The Police raid on Newsday and the seizure of hard drive and paraphernalia of reporter Andre Bhagoo has triggered fears of a state crackdown on the Media coming as soon as it has behind the raid on TV6 in the wake of Ian Alleyne’s airing of explicit material that offended sensibilities.
These fears were doggedly probed by CNC3’s reporter in the 7pm news this evening (Thursday) taking Ms. Judy Raymond by surprise when she first found no similarity between the two instances. She soon agreed that the matter may reveal a pattern of some sort.
AG Ramlogan, sensing that the PPG was being targeted immediately distanced it from the police action and called for accounting by the CoP for what seemed selective efficiency by the police in a new case while others remain mired in delays.
Mr. Bhagoo has refused to name his source in a sensitive integrity matter which has now escalated to the suspension of a senior member by the President, which itself may have justified the police action in a fast tracked investigation given the checkered recent history of the IC.
That the Press feels under attack is understandable, but internationally courts have jailed reporters for not revealing sources in sensitive matters. Priests have the right of protecting confessors and doctors must not reveal patient data, and lawyers guard client secrecy. But if we are to take the IC seriously, and particularly in the light of Mrs. Gafoor’s stance, we cannot permit continued stalemate.
The recent SoE may have convinced the police that firm action must be fearless and determined if it is to recover its credibility. It runs definite risks with its new resolve but ought not to be dissuaded from decisiveness. It is now left to the articulate CoP to offer whatever explanations he thinks necessary in the present instant.
A free media is a democratic safeguard, but responsibility is its concomitant duty. Should the Police discover Mr. Bhagoo’s informant, the circumstances may change dramatically.
MFRahman
AG Ramlogan, sensing that the PPG was being targeted immediately distanced it from the police action and called for accounting by the CoP for what seemed selective efficiency by the police in a new case while others remain mired in delays.
Mr. Bhagoo has refused to name his source in a sensitive integrity matter which has now escalated to the suspension of a senior member by the President, which itself may have justified the police action in a fast tracked investigation given the checkered recent history of the IC.
That the Press feels under attack is understandable, but internationally courts have jailed reporters for not revealing sources in sensitive matters. Priests have the right of protecting confessors and doctors must not reveal patient data, and lawyers guard client secrecy. But if we are to take the IC seriously, and particularly in the light of Mrs. Gafoor’s stance, we cannot permit continued stalemate.
The recent SoE may have convinced the police that firm action must be fearless and determined if it is to recover its credibility. It runs definite risks with its new resolve but ought not to be dissuaded from decisiveness. It is now left to the articulate CoP to offer whatever explanations he thinks necessary in the present instant.
A free media is a democratic safeguard, but responsibility is its concomitant duty. Should the Police discover Mr. Bhagoo’s informant, the circumstances may change dramatically.
MFRahman
No comments:
Post a Comment