We applaud the removal of the two clauses in the previous draft of the emergency response law that may lead to constrains on the press.
According to article 57 of that draft, proposed for first reading at the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress last June, the media are not supposed to release information about the handling of emergencies and development of the situation on their own "in violation of related rules", or publish false information. If the circumstances or consequences are considered "serious", the violator may face a fine of 50,000 yuan to 100,000 yuan ($6,250-$12,500).
Article 45, while obligating the media to publish timely information in emergencies, ruled that government offices must "regulate" the reports.
It is inspiring to see such clauses gone in the updated version submitted to the current session of the NPC Standing Committee. In spite of some people's hallow promises that they would not curtail the media's latitude in emergency coverage, such stipulations can do no good in times of emergency.
Imposing a legal burden on the press to ask for local authorities' approval to run stories in emergency coverage is a very questionable idea. In practice, we have more than enough cases to illustrate the desire of responsible authorities to cover things up.
Our bureaucrats may be a little more comfortable with media reports on natural disasters. Such information, though negative, may end up drawing sympathy or even practical aid. But things are totally different when human responsibilities are involved.
There is a strong bureaucratic interest in hiding the truth. Subjecting media reporting to their consent is like giving them a license to conceal the truth. This is against the national leadership's persistent pledge to give full play to the media's supervisory role.
Some bureaucrats are accustomed to information control in times of emergency, believing knowledge may cause instability. But misinformation is far more destabilizing. We are not unfamiliar with panic resulting from rumors when the authorities chose to withhold what they knew.
Instead of legalizing information control, a law regulating our responses to emergencies should make sure the authorities share substantial information with the public. Proper latitude for the press will be conducive to that.
(China Daily 06/26/2007 page10)
