IAPA Presidential Inauguration Address
IAPA Presidential Inauguration Address
2010-2011
Gonzalo Marroquín Godoy
In the middle of the last century, especially after World War II, military and dictatorial regimes ruled most of America, with the common denominator of repression, brute force, and limitations on freedoms, all to keep our peoples under control.
Violation of human rights was brutal. In some countries it was worse than others. Of all freedoms, the first one that these regimes tried to put out was the right to inform and to be informed. As we all know, a people without information allows its basic rights to be trampled and tainted. There was little opportunity to raise ones voice.
Murder, threats, imprisonment, and persecution of journalists were constants, and were not even made known very forcefully. The result? An entire continent was silenced and dictatorships oppressed at their pleasure and whim.
In defense of the press of the hemisphere, I must recognize that there were many papers and journalists who never shut down, who always raised their voices to defend principles and the trampled rights of the citizens. But sadly, these were not the majority and a strong alliance was never formed between the people and the press.
I lived through one of the most notable of the cases that I am talking about. In Guatemala, the press was brutally repressed and the result was self-censorship of most of the media, a situation that in turn facilitated the constant commission human rights violations and the suppression of voices that were crying out for a stop to repression and violence.
Enforced silence never brings about good.
Thank goodness, starting in the 1970s, those dictatorships began to fall apart, one by one. With the embarrassing exception of Cuba, democracy returned to all Latin American nations, and many thought that freedom of expression and the press, which are indispensable for the development of democratic societies, would be respected without limits and would even be strengthened.
We were far from thinking that many politicians, who previously were demanding their right to express themselves, upon taking power, would become just as intolerant as the military dictatorships, although in a more sophisticated way in order to avoid being labeled murderers, like their predecessors.
Civilians came to power by means of the vote, but since then, freedom of the press has faced new enemies, this time with different methods and strategies. Nevertheless, the new leaders also tend to obtain control of information and silence on the part of society.
He who has information has power. This wise adage explains why intolerant presidents with dictatorial tendencies try to control the flow of information, always with their eye on perpetuating their power, or at least influencing citizens decisions at their own taste and whim.
Why does Hugo Chávez first pass laws to restrict freedom of expression in Venezuela, and then close media and the press, such as RCTV, and finally keep up constant persecution of the independent press?
It is for the same reason that the dictators of the last century, including Fidel Castro of Cuba, went to the trouble of stifling the free exchange of ideas, knowing that human beings are free by nature and that the only way to prevent the exercise of their rights and freedoms is by reigning in opinion. The man or woman who is not permitted to express his or her ideas cannot exercise democratic rights.
Chávez does it, then, because he wants to keep himself in power, and he wants to hold it through control of information. The less information in the hands of the people, the greater is his ability to manipulate democracy.
But pay close attention: we are not facing a problem of ideologies. This is a lack of a democratic spirit. There are presidents who want to perpetuate themselves in power, people who do not respect democracy, but on behalf of it, are willing to stamp out any principle or value that stands in the way of their perverse ends.
The murder of journalists does not necessarily figure among the new strategies of politicians to silence the press. Now restrictive laws are passed, and the media and journalists are persecuted in legal ways, but I emphasize that so-called legality because it has been constructed precisely on the basis of spurious laws passed against democratic principles.
I mention Chávez in the first place because he has set a standard that other leaders have followed, such as Rafael Correa in Ecuador, Evo Morales in Bolivia, Daniel Ortega in Nicaragua and Cristina de Kirchner in Argentina. These leaders have two things in common: intolerance and an eagerness to remain in power.
Once again, I insist that the problem is not one of ideology. I could give examples of politicians of varying ideological stripes who have governed in the recent past in other countries, and who have shown the same desire to control information, paying off friendly media and repressing those that they consider to be in opposition, simply because of their independent stance.
Dictatorships and authoritarian governments, without ideological distinction, are no friends of the press, because the press, expression, and information represent the spirit of freedom, and those politicians do not believe in it, although they give fiery, demagogical speeches in favor of rights and freedoms.
So a brief reflection is needed: When one of those regimes represses the press or any other media, who is really affected? Of course in the first place it would be the media or the press, but fundamentally the harm is not done to us, but rather it lamentably hurts all of society, democracy, and individuals.
These and other governments on the continent also use legal harassment, rewarding or punishing media for their editorial line, including manipulation of advertising and official sources, and among other things, threats, imprisonment, and verbal abuse to undermine journalists credibility.
This is the scenario of freedom of the press in the hemisphere from the political point of view. Our democracies are not necessarily fortifying freedom of expression. Those who are called upon to defend democratic principles are often intentionally weakened for the benefit of individuals or a party.
But in these times there is also another great danger that threatens freedom of the press. This is organized crime, and especially drug trafficking which, just like those politicians, tries to muzzle the press to control information.
Mexico is the best example right now, but previously it was Colombia, the country which has suffered most from this scourge in recent times. Attacks, murders, abductions, and threats against journalists have caused some media to invoke self-censorship just to survive.
* * * * *
At the IAPA, we maintain a constant posture of solidarity with our Mexican colleagues, solidarity that goes beyond simple vigilance. We have sent letters on the matter, and gone to the extremes of promoting alliances among media, training journalists in risky coverage, and, above all, demanding that authorities fulfill their obligation by guaranteeing the right to inform and be informed in the broadest way possible.
We have also called for the passage of a series of laws for the purpose of ending impunity in crimes against journalists, an evil that reaches almost all countries where journalists have been murdered while carrying out their professional duties.
Curiously, organized crime seeks the same thing as those intolerant and haughty politicians. It wants to keep information out of the hands of the citizens. It wants a monopoly on information, just like the others. Once again, we ask ourselves, who suffers the greatest harm?
The answer is the same: the greatest harm is done to society in general, which is losing its right to express itself, but also to know the reality of what is happening around it. Its right to get information is being hampered.
That is why we have worked within the IAPA to have a more intense and better defined strategy in defense of freedom of expression. We know that we are opening a strong head-on battle, but we cannot, we must not, battle alone, as has happened up to now.
For us, the year 2011 will be The Year of Freedom of Expression. This may seem strange, since every year we focus on this war without an army. Certainly so. However, the goal this year is to promote greater individual and collective awareness among societies of the entire continent.
The goal is for most North Americans, Central Americans, South Americans, and residents of the Caribbean, to understand that when any media or journalist is attacked, harassed, or threatened, the action is in reality directed against citizen rights.
We shall make strategic alliances with all of those who share our ideals and principles. We must raise the tone of our denunciations and we are going to utilize all resources within our reach to promote an America in which principles and values are respected, so that we can enjoy greater freedom.
The discourse that the IAPA has proclaimed for 66 years does not change. We change our strategy, since we understand that everyone, and not just journalists, must be builders of our democratic future, and for this reason we must be innovators.
The dreams of absolute power of some politicians and government leaders do not disappear overnight, but as our societies awake and vehemently demand their rights, dictatorships and pseudo-democracies will disappear.
Eradicating organized crime is not our task, but rather it is to promote its rejection and create mechanisms of self-defense in each community. The debate must be kept current.
It is certain that he who has information has power. That is why the press exists, to democratize information. Information must be in the hands of the people so that they can exercise their sovereign right to forge a democracy with greater justice, respect, and opportunity for all.
Thus we make a call to the societies of the entire continent. We must defend freedom of expression. We have the right to inform and be informed. It is not a concession that governments may grant; it is among of our basic liberties.
I would like to close by citing the Declaration of Chapultepec, the decalogue that the IAPA has adopted as fundamental principles for there to exist an independent press, which by fulfilling its function of informing, it contributes to strengthening democracies.
Without freedom, there can be no real order, stability or justice. And without freedom of expression, there can be no freedom. Freedom of expression and the search, dissemination, and reception of information can be exercised only if freedom of the press exists.
Thank you very much.
