Findings and recommendations of 9th June, 2020 of the Independent Media Commission (IMC), the country’s media regulator against nightwatch Newspaper will be contested in court.
The findings were a direct product of a Wednesday 22nd April, 2020 publication titled: “GIRLFRIENDS AS PRESS ATTACHES?”
“During its deliberations, the committee found that the article breached the accuracy provision in the IMC Code of Practice.
The board of IMC at its meeting held on Wednesday 3rd, 2020 fully endorsed the recommendations of the committee as follows:
That a fine of Le1, 000, 000 be levied in accordance with principle 3 of the IMC Media Code of Practice dealing with accuracy.
That a fine of 5,000,000 be levied for discrimination against women…”
The IMC findings, to a large extent, are malicious and unfair to the core. nightwatch opines that it is a ploy to shut down a newspaper known for its critical voice on issues of public interest.
The malicious and unfair nature of the adverse findings against the newspaper could be seen in the provisions of the Media Code of Practice and the strained relationship between the nightwatch Newspaper and the IMC Chairman, George Koyama.
The IMC findings indicate that owing to the publication, the accuracy provision in the media Code of Practice was breached.
It is incontrovertible that PRINCIPLE-1 of the Code provides for the breach. It reads:
“Newspapers and periodicals must take care not to publish inaccurate, misleading or distorted materials including pictures…”
The IMC findings failed to cite PRINCIPLE-1 which talks about the breach, and jumps to PRINCIPLE-3 which provides for the fine.
In the opinion of the newspaper, it is PRINCIPLE-1 that lays the foundation for PRINCIPLE-3. The IMC ought to have properly analysed the former to show how it was breached by the newspaper before coming to the latter.
Thus, the first finding and recommendation of the IMC is Vague, and its vagueness warrants the appeal.
nightwatch Newspaper also views illegal, the second part of the findings that levies a fine of Le 5,000,000.
The fine is premised on PRINCIPLES 25 and 26 of the Media Code of Practice which reads:
“The press must avoid prejudicial or pejorative reference to a person’s colour, ethnicity, sex or individual lifestyle…”
PRINCIPLE-26 says: “It must avoid publishing details of a person’s religion, ethnicity, individual lifestyle…”
It is the firm conviction of the newspaper management that the publication does not discriminate the female journalists on the basis of their sexual orientation.
It raises a question only about the affiliation of the female journalists with the government as this is the first time the country witnessed the appointment of such a huge number of female media practitioners as press attaches.
Most importantly, the principles do not provide that the said sum of money that should be a fine on any newspaper for the breach.
Almost invariably, instances of a strained relationship between nightwatch and the IMC Chairman, George Koyama are explored.
This article makes reference to an article published by Mr Koyama titled: “NIGHTWATCH NEWSPAPER NEARS ITS WATERLOO.”
In that article, the IMC Chair tacitly threatened to shut down nighwatch newspaper in a rhetorical question he posed: “Do you know Mr Author that, by your curse on our President’s life, you have bought yourself a one-way ticket to obscurity and you may as well kiss your future journalism good-bye?”
The author, Mr Koyama was responding to a statement in the same gossip column that the President’s aeroplane would one day collide with a flying saucer.
Mr Koyama also alleged, in the article, that the writer of the statement in the gossip column is an “APC stooge masquerading as an objective and trained journalist.”
The readership can see the other instances in the article published verbatim in this newspaper.
The aforementioned instances negatively impute on the neutrality of the IMC chair towards nightwatch Newspaper.
As a result, the newspaper finds it difficult to accept the IMC findings owing to Mr Koyama’s stance against the newspaper.
This article would like to make reference to the removal from the Special Court for Sierra Leone (SCSL), one of the world’s finest legal luminaries, Professor Geoffrey Robertson.
Prof. Robertson was dismissed as President of SCSL and President of Appeals Chamber of the court when it was discovered that he wrote a book against the Revolutionary United Front (RUFP).
The book titled: ‘DOGS OF WAR’ made direct reference to the atrocious crimes the RUFP committed against the people of Sierra Leone.
The RUFP being one of the groups that was arraigned before the court petitioned Prof Robertson’s presence in the panel through one of its lawyers.
Drawing on the Prof. Robertson experience, George Koyama’s presence in the committee that came up with the findings negates the IMC decision.