2024-05-05 19:54:06
Get real-time updates straight to your device, subscribe now.
The recent suspension of Mamoudou Babila Kéita, journalist at GROUPE HADAFO MEDIAS, and his information site www.inquisiteur.net, once again raises worrying questions about press freedom in Guinea. This decision by the High Authority of Communication (HAC), pretexted by the revelation of potentially embarrassing matters for established figures, arouses suspicions about the true independence of the regulatory authorities in Guinea.
Investigative Journalism under High Surveillance
Mamoudou Kéita was suspended for six months, a harsh sanction which appears to be a direct response to his investigations into questionable transactions in public procurement, including those involving the HAC itself. However, articles 63 and 64 of law L/2017/041/AN of July 4, 2017 are clear: an investigative newspaper which exposes corruption, based on sufficiently serious evidence or clues, cannot be either censored, prohibited, or subject to legal proceedings. In addition, those responsible for the newspaper, such as the publication director or the author of the article, cannot be arrested. This measure aims to encourage the media to play an active role in detecting and reporting corruption without fear of repression.
“Article 63: An investigative newspaper, when it contributes to revealing, on the basis of consistent evidence or clues, corruption cases, may not be subject to censorship, prohibition or prosecution of any kind, nor arrest of its publishing director or the author of the article in question.
Article 64: Denunciations of cases of corruption made by the press are credible revelations, capable of being evaluated or verified in such a way as to allow legal proceedings, under penalty of incurring the responsibility of their author. »
Presumably, it is not tomorrow that this partition of the press will be sought and protected by our commissioners.
The Law: A Paper Shield?
Although Guinean legislation (anti-corruption law and whistleblower law) theoretically protects the press and its actors when they uncover corruption cases, the recent practice of the HAC seems to paint a different picture. The action of this authority, which should be a guarantee of protection and fair regulation, appears rather as a tool of selective repression. The arbitrary application of censorship not only exposes journalists to unjustified risks, but it also undermines democracy by preventing citizens from being properly informed.
Disguised Censorship
Babila’s case is symptomatic of a broader trend of using administrative pretexts to muzzle the media. This strategy of disguised censorship is particularly worrying because it is in direct violation of fundamental rights enshrined both in national legislation and in international conventions ratified by Guinea.
What Future for Press Freedom?
This hostile context for free and independent journalism, also marked by the systematic jamming of private radio and television waves deemed “annoying” by the current holders of power, requires increased vigilance from the international community as well as national actors. Human rights organizations and international bodies must intensify their monitoring and pressure so that Guinea respects its legal and ethical commitments to the press.
In conclusion, the suspension of Mamoudou Babila Kéita is not only an isolated act; it reflects an atmosphere of repression and media control which should not go unnoticed. Journalists, true sentinels of democracy, must be able to practice their profession without fear of suffering reprisals for simply exercising their right to inform. It is imperative that the press, civil society organizations and citizens who love freedom and good governance defend, by all legal means, the freedom of the press so dearly obtained.
Mohamed MARA