SRI LANKA PRESS
COUNCIL: THE PROBLEMATIC FORUM OF STATE REGULATING IN SL?
Regulating is not only a
form of controlling but also a reputed manner in legislation. Media regulating
is another top topic of most discussions relevant to socio – politics and legal
dimensions. Sri Lanka Press Council is established in 1973 under the Sri Lanka
Press Council Act, no 5 of 1973 as a government body to regulate the print
media in Sri Lanka. As per the act objectives of this Government body are to
regulate and to tender advice on matters relating to the press in Sri Lanka. But,
since the inspection of the council the term of ‘Press Council’ also was a
controversial form to the media industry of Sri Lanka. The active Journalists,
Journalists’ forums and other pressure groups interpreted the new body as a
tool of jeopardous to the freedom of free writing which journalists ever had.
Therefore since 1973 to
2023 in special occasions the matter has being discussed in several forums in
Sri Lanka. Even though, this type of government regulating bodies are not a
novel concept to the media world. The region including Asia, America and Europe
also have been experienced press councils or media councils as per the need of
their media societies. But state regulating method is a criticized form of
regulation in all regions. Instead of that self-media regulation, in – house
media regulation, co – media regulation has been popularized in the recent era
as an alternative method to the state regulation.
In Sri Lanka, though the
press complaint commission was established in 2003 with a cooperative
collaboration of media personnel as an alternative method to state based regulation,
according to the revelations of report of media analysis was done by IFJ and
scholars’ remarks, this self-regulation method also not in effective as the
expected manner.
When the scrutiny
analysis the act no 5 of 1973, it shows that, the provisions including,
·
The process of appointing, termination of
members to the board.
·
Structure of the board.
·
Clause no 15 and 16 of the act.
·
The district judicial power of the council
to summon and compel the attendance of any person, the production of documents,
to administer any oath or affirmation to any person.
·
Fine and imprisonment could be enacted on
the person who deemed to be guilty of the offence.
Have
been fully criticized within the media society as a threat to the wellbeing of
media freedom. Specially, being the structure of the board and appointing
manner is scheduled under the presidential power and consent caused to build a
non- trustworthy within the media society and pale the idea of state
regulating. Although, a regulating body
is indeed for wellbeing of the media and society too.
In
this case practically, Sri Lanka Press council has not yet used the legitimate
power in full effect since the inspection of council. No one has imprisoned or
fined through a court within the 50 years of its role of regulation.
It
should be emphasized being a proper regulating authority with power to make
evaluation on ethical infringement and making proper guidance to wellbeing of
the journalists is not a matter to debate in a novel media society. According
to the opinion of media expertise it should not be merely state or
self-regulation but also a legally empowered co-regulation.
Therefore,
the existence act could not be identified entirely a demon of curtailing media
freedom in SL with its practical conduct as per the observation. Instead of
identifying the SLPC act as a merely demon of media freedom, it should be pay
the proper attention to make necessary amendments for the act with the collaboration
of expertise, media personnel, policy makers, researchers as per a proper study.
Otherwise, it also can be another jeopardy of regulating.
