The original statement affirmed a 1992 agreement recognizing the region's development partners
Originally published on Global Voices
Pacific leaders pose for a group photo during their 2024 meeting in Tonga. Source: Facebook page of PM Press of Tonga
The communique of the 2024 meeting of leaders of the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) was amended after a Chinese diplomat pointed out that the inclusion of “Taiwan” in the document was a “mistake.”
The PIF is composed of 18 members and holds an annual meeting attended by heads of states across the Pacific. Three members of PIF continue to maintain diplomatic relations with Taiwan: The Marshall Islands, Palau, and Tuvalu.
The annual PIF meetings are also attended by “dialogue partners” such as China, the United States, Japan, Canada, and the European Union. Taiwan has been participating in the event as a “development partner” since 1993.
After being defeated by the Communist Party of China (CPC) during the Chinese civil war in 1949, the ruling Kuomintang Party of Republic of China (ROC), escaped to Taiwan and established the exiled government there. The ROC was the representative of China in the United Nations until 1971. In recent years, China has ramped up diplomatic pressure by forcing other countries and international organizations to cut ties with Taiwan.
This year’s PIF meeting was held in Tonga, guided by the theme of “reaffirming the importance of integrated resilience,” especially in the areas of climate change and environmental degradation. For several days, the PIF became a venue for participants to articulate their commitment to work together to address the challenges posed by climate change in the region and the need to develop regional cooperation in developing a stronger and sustainable economy.
China's Ambassador to the Pacific, Qian Bo, was able to speak at the meeting where he declared his country’s adherence “to the path of peaceful development” while “advocating an equal and orderly multipolar world and a universally beneficial and inclusive economic globalization.” The diplomat also enumerated China’s Belt and Road landmark projects in the region.
Taiwan’s Deputy Foreign Minister, Tien Chung-kwang, also traveled to Tonga but only met their three allies in the region. His visit was also closely monitored by China.
“Any attempt by the Taiwan authorities to brush up their sense of presence by rubbing shoulders with the forum can only be self-deceptive,” said China's foreign ministry spokesman, Lin Jian, at a regular press briefing in Beijing.
Taiwan’s status as a development partner was initially mentioned in the PIF communique released on August 30th. Section 66 of the communique states the following:
Relations with Taiwan/Republic of China: 66. Leaders reaffirmed the 1992 Leaders decision on relations with Taiwan/Republic of China.
Chinese Ambassador Qian Bo immediately protested and asserted that this section was a “surprising mistake” that needed to be corrected.
“The key issue is the fact that Taiwan is part of China, and Taiwan will certainly not be the development dialogue partner for the PIF,” he added.
Later, the PIF uploaded a new document on its website without any reference to Taiwan. This tweet compares the two documents:
Line affirming Taiwan's status in the Pacific Islands Forum has been entirely removed from the latest version of the Communique (originally released yesterday), after China's Ambassador to the Pacific Qian Bo demanded the PIF to “correct” the “surprising mistake”. pic.twitter.com/erkTaDwHBf
— Sophie Mak (@SophieMak1) August 30, 2024
The former PIF chair, Cook Islands Prime Minister Mark Brown, was heard reassuring the Chinese diplomat about removing something.
“We’ll remove it,” China/Taiwan PIF communique bungle caught on camera.@stephendziedzic @TNCPacific @kelvinfiji https://t.co/9sWeLGHG8a pic.twitter.com/Iy1S1RRvpi
— Lydia Lewis (@LydiaLewisRNZ) September 1, 2024
Taiwan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs criticized China's “intervention” on the matter.
Taiwan condemns China’s rude and unreasonable intervention and irrational behavior that undermines regional peace and stability and calls on all like-minded countries to pay close attention to China’s actions.
Asked by the media, Massey University associate professor in security studies Anna Powles noted that the issue reflects China’s intent to wield stronger influence in the region.
China’s ability to successfully pressure the Forum to remove Section 66 is a clear wedge strategy with the intention to disrupt and divide.
It sends a clear message to the Forum and Taiwan’s remaining Pacific allies that China wields significant influence at the potential expense of regional unity.
Kiribati's Education Minister Alexander Teabo, who was also in Tonga, expressed disappointment over the mistake. He also bemoaned that the Taiwan-China issue is being pushed as an agenda in the PIF. “Taiwan and China have their own internal politics…and now pushing it into the forum, we think that it is going to be sort of trying to push their way into our forum family,” he said in a media interview.
Journalist Stephen Dziedzic advised the PIF secretariat to properly explain the snafu over the communique because otherwise, “it leaves a troubling impression it simply caved to pressure from the PRC [China].”
Despite the incident, the Taiwanese government insisted that its status remains unchanged and that it even signed a cooperation agreement with the PIF to support the latter’s secretariat work until 2027.
Solomon Islands, which had diplomatic relations with Taiwan until 2019, proposed a re-evaluation of Taiwan as a “development partner” but this was not pursued by PIF participants. The Solomon Islands will host the PIF meeting next year.
]]>David Robie has been writing about the Pacific for over five decades
Originally published on Global Voices
Dr. David Robie. Image: Asia Pacific Media Network, used with permission
Global Voices interviewed veteran writer and educator David Robie who discussed the state of Pacific media, journalism education, and the role of the press in addressing decolonization and the climate crisis.
Professor Robie is among this year’s New Zealand Order of Merit awardees and is on the King’s Birthday Honours list for his “services to journalism and Asia-Pacific media education.”
His career in journalism has spanned five decades. He was the founding editor of the Pacific Journalism Review journal in 1994 and in 1996 he established the Pacific Media Watch, a media rights watchdog group. He was head of the journalism department at the University of Papua New Guinea from 1993–1997 and at the University of the South Pacific from 1998–2002. While teaching at the Auckland University of Technology, he founded the Pacific Media Centre in 2007.
He has authored 10 books on Asia-Pacific media and politics. He received the 1985 Media Peace Prize for his coverage of the Rainbow Warrior bombing and the French and American nuclear testing. In 2015, he was given the Asian Media Information and Communication Centre (AMIC) Asian Communication Award in Dubai. Global Voices interviewed him about the challenges faced by journalists in the Pacific and his illustrious career. This interview has been edited for length and clarity.
Mong Palatino (MP): What are the main challenges faced by the media in the region?
David Robie (DR): Corruption, viability, and credibility — the corruption among politicians and influence on journalists, the viability of weak business models and small media enterprises, and weakening credibility. After many years of developing a reasonably independent Pacific media in many countries in the region with courageous and independent journalists in leadership roles, many media groups are becoming susceptible to growing geopolitical rivalry between powerful players in the region, particularly China, which is steadily increasing its influence on the region’s media — especially in Solomon Islands — not just in development aid.
However, the United States, Australia and France are also stepping up their Pacific media and journalism training influences in the region as part of “Indo-Pacific” strategies that are really all about countering Chinese influence.
Indonesia is also becoming an influence in the media in the region, for other reasons. Jakarta is in the middle of a massive “hearts and minds” strategy in the Pacific, mainly through the media and diplomacy, in an attempt to blunt the widespread “people’s” sentiment in support of West Papuan aspirations for self-determination and eventual independence.
MP: What should be prioritized in improving journalism education in the region?
DR: The university-based journalism schools, such as at the University of the South Pacific in Fiji, are best placed to improve foundation journalism skills and education, and also to encourage life-long learning for journalists. More funding would be more beneficial channelled through the universities for more advanced courses, and not just through short-course industry training. I can say that because I have been through the mill both ways — 50 years as a journalist starting off in the “school of hard knocks” in many countries, including almost 30 years running journalism courses and pioneering several award-winning student journalist publications. However, it is important to retain media independence and not allow funding NGOs to dictate policies.
MP: How can Pacific journalists best fulfill their role in highlighting Pacific stories, especially the impact of the climate crisis?
DR: The best strategy is collaboration with international partners that have resources and expertise in climate crisis, such as the Earth Journalism Network to give a global stage for their issues and concerns. When I was still running the Pacific Media Centre, we had a high profile Pacific climate journalism Bearing Witness project where students made many successful multimedia reports and award-winning commentaries. An example is this one on YouTube: Banabans of Rabi: A Story of Survival
MP: What should the international community focus on when reporting about the Pacific?
]]>DR: It is important for media to monitor the Indo-Pacific rivalries, but to also keep them in perspective — so-called ”security” is nowhere as important to Pacific countries as it is to its Western neighbours and China. It is important for the international community to keep an eye on the ball about what is important to the Pacific, which is ‘development’ and ‘climate crisis’ and why China has an edge in some countries at the moment. Australia and, to a lesser extent, New Zealand have dropped the ball in recent years, and are tying to regain lost ground, but concentrating too much on ‘security’. Listen to the Pacific voices.
There should be more international reporting about the ‘hidden stories’ of the Pacific such as the unresolved decolonisation issues — Kanaky New Caledonia, ‘French’ Polynesia (Mā'ohi Nui), both from France; and West Papua from Indonesia. West Papua, in particular, is virtually ignored by Western media in spite of the ongoing serious human rights violations. This is unconscionable.
Journalists raised awareness about media suppression in the Pacific
Originally published on Global Voices
Journalists discuss the state of media in the Solomon Islands. Screenshot from the YouTube video of MASI: Media Association of Solomon Islands posted in May 2022. Fair use.
Media groups, heads of state, and free speech advocates across the Pacific marked World Press Freedom Day (WPFD) on May 3, by emphasizing the role of upholding the right to information in addressing the impact of the climate crisis in the region.
The theme of WPFD this year, “A Press for the Planet: Journalism in the Face of the Environmental Crisis,” resonates with the work being done by media groups in the Pacific. The statement of the Palau Media Council reflects the WPFD theme:
A free press is vital to informing our communities about the environmental challenges we face and holding all accountable for protecting our precious environment.
We celebrate the courageous work of journalists and recommit ourselves to defending press freedom, ensuring a strong and independent media that serves the people of Palau.
Moving forward, we pledge to prioritize climate crisis stories, ensuring they take center stage in our coverage. We will amplify important voices advocating for environmental protection.
Robert Iroga, chair of the regional media watchdog Pacific Freedom Forum, underscored the need for media coverage and inclusion of Pacific journalists at global climate conferences.
If there is work to be done by journalists in the Pacific, it is to urge and encourage global awareness of climate change's impacts and hold wealthy polluters accountable.
Pacific Islands News Association President Kora Nou asserted that journalists should have an active role in implementing initiatives that seek to address the harsh impact of climate change.
Journalists must be included in projects not merely as observers but as active participants, providing independent and objective coverage that uncovers the truth, expose wrongdoing, and amplify the voices of marginalised communities.
Fiji Media Association General Secretary Stanley Simpson has a reminder for fellow journalists.
Ethics must guide our industry; our code of ethics must guide us. We must serve the people with integrity; our articles must have integrity, balance, fairness, and accuracy.
The Media Association of Solomon Islands (MASI), in partnership with the @bbcmediaaction, held a breakfast event today at Heritage Park Hotel to commemorate the World Press Freedom Day 2024. Thanks to all our distinguished guests for availing your time to commemorate this event. pic.twitter.com/XXsx1ifXFl
— MASI (@solsmasi) May 3, 2024
Media groups also highlighted the various challenges they face in fulfilling their work. Some countries like Fiji saw an improvement in their media landscape after the parliament annulled repressive media laws; but there are also countries like Papua New Guinea where journalists are being threatened with stricter media regulations. Meanwhile, a “word war” recently created tension between some media outlets and a minister in New Zealand’s new government.
Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance Federal President Karen Percy cited the weaponization of laws that undermine the work of media in Australia:
When whistleblowers are prosecuted for revealing wrongdoing by governments and corporations; when defamation is weaponised to prevent scrutiny; when information that should be publicly available is inaccessible or wrongly marked top secret; and when the basic role of journalism is criminalised on ‘national security grounds’ – then it is the public who loses out.
In the French overseas territory New Caledonia, a union conducted a sit-in protest in solidarity with Kanak Indigenous journalist Thérèse Waia who was criticized by pro-France forces for her reporting on pro-independence protests. Sonia Togna of New Caledonia’s Union of Francophone Women in Oceania said in a media interview:
]]>We are here to sound the alarm bell and to remind our leaders not to cross the line regarding freedom of expression and freedom to exercise the profession of journalism in New Caledonia.
Pacific voices react to China's rising influence in the region
Originally published on Global Voices
The Pacific games stadium one of the projects China is helping to build in the Solomon Islands. Screenshot from video of Four Corners, ABC
China has rolled out its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) in the Pacific region after securing the support of at least ten nations.
The BRI expansion in the Pacific has inflamed geopolitical rivalries and generated mixed reactions in Pacific communities.
Over the past year, Global Voices published several reports that reflect frames and narratives related to the impact of BRI projects in the Pacific.
A key narrative promoted by Chinese officials and their supporters is to highlight that China is a friend of the Pacific. In statements, speeches, and press releases issued by Chinese diplomats, they enumerated the ongoing and future projects that China is funding across the region. BRI projects range from municipal markets and roads to stadiums and sports facilities. There has also been an increasing reference to green development as Chinese officials point out that BRI is a “win-win cooperation” for both China and the Pacific in sustainable development.
However, it is unclear whether the financing for the BRI projects is through loans or aid grants. The statements of officials also do not mention how BRI projects in the Pacific can boost China’s economy and influence as a rising superpower.
An independent study described the strategic role of the Pacific BRI as a “critical air freight hub” connecting China with Central and South America.
Another central narrative promoted by Chinese officials is the claim that China is different from Western superpowers. They often argue that China has no ulterior motives in expanding its economic and diplomatic presence in the region. They insist that China is a benevolent superpower, unlike other big nations in the Pacific like the United States and Australia. An example of this narrative is articulated by Chinese diplomat Li Ming:
China has no selfish interests, and does not seek ‘spheres of influence’ or use bully and coercion. China will always be a constructive force for peace and development.
When China’s Foreign Minister Wang Yi toured the Pacific in May, the Chinese government underscored that it will treat Pacific countries as equal partners in its BRI endeavors:
Wang Yi stressed that Pacific Island Countries are sovereign and independent states and are not anyone's “backyard”; both countries have the right to make their own choices, not being subordinate to others.
The leaked security pact between China and the Solomon Islands alarmed the United States and Australia as they warned against a possible military buildup in the region. China has denied that it plans to establish a military base in the Solomon Islands as it dismissed the concern as part of “Western threats and hysterical attacks” aimed at amplifying “anti-China noises.”
Simmering local and international tensions
Wang’s tour highlighted the simmering anxiety over the increasing presence of China in the Pacific. For example, local residents and stakeholders were able to express their fear that China’s model of media censorship will be adopted in the Pacific.
Local journalists raised this issue when they were prevented from directly asking Wang during his 2022 visit to the Solomon Islands, Kiribati, Samoa, and Fiji. Journalists in the Solomon Islands have even called for a boycott. But Timor-Leste journalists pushed back and pressured their government to respect the media’s right to engage with officials, including Wang.
It was not just the refusal to meet the press that triggered the concern about China’s role in undermining media freedom but also the lack of transparency and information about the BRI projects. Locals are wary about the details of the projects, including the extent of subsidies and conditions offered by the Chinese government.
The secrecy surrounding some of these agreements, especially on matters concerning security, has elicited fear among some local citizens that China’s BRI might drive other superpowers to enhance their security cooperation with Pacific governments. In other words, China’s Pacific expansion could militarize the region.
This is evident in the Solomon Islands, where China actively trained the local police force and donated replica guns. This led Australia to offer guns and security vehicles to the Solomon Islands government. Not to be outdone, China provided water cannon vehicles while arranging a martial arts demonstration during the turnover ceremonies. Local analysts and the opposition criticized the donations and warned against turning the country into a “gun state.”
Meanwhile, the United States has renewed its partnership with Pacific countries which observers have noted is intended to deflect China’s rising influence in the region.
Despite China’s assurance that it will not interfere with the affairs of Pacific nations, it has been accused of disrupting regional unity. Kiribati’s decision to leave the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) in July 2022 is supposedly related to a dispute over leadership. But an opposition leader believes that China has a role in this decision: “China wants to isolate us.”
Aside from the Solomon Islands, Kiribati is among the Pacific countries which broke ties with Taiwan and recognized the Beijing government. Kiribati is also a recipient of Chinese investments and BRI projects. China has rejected the accusation that it caused Kiribati’s departure from the PIF, but it reflects how the BRI and other new initiatives could easily trigger suspicions about the real motives of the Chinese government.
China’s Pacific push is expected to continue into 2023, with the BRI as its major economic and diplomatic tool. This will certainly continue to draw a strong response from other superpowers in the region. But based on what Global Voices covered over the past year, the real challenge for China will be addressing local resistance and convincing Pacific communities that its presence will improve the region’s present and future development.
]]>Police received new rifles, water cannons, and martial arts training
Originally published on Global Voices
Australia donated 13 vehicles and 60 short barrel rifles to the Solomon Islands police. Photo from press statement published on the website of the Solomon Islands government
As global superpowers vie for influence in the Pacific, the various types of assistance given by Australia and China to the Solomon Islands police have elicited questions and concern about their long-term geopolitical impact. Some citizens are worried that the trend toward “militarization” could turn the Solomon Islands into a “gun state.”
Under the Manasseh Sogavare government, the Solomon Islands broke diplomatic ties with Taiwan in 2019. Since then, China has boosted its aid and investments in the archipelago as it vowed to foster closer ties with the Solomon Islands.
Early this year, a leaked security pact between the two countries raised alarm about its destabilizing impact in the region. Solomon Islands Prime Minister Sogavare has repeatedly denied that the security partnership will lead to the installation of a Chinese military base in the islands. He insisted that China only offered to help in the training of the local police force.
Solomon Islands sent police officers to China to undergo training, which involved the teaching of martial arts. This was reported by Global Times, a state-run news website. Zhang Guangbao, who is the leader of the China Police Liaison Team to the Solomon Islands, described the martial arts training:
We combined martial arts and grappling, and our local colleagues were very interested in it, because they of course all know Bruce Lee and Jackie Chan. We taught them martial arts moves which they had never seen before.
Policemen of Solomon Islands perform Chinese martial arts after having been trained by Chinese police team. pic.twitter.com/bSuqq3GHdp
— Xiao Yewen肖业文 (@XiaoYewen) July 4, 2022
China also sent replica guns to the Solomon Islands as part of its training assistance.
During the first week of November, the Solomon Islands received numerous police donations from Australia and China. Australia donated 60 Daniel’s Defense MK18 short Barrel Rifles and 13 police vehicles. Two days later, China donated 20 police vehicles, 30 motorcycles and two water cannon vehicles. China even presented a martial arts demonstration during the handover ceremony:
A brief martial arts demonstration 5/ pic.twitter.com/Fyq1fVc8oL
— Stephen Dziedzic (@stephendziedzic) November 4, 2022
Opposition leader Matthew Wale noted that Australia and China are trying to outcompete each other through the militaristic donations:
Sucking up to Soga & trying to out-compete China! For use where & when? https://t.co/nB4NjOYBQ4
— Matthew C Wale (@MatthewCWale) November 2, 2022
He believes this does not benefit the country in the long run:
It is clear Australia is anxious that if they do not supply guns then China will. Geopolitical interests has surpassed national interest in this country and it is a sad state of affairs.
Solomon Islands Opposition leader slams Australia's move to hand 60 semi-automatic rifles to the RSIPF. He says the country does not need to be “militarised” and says Australia is being driven by “anxiety” over China's growing police cooperation program in SI pic.twitter.com/v4xPoJ0goU
— Stephen Dziedzic (@stephendziedzic) November 2, 2022
Prime Minister Sogavare argued the donations will enhance the capacity of the police:
To those who view the enhancement of our Police Force, in a negative lens, I wish to appeal to you, to note that it is the responsibility of the [police] to serve and protect the lives, welfare, liberty and property of all individuals in this country. To be unable to deliver on this mandate is a poor indication of a country’s own security capacity, as a Sovereign and Independent Country. We must have that capacity and not depend on others.
He added that a strong police force will be able to protect the country from threats:
Law and order is an enabler for development, and it is important that as a Sovereign State, we are able to better protect ourselves, deliver on our security mandates, and confront threats when it looms.
Some disagreed. Journalist Robert Iroga urged the government to focus on other aspects of governance as he warned against the possible negative consequences of arming the police with assault weapons:
It is not the power of one’s guns that determine a good government. Rather, it is the ability of a government to deliver opportunities and better livelihood to its people.
Perhaps for donors, Solomon Islands is a pawn in the broader geopolitical competition: one provides Kung Fu training and replica guns and the other tries out-compete with real assault weapons. In these times of hyper-geopolitical competition, the arming of police forces with assault weapons could result in dangerous outcomes in the future.
Journalist Dorothy Wickham said the donation will entail additional expenses for the government:
My god! Who will pay for all the fuel and maintenance of these police vehicles and weapons. The police have many vehicles sitting idle because there is no budget allocation to fix them. And can they quarantee the safe keeping of these weapons when under pressure?
— Dorothy Wickham (@melanesianius) November 3, 2022
She is also worried about how the intense rivalry in the Pacific could turn her country into a “gun state”:
]]>Australia and China must not turn my country into a gun state again
, we have been down this road before. Only 1,700 officers for whole country and you arm them! Increase community policing not arm them
…or we will be all sorry in the near future!
— Dorothy Wickham (@melanesianius) November 2, 2022
The Prime Minister said ABC's report smacks of racism
Originally published on Global Voices
The Pacific games stadium one of the projects China is helping to build in the Solomon Islands. Screenshot from video of Four Corners, ABC
The government of the Solomon Islands has warned that journalists who are “disrespectful” will not be allowed entry into the country.
On August 24, the Office of Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare criticized the Four Corners program of the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) for its video episode titled “Pacific Capture: How Chinese money is buying the Solomons,” which tackles the rising influence of the Beijing government in the Solomon Islands.
…title suggests to the unsuspecting mind that Solomon Islands is for sale. ABC with its vast viewership in the region had chosen to parade its anti-China attitude using Solomon Islands as its springboard to cause geopolitical fear and uncertainty in the region.
The Sogavare government has developed closer ties with China after ceasing its diplomatic relations with Taiwan in 2019. It welcomed and promoted the expansion of Chinese aid and investments over the last three years. In March, a leaked security pact between the two countries sparked regional controversy and elicited strong reactions from other Pacific powers such as Australia and the United States. Sogavare has consistently denied that a Chinese military facility will be established in the Solomon Islands.
The prime minister’s statement accused ABC of spreading misinformation:
We will not allow bad press to grow seeds of disharmony in a country that is going through its nation building process.
Media freedom must not be used to undermine a state’s stability based on misinformation and biased reporting.
It added that the ABC reporting smacks of racism. These accusations may be used as a basis to block ABC reporters and other foreign journalists who are behaving the same way from entering the country.
ABC is trying to tell the Solomon Islands people that because the Government of Solomon Islands is opening up to partners who are not, in the opinion of ABC, white and does not operate a democratic system it is wrong, unfit and corrupt. This is racial profiling and at best promotes racism and racial stereotyping.
When you chose to come to our Pacific Islands, be respectful, be courteous and accord the appropriate protocols.
Such organizations or journalist who possess such qualities will not be allowed to enter Solomon Islands and other Pacific Islands nations.
The ABC stands by the “accuracy and integrity” of its program. It also reminded the Solomon Islands government that local experts were interviewed in the video.
…we were determined to tell the story from the perspective of Solomon Islanders and the program reflected their concerns. Its main interviews were with two eminent Solomon Islanders, rather than relying on “foreign experts” as is often the case.
An ABC journalist also clarified that they reached out to the prime minister’s office several times.
This has nothing to do with “demeaning coverage” and everything to do with a government in Honiara allergic to scrutiny. Four Corners sought an interview with PM Sogavare 10 weeks before going to air and followed up on at least six occasions. https://t.co/Of5qIk3z13
— angus grigg (@AngusGrigg) August 25, 2022
Another ABC journalist posted a question about how the prime minister’s statement could affect the work of foreign correspondents.
Plenty remains unclear here. Is Mr Sogavare's office stating categorically that the govt is developing a new visa regime for foreign journalists? Or is this just a vague statement of intent? It's only a single line in a very, very long press release 2/
— Stephen Dziedzic (@stephendziedzic) August 24, 2022
Solomon islands “summoned” Australia’s High Commissioner about the ABC program, but the Ministry of Foreign Affairs insisted that it was a mere “neighborly discussion” about the issues raised in the report.
Opposition leader Matthew Wale described Sogavare as “a person with extreme paranoia” and added that the prime minister should blame himself for refusing to face the media.
It is totally pointless to summon people when international media have travelled to your doorstep and requested interviews with you, but you declined. The best you could have done is face the media and tell your side of the story and not to cry over spilt milk. Why is the Prime Minister afraid to face the media?
The International Federation of Journalists has expressed concern about Sogavare’s statement and its negative impact on upholding press freedom. This is not the first time this year that proposed restrictions on news coverage were highlighted by the media. Last month, the government directed the public broadcaster to stop promoting “disunity.” Local journalists also boycotted a press forum in May during the visit of China’s foreign minister after they were barred from raising questions during the event.
]]>The government denies that it is seeking to censor content
Originally published on Global Voices
Solomon Islands Broadcasting Corporation or (SIBC)
The Solomon Islands Broadcasting Corporation (SIBC), a publicly funded media network, was ordered by the prime minister’s office to enforce new guidelines that will require news and paid programs to undergo a vetting process as the government reins in on “disunity.”
SIBC chief executive Johnson Honimae told the Associated Press that the prime minister’s office has raised the issue of “disunity” in several telephone calls. “They believe we've been running too many stories from the opposition side, causing too much disunity,” Honimae said.
The Prime Minister's Office reminded SIBC about its duty “to practice, fair, responsible and ethical journalism.”
We have seen that recently SIBC has been broadcasting news that is inciting alarm and anxiety in our public, mostly based on misinformation and lies. The Government has not been even given the opportunity to respond to this misinformation and lies.
This was echoed by the prime minister during a session in Parliament.
PM Manasseh Sogavare told Parliament: “As a national broadcaster, Solomon Islands Broadcasting Commission is expected to conduct its business in such a manner that instils unity amongst our people. However, in recent times, that was not the case.” https://t.co/ut1VfDBOLU pic.twitter.com/Zk2fe0STfM
— Nic Maclellan (@MaclellanNic) August 2, 2022
Opposition leader Matthew Wale described the order of the prime minister as a gag on the press:
Allowing the Prime Minister to control SIBC activities is not only contrary to law but can also have far-reaching consequences. It may well be draconian leaving no room for corruption by ministers and government officials to be brought to public attention.
Melanesian News Network editor Dorothy Wickham told ABC in an interview about the potential negative impact of the order on press freedom:
If the opposition gets on SIBC and starts criticising government policies, which every opposition does … would the government disallow SIBC to air that story or that interview? That is the question that we're asking.
She added that it is not the duty of the media to promote unity.
Seriously, PM Sogavare needs to understand that creating UNITY is not the responsibility of the media, it's the role of the Government. SIBC is the voice of the people, its where citizens can voice their joy, challenges, disappointment, aspirations and concerns.
— Dorothy Wickham (@DorothyWickham) July 27, 2022
University of South Pacific journalism professor Shailendra Singh wrote about the decline of freedom of expression in the country.
This seems consistent with the illiberal trends in the Solomons in recent times. It was predictable because as the last line of defense, media are thorn in the side that need to be removed. https://t.co/4Y3UYRZChy
— Dr Shailendra B Singh (@ShailendraBSing) August 1, 2022
The government has clarified that its order is not censorship since it only seeks to protect “our people from lies and misinformation, especially when these very lies and misinformation is propagated by the national broadcaster.”
The precarious state of media freedom in the Solomon Islands was also highlighted during the visit of the Chinese foreign minister in May, when local reporters were barred from raising questions at the press forum.
]]>Local journalists have threatened to boycott the state visit
Originally published on Global Voices
Solomon Islands Prime Minister Manasseh Damukana Sogavare (right) met with China’s State Councilor and Foreign Minister Wang Yi (left) at the Prime Minister’s Office in Honiara. Photo from the website of the Solomon Islands government.
Solomon Islands Prime Minister Manasseh Damukana Sogavare met with China’s State Councilor and Foreign Minister Wang Yi at the Prime Minister’s Office in Honiara, the country’s capital, on May 26. However, Solomon Islands journalists have criticized officials for seemingly imposing press restrictions during the visit and failing to offer adequate information about the meetings or policy agendas.
The Solomon Islands was the first stop for Wang Yi, whose Pacific tour covering eight countries has gained wide attention in the region.
It was only three years ago that the Solomon Islands broke diplomatic ties with Taiwan and recognized the People’s Republic of China. For Taipei, this follows a steady loss of diplomatic presence: In the past five years, five countries in Latin America switch their support to Beijing. Taiwan now maintains full diplomatic relations with only 14 countries.
Since the establishment of an embassy, China has become a major investor in the Solomon Islands. The government of the Solomon Islands describes China as its major infrastructure and trade partner.
Wang Yi arrived in the archipelago on May 26 and has already signed several agreements expanding cooperation between China and the Solomon Islands on issues relating to trade, environment, sports, and security. Prior to the visit, there were reports that a leaked security draft deal between the two countries could lead to the installation of a Chinese military base in the Solomon Islands. This was denied by both governments, although it was revealed that China is interested in building a police training facility in the Solomon Islands.
The possibility of a Chinese military basis has become the focus of much debate, given that the archipelago nation currently has a security deal with Australia. Beijing and Canberra have engaged in a long diplomatic stand-off and are competing for influence in the Pacific and Antarctica. Observers also point out that the political balancing act could inspire other governments to play Beijing against Washington in a region that the US also sees as key to its own security, thus having large global repercussions.
Naturally, local journalists have many questions about the rumored security deal and the scope of the other agreements that the two countries will sign. But local journalists criticized the lack of transparency around the visit and the restrictions imposed during a press forum organized by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Some journalists complained about not being able to effectively cover Wang Yi’s arrival:
#media outside airport waiting for
Foreign Affairs Minister's arrival in #Honiara Wed 11, 12ish at night. All we want are to take pictures & videos of this historic occassion. Next time we hope they'll give us a good spot to get good pics & vids too @solsmasi @lisaosifelo pic.twitter.com/JLgqk97wSw
— Georgina Kekea (@ginakekea) May 28, 2022
The Media Association of Solomon Islands (MASI) also questioned why some local journalists were prevented from raising questions during the press forum of Wang Yi and Solomon Islands Foreign Minister Jeremiah Manele:
MASI thrives on professional journalism and sees no reason for journalists to be discriminated against based on who they represent. Giving credentials to selected journalists is a sign of favouritism. Journalists should be allowed to do their job without fear or favour.
Because of the restrictions, MASI has threatened to boycott the event:
MASI called on its members to boycott Press Event by
because it sees no logic for them to attend. Only selected local media orgs given credentials to attend. MASI says no to discrimination. All media must be allowed to do their job without fear or favor & must ask questions pic.twitter.com/NfsbdLtojz
— MASI (@solsmasi) May 25, 2022
Journalist Dorothy Wickham, who is also a board member of MASI, explains why local media groups have raised the alarm over the news coverage restrictions:
Board Member @DorothyWickham enlightens why MASI called for a boycott on the official press event during the visit of China's Foreign Affairs Minister to #Honiara
— MASI (@solsmasi) May 27, 2022
On the other side, a government representative challenged the idea that journalists were unable to properly attend the press forum:
Would like to clarify to the international media that
— Collin Beck, (@CollinBeck) May 28, 2022
The Media Association of Vanuatu has released a statement expressing solidarity with their colleagues in the Solomon Islands. “Not allowing the Media to freely demand answers from Government and the Chinese delegate is a slap to the principles of Freedom of Information and democracy,” the group stated.
The International Federation of Journalists has warned that the “restriction of journalists and media organizations from the Chinese delegation’s visit to the Solomon Islands sets a worrying precedent for press freedom in the Pacific.”
]]>Around 63 buildings were burned down during the three-day riot
Originally published on Global Voices
Volunteers help clean up the streets after three days of rioting and looting in Honiara City. Photo supplied by ZFM 99.5 My Favourite Music Station, used with permission.
Hundreds of volunteers have responded to the Soloman Island government’s public appeal to help clean up the capital Honiara after three days of rioting and looting in the city’s Chinatown district.
Protests demanding the resignation of Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare erupted in the capital of the South Pacific nation on November 24, which later turned violent, leading authorities to institute a 36-hour lockdown.
Based on the initial assessment of the Central Bank of Solomon Islands, 63 buildings were burned down, including schools and police outposts, 1,000 employees lost their jobs, and the total damage to the economy could reach 534 million US dollars. The government lost about 36 million US dollars in potential revenue from tobacco excise taxes alone. Honiara represents 30 percent of the country’s Gross Domestic Product.
As of December 3, the police have arrested 217 individuals suspected of participating in the riots.
Journalist Robert Iroga wrote about the impact of the violence in the city:
Within just three days, life in Honiara — which has been rebuilt steadily over the years since the ethnic tensions and the 2006 riots — has been turned into a nightmare.
Our public transport has been interrupted, shops are closing or burned down and life has been turned upside-down. Such is the new normal for Honiara, but surely more painful days are ahead.
The Honiara City Council deplored the actions of the rioters:
We bring hardships and struggles upon ourselves, our family members, relatives and community members by involving in unlawful activities like riots, arson and looting. We are the ones who will suffer. The hardships we will face are huge and catastrophic.
We also appeal that we realize the harm we bring upon the traditional owners of Honiara. Because of our actions, innocent lives were lost during the burning and looting. The spilled blood desecrated the land traditionally owned by people of Tandai.
Chinatown on Friday and Chinatown today pic.twitter.com/AuWTpHwjRz
— Georgina Kekea (@ginakekea) November 28, 2021
After the riots ended, concerned citizens, civic groups, and even foreigners took to the streets to clean up the city.
Cleanup starts for some in Chinatown. Locals manning the shop can not control the mob that looted the hardware & plumbing shop. pic.twitter.com/kkjfItlaFe
— Georgina Kekea (@ginakekea) November 27, 2021
The Solomon Islands Chinese Association expressed gratitude to those who extended assistance to displaced community members who had their homes or businesses destroyed:
Many Chinese individuals and families have lost literally everything and are also homeless.
The Chinese community extends their gratitude towards the many peace-loving Solomon Islanders who have offered their support and sympathy during this difficult time.
The Indigenous Solomon Islanders will also be heavily affected such as through loss of employment, and lack of timely supplies for their businesses and canteens.
Selwyn College Old Student's Association #SOSA netball team participating in a cleanup session this afternoon in #Honiara ? Pictures by Robert Iroga @LukeIroga pic.twitter.com/FQOWjx6LIO
— Georgina Kekea (@ginakekea) November 28, 2021
What triggered the unrest?
Most of those who joined the protests on November 24 were from Malaita Island, a province whose local leadership has consistently opposed the decision of the Sogavare government to cut diplomatic ties with Taiwan in 2019 and adopt a “One China” policy. This was a controversial decision since the Solomon Islands had maintained diplomatic relations with Taiwan for 36 years before Prime Minister Sogavare decided to formally establish relations with Beijing. This controversial decision seemed to further exacerbate tensions within the nation.
Malaita officials refused Chinese aid and continued relations with Taiwan. They said that the province’s criticism over the foreign policy of the Sogavare government led to reprisals that hurt citizens’ livelihoods and the island’s economy.
The Malaita Provincial Executive has issued a statement condemning the violence but also articulated the sentiment of the protesters:
Solomon Islands state is a house built on sand, unless the provinces have more autonomy and the issues of land, natural resource control and indigenous benefit are meaningfully addressed.
From 2019 to 2021, Malaitan attempts to develop its own affairs have been blocked and frustrated by central government, which ultimately resulted in the protests which have spiralled out of control this past week.
Transform Aqorau wrote on the DevPolicy blog that the “sense of alienation, disempowerment and neglect has been building for some time,” not just in Malaita but also in other islands.
Solomon Islands has been drifting to self-destruction. It is one of the most aid dependent countries in the world. Significant donor support is given to its health and education sector. Yet, its ministers and senior government officials treat its people poorly, and allow them to be exploited by loggers and miners.
The ruling and opposition parties have each traded blame over who is responsible for the violence that gripped the capital in November. The prime minister said opposition leaders were seen talking to the rioters and looters before November 24. He urged local leaders not to coddle “domestic terrorists.” Meanwhile, the opposition said the government has “politicized” the police in ordering the arbitrary arrest of innocent citizens and peaceful protestors.
Response from other countries
Amid the unrest, other Pacific nations deployed security forces to help the Solomon Islands government restore peace and order. More than 150 troops arrived from Fiji, Australia, Papua New Guinea, and New Zealand to help stabilize the situation.
World leaders, including Fiji’s prime minister, conveyed concern about the situation in the Solomon Islands:
Out of concern for the safety and well-being of our Pacific sisters and brothers in the Solomon Islands, 50 Fijian troops will dispatch to Honiara tomorrow as part of reinforced platoon embedded with Australian Force Elements to help maintain peace and security. ?????
— Frank Bainimarama (@FijiPM) November 29, 2021
While some media outlets have blamed China for stoking unrest in the Pacific nation, China took a different narrative, accusing the US and Australia of encouraging unrest. The Global Times, a state-owned media outlet in China, published an editorial which accused Australia of “fomenting” the riots in the Solomon Islands:
]]>It is clear that Australia's overall attitude, and that of the US, is to connive with and even encourage the unrest, even though the Australian troops and police were sent to keep order in the Solomon Islands. What is right and what is not is obvious.
The government of the Solomon Islands and their people know what is really going on there. It is also not hard for the outside world to know.
An official claims Facebook is merely being ‘suspended’ for an indefinite time
Originally published on Global Voices
Students studying at a computer lab in University of South Pacific Solomon Islands Campus. Photo from Flickr account of the Asian Development Bank, (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0)
The Cabinet of Solomon Islands has issued a temporary ban on Facebook for what it considers ‘harmful content’ disseminated on the social media platform. It is unclear when the ban will begin and how long will this last.
The ban was proposed by Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare and Communication and Civil Aviation Minister Peter Shanel Agovaka.
Agovaka told Solomon Times why the Cabinet came up with this decision:
Abusive languages against Ministers, Prime Minister, character assassination, defamation of character, all these are issues of concerns.
The use of the internet now in Solomon Islands needs to be properly regulated to safeguard our young people from harmful content. At the moment there is no legislation to govern the use of the internet and even young kids can be able to download harmful stuff from the internet.
Agovaka said the government has not yet finalized the details with internet service providers about how the ban will be enforced. He added that press freedom will not be affected since citizens can still publish or air their sentiments on other media platforms.
There are 120,000 Facebook users in Solomon Islands.
The announcement garnered widespread criticism which prompted Permanent Secretary of Communication and Aviation Moses Virivolomo to clarify that Facebook is merely being suspended. But the official gave no timeline about the suspension.
The Facebook ban or suspension is seen by critics and the opposition as an attempt to silence citizens who are exposing irregularities in government.
Opposition Member of Parliament Peter Kenilorea Jnr reminded the Cabinet about the importance of upholding freedom of expression in a democracy:
As leaders, we will face resentment from factions of a demanding and at times dissatisfied public. Much of the dissatisfaction and mistrust, whether real or perceived, will be aired. Sometimes these need to be aired. After all, we, leaders, need to be held accountable by the electorate that place us in positions of power. We need to face the music from time to time. This is democracy.
But as leaders, let us not attack one of the main pillars of democracy upon which our nation rests – the freedom of expression. Let us not mute the voices, however angry, of those that we have sworn to serve.
Malaita Provincial Premier Daniel Suidani, a local official, also disagreed with the decision to ban Facebook:
Do not go into public life and make laws and decisions for your own good or for your own protection as is seen with the banning of Facebook.
Doing this will only lead to further frustrations. You can be guaranteed that going against your people only leads to failures.
The business sector is not supportive of the ban. Jay Bartlett, the board chairperson of the Solomon Islands Chamber of Commerce and Industry (SICCI), said the Cabinet should be focusing on other more important matters:
It is the Government’s prerogative to make such a decision, but as a Chamber we believe that there are other pressing issues that requires our collective focus.
Ms Gloria Hong, a member of SICCI representing small businesses, argued that Facebook is an essential platform to interact with consumers.
Using social media helps us to build brand awareness, increase our customer base, and connect with customers.
In my view, banning Facebook is a threat to businesses, especially the small businesses who cannot afford to run advertisements on radio, newspapers and on TV.
Tourism Solomons CEO Josefa ‘Jo’ Tuamoto warned about the repercussions for the tourism industry:
It goes without saying the platform has become vital in our efforts to keep the Solomon Islands top of mind and competitive on the world tourism stage for the time when things return to normal.
No other social media platform comes even close to what we have been achieving with Facebook.
And not just for our tourism sector, but for all Solomon Islands businesses and the wider community in general which uses Facebook as a key means of communication across our 992-island archipelago.
In a letter sent to the Solomon Times, Floyd Manata from Port Moresby said banning Facebook is not the solution:
We need to be very careful about dealing with certain things regarding this time where the world technology is changing every 6 months. Today it's Facebook next year probably TikTok. But hey think again is this the best solution to the problem?
Before you ban Facebook you should establish or come up with policies that will facilitate the issue of cyber crime and cyber security. Do we have one in place at the moment?
Facebook told ABC Australia that it is ready to discuss the issues raised by the Solomon Islands government:
We’re reaching out to the Solomon Islands government to discuss today’s decision.
This move will impact thousands of people in the Solomon Islands who use our services to connect and engage in important discussions across the Pacific.
Amnesty International’s Pacific Researcher Kate Schuetze said the ban will deprive users of vital information that can save lives during a pandemic.
Given how important it is for people to quickly access information in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, the government may not just place political discourse and participation at risk, but even lives. Total bans on websites or internet information providers will almost never be justifiable under international human rights law.
Dan McGarry, an independent journalist living in Vanuatu, has a proposal for Pacific governments which are unhappy over the social impact of Facebook and has considered plans to censor or ban the popular social media website:
]]>Pacific governments need to start a dialogue, not just with social media giants, but with other national regulators too. They need to learn from others’ mistakes, and leverage others’ successes.
A Taiwanese aid shipment destined for Malaita province got snaffled by police
Originally published on Global Voices
Malaita residents welcome the humanitarian aid from Taiwan. Photos from the Facebook page of Malaita Province Premier Daniel Suidani
A confiscated aid shipment, a provincial leader playing by his own playbook, and an angry Chinese embassy.
These are all ingredients in the complicated COVID-19 response of the Solomon Islands, one of the few countries in the world yet to register a coronavirus case, but one that is still hurting economically from pandemic-related disruptions.
At the heart of the confusion is a very recent diplomatic shift.
After 36 years of diplomatic relations with Taiwan, Solomon Islands recognized China and adopted a ‘One China’ policy in September 2019.
But the Solomon Islands is an archipelago nation and not all the parts of its whole agreed with the decision.
Pro-Taiwan Daniel Suidani, premier of Malaita province — the most populous province in the Solomon Islands — has consistently refused aid from the Chinese government.
And so the province has remained an outpost of Taiwanese influence, a fact that has taken on greater importance as an emboldened Tapei employs COVID-19 diplomacy to boost its international profile.
Suidani has made little effort to play things down.
In fact, on June 8, he dialled up the controversy by issuing a statement hailing Taiwan after it sent rice, face masks, and medical equipment to Malaita:
Fellow Malaitans, we are in a unique and privileged position to have been assisted by a country that has stood against the might of the Wuhan virus.
He also disparaged the national government’s ‘One China’ policy:
What we are doing today to reach out for the protection of our survival is nothing new. It looks new only because of the newly introduced frameworks and institutional set ups. However, the limitations under these frameworks must not be used to limit our ability as a people to find appropriate support in times like this.
‘It is noted with deep concern…’
These comments were never going to go unnoticed. Foreign Minister Jeremiah Manele swiftly released a press statement criticizing Suidani's “divisive” and “inflammatory” remarks:
Such a divisive statement from a Provincial Premier threatens the unity of the country at a time when we need to work together in keeping COVID-19 from entering our borders and not politicize the virus.
Minister Manele calls for respect for government’s foreign policy and urges those who continue to make provocative and inflammatory statements to stop and work towards building a strong united country.
The Chinese embassy fumed, describing Suidani’s statement as “irresponsible”:
It is noted with deep concern that leaders of the Malaita provincial government have recently made irresponsible remarks and actions against the ‘One China’ policy adopted by the Solomon Islands national government.
The claims and actions by the Malaita provincial leaders are illegitimate, inappropriate, and entirely wrong. It breaches the sovereignty and territorial integrity of China and hurts the national feelings of the Chinese people.
‘Malaita lives matter’
But Malaita's local leader found support in the country's parliament. Peter Kenilorea Jr, the chair of the Foreign Relations Committee demanded to know why the government had failed to express official gratitude for the humanitarian aid provided by Taiwan. Based on the statement published by the SB herald, the lawmaker noted:
There was not even a simple ‘thank you’ from the national government for this humanitarian assistance to one of its largest provinces. The silence on this humanitarian aid by a former diplomatic friend, who is now supposedly an integral part of our new partner, was deafening.
More scandal was still to come.
On June 11, the Malaita provincial government reported that the national police had confiscated a shipment from Taiwan containing medical supplies that were intended for Malaita.
The police said it had confiscated the shipment because it looked suspicious. It claimed that the sender’s address was not proper and that the consignment had not been addressed to the Malaita Provincial Government.
But the media later reported that the office of the country’s attorney general had sent a letter notifying the police that “the medical supplies reportedly being sent by Taiwan to Malaita Province is an Act of defiance of the decisions of the government”.
It further warned that the shipment may “include materials that may be in breach of the Sedition Act.”
On June 24 opposition leader Matthew Wale condemned the actions of the police and the national government:
This is inexcusable, and it only makes a mockery of our efforts to prepare our people against Covid-19 and the State of Emergency.
I, therefore, call on the government to stop dancing to Beijing’s tune and prioritise our people’s health and safety.
An online campaign themed ‘Malaita Lives Matter, Release COVID-19 Equipment’ has since been launched to press for the release of the confiscated medical supplies.
The Malaita provincial government said it is preparing legal action to immediately retrieve the shipment from Taiwan.
]]>Originally published on Global Voices
Delegates of the first Melanesian Media Freedom Forum. Source: Pacific Islands News Association, photo by Georgina Kekea
Journalists from Fiji, Vanuatu, Solomon Islands, Papua New Guinea and West Papua gathered in Brisbane, Australia for the inaugural launch of the Melanesian Media Freedom Forum which was organized in response to ‘increasing media repression’ in the region.
The outcome statement of the event highlighted the main threats against media freedom in Melanesia:
The range of threats to media freedom is increasing. These include restrictive legislation, intimidation, political threats, legal threats and prosecutions, assaults and police and military brutality, illegal detention, online abuse, racism between ethnic groups and the ever-present threats facing particularly younger and female reporters who may face violence both on the job and within their own homes.
Participants asked Melanesian governments to ‘respect the media and its necessary place in national conversations’ and ‘assure the safety of journalists as they pursue their professional activities.’
Melanesia. Source: Wikipedia, Oceania_ISO_3166-1.svg: User:Tintazul, Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported
Various issues were tackled during the forum such as surveillance, workplace conditions, climate change, and the impact of social media. Philip Cass, acting-editor of the Pacific Media Centre’s Pacific Journalism Review, also documented a session about some of the challenges faced by women journalists:
A special session on the experiences of women journalists took place later in the morning, with women journalists, editors and freelancers speaking about common problems.
These included demands that they show “respect” for men they are interviewing, a background of violence against women in many places and traditional notions of gender roles.
An unexpected moment in the forum was the unfurling of West Papua’s independence flag. West Papua is a province of Indonesia where foreign journalists are barred from entering. Tension has intensified in recent years as some ethnic groups continue to assert their right to self-determination.
A powerful moment at the end of Prof. David Robie's Pre-Conference Keynote Address tonight. Thank you to those who attended. #WestPapua #MediaFreedom #MMFF pic.twitter.com/hmg8SdLQF7
— Melanesian Media Freedom Forum (@mmfforum) October 28, 2019
The Melanesian Media Freedom Forum also issued specific demands addressed to national governments. For Papua New Guinea, the government was urged to ‘respect the independence of media institutions and journalists’ and ‘strengthen anti-corruption and whistle-blower protection legislation to include journalists and media practitioners.’ For Fiji, the government was asked to repeal the media decree which has ‘draconian penalties and the vagueness of offenses it establishes are having a stifling effect on free media.’ For Vanuatu, the government was shown an appeal of the participants to reverse the work permit rejection given to Daily Post media director Dan McGarry.
MacGarry said his visa was denied because of his criticism against China’s growing influence in Vanuatu. His situation got worse because he was barred from entering Vanuatu after attending the Melanesian Media Freedom Forum.
Hi everyone, here's news:
Yesterday I was barred from returning to my family by Vanuatu Immigration. I was denied permission to board.
My family is being ripped apart by a govt that doesn't want its people to know about rising Chinese influence. Statement coming soon. pic.twitter.com/AJMJNqTZRc
— Dan McGarry (@dailypostdan) November 17, 2019
Scott Waide, a journalist from Papua New Guinea, wrote an appeal on behalf of other participants:
As a member of the Melanesian Media Freedom Forum, I am joining my colleagues in calling on the Vanuatu government to allow Dan McGarry the dignity and respect he deserves.
It is important that media freedom in Melanesian is protected by our ELECTED governments. Any attack on members of the media is an attack on the freedom of expression of the people.
Melanesian governments cannot pay lip service to international conventions and commitments to democratic freedoms and in the same breath issue orders to clamp down on journalists right to expression.
The outcome statement of the Melanesian Media Freedom Forum concluded with a commitment to ‘establish a network to assist participants to respond promptly and effectively to threats to journalist safety or to media freedom.’
]]>