Perhaps no one understands the issue of deception better than the Zimbabwe's commercial farmers. The next to taste this bitter pill could be the media.

When farm invasions and occupations by the ruling party and government supporters began, the country's 3,100 commercial farmers were uncertain as to how to react.

One view was to run to the courts to challenge this deprivation of an owner's right to, and protection of property. The other was that it was far better to be less confrontational. So, the accommodation route was adopted. As a result, more than 95 percent of what was two years ago commercial farming land, has been taken over by the government in the name of seeking to correct a historical injustice.

Even though the government had all the powers to amend the law in order to acquire land, 12 commercial farmers have needlessly lost their lives as a result.

Once they adopted the view they would accommodate the government, they had acquiesced to working within the government's game plan. Today, it is inconceivable the same farmers, given a second chance, would do things the same way they approached the government's desire to acquire more land in order to resettle villagers in overcrowded communal areas.

In terms of the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act (AIPPA), the country's media organisations must be registered with the Media and Information Commission by the close of last Sunday.

After that, failure to do so could leave them open to prosecution or closure or both, because they would be operating "illegally".

Double registration

Registering with the registrar of companies is a legal requirement upon forming a company, so the requirement under the AIPPA that media companies — already registered under the Companies Act — should register again, amounts to double registration. If there is no intent to deny any media organisation registration, why does the Media and Information Commission not accept registration under the Companies Act as being valid under the new law?

The chairman of the commission, Dr Tafataona Mahoso, has told other media organisations that the "registration with the registrar of companies will do for the time being . . ."

In an environment pregnant with suspicions, is there no likelihood that despite this "assurance" last Monday, media houses could find themselves being declared illegal? Maybe they ought to insist on the undertaking being in written form, preferably with some clarity on what "for the time being" might mean precisely.

If the Media and Information Commission was not yet ready, what exactly was the hurry and preoccupation with the June 16 deadline, when it could allow itself more time to put all mechanisms in place first?

Like the commercial farmers, one of the dilemmas of registering is that it presupposes an acceptance to subject oneself to AIPPA. That, however, could be akin to walking into an ambush. There will be very little scope for alternatives. Once you are in you can't get out.

It also might imply full acceptance of the penalties attached thereto.

An example: Over the past month there have been 15 arrests of 11 journalists, all coincidentally from the private media, for offences surpassed by the transgression of their colleagues in the government-controlled media.

Whither press freedom?

The private media may want an unequivocal assurance of similar and fair treatment from the Media and Information Commission. Otherwise, as happened to the farmers, the media could find itself being closed down for what the commission deems "offences" or "falsehoods", resulting from selective application of the law.

As has been the case, the government/commission will declare it is only acting within the confines and dictates of the law.

In fairness to all, the media organisations should seek a postponement to the Sunday deadline, while the commission prepares itself for the task.

In the end, however, the question begging an answer will be whether press freedom and freedom of expression will remain attainable under the circumstances. Clearly, they will not.

Without the genuine freedom of the press, the freedom of the ordinary citizen without friends in high places could be compromised. It is to be hoped the government is prepared to interact with a citizenry not as well-informed about its country as one with a genuinely free press. — GVNN/The Daily News (Harare)