By Sachindri Piyahasie Dias

“The road to power is paved with hypocrisy and casualties.” Frank Underwood, House of Cards

With a record number of candidates (38) contesting Sri Lanka’s presidential election, voters are yet to witness what new stories (and old stories) these 38 players bring to the table. After all, from rival lookalikes in slanderous advertisements to snakes descending from Naga Loka to offer spiritual support, we have seen it all.

While the candidates and political parties are to be blamed for this, the media need to be equally responsible for manipulating the voters for their own personal agendas. Technically, the role of the media during the election period is to disseminate information to the public. But in reality, the media plays a much larger role as the communicating middleman between the candidates and the voters. In fact, the media has opted for selective reporting and openly campaigning for certain candidates causing us to question if the media nowadays are the watchdogs for truth or mere wheeler-dealers of the politicians.

Media guidelines: a swing and a miss?

Contrary to popular belief, the ownership of frequencies belongs to the public. We as the voters have a right and the media has a duty for impartial and truthful information. The Election Commission (EC) needs to maintain a close interaction with the media and be the institutional layer of checks and balances. With the 17th Amendment to the Constitution, Article 104(5)(a) has provided powers to the EC to issue guidelines from time to time considered appropriate to any broadcasting or telecasting operator or any proprietor or publisher of a newspaper to ensure a free and fair election and only the Sri Lanka Rupavahini Corporation and SLBC were constitutionally mandated to ensure compliance to the guidelines issued by the EC.

The 19th Amendment in 2015, empowered the EC to issue guidelines “to any broadcasting or telecasting operator or any proprietor or publisher of a newspaper, as the case may be, as the Commission may consider necessary to ensure a free and fair election and expanded the category of state-owned media institutions to include the Independent Television Network and other broadcasting or telecasting enterprise owned or controlled by the State.”

The 19th Amendment introduced a Penal provision (Article 104GG) that made non-compliance of the directions and guidelines issued by the EC a punishable offence. It provides for trial in High Court and on conviction, for “Any public officer, any employee of any public corporation, business or other undertaking vested in the Government under any other written law and any company registered or deemed to be registered under the Companies Act, No. 7 of 2007, in which the Government or any public corporation or local authority holds fifty per centum or more of the shares of that company be liable to a fine not exceeding one hundred thousand rupees or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years or to both such fine and imprisonment.”  

The 20th Amendment and 21st Amendment by amending Article 104(5)(b) authorized the EC to issue guidelines to regulate both private and public media as the EC may consider necessary to ensure a free and fair election. However, neither the 20th Amendment nor the 21st Amendment amended the penal provision of Article 104GG to be extended to private media. Therefore, only the state-owned media are constitutionally liable for non-compliance with the guidelines issued by the EC. This could either be an accidental mishap or a purposefully created loophole. Either way, the private media is free not to comply with the guidelines issued by the EC.

Presidential election 2024

The EC has launched the media guidelines for the Presidential Election of 2024 by way of an Extraordinary Gazette No. 2394/57 dated 26.07.2024.

Role of the Permanent Representative Committee

A Permanent Representative Committee is appointed by the Election Commission to oversee the enforcement of these guidelines. This committee monitors media activities to ensure compliance and makes recommendations based on their observations. The committee acts under the directives of the Election Commission, which takes necessary actions based on the committee’s recommendations.

General Media Conduct

Media institutions are mandated to provide accurate, balanced, and impartial information. They must refrain from any activity that could unfairly influence public opinion or provide undue advantage to any political party, independent group, or candidate.

Guidelines for Electronic Media

– Neutral Coverage: All broadcasting must maintain neutrality, avoiding favouritism or discrimination against any political entity.

– Editorial Integrity: Media should avoid commenting on newspaper editorials in a way that could influence public opinion. Affected parties must be given the opportunity to present counter perspectives.

– Presenter Conduct: Presenters and announcers must refrain from expressing personal views that could promote or harm any political party.

– Balanced Programming: News divisions must avoid broadcasting content that violates election laws or guidelines. All parties affected by an event or incident should be given equal opportunities to express their views.

– Responsibility and Accountability: Media institutions and individuals involved in broadcasting are accountable for the content aired, including the requirement to disclose the identities of those responsible for election-related programming.

– Equal Air Time: Equal coverage must be given to all political parties, especially when covering the President, Prime Minister, or other prominent figures.

Social Media and Online Platforms

Administrators of social media and internet platforms are responsible for ensuring that their content does not spread false information, promote hatred, or unfairly influence public opinion. They must also avoid creating fake accounts or using artificial intelligence to manipulate public perception.

Print Media Guidelines

Print media are also expected to maintain neutrality and impartiality, particularly in allocating space for political content. They must avoid publishing content that promotes one party or candidate over another, and all election-related publications must adhere to the guidelines set by the Election Commission.

Way forward

We need a rapid remedy to prevent misinformation and disinformation. But more often than not, when the EC along with other institutional authorities acts the damage is done. As we have witnessed in the past even news about the voting eligibility of a candidate can be misused on the polling day to manipulate the voters. In the age of digital platforms, the understanding of media must extend beyond traditional forms. Digital platforms offer citizens opportunities to communicate their ideas and views through intermediaries such as Meta, X, TikTok and YouTube facilitated by modern technology. Social media platforms play and have played a significant role in sharing news as well as being a lively campaign tool during elections.

The 2019 presidential election saw a massive leap forward in the use of social media for election campaigning. According to Election Observer Reports “Even during the 48-hour cooling-off period before election day, election campaigns continued on social media along with advertisements.” This has prompted both local and foreign election observers to recommend measures to regulate social media during election time. But the reality is that while the regulation of social media during elections is necessary, it must be carefully balanced with the right to freedom of expression. By establishing clear, fair and transparent regulations, governments can protect the integrity of elections while also safeguarding the fundamental rights of individuals and the press. This balance is crucial for maintaining the health and vibrancy of democratic societies.

-groundviews.org