Challenge of media liberalisation

Despite a pledge by Kyrgyzstan's new government to reform and liberalise state-controlled media, the shift from rhetoric to reality will prove a key challenge for the former Soviet republic. Following the overthrow of former president Askar Akayev in March, lawmakers and civil society have been wrestling with how to transform national radio and television from a mouthpiece of the regime into an independent public service. The interim government was ushered in on a platform of liberalisation and transparency. It also pledged itself to reform the state-controlled media. "The March events provided the opportunity to make changes in the mass media," said Medet Tyuleganov, executive director of the Soros Foundation in Kyrgyzstan, the local arm of the international NGO promoting open societies. Media reform was the subject of a conference in the capital, Bishkek, recently and attracted 150 participants. "Basically the discussions were about transforming national television and radio. In particular, about its financing and administration," Kuban Mambetaliev of the Journalist's Public Association (JPA), a local media watchdog, said. On 25 May, acting president Kurmanbek Bakiev signed a decree creating a working group tasked with the difficult duty of reforming state media. All radio and television in Kyrgyzstan is state controlled and used to provide wall-to-wall coverage of the activities of former president Akayev and family. "There should not be state-owned mass media outlets in Kyrgyzstan," Bakiev said, shortly after the demise of Akayev's government. Adakhan Madumarov, acting vice-prime minister and head of the media reform group, had an optimistic view of the future. "Now all the mass media outlets will be given complete freedom," he said. But given the presence of laws that restrict the rights of journalists to report freely in Kyrgyzstan, many journalists and editors want to see new legislation enabling freer reporting to be passed, along with laws separating the public broadcast media from government control. The media environment in Kyrgyzstan became increasingly intolerant in the last years of Akayev, activists have said. Once praised as an island of democracy in the region, Kyrgyzstan began emulating authoritarian neighbouring states after 1995. Presidential elections in 2000 were described by many international bodies as neither free nor fair. Since then, international media watchdog groups have repeatedly warned that freedom of speech has been under threat. "By the beginning of 2005 all nationwide electronic mass media was controlled or owned by the family of the president [Askar Akayev]. The last independent TV station, Pyramid, was bought by the president's son-in-law recently, while independent newspapers trying to provide balanced reporting of political issues are constantly pressured to close," Mambetaliev, said. There have already been some changes at the national broadcaster in the post-Akayev era. "The main innovation in our work is absence of pressure on the part of the government, though we are given some recommendations on broadcasting," Beishenbek Bekeshov, newly appointed head of state television and radio, said. International organisations working to promote more open media in Kyrgyzstan, like the NGO Internews, are confident that the post-Akayev era is one in which independent media have a better chance of flourishing. "The media are working with much more freedom than before. And they have the added responsibility of covering the many major changes taking place within Kyrgyz society," the organisation said in a statement to mark World Press Freedom Day on 3 May. In a test of how much has changed in recent weeks, Internews has launched a project to produce special debates on state TV and radio among presidential candidates in the run-up to the election on 10 July. Internews will assist the state broadcaster with the guarantee that all candidates will be allowed equal participation. The debates will be broadcast nationwide on television and radio, allowing a very wide audience to become familiar with the candidates' platforms and positions. But Tamara Valieva, a former editor in national television, removed from her post by the new government, does not believe those now in charge of the national broadcaster will relinquish control because of the need for a mouthpiece, particularly in the weeks before the poll. She alleged that already, Dastan Sarygulov, the new state secretary, had been seen trying to supervise the editing of television news reports. "Only when we see and hear the views of the opposition on state channels, then we could talk about democracy in the media but so far I have not seen such news yet," Edil Baisalov, the Coalition for Democracy and Civil Society president, said. Many observers are waiting to see how the political situation will pan out post-elections before commenting on the prospects of the public broadcaster being a genuine servant of the Kyrgyz people. Political hurdles are not the only difficulty in the transition from state-controlled radio and television to a public service broadcaster supplemented by independent commercial stations. The state relinquishing direct control will also mean Bishkek no longer foots all the bills and consequently, new forms of revenue will need to be found. The situation does not look rosy given the limited amount of advertising revenue available in Kyrgyzstan which suffers from widespread poverty. Paying a licence fee, another source of revenue public broadcasters rely on, would be beyond the means of most Kyrgyz people, observers say. "Introduction of subscription payment for the TV as some journalists from the national broadcaster suggest, is impossible because the population is unable to pay," Omurbek Tekebaev, parliamentary speaker, told IRIN.