You are here: HomeNews2016 07 12Article 454600

General News of Tuesday, 12 July 2016

Source: classfmonline.com

Fast track Content Authorisation Law - NMC to Supreme Court

Chairman of the National Media Commission (NMC), Kwasi Gyan Appenteng Chairman of the National Media Commission (NMC), Kwasi Gyan Appenteng

The National Media Commission (NMC) has called on Justices of the Supreme Court to facilitate speedy determination of the case currently before them on the implementation of the Content Authorization Law as it has said the absence of the law continues to render it ineffective.

According to the NMC, had the Supreme Court not frozen its Content Authorization Law aimed at sanitising the media landscape, recent incidents of unguarded comments and threats on media platforms could have been curtailed.

Addressing journalists at a news conference at the International Press Centre in Accra, NMC Chairman Kwasi Gyan Appenteng noted that the lack of implementation of the Content Standards Regulations 2015 (LI 2224), which require electronic media owners to seek content approval from the NMC before any publication, remains a big hurdle to its effectiveness.

He told the media: “This is what informed the passage of the LI2224. It is a necessary mechanism for sanitising our airwaves. At the heart of the law are standards set as universal and consistent with international norms. As it has become clear to the whole nation, the threats to good order and public safety comes not from the law but from the absence of the law. Thus, we are hopeful that the Supreme Court will give a judgment that will enable us to apply the core principles of the law during this election period.

“The question many have asked and continue to ask on a daily basis is how come the NMC provides effective regulation without the law. This question often contains what we call the teeth analogy that the NMC has not got enough teeth to bite. They stated that the NMC has no teeth. It is true that the law encourages the NMC to use the gentler acts of mediation and negotiations to settle disputes. This is coming from our history so it was imperative that we find other means instead of hard sanctions. But the law also anticipated changes in the nature of the media, society and the relationship between controllers of the media and the vulnerabilities inherent in a new democratic polity. As a result, it also gave authority to the commission under sections 24 (1) (b) of Act 449 to make legislative instrument to provide for 'any matter that may be necessary for the efficient discharge of its functions'. This is the authority under which the law was made. We believe that we need this law to safeguard the peace of our society.”