Socialist Party president Dr. Fred M’membe has strongly opposed the proposed Journalism Bill, warning that its enactment would cripple journalism and threaten media freedom in Zambia.
In a statement issued on Monday, Dr. M’membe accused President Hakainde Hichilema’s administration of attempting to take the country backwards, likening the current push for statutory media regulation to a failed attempt made under former president Frederick Chiluba in 1995, which was ultimately quashed by the High Court.
“Mr. Hakainde Hichilema’s Journalism Bill will kill journalism and media freedom and must be vigorously opposed and stopped. It must be killed before it kills journalism and media freedom in this country,” said Dr. M’membe.
He argued that introducing strict statutory regulation over the practice of journalism would effectively place the media “under house arrest” and contradict the principles of a free press.
“Strict statutory regulation of the practice of journalism won’t address the deficiencies in the media. Instead, it will put the entire practice under house arrest,” he warned.
Dr. M’membe also cautioned against treating journalism as a closed profession, akin to law or medicine, which require formal licensing and entry barriers. He stressed that journalism is rooted in the fundamental right to freedom of expression and should remain open to anyone who chooses to pursue it.
“Journalism is an open calling, not a closed profession,” he said. “It is dangerous to try to turn journalism into a closed profession like medicine or law and start licensing journalists. This would be a serious blow to media freedom.”
He emphasized that journalism, whether practiced professionally or by citizens expressing themselves, should not be subject to rigid regulations that could lead to censorship or exclusion.
“A system allowing journalists to be struck off or denied a press card for breaching some enforced code would be anathema to media freedom,” Dr. M’membe stated.
His remarks add to the growing criticism of the proposed legislation from media stakeholders, civil society organizations, and political leaders, many of whom argue that the bill could be used to suppress dissent and stifle free expression.