BAGUIO CITY, Philippines – The Philippines has improved slightly in the 2011 Press Freedom Index, the Reporters sans Frontières (RSF) or Reporters Without Borders said.
Now on its 10th year, RSF is a Brussels-based organization that publishes an annual rating index covering 178 countries worldwide.
Though still reeling from the stigma of the November 2009 Maguindanao massacre where at least 57 were killed including 32 media people, the Philippines ranked 140th in 2011.
A year after the Maguindanao massacre, Philippines dropped to 156th, a tremendous slide from its former ranking at 122nd.
Despite the improvement, the RSF still included the Philippines in its 2011 Press Freedom Index, together with Pakistan and Afghanistan “where violence and impunity persist” while indicating redress over “more repression in Sri Lanka, Vietnam and China.”
In the Philippines, the RSF said, “paramilitary groups and private militias continued to attack media workers.”
The Press Freedom Index this year specified the still lingering issue on the Maguindanao massacre, claiming “the judicial investigation into the Ampatuan massacre made it clear that the response of the authorities was seriously inadequate.”
The New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) earlier listed the Philippines third after Iraq and Somalia in the worldwide list of unsolved murders of journalists in 2011.
Maintaining its third spot since 2010, the Philippines “was adjudged from a 13-country list where journalists are murdered on a recurring basis and governments are unable or unwilling to prosecute the killers,” the CPJ said.
Violence and censorship around Asia
Journalists continued to be exposed to violence in Bangladesh (129th) and Nepal (106th), although less than in the past, the RSF noted, while citing Nepalese journalists were regularly subjected to threats from rival political groups and their supporters.
In Bangladesh, opposition groups and the ruling Awami League took turns attacking and obstructing the press. The Bangladeshi government maintains excessive control over the media and the Internet, the RSF claimed.
RSF cited China (171st) and Vietnam where freedom of information worsened because of authoritarian rule.
“China has a record of having more journalists, bloggers and cyber-dissidents in prison than any other country, stepped up its censorship and propaganda in 2011 and tightened its control of the Internet, particularly the blogosphere,” it said.
The RSF also documented that in Beijing and Shanghai, international correspondents were particular targets of security forces and had to work under the continual threat of expulsion or having their visas withdrawn. “Journalists were prevented from covering most of the events that threatened China’s stability or might have given it a negative image,” the press freedom watchdog said.
Vietnam (172nd), the RSF said, appeared to follow China’s repressive lead and fell seven places. “Politically committed journalists and pro-democracy bloggers were harassed by the authorities while courts continued to invoke state security to hand out prison sentences ranging from two to seven years,” the index claimed.
In Sri Lanka (163rd), the regime of the Rajapakse clan forced the last few opposition journalists to flee the country, RSF said.
Interestingly, the RSF saw Burma (169th) showing signs of beginning to carry out reforms including partial amnesties and a reduction in prior censorship, but it remained largely under the control of an authoritarian government run by former members of the military junta reinvented as civilian politicians. Less than 10 of its journalists remain in prison at the start of 2012.
In North Korea (178th), although news and information was able to move across its borders to a greater extent, no one knows whether this will continue under Kim Jong-un, the son and heir of Kim Jong-il. The dynastic succession, the dominance of the military machine and the government’s desire for power give no grounds for optimism.
‘Good turning bad’
RSF claimed that in 2011, countries which are traditionally good performers did not shine.
With New Zealand’s fall to 13th position, no country in the Asia-Pacific region figured among the top 10 in the index.
Hong Kong (54th), the RSF saw, showed a sharp deterioration in press freedom in 2011 and its ranking fell sharply. Arrests, assaults and harassment worsened working conditions for journalists to an extent not seen previously, a sign of a worrying change in government policy, it said.
In Australia (30th), the media were subjected to investigations and criticism by the authorities, and were denied access to information, while in Japan (22nd), coverage of the tsunami and the Fukushima nuclear accident gave rise to excessive restrictions and exposed the limits of the pluralism of the country’s press.
Other developments
Syria, Bahrain and Yemen got worst-ever rankings owing to crackdowns after these countries’ political upheavals, the RSF said.
“This year’s index sees many changes in the rankings, changes that reflect a year that was incredibly rich in developments, especially in the Arab world.”
RSF also claimed “many media paid dearly for their coverage of democratic aspirations or opposition movements. Control of news and information continued to tempt governments and to be a question of survival for totalitarian and repressive regimes.”
This year, Eritrea, Turkmenistan and North Korea are immediately preceded at the bottom by Syria, Iran and China, three countries that “seem to have lost contact with reality as they have been sucked into an insane spiral of terror,” and by Bahrain and Vietnam, quintessential oppressive regimes, the RSF said in its report.
Other countries such as Uganda and Belarus have also become much more repressive, it added further.
On the other hand, countries like Finland, Norway and the Netherlands still “respect basic freedoms.”
RSF also noted the entry of Cape Verde and Namibia into the top 20, “two African countries where no attempts to obstruct the media were reported in 2011.”
“This serves as a reminder that media independence can only be maintained in strong democracies and that democracy needs media freedom.”
