On June 16, an event signalling a major policy shift in the regulatory framework of the media, broadcast and telecommunications industry happened but its significance was lost in the heat of the ongoing campaigns.
This was the swearing-in to office of the chairperson and members of the Communications and Multimedia Appeals Tribunal, presided over by Deputy Chief Justice Philomena Mwilu at the Supreme Court of Kenya.
Those appointed are chairperson William Oketch, a senior resident magistrate and former complaints commissioner with the Media Council of Kenya; Annette Okello, an ICT consultant; Dr Isaiah Cherutich, a broadcast journalist; Janet Wekesa, an advocate of the High Court and Ibrahim Mutembei, also an advocate.
The tribunal is established under Section 102 of the Kenya Information and Communication (Amendment) Act 2013, as the lead disputes settlement mechanism in the entire media, broadcast and telecommunications industry. Its jurisdiction includes the power to hear complaints against any publication or conduct of a journalist or media enterprise; to hear appeals against the decisions of the industry regulators the Communications Authority and the Media Council of Kenya; and complaints by any citizen who is aggrieved by an action or decision of licensees, who are telecommunications service providers under the KICA.
The tribunal brings functional clarity to the multimedia regulatory framework, and will be vital in protecting the constitutional rights of telecom service providers and consumers to goods and services of good quality. Article 46 of the Constitution guarantees consumers the right to goods and services of reasonable quality, and to the protection of their health, safety, and economic interests.
It is essential for telecommunications regulators to have an effective and efficient dispute resolution system since failure to resolve disputes quickly can limit competition, delay innovation and impede investment in the sector. Granted, the media laws enacted in 2103 did not gain stakeholder confidence, and instead sought to limit media freedom contrary to Articles 33 and 34 of the Constitution. It is also accepted that there is a need to address growing concerns on gross violation of ethical journalistic and professional standards by media practitioners. But this has to be done in a way that promotes rather than restricts media freedoms.
There are concerns about heavy fines imposed by the Act against journalists or media houses adjudged to have violated the Act. In contrast, the fines don’t in any way mean they will be mandatory and automatically imposed once cited to be in breach of professional journalistic ethics. The provisions allow for discretionary sentencing, where the tribunal has been provided with statutory limits of an acceptable sentence for a breach — but the tribunal must weigh out and decide based on the facts of a particular case, what would be a reasonable and appropriate fine commensurate with the breach.
In exercising discretion, the tribunal will be guided by the tenets of due process, the rule of law, impartiality, accountability and objectivity. The task ahead is monumental, and the tribunal calls upon the entire media industry, stakeholders and the general public to support it in realising its mandate, and to work together for a common goal — improved ethical and professional journalism based on excellent reporting, gender sensitivity and entrenchment of the basic principles of ethics and professionalism in the media sector, which include fairness, accuracy, truthfulness and objectivity.
Chairperson, Communications and Multimedia Appeals Tribunal