bernardino attacker, who was a US citizen and purchased his guns using his(and his US citizen friend’s) 2nd amendment rights, senselessly murder innocent people. I believe that one life lost to terrorism is one too many! However, it’s noteworthy that nobody has entered the country from outside to come execute a successful terrorist plan (at least up to the time of writing).
2. Bin Laden has been killed but Abubakr Al-Baghdadi is running around and his gang of criminals is releasing videos of gruesome murders of innocent people.
3. The number of Americans in combat is significantly reduced but Syrian, Libyan, Iraqi and Afghan lives are being lost daily.
4. The auto industry is back, the banks are back to screwing over the people, the housing market has picked up, job gains have been registered for several consecutive months and unemployment is below 5%.
So how come this election cycle is all about ANGER? How come people are angrier than in 2008 when they had more reasons to be angry? How come people are so angry as to rally behind an egomaniacal, greedy opportunist that leads the Republican party? (Allow me to digress a bit because i think this is important. I did not forget to call him “racist”. I deliberately left it out because i honestly am not sure how racist he is. I think the Orange Man with the tiny hands is more opportunistic than racist. I think, and he has shown, that he will insult anyone and everyone if he thinks it will further his agenda. He does business with China, Hispanics and the Muslims in the Middle East when it serves him, yet on the campaign trail he “hates” them.)
“The chickens coming home to roost”, “those living in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones”, “reaping what you sow” etc. – choose your proverb – but “anger” is no coincidence or accident. It’s a direct consequence of that meeting on the night Obama was inaugurated back in 2009 when the leaders of GOP decided (as admitted to by former speaker Newt Gingrich), that their number one priority was not to serve the American people, not to do what was best for the country, but “to make Obama a one-term president”. (See Robert Draper’s “Do Not ask What Good We Do”) With that agenda, the GOP embarked on their “carefully” devised plan of sowing the seeds of division and hate through fear-mongering. The aim was to anger the population just enough that Obama would be booted out by 2012. Unfortunately for them, not only did they fail when Obama was reelected in 2012, but the seeds of anger they had sown had overgrown. The base they pandered to had been angered past reason giving room for an opportunist like Ted Cruz to cultivate the tea party. He took over their tactic of obstruction and shoved it in their faces in congress. Things got so bad, that Speaker John Boehner could not take it any more and he quit when he “found Jesus” after the Pope’s visit. By this time, they had all seen the mess they had created so nobody wanted the prestigious position of House Speaker! They had to beg Paul Ryan (by the way, speaker Ryan was present at that cynical meeting when the obstruction strategy was devised) to accept the position. This was bad enough but the worst was yet to come. Little did the GOP know that the big bad wolf was lurking…and even when they saw him, instead of realizing their mistake, like a drunk asking for an extra bottle, they thought they would cash in some more…just a little bit more. Like a true opportunist, Trump saw the cracks and burst in. He seized on the simmering anger message the GOP had been nursing for 8 years and fertilized it with a brash, unapologetic and deliberate rhetoric of fear mongering, division, xenophobia and hate. Instead of nipping it in the bud, the GOP thought Trump was a clown they would use and dump. They were going to let him verbalize and amplify all the crazy things they had been subtly whispering and implying since 2008 to fire up the anger in their base. This was going to make their preferred candidate (Jeb) appear more moderate and they would dump Trump whenever they wanted. Little did they know that their magic beans had grown into Jack’s beanstalk with Trump the monster at the top. The little smoke they lit in the backyard to scare the neighbors had grown into a full-blown inferno engulfing the entire city! Mocking John McCain for being captured while serving his country, insulting the new party darling Carly Fiorina, being disgusting to their most effective “super-pac”, Fox News star anchor Megyn Kelly, boycotting a debate their main propaganda arm, Fox News – nothing matters to the angry base. The man even had a go at the infallible POPE and his support remains unflinching!!!
Yes, it seems like now they’ve realized it after they’re practically left with what Republican Senator Lindsey Graham accurately called “choosing between shot or poisoned” in a choice between Ted Cruz and Donald Trump that the GOP finally woke up and decided to put out the fire. At this stage, with wins in Florida and Ohio, it seems like all their efforts including former republican nominee Mitt Romney’s statements, the meetings they hold, the ads, the super-pacs, and all the “anybody but Trump” efforts seem like using a teacup to try and put out the inferno that already engulfed the entire neighborhood – too little, too late.
While writing the piece, I realized that by encouraging a vote for Trump in the republican primaries with the hope that it would teach everyone a lesson, I would be guilty of the same cynical motives and methods they’re guilty of. I therefore take back that recommendation and remind myself to ALWAYS do what I honestly believe is best for the good of all and to be sincere in my words and actions.
I conclude with a Wollof saying from West Africa – “Ku yarr sa mbeur, balaa daan ken fayti lah”.
…and tell me this “logic” does not sound like Trump and his troops…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yBk…
Sana Sarr