Following the news that PBS will be withdrawing its judicial claims against the Broadcasting Authority, it was reported that, to some extent, this may have been decided after the BA sought the intervention of the Interior and National Security Minister. If this is true, then it is a mockery of the independence for which the Broadcasting Authority, as a constitutional authority, ought to strive and cherish.

In establishing a broadcasting authority, our Constitution clearly intended the authority to be independent and far removed from politics in all senses of the word. Its members are appointed by the President on the advice of the Prime Minister after the latter has consulted the Leader of the Opposition. Anyone who is in politics in a formal manner is excluded from appointment so that no person who is a Minister, a parliamentary secretary, MP, candidate for the House of Representatives or for local government or a public officer can be appointed as a member of the Authority. Anyone who has served on the board of the Authority is also precluded from appointment to a public office for at least three years from his last day of service. To enhance the Authority’s independence, its members can be removed from office by the President on the advice of the Prime Minister but only for an inability to discharge the duties of such office or for misbehaviour. Their remuneration is protected and is a charge on the consolidated fund. The Constitution actually provides ways in which it can protect the Broadcasting Authority from interference while also protecting the Authority’s independence from being tarnished by partisan opinions. 

Its constitutional responsibility is a crucial one, as in any democratic state, since it is tasked with “so far as possible” ensuring that due impartiality in respect of matters of political or industrial controversy or relating to current public policy is exercised and also to ensure that time and facilities are fairly apportioned between different political parties. In the exercise of these honourable responsibilities, the Constitution has protected the Broadcasting Authority to the utmost degree and expressly provides that it can be subject to the direction or control of no other person or authority. This not only means that the Broadcasting Authority – as an authority – ought not to be given directions but also that it must neither seek directions nor entice the assistance of those serving in an executive role to carry out its role. Where the Authority wishes to initiate cooperation with any of the broadcasting stakeholders, it does not need – nor should it seek – assistance from the executive to do so. When that stakeholder is the public broadcaster who is also required to be above partisan politics, the intervention of a Minister continues to spoil public perception.

The impression of proximity to the executive that is given by seeking ministerial intervention not only raises doubts regarding the extent to which the Broadcasting Authority cherishes its independence and constitutional responsibility but also casts a shadow on the public broadcaster’s capability of acting independently of the Minister’s direction and consequently of rising above partisan politics.

When one considers that the cases that are being withdrawn actually deal with the manner in which the Broadcasting Authority has exercised its constitutional responsibility, and when one of those cases alleges a lack of independence and impartiality on the part of two of its members, the Minister’s intervention in bringing about a start for cooperation has kicked this process off on the wrong foot. It is true that cooperation is required between the Broadcasting Authority and broadcasting stakeholders, in that both need to identify the limits of their functions within a democratic society, but the stakeholders must be aware that they are empowered to establish such cooperation without requiring the intervention of the Minister.

Cooperation between the BA and the public broadcaster ought to be established on the premise that both bodies are equally needed in society. At the end of the day, the role of the Authority is not to control the public broadcaster and not to determine the style or manner in which the public broadcaster exposes issues of political controversy or current public policy. Its role is to admonish the public broadcaster through a declaration or the imposition of a fine when it exposes these issues in a partisan manner.