Analysis: China’s media law on unexpected public incidents

MANDARIN: Law on Handling Unexpected Public Incidents (6/24/07)
Reporter: Yang Jiadai

Yang Jiadai: The draft of the Law on Handling Unexpected Public Incidents was submitted to the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress for its first review in June 2006. At that time, the Office of Legislative Affairs of the State Council defended an article in the draft that prohibits the media from violating rules by publishing news concerning unexpected public incidents without authorization. It alleged that that article would contribute to the accuracy and reliability of reports on unexpected public incidents. After the first review, comments on the draft were solicited. The Supreme People’s Court, China Law Society, and many other organizations were of the view that the media has played a positive role in reporting unexpected public incidents and that regional authorities might use the stipulation on violation of rules in the draft as an excuse to restrict the media, as the stipulation itself is ambiguous. Under such circumstances, the Commission of Legislative Affairs of the National People’s Congress, after consulting departments concerned, has added a new article in the draft. It stipulates that all departments, organizations, or individuals are prohibited from fabricating or spreading false news about unexpected public incidents or the emergency measures taken to handle such incidents. Undoubtedly, “all departments, organizations and individuals” cover media outlets and individuals. The article in the draft that prohibits the media from violating rules by publishing news concerning unexpected public incidents without authorization has been deleted. Wu Fan, editor-in-chief of China Affairs, an online magazine, said that the newly-added article remains ambiguous.

Wu Fan: That article is very ambiguous, and there is a trap in it. It means the media can publish but is not allowed to fabricate news. As a result, the media can be labeled as fabricating news at any time. What do you mean by fabricating news? If what the media reports is based on facts, it is not fabricating news. But what can the media do if the authorities allege that it is fabricating news on the excuse that the account of the incident is not comprehensive?

Yang Jiadai: Professor Zhou Zehou of York College in the United States said that it is slight progress to have that article deleted for fear that regional authorities might use it to restrict the media.

Zhou Zehou: A little relaxation in a closed society is progress. Though limited, it is very symbolic and indicates that the Chinese authorities are aware of the negative impact on the nation if the media is prohibited from reporting unexpected public incidents. If the media had been allowed to report the outbreak of SARS, its negative impact would not have been so great, and the mortality rate would not have been so high.

Yang Jiadai: However, Professor Zhou also said that the newly-added article remains ambiguous.

Zhou Zehou: The key issue is if the article is enforceable. One has to look at how the article is worded. How to distinguish fabrication from facts? Two weeks ago, farmers in Guangxi, triggered by family planning issues, attacked local government offices. Overseas media reported that local farmers, who resent the family planning policy, attacked government offices in a riot in Guangxi, but China’s media did not report the incident. If China’s media had republished the news reported overseas, would it have been labeled as fabricating news? That newly-added article should be clearly worded.

Yang Jiadai: Professor Zhou said that if there is press freedom, it is inevitable that there will be misreporting. But the authorities should not put labels on the media or beat it with a big stick for misreports. He said:

Zhou Zehou: The key issue is how the government looks at press freedom. Hu Jintao said a while ago that China also needs democracy. If China needs democracy, it must take specific actions. First of all, it should guarantee press freedom. If there is press freedom in China, there will be misreporting. In Western countries misreporting is not uncommon. If a media outlet in China misreports something, should labels be put on it? Who is to judge misreporting — the National People’s Congress, the Central Propaganda Department, or the judicial organ?

Yang Jiadai: Commentator Wu Fan said that since the information age has been in existence for a long time, everyone should be able to report any event in a free country. He said:

Wu Fan: The Chinese government is self-contradictory in that it claims that there is press freedom in China but does not allow the spread of news that it dislikes to the outside world. In a country where information flows freely, an individual can report whatever event he has witnessed or photographed regardless of whether or not there are other witnesses. After he has published something, others can verify his story. Blogs are a form in which everyone is a reporter, editor, or writer. But there is no such freedom in China, as the government is afraid that it will lose control of the things that it wants to keep away from the outside world.

Yang Jiadai: According to a Xinhua News Agency report, an article in the first draft of the law that stipulates government administration of relevant reports by the media has also been deleted. However, the Xinhua report fails to explain what government administration means, how the government administers, or why that article has been deleted. This is a report by Radio Free Asia’s reporter Yang Jiadai.