Why amendment of Media Services Act hasn’t gone far enough

By Neema Mhina

Oppression of journalists is a big problem globally. In 2012, the UN came up with the first-ever systematic global strategy to protect journalists and which involves UN agencies, national authorities, media and civil society organisations.

The UN Plan of Action on the Safety of Journalists and the Issue of Impunity addresses the fundamental aspects of prevention, protection and prosecution. The plan was the result of a process that began in 2010 following a request by Unesco’s Intergovernmental Programme for the Development of Communication (IPDC).

It was endorsed by the Chief Executives Board of the United Nations and launched in Vienna at the Second UN Inter-Agency Meeting on the Safety of Journalists in November 2012.

In Tanzania, the Media Services Act was recently amended in what was widely seen as an attempt to address the oppression of journalists and discourage impunity ahead of the 2025 General Election.

The media in Tanzania are governed by a specific laws and regulations that outline the rights and responsibilities of media practitioners, as well as legal frameworks for media operations. Some of these laws are:

The Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania: Under Article 18 of the supreme law, every individual has freedom of opinion and expression of their ideas. It means that every person has the right to seek, receive and disseminate information, regardless of national boundaries, and also be informed at all times of various important events and activities.

The Newspaper Act, 1976: This regulates the registration, publication and distribution of newspapers in Tanzania.

The Broadcasting Act, 1993: This particular law regulates the broadcasting sector in Tanzania, with the Tanzania Communications Regulatory Authority (TCRA) overseeing broadcasting licensing, content standards and spectrum management.

The Cybercrimes Act, 2015: This is centred on various offences related to computer systems, online content and digital communications. It includes provisions related to cyberbullying, online harassment and dissemination of false information.

The Access to Information Act, 2016: This law is meant to promote transparency and accountability by providing citizens, including journalists, with the right to access information held by public authorities.

The Media Services Act of 2016: The act governs the regulation and licensing of print media and oversees media standards, ethics and professionalism.

In 2023, Parliament passed several amendments to the Media Services Act that were proposed by the government as part of efforts to create a conducive environment for journalists and media companies in the country. In total, nine sections – 5, 38, 50, 51, 53, 54, 55, 63 and 64 – were amended.

Amendment of Section 5 removed the authority bestowed on the Director of Information Services to coordinate government advertisements.

Section 38 was amended by deleting Subsection 3, which provided for absolute privilege in defamation.

Section 50 is now devoid of paragraph (a) (ii), which was about publishing of information deemed falsified and injurious to the reputation, rights and freedoms of other persons. Also deleted is paragraph (c) (ii), which was about publishing statements deemed injurious to the reputation, rights and freedoms of other persons. Monetary penalties have also been reduced.

Further penalties have also been reduced following the amendment of Section 51, while Section 53 has been revised and jail terms and fines for sedition mentioned in Subsection 1 reduced.

Section 54(1), which is centred on publications likely to cause fear and harm, has been amended by reducing jail terms and fines.

Amendments has also been made to Section 55 (2), which mentions offences by corporations and societies, by reducing the prescribed monetary penalty (fine). The amended Section 63(1) has the prescribed fine and imprisonment being reduced.

Further penalties have also been reduced following the amendment of Section 64(2)(a) and 64(2)(b) of the Act.

The amended Act vis-à-vis oppression of journalists ahead of elections

In my view, the amendment of the Media Services Act has not gone far enough to ensure that journalists will be able to work without any fear or encumbrance whatsoever in the run-up to, during and after the forthcoming elections. It is worth noting that the abovementioned individual amendments focused on reducing penalties rather than abolishing them.

This law still infringes on freedom of expression among media, especially through Section 7(3), (a), (b), (c), (f), (g), (h) and (i) and 7(3) (a)(i) and (ii) by prohibiting media from investigating the government.

Section 50 outlines penalties against journalists deemed to have produced false information, prohibited information, threatening the security of the United Republic of Tanzania and so on. As elections approach, this provision appears to aim at preventing journalists from disseminating “harmful” information about political parties participating in elections.

This can lead to a lack of transparency and comprehensive information for the public about candidates and political parties involved in the electoral process. It is important to find a way to promote transparency and avoid provocation without compromising press freedom and the public’s right to accurate information.

In order to promote freedom of expression and fair practice for journalists and media houses ahead of elections, sections of the Media Services Act that infringe on journalists’ and media houses’ right to operate freely should be amended. These are sections 7(3), 19, 20, 21, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 50, 52, 53, 54, 58 and 59.

Neema Mhina is an Advocate of the High Court in Tanzania