Kazakhstan mass media needs adequate legislative framework

ASTANA. January 15. KAZINFROM /Muratbek Makulbekov/ The Ministry of Culture and Information of the Republic of Kazakhstan has recently completed the work on amendments to the law on mass media. The Majilis deputies have already approved this draft law and its further destiny is solved in the Senate of the Parliament. Member of the working group on development of the draft law Kanat Sakhariyanov shares his view upon the document with our readers.

Kanat Akylbayevich, you were the member of the working group on the development of the draft law ?On amendments to some legislative acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan on mass media?. Would you tell about the working process over this draft law. As is known, it is not the first attempt to improve the legal sphere of Kazakhstan?s mass media market. But we can say that this is the first time over the recent years when the amendments have positive character for the establishment of an institution on freedom of speech. The legislation should develop apace with public relations. The level of Kazakhstan?s mass media requires more adequate legislative base. We should note that the amendments offered by the developers mostly correspond to those offered by journalistic organizations starting from 2004. A number of journalistic and human rights organizations and expert community were invited to join the working group on the draft law. The result which we have achieved can be named as a breakthrough phase from the tendency of increasing legislative pressure towards the liberalization. Tell, please, about principal amendments to the legislation in the sphere of mass media. During the development of amendements to the law on mass media the attention was paid to the observance of rights and professional interests of journalists. The norms aimed at easing the work of the media were developed during the discussion. In case the draft law is approved, reporters will be released from the obligation to receive permission for use of audio or video record in interviewing. Another norm of the new legislation will strengthen legal protection of journalists. Now, a reporter is considered to be certainly guilty if he/she is required rebut of released material through the court. Thus a journalist must prove the verity of his information. But it is not always possible when the question is about the utterances of other persons. Offered amendments balance the positions of a plaintiff and a defendant. According to the amendments a plaintiff must prove that information published by a reporter does not correspond to the reality. In addition, I would like to note that needless bureaucratic barriers within the process of establishment of mass media will be removed. The norm which eliminates the registration of television- and radio-broadcasting companies can testify it. Now, it is enough to receive the license for doing this business. I think the heads of TV channels and radio stations will know the worth of this amendment. As you know, many public unions think that these amendments are not enough for liberalization of the current legislation. How do you think is it really necessary to make more amendments to the draft law? Yes, not everyone is satisfied with this draft law. But I should say that the volume of amendments engenders argument instead of the content of amendments. The serious amendments offered by journalistic organizations were not included into the project. The issues of recall of criminal sentence for the defamation in mass media, limitation period, sum of recovery for moral damage, and etc. are still not reflected. The work of mass media can be suspended because of formal factors or insignificant violations. There is the same situation with the confiscation of mass media production. Alongside, the draft law contains norms which will simplify the work of our colleagues even today. The document has become the result of joint efforts of officials, deputies, human rights activists and market participants. Nevertheless, we are the citizens of Kazakhstan and our interests are similar. I am sure that today?s project will not become the last one in its way. The liberalization of Kazakhstani legislation will be continued. This process is inevitable.