Key to a culture of human rights is journalism that acts on its social and ethical conscience, writes Nour Farahat* The media, in all its forms, plays a pivotal role in spreading across the various strata of society the culture of human rights. It exercises this role through first internalising human rights principles in its own work; second, by spreading these principles and raising awareness of their importance; third, by exposing human rights violations and trying to prevent their continuance; and fourth, by monitoring and publicising developments in the domestic, regional, and international human rights movements. An analysis of topics covered by the media will quickly reveal that nearly every domain of public and private life is related to human rights. Topics such as education, health, housing, unemployment and the environment all fall under the umbrella of social and economic rights, while other topics like culture, art and literature, scientific progress and technology fall under the rubric of cultural rights. Other topics such as the right to self-determination, the difference between terrorism and the legitimate right of a people to resist occupation, the freedom to form political parties and associations, freedom of thought and expression, freedom of the press, political participation issues, and the right to a fair trial, etc, all fall under civil and political rights. Hence, practically all of the topics covered by the media belong to the domain of human rights in one way or another. To effectively play its role in the spread of human rights principles, the press must itself enjoy its basic rights within a free and democratic social order. Obviously, a press that is muzzled and lacking in freedom will not be capable of preaching the values of freedom and basic human rights, since, as the Arabic saying goes, "You cannot give that which you don't have"! To preach freedom, the press must be free. Institutions lacking in freedom can only preach tyranny. Laws governing the press must provide sufficient guarantees for its freedom and independence to allow it to defend itself in the face of official directives. The appropriateness of national press laws must be judged according to the extent to which they respect the freedom of the press. Freedom of opinion and expression in general, and press freedom in particular, are constitutionally protected in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant for Civil and Political Rights (Articles 19 in both documents), which have been ratified by Egypt. These rights are subject to certain limitations in the International Covenant, namely that the press should respect the rights and reputations of others and take into consideration issues related to national security, public order and public health, and public morality. Article 20 of the International Covenant includes, in addition, legal limits on such rights where it says, "1) Propagation for war must be forbidden by law; 2) all propagation of national, ethnic, or religious hate that would constitute a call for discrimination and violence should be forbidden by law." At the national level, the Egyptian constitution guarantees freedom of opinion and expression and freedom of the press. Furthermore, it considers the press to be one of the powers of the state. Article 47 of the constitution stipulates that freedom of opinion is guaranteed and that any individual has the right to express his opinion orally, in writing, through art, or in any form of expression, within the confines of the law. It also notes that self-criticism and positive criticism are a guarantee of the health of the nation. Furthermore, Article 48 in the constitution states that "freedom of the press, of printing, of publication and of media are guaranteed and censorship is forbidden, as are threats or actual closure and stoppage through administrative action." These guarantees notwithstanding, we find Egyptian press and publication laws, as well as other laws, imposing various restrictions on the freedom of opinion and expression, including of course, freedom of the press. Some of these restrictions are acceptable according to international norms, while others are considered violations of international standards of freedom of opinion and expression. Despite all the above, it remains the duty of the press to strive to spread the culture of human rights and to expose human rights violations. Some researchers have attempted to measure the degree of freedom enjoyed by the Arab press to spread the culture of human rights. They have found that this freedom is greater when it deals with international issues, steering away from domestic issues. It also becomes greater as parliamentary elections get closer. Furthermore, the written word enjoys more freedom than other media forms such as television and radio. Other studies examined the factors affecting the role of the press in spreading human rights values by focusing on the issue of the ownership of newspapers and the nature of the issues being discussed. Thus newspapers owned by the state are expected to be less inclined to deal with human rights issues than partisan or independent newspapers. Here it must be noted that the visual and radio media in Arab countries is mostly owned by the state, except for a few private television channels that have emerged recently; while the ownership of newspapers is more diverse with some being state owned, some being owned by political parties, and still others by joint-stock companies, or cooperatives. In terms of editorial orientation, they could be broadly classified as national, partisan, or independent. The main feature of the way the official media deals with the issue of human rights is its selectivity. Thus, it highlights criticism directed at Arab regimes with which official relations are tense and either totally ignores any criticism directed at domestic conditions or attacks the sources of such criticism while neglecting to provide the reader with an objective presentation of the criticism itself. As for the reports of domestic human rights organisations, these are either totally ignored or are viciously attacked as acts of treason or, at a minimum, as coming from organisations that are agents of the West. The human rights discourse in the "national" media has certain characteristics. The first is that this discourse is manipulated in the service of official political objectives. For example, we find statements of human rights organisations that condemn terrorist acts being highlighted while information on the torture and abuse of prisoners is ignored. Furthermore, human rights organisations that expose violations are constantly rubbished while those that support official policies are celebrated and placed in the limelight. The publication of human rights violations, particularly those touching political issues, in official media is a sensitive task. However, this sensitivity is overcome by the fact that violations are condemned as a matter of principle through statements by government officials who continuously announce their vigilance in the pursuit of perpetrators of human rights abuses and extra- legal behaviour. It is essential that accusations of violations are documented and backed by evidence leaving no doubt as to their veracity. Certain human rights must be given priority in the national discourse. Some of the most important of these are the rights of those sectors of society that, for historical, economic or cultural reasons have been the objects of discrimination or of some form or other of social injustice -- for example, the rights of women and children. It must be acknowledged that the media does provide special coverage for issues related to women and children. However, the manner with which these issues are dealt remains deficient at a minimum and sometimes is even biased against the interests of these groups. Thus we find that most of the coverage of women's issues is focused on the art of cooking, fashion, health and beauty, while sections devoted to children's issues focus on storytelling that often stress superstition and belief in the supernatural. What is required, is to deal with women's and children's issues from a rights perspective by highlighting the rights and duties of women according to international instruments, the most important of which is the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). The rights of the accused and the right to a fair trial, as well as other legal rights, are also high priorities. The press must play its role in raising awareness of these rights, whether in its coverage of specific incidents or in a direct manner by reporting critically on the administration of justice. These are some quick points on the role of the press in spreading human rights principles. Implementation of these recommendations would help spread the values of both rights and duties without which we cannot hope to build a just society or good citizens. At the end of the day, it all depends on the conscience of individual journalists and their belief in the sanctity of their role in advancing enlightenment and social progress. * The writer is professor of law at Zagazig University and a UN human rights consultant. The article was written in Arabic and translated by Samia Farid Shihata.
