• SLWJA report urges the need to empower and protect journos in situations similar to the ‘aragalaya’ era, and recommends the establishment of a multi-stakeholder independent regulatory comm., a media safety fund, and sensitive reporting trainings

Sri Lanka’s journalists have been reporting in a highly socio-politically volatile environment for a long time. The Constitution guarantees the Freedom of Expression, and journalists play a key role in materialising it. However, in doing so, the safety of journalists and media workers has been compromised and their working conditions have remained precarious. Since the “aragalaya” (the 2022 protest movement that sought to depose the former Government led by then President Gotabaya Rajapaksa and then Prime Minister and incumbent Government Parliamentarian Mahinda Rajapaksa) started in March, 2022, the media faced several challenges in accurately informing the situations to the citizens. During the 2022 mass protests, incidents of assault and harassment came from the Police and the security forces, but also from other groups, such as pro-Government supporters and from some within the protests itself. Other incidents of harassment and the surveillance of media, outside the main protest site, by security forces and the Police were also recorded during this period.

Noting that these developments are a cause for concern as a free and independent media is essential to a functioning and healthy democracy, a research report titled “Media Safety in Sri Lanka: Reporting on the 2022 Aragalaya” which was issued by the Sri Lanka Working Journalists’ Association (SLWJA) this week, emphasised that empowering and protecting journalists is a need of the hour. The report, which was based on a research on the challenges faced by journalists during their reporting of the 2022 protests (covering the period from 30 March to 31 August, 2022),was conducted by a group of researchers, namely Rajni Gamage, Harindra B. Dassanayake, and Aparna Hettiarachchi. 

Journalists’ safety

Underscoring that Articles 14(1)(a) and 14A(1) of the Constitution respectively guarantee, subjected to certain restrictions, the citizens’ right to the Freedom of Expression and Access to Information, the report said: “This in turn implies that any act or threat of violence against journalists is in direct violation of the constitutional rights of the people. Nonetheless, similar to elsewhere in the world, these laws tend to remain nominal in the context of media safety and journalistic rights. As such, Sri Lanka is challenged with a long history of violence against the media as well as the judicial harassment of media workers and impunity for crimes against journalists.”

With regard to the era of the “aragalaya” movement, it explained that the challenges faced by journalists during the period ranged from intimidation, assaults, the obstruction of duty, the damaging and confiscation of equipment, arrests, surveillance, and the intrusion into media institutions, and social media bans. At least 24 journalists and media workers that were covering protests had been assaulted by the law enforcement authorities between March and August 2022, while several others had been arrested. These assaults and arrests had taken place during the four major episodes of State crackdown on the protests, namely, on 31 March, 9 May, 9 July, and 22 July. The report explained: “These attacks were not mere responses by the law enforcement to an overbearing and rapidly escalating situation going out of control, but instead were premeditated attacks. The four episodes should therefore not be read in isolation but within the evolving political context. For instance, the Government declared a state of emergency three times during the months of the protest, and the two most organised attacks against the protestors – on 9 May and 22 July – took place mere days following the announcement of Emergency Regulations. Many journalists were caught in the crossfire between the protestors and the law enforcement and/or pro-Government anti-protestors. Second, especially with regard to the attacks on 9 May, given the nature of the attack on the protesters, inaction from the Police can be inferred. The mob that left the Temple Trees first attacked MainaGoGama, and moved towards the GotaGoGama. Arguably, the Police and the law enforcement authorities had sufficient time to prevent the evidently violent mob from entering the heavily guarded latter site. The presence of Government State Ministers and senior Police officers on the protest grounds while a mob went on assaulting unarmed protesters indicate a degree of complicity in these attacks. Third, the incident of the Rupavahini studios being stormed by some protestors revealed how both the State media as well as those who stormed the channel had a partial attitude towards their side of the story. The storming of the Rupavahini happened in the context of the channel not adequately reporting and seriously downplaying current affairs. However, the protesters too reportedly demanded that only news related to the protests should be telecast.”

Some of the key issues and observations discussed in the above mentioned context pertain to the lack of effective legal mechanisms and frameworks, political agenda and biases of media institutions, casualisation of the media profession, discouraging unionisation within media organisations, safety measures that are available for journalists from the State being problematic, law enforcement agencies’ sensitivity to deal with the media and the safety of journalists needing to improve, journalists lacking adequate training in media safety, the lack of adherence to media ethics and best practices, the fragmentation of institutions regulating the media, and the potential of current institutional reforms leading to the further shrinking of the freedom of expression.

Policy recommendations

Based on the research’s findings, the report presented a number of policy recommendations which it said are for the interest of protecting and promoting the safety of journalists and media persons in Sri Lanka. Establishing an independent commission for the protection and promotion of the freedom of expression in Sri Lanka is one of the foremost policy recommendations, regarding which the report explained: “There are three main stakeholders in the information space, i.e. the Government, the information industry, and citizens who need unbiased information. These stakeholders have different kinds of powers, access, and controls. Historically, Sri Lanka has found it difficult to promote consensus among these stakeholders. An independent commission should be established, which functions as the main platform for the co-regulation of the print, electronic, and social media.” The members of such a co-regulatory body should, as per the report, include nominees from all key stakeholders, while the functions of such a commission would be issuing licences to media stations and the registration of news publications, ensuring the recognition of journalists, ensuring that media identity cards provide more guarantees to safeguard journalists on duty, investigating alleged violence against journalists and providing legal protection to affected journalists including initiating strategic litigation and prosecuting against crimes against journalists, and also establishing co-governance mechanisms for information regulation. Establishing checks and balances to ensure editorial independence was another recommendation. The report noted that alternatively, it is possible to set up an independent mechanism within the existing institutional framework to introduce checks and balances on the editorial conduct of media outlets. Noting that such an evaluation may consider a news outlet’s editorial conduct over a relatively long period of time such as five to 10 years, it further said that the aim of such a review process is to impose penalties and revoke licences if the adequate standards are unmet. Explaining that the collectivisation of labour has been a proven way of upholding the rights of journalists and media workers in a context where the media industry is not an exception in the global trend of increasingly atomising workforces, the report further recommended that employee contracts within media organisations be brought in line with the national labour law, and that journalists’ and media workers’ trade unions evolve to respond to the emerging labour trends better. This, as per the report, includes being more flexible and inclusive of freelancers and part-time journalists. The recommendation to establish a media safety fund was another highlight. Recommending that a media safety fund should be established alongside a sustainable and transparent financing model, the report explained that this endeavour could include the State allocation of funds to a media safety fund and/or passing necessary legislation to tax a portion of the media advertising (including on social media platforms), or on the turnover of media corporations above a certain threshold. The primary function of the proposed media safety fund, it added, is to provide journalists and media workers with insurance, for damages and injuries incurred as occupational hazards. It was further explained: “State budget allocations for the media should be allocated and distributed in an equal and transparent manner. This should take into account the higher youth demographics using social media, so that investments in the media are not skewed. Moreover, support mechanisms for investigative journalists and journalism should be strengthened.” Also recommending to develop a locally adapted safety training for journalists, the report said that some measures to ensure uniform standards of safety in the media industry include the Department of Government Information [DGI] mandating short, locally tailored online courses on media safety and sensitivity training, in the official national languages, in order to obtain official media licences. Licensed journalists can be required to undertake safety and risk awareness and management training modules periodically in order to ensure that they are up-to-date with evolving risks in the media landscape. The online course should be combined with stronger guarantees by the media identity issuing authority (currently the DGI), through inter-agency coordination with the law enforcement authorities and the Mass Media Ministry. To ensure the safety of journalists, it was further recommended to establish a mentoring system within and across media organisations in order to foster a community and shared values on media ethics and safety training, among others, and to encourage access to personal protective equipment for journalists commensurate with the level of risk that they are exposed to, and also to provide victims of assault, such as those with signs of post-traumatic stress disorder and other mental health issues, adequate and sustainable psychosocial support. Among other recommendations were developing a knowledge base on the harassment of journalists, instilling gender sensitivity and inclusivity in media practices and ethics, and supporting law enforcement related sensitivity and inclusivity training.

Bullet points

Local research claims ‘aragalaya’ era harassment against journalists, media professionals show a pressing need to empower, protect and support journalists, media professionals