Banning advisors’ statements: a restriction on access to information or “discipline”?
Political and media specialists in Iraq confirm that regulating government media discourse can reduce conflicting official statements and positions, but they pointed out that the nature and limits of this unification procedures can affect the scope of dialogue and sources of information. News
On Saturday, Iraqi Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi directed that all advisors and government officials be prevented from making press statements or appearing in the media without prior approval from his office, in order to comply with regulatory controls and ensure the unification of the government discourse and the consistency of the official message, while emphasizing the need to avoid issuing statements that do not accurately express the official position of the state.
This comes in conjunction with ongoing regulatory measures by the Media and Communications Commission, which during September included banning media appearances for a number of politicians, media professionals and analysts for varying periods, reaching in some cases 90 days.
The measures also included issuing official warnings to a number of local and foreign satellite channels for violations related to broadcasting rules and approved legal regulations.
In a parliamentary reading of the directive, Iraqi parliament member Imad Youkhna says that the decision concerns advisors and spokespeople associated with the Prime Minister’s office, with the aim of preventing conflicting information or the issuance of incomplete statements that may be attributed to the government.
Yukhna adds to Shafaq News Agency that the official spokesperson will remain the entity responsible for announcing government positions, stressing that regulating the media appearances of government employees does not necessarily mean restricting freedom of expression, but he emphasizes at the same time the need for controls that preserve the freedom of the media and access to information, in accordance with the law and Iraq’s international obligations.
It is noted that journalists generally face difficulty in obtaining information from official sources, and even official spokespeople for ministries and the government, which sometimes forces them to use old statements as background for their reports without updating, or to rely on personal sources within ministries to obtain information, without revealing their names.
For his part, Hadi Jalu Mar’i, spokesman for the Iraqi Journalists Syndicate, affirms that regulating media work must be based on the law and respect freedom of expression and the right to access information, warning against the strict and continuous restrictions that may limit the media’s ability to perform its role.
In his interview with Shafaq News Agency, Mar’i points to the need to enable analysts and media professionals to express their opinions, while adhering to the principle of not inciting hatred, violence, threats, or blackmail, and taking into account the social and cultural conditions and the diversity of sects and nationalities in Iraq.
A government advisor often makes statements in televised interviews or to news agencies that are controversial and force some institutions to issue a clarification afterwards.
The measure of preventing speakers from making statements without prior approval was previously taken by former Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani, following controversial statements made by one of his advisors in a televised interview.
For his part, writer and political analyst Ali Al-Baydar believes that regulating media discourse is “an important issue and a necessity for any country,” considering that chaos in content may allow for the marketing of negative ideas about the Iraqi reality and lead to undesirable results.
Al-Bader tells Shafaq News Agency that setting standards that define who appears in the media and what content they present is necessary, but at the same time he warns against exceeding the limits of regulation, stressing the need to ensure that the procedures do not turn into “creating new dictatorships” at the expense of these concepts.
Regarding the recent directive concerning officials and advisors, Al-Bader believes that the government may have banned some media outlets close to it due to a loss of confidence in them or for reasons related to competence, so that their statements would not be attributed to the official position of the government.
From another perspective, Zainab Rabie, head of the “Al-Nakheel” Center for Press Freedoms, believes that preventing advisors from appearing or making statements before obtaining approvals is a normal procedure related to government work mechanisms, and is not related to restricting freedoms or the work of political programs.
Rabee told Shafaq News Agency that unifying the government’s discourse prevents multiple opinions and conflicting narratives regarding the official position, which could present journalists with contradictory information and affect their credibility. She emphasized her support for this approach as a means to arrive at a clear official position.
Political program presenter, Inas Halim, agrees on the importance of unifying the government’s discourse, stating in an interview with Shafaq News Agency that the issuance of contradictory statements by officials within the government may reflect negatively on the government’s image and positions.
Halim believes that returning to the Prime Minister’s media office before media appearances can help to control the official message, especially since some advisors hold advisory positions and do not necessarily represent official spokespeople for the government.
Shafaq.com