Champions of freedom

IN PRAISE OF THE PRESS II
Alan Fisher on the journalists who risk their lives to bring us the real news

Suzanne Breen

Suzanne Breen is a good journalist. A stylish writer with a great nose for a story, she often breaks exclusives other journalists wish they had written. Northern Ireland is her patch – it has been for years. She used to work out of an office across from mine in Belfast. She was always busy, and I worried when I saw the light burning late over her desk wondering what she'd got. Now she works for the Sunday Tribune – a Dublin-based broadsheet where she holds the title northern editor. 
     When the Real IRA shot dead two soldiers at a barracks near Ballymena, it called Suzanne to tell the world it had done it. A short time later, she carried out an interview with someone from the Real IRA which had announced in the most dramatic fashion that it was back in business and intent on bringing violence back to the streets of Northern Ireland. It was a revealing read. The Police Service of Northern Ireland thought so too. It got in touch and asked for all the background material and confidential information, insisting it would help their inquiry. Like most other journalists protecting sources, Suzanne Breen said no. So, citing anti-terror laws, the police tried to seize her computer, phone and notebooks. Told if she didn't co-operate, she could be jailed for five years, she steadfastly refused to back down.
     In court she argued that if she handed over the material, the Real IRA would kill her. The lawyer acting for the police said there was no immediate threat, seemingly oblivious to the fact that the threat would only become real if she handed over the documents. The judge ruled that she had the right to withhold the evidence because clearly her life was at risk. It's an important ruling for journalists and press freedom.
     There will be those who tut loudly and once again pillory journalism and all those involved in it. But on the steps of the court Suzanne made the point which is crucial to all of this. Journalists are not detectives. Police pursue the bad guys. Journalists collect facts and put them into the public sphere. If we journalists are put in the position of simply gathering evidence for the state, we are no longer doing our jobs. If people who anonymously tip-off journalists about institutional wrongdoing are being revealed, fewer people will come forward in future, and that lets governments and wrongdoers get away with it. Surely the British MPs' expenses scandal and the subsequent release of 'official' documents has told us that. In this case, a lot of time and resources have been spent chasing the messenger rather than those responsible for the murders of the two soldiers.

Last Sunday morning, just after eight, a friend of mine took a cab through the busy streets of Kabul. Qais Azimy works for Al Jazeera in Kabul. Smart, funny and incredibly well-connected, he essentially runs the operation there. He has a network of contacts second-to-none. He was heading for a tower block not far from the city centre which houses the country's intelligence service. He'd been invited along 'for a chat' and so he told his driver to wait and went into the building.
     Around the same time, on the dusty road which runs pasts the three- storey house in the Afghan capital which doubles as the Al Jazeera office, two intelligence officers approached Hameedullah Shah who worked for Al Jazeera's Arabic service. They asked him to get into the car. They wanted 'a chat'. They drove him to the intelligence service building.
     Six hours after Qais entered, a man from inside the building approached his driver and told him to head home. Qais and Hameedullah were held for three days without any contact with their families, their office, or even a lawyer. Their crime? Committing journalism. Or, as Afghanistan's president, Hamid Karzai, himself said: Azimy was guilty of reporting 'a story in favour of terrorism'. The problem was that the Al Jazeera producer had gone to visit the Taliban in Kunduz – a stronghold in the east of the country. The piece showed a Taliban commander boasting that he had hundreds of fighters under his command, along with 12 suicide bombers ready to go. A NATO commander from the region also appeared in the report.
     The intelligence agency said this was a false report with faked footage. When I worked with Qais in Afghanistan almost two years ago, he produced a report which said the Taliban were operating in an area just a hundred kilometres from Kabul. NATO dismissed the report, but less than a month later, they launched a major drive against 'insurgents' in the area. Qais can't say what happened during the three nights he was detained. That's part of the release agreement, but in a country that claims to be a democracy, a free press is essential. It cannot be controlled or intimidated. It cannot be regulated out of existence. There is a media law in Afghanistan but it is riddled with loopholes and allows prosecution of journalists and others for things like 'blasphemy' or 'insulting' public officials.
     It's easy to criticise journalists, and many do. But the world would be a much darker place without people like Qais Azimy and Suzanne Breen shining a light on things, which lets the rest of us know what's really going on.