STATEMENT AT OAS GENERAL ASSEMBLY
SANTIAGO 9 JUNE 2003
The New York Times is in the midst of a scandal with a self absorbed reporter Jayson Blair.  I have had a long personal connection as a reader with the New York Times which many consider the paper of record for world events.  This is very much the case with newspapers in our own country.  Even though many more people look and rely on television, newspapers are still regarded as the official record of what goes on in a society.  And so we watched with interest as the New York Times dealt with the issues of  plagiarism at their newspaper.  Their owners felt they had to be publicly accountable.

The  New York Times is a public company and it has to account to its shareholders.  But I think that the lesson is more instructive.  The media has to be accountable to the public generally precisely because the public at large depends on the media for information and make their decisions based on the judgements of what is important by media personalities.

Freedom of expression is enshrined in our constitution but as I argued in opposition, this is only the recognition and protection of a God given right.  Our system of governance is adversarial, the cut and thrust of debate is to engender good public policy.  But I always say in order to have freedom of expression, you must simply speak freely.  I also say it is better to be shouting than fighting.

The way that many newspapers and other sectors of the media , television , radio , the web  operate, tends to reinforce the positions of their owners,  particularly in our country where the newspapers are not yet publicly owned companies.  But what is good is that many people recognize that while objectivity is difficult  to achieve in editorial policies, and even in reportage, balance is more important.  It is encapsulated in the Latin maxim, audi alterem partem, meaning: “ Hear the Other Side!”  I also say that free speech comes with responsibility, and that means protecting the reputations of those who are unable to defend themselves from unnecessary media attack or intrusions.

Further, it must be acknowledged that the media often plays a valuable role as Opposition to a Government and strengthens democracy in our countries when after general elections and Opposition parties have been severely depleted, the newspapers continue to carry the battle. 

The question of freedom of expression today takes on even larger importance at a time of testing when our systems and beliefs are under siege, struggling to find the balance between  security on the one hand and freedom on the other.  There are some who argue that given the present security concerns that voices of dissent ought to be suppressed.  We reject that.  We must know from history that we fall into error if we accept at the time of testing the rationale of suppressing public opinion, and this operates whether within countries or on the international stage on which we delegates now sit today.

The Bahamas therefore supports a vigorous application of the principle of free speech. This finds one of its purer expressions in the freedom of the media.  To this end, we believe that this means wider access to forums including the Judiciary that in many of our countries appears to be sacrosanct from public scrutiny and criticism in the name of a fear of interfering with the independence of the judiciary.  Judges make public policy and ought to be subject to the same scrutiny in their work as do all other public institutions.

What is also important is training, training of reporters and making the working conditions such that they will remain in their craft.  In The Bahamas there is a well worn path from journalism to law to politics because the working conditions and pay are not what they should be. I am en example of one who has followed that path.  The result is there is a disconnect between the level of understanding of many issues between the journalists who work the every day beat and those of us who are in politics.  Reporters need training and exposure to their colleagues [in other countries] to be able to present the issues of complexity to our respective publics.  This must necessarily be so in small countries where there are generalist reporters, not specialists as in the developed states. There is a special need and emphasis and requirement for instruction in history. 

The other requirement is availability of information to the public through TV, the web, and print and we need also to address issues of literacy so that the public increasingly can comprehend the complexity of the issues that face our countries.

Finally, The Bahamas welcomes the statement by the distinguished Secretary of State of the United States in its continued commitment to the processes of the OAS in Haiti. Our view is that engagement with Haiti is preferable to disengagement, and we pledge our continued efforts and resources to assist Haiti and the OAS in bringing about a solution to their political issues.  Our view is that both the Government and the Civil Society have a responsibility to work to solve the problems.

As regards Cuba, we share the concerns expressed by CARICOM, by the US and Canadian delegations.  It is important that the democratic forces and processes be supported in Cuba, and that means to us continued engagement so as to loosen the reigns which would suppress  freedom of speech and political participation.  We have made that clear to the Cubans but we also feel that Canada has started in a good direction in embracing the comments of the US Ambassador to OAS that a way must be found to move forward on the issue of Cuba.

Thank you very much indeed.