Heated debate about media law

The work of the media is a subject of debate here, especially now as a new UAE draft media draft law has just been criticised by Human Rights Watch (HRW).

While the US-based rights watchdog says the proposed law is a "significant" improvement over existing legislation, it still restricts press freedoms, according to HRW. In their view, there are positive aspects such as that journalists should not be pressed to reveal their sources; and the law would also reduce the number of areas which could result in penalties from 16 to three. However, HRW criticize that there can be high fines of up to Dhs 5 million if journalists are found to have personally insulted the UAE's President or other senior federal government officials or crown princes. And other 'content based restrictions' remain, including information that could harm the economy; also, media need to provide security deposits to be allowed to run - resulting in what the watchdog described as government controls on the registration of media outlets. Some say parts of the proposed law remain too vague, so the initiative would represent a "missed opportunity".

Many who read this will probably see the points of HRW. Interestingly, the National Media Council reacted the same day the HRW report came out - stating it welcomes "informed discussion and debate" but also emphasizing that the draft law "has not been designed for applications in other societies, with different value systems, but is only applicable within the context of the United Arab Emirates".

Personally, what I find enriching about such things is how your own beliefs are challenged; coming from a certain culture, we do have certain values and perspectives, a strong feeling of what is right or wrong, which you become only fully aware of when you expose yourself to the notions and convictions of others.

It makes you think about how you think.