Don Robotham, Contributor

Ralph Chen was among members of the public who attended last Tuesday's seminar on press freedom and corruption prevention. Justice Hugh Small, who leads a government-appointed committee to review the country's libel and defamation laws, said that the public will be consulted before a final report is submitted. - Ricardo Makyn/Staff Photographer

The establishment by the Bruce Golding government of a committee, under the leadership of Mr. Justice Hugh Small, to review the libel and defamation laws of Jamaica is a welcome step. The terms of reference permit a review of the long-standing concerns about restrictions on the media in the context of the highly sophisticated and demanding global world of today.

In the last 20 years, there has been a huge expansion of the media in Jamaica, as has been the case in the rest of the Caribbean and the world. New forms of media and journalism such as chat rooms, blogging, Youtube and Facebook have been generated by the Internet and by improvements in cellphone technology. This has opened up unprecedented opportunities for self-expression as well as access to information in which many Jamaicans are enthusiastically participating. As the information technology infrastructure expands, the numbers and diversity of persons and institutions active in the media will naturally grow, further strengthening our democracy.

This has been all to the good but it does mean that we have a far more sophisticated global information environment dealing with than ever before. In this context, our restrictive libel laws are particularly incongruous and pointless. They only serve to hamstring the more traditional sections of the print and electronic media but are completely ineffectual in this broader technological context.

Complex issues of law

The committee will consider the many complex issues of law which govern modern concepts of libel and defamation as well as access to information. It will avail itself not only of local knowledge but also of the international experience with attempts to establish a framework for the extraordinarily complex media environment of today's world. On this basis it will make its recommendations to Government.

These issues of freedom of the press are not only of relevance to media houses and journalists. On the contrary, these are matters in which the general public has a direct and enduring interest. Press freedom rights are an inseparable part of the rights of freedom of thought as well as of ethical freedom. For there can be no responsible exercise of mental and moral choice in the absence of the freedom to acquire information, analysis and moral sentiments from the widest possible sources.

Likewise, it is impossible to conceive of freedom of action in any meaningful sense without freedom of thought. This pertains not only to the exercise of reason but also the exercise of morality.

Responsible individual choice presumes not only the exercise of logic but perhaps even more so, the exercise of ethics. When one considers the issue of the freedom of the press therefore, one is in fact dealing with one of the fundamental human rights which provide the foundation for modern life at both the individual and collective levels.

To place press freedom in this exalted philosophical and ethical realm means that it is an inalienable right. It is not a privilege conferred on a grateful citizenry by a generous-minded state. On the contrary, press freedom occupies the hallowed ground of natural rights to which all states must defer. This fact makes the narrow restrictions of our libel laws all the more intolerable. Under the present laws, significant information and analyses which are clearly in the public interest are impossible to publicise without breaching the law. This is unjustifiable in any terms and we look forward to the committee providing practical proposals which can remedy this situation.