Editorial | Safety for journalists

Unlike with Israel’s action in Gaza, journalists in Jamaica are not routinely marked for death by the military, the killings defended as legitimate acts of war, and any of their colleagues who die seen merely as collateral damage.

Which is not to say that Jamaican journalists, despite the island’s high degree of press freedom, don’t face dangers, which tend to amplify during periods of high political tension, such as in election campaigns, as is now under way in the island. Often, someone is offended by what journalists report and would wish to dictate or control the narrative of the media.

In that regard, journalists everywhere, and anyone who believes in a free and independent press and the right of reporters to do their jobs without interference or intimidation, ought to stand on common ground and share a common solidarity.

That is why this newspaper unreservedly condemns Sunday’s assassination in Gaza of the Al Jazeera network correspondent, Anas al-Sharif, and four of his colleagues by the Israeli Defence Force (IDF), as well as the 175 or so other journalists that Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) says have been verified as killed in 18 months of war. Gazan officials put the number at over 230.

It is also why The Gleaner, even at this stage, weeks before the general election, repeats its call for the Electoral Commission of Jamaica (ECJ), in its role as political ombudsman, to update the Code of Political Conduct to expressly recognise the free press and journalists as integral parts of the ecosystem of democracy and deserving of protection therein. So, political parties, their officials, candidates and supporters should be pledged to eschew behaviour, either in speech or act, that might cause intimidation or violence against journalists.

We urge the Press Association of Jamaica (PAJ) to join us in these calls, even as we express surprise at the association’s silence, thus far, at the targeting of journalists in Gaza.

BREACH OF INTERNATIONAL LAW

Mr al-Sharif, 28, knew he was marked for death and had prepared to be released in the event of his assassination.

“If these words reach you, know that Israel has succeeded in killing me and in silencing my voice,” he wrote in the statement published by Al Jazeera after his death.

Only July 24, the CPJ had called for Mr al-Sharif’s protection in the face of what it described as smears by the IDF, as a precursor to his assassination. The IDF claimed, improbable, that Mr al-Sharif was a Hamas terrorist and squad leader.

What is indisputable is that, at a time when Israel wouldn’t allow foreign journalists into Gaza, Anas al-Sharif became a constant, authoritative and trusted voice in Gaza, which has been bombed to rubble; where more than 61,000 people have been killed; and where famine has set in because of the blockade of the territory by Benjamin Netanyahu’s Government. He was a visible chronicler of the dehumanisation of Gaza, counter to the narrative Mr Netanyahu hoped to write.

So, on Sunday, the IDF deliberately bombed the press tent in a hospital compound where Mr al-Sharif and four of his Al Jazeera colleagues – one correspondent and four camera operators – were sheltering.

In this war, before Sunday’s assassinations, the IDF is known to have deliberately killed six Al Jazeera journalists. The Israelis are also widely blamed for the 2023 shooting in the head in the West Bank of a well-known Palestinian-American journalist, Shireen Abu Akleh.

It says much that Keir Starmer, the British prime minister, who has been a reluctant critic of Israel’s conduct of the war, described Mr al-Sharif’s killing as a breach of international humanitarian law.

“.. .Journalists must be able to report independently without fear …” he said.

DECLINE IN TRUST

And that should be the case whether in a conflict zone in Gaza or at a political rally in Wait-a-Bit, Jamaica.

Jamaica is 26th in Reporters Without Borders’ league table of countries with a free press – still up the scale of 180 countries, but a decline of 20 spaces over five years. What is more significant than Jamaica’s decline in the rankings is the fall of its score on the RSF index – from 90.59 in 2020 to 75.83 this year. Reporters Without Borders attributed this largely to a decline in trust that fed a “decline in institutional respect for press freedom”.

This is reflected in how some politicians have demonised the press, media managers and individual journalists. This newspaper has borne the brunt of the unwarranted assault, like the anonymous social media postings targeting six of The Gleaner’s senior reporters, accusing them of bias and seeking to topple the incumbent Jamaica Labour Party and Prime Minister Dr Andrew Holness.

Prime Minister Holness has declared his support for press freedom, but the social media attacks were tantamount to placing bull’s eyes targets on the backs of The Gleaner Six. As the political environment becomes more febrile, the acts of intimidation could move from subtle to open.

The political ombudsman, therefore, should see cause for clearly asserting the place of a free press in democracy, including during election campaigns.