EDITORIAL

It is generally accepted that freedom of the press is guaranteed in the Constitution of Grenada.

But for the press to be truly "free" and to carry out its role and functions of being the watch dog in a democratic society, the State has an important role in helping to lay the foundation for the media to play its part.

The press is often accused by politicians especially those in government of being bias and unfair to them. There is a general mistrust between the media and government on just what constitutes "the public interest" where the dissemination of information is concerned.

And the moves being made once again by the ruling New National Party (NNP) government to regulate the media through the proposed Broadcasting Act is again leading to a fresh round of debate on the issue of whether or not the current regime is trying to curtail press freedom on the island.

GRENADA TODAY is not opposed to any genuine piece of legislation which can help to foster a better climate for media houses to operate. However, it is our belief that the government should not only seek to introduce a Broadcast Act by itself but give serious consideration to enacting side by side with it an Access to Information Law which can help the press to carry out its functions with greater leverage.

Such an act is already on the law books of several Caribbean islands including Jamaica and Trinidad and Tobago.... and nothing new in this part of the world. The experts all agree that such an act is a very important tool in helping journalists to fully investigate matters of public interest.

The act would also help the media to carry out its function of helping to foster transparency and accountability in government, and deepening the democratic process in the country.

In Grenada in particular, the ruling New National Party (NNP) government of Prime Minister is quick to accuse certain sections of the media that are not under its control and influence of being bias in their reporting. The politicians often campaign on the premise of wanting to establish "a government by the people and for the people" but within days of taking office the peoples' right to know of what is taking place in government is taken away.

It is the people's right to know the amount of overseas visits undertaken by their Prime Minister, the places travelled, the reason for the visit, the cost of that visit to taxpayers, the members of the delegation, and the outcome of the trip.

The people should also know all the holders of Grenada Economic Citizenship passports, who sold them the passports, the basis for granting them this right, the amount of monies collected from the sale, and the use to which the money has been put.

The Access to Information Act would provide information to citizens on how the government awards contracts whether in road construction, building of stadia and ministerial complexes, the reasons for granting tax exemptions to particular businesses, and all the companies and individuals to whom exemptions are granted.
The government itself can benefit from the results of investigations carried out by the media based on information that is provided from the act.

It provides the barometer for the government to order probes into the functioning of various government ministries and departments with a view to making the necessary changes to better serve the public.

Any government that supports the notion of wanting to promote openness in matters of public affairs should see no problem in implementing the Access to Public Information act for its people. It would not even try to manipulate and manage the information that should be made available to the people who put them into office to look after the affairs of the State.

The current "Briefcase Saga" involving the Prime Minister would have been history if there was in place an Access to Information Act and the administration in power being democratic enough to play by the rule.

The Prime Minister would have put before the eyes of the public for scrutiny a long time ago the exact amount of monies that he received from Eric Resteiner (whether cash, cheque, bank draft etc.), the receipts from the airline company that he purchased the tickets for the entire delegation to travel abroad, and the receipts from other expenses related to the trip.

As a matter of fact under the Access to Information Act, the Prime Minister would be hard pressed to accept monies from the likes of Resteiner, Viktor Kozeny and Van Brink and Company for fear of the international community getting to know that he was dealing openly with crooks and conmen.

It is very unlikely that the NNP which has been dogged by so much corruption and bribery scandals would see it fit to introduce such an act that can only serve to further expose its many inner and drak secrets.

The challenge would be for a new government to attempt to raise the accountability and transparency bar a little higher through the enactment of the Public Access to Information Act. It is not only the media that can make requests for information on matters of public interest through the act but all and sundry in the society.

The proposed broadcasting act must be accompanied by the Access to Information Act.