By Allieu Sahid Tunkara
Informing society and holding power to account is the traditional function of a journalist.
In the execution of this duty, the journalist is expected to show patriotism which means identifying with the society he serves because love for country reigns supreme.
Political scientists have conceptualised ‘patriotism’ with ‘citizenship.’ The two terms which are viewed synonymous means a strong emotional awareness of belonging to a nation-state backed up with the ability to put one’s safety at stake when situation calls for it.
In every society, the journalist holds the torchlight and point at any issue or vice in society, most times, to inform and generate the required response from authorities in terms of policy and action.
This leads to the journalistic maxim: “Journalists report people to the government and same time report government to the people.”
Media pundits have argued that the press takes the form and colouration of any society in which it operates because journalists are part of society.
The Journalistic philosophy can be explained to mean that journalists in a democratic order enjoys a degree of liberty that is absent in totalitarian states.
The duty to inform society seems not legally but morally compelling considering the academic lenses which journalism have come to be viewed by Media Scholars.
As the concept of human rights gains foothold in contemporary societies, various communication scholars have made a strong case in academic community that pressmen must prioritise reportage of serious human rights abuses and violations.
Professor Allan Thompson’s work on ‘Responsibility to Report’ places obligations on journalists to inform societies about grave human rights abuse that takes place in any part of the world.
Through quality reporting on human rights violations, Prof. Thompson argues, action towards preventing a recurrence would be mobilised.
Prof Thompson’s work was taken one step further by Dr Ibrahim Seaga Shaw’s work on ‘Human Rights Journalism.’
Dr Shaw who heads the country’s Right to Access Information Commission (RAIC) was a lecturer in Media and Politics at the Northumbria University in the United Kingdom.
Shaw’s work on human rights presents him as a man of passion to mobilise international response to situations of deteriorating human rights conditions.
The work, to some extent, is quite critical of Western frames of ‘us’ and ‘them.’ The frames means conflictual situations in some parts of the world should be handled by themselves and not by the West.
Dr Shaw’s thematic argument in the article is that if acts of physical violence are perpetrated to some weak and vulnerable groups either by state or non-state actors, the brutal acts must be brought to the world’s attention for prompt and decisive action.
Another work that lends credence to the philosophical postulations of the two scholars is that of Martin Bell’s ‘Journalism of Attachment.’
Bell’s concept means in situations where the rights of persons are recklessly abused or violated especially the right to life, journalists must attach themselves to the situation.
Attachment, within the context of Bell’s notion, connotes the moral responsibility of journalists to report the violations so that the authorities would know what is happening and respond accordingly.
Martin Bell’s philosophy of attachment directly contrasts with that of Gaye Tuchman’s notion of detached Journalism in his work on ‘Objectivity: A Strategic Ritual.’
A white thread runs through the arguments of the scholars depicting that through quality reportage on issues of human rights abuses and violations, discussions and debates would emerge for solutions.
The debates and discussions through human rights reportage resonate with the Habermas conception of the ‘Public Sphere’ and John Milton’s ‘Free ‘Market Place of Ideas.’
The twin journalistic concepts pinpoint that ideas must be allowed to clash in an open encounter so that the truth can emerge.
To contextualise the scholars’ philosophical assertions in the Sierra Leone situation, it is safe to say the country takes pride in press freedom accompanied by responsibility.
The media environment characterises a combination of press freedom and responsibility.
Press freedom is seen in two provisions: Sections 11 and 25 of the Constitution of Sierra Leone, 1991.
The former confers on the media the liberty to inform society and hold power to account while the latter recognises the right to disseminate information, ideas and opinions and to receive same .
Section 11 says the press, radio and television shall, at all times, be free to uphold the fundamental objectives contained in this constitution and highlight the responsibility and accountability of government to the people.
Section 25 says no one shall be hindered in the enjoyment of his right to freedom of expression. It also includes the right to own, establish and operate any medium for the dissemination of information, ideas and opinions.
The social responsibility side is seen in section 25 (2) of the same constitution which obliges the state, through enactment, to regulate media publications in the interest of defence, public order, safety, morality and health.
The enactment of the Public Order Act especially part-5 of 1965 and the Right to Access Information Act, 2013 are products of section 25 (2).
Nonetheless, the restrictive powers of the statutes do not, in no way, stifle press freedom in democratic Sierra Leone, but checkmates reckless journalism.
However, media reportage on the chaos in the North-eastern headquarters of Makeni which led to the deaths of youths is in line with media philosophies, principles and rules.
The reportage is to inform authorities about what was going on in Makeni City so that they can respond either proactively or retroactively.
Since proactive response is now out of the question, a reactive response cannot be ruled out as the Independent Police complaints Board (IPCB) is reportedly investigating the incidents.
The IPCB investigations could hardly be divorced from contemporaneous media publications as well as calls from Amnesty international, the global human rights watchdog and Network Movement for Justice and Development.
The Public waits to see the outcome of the IPCB investigations.