State of the media in Southern Africa - 2003 Malawi by Francis Chikunkhuzeni • Introduction D espite legal and policy frameworks1 that have specific provisions to facilitate media operations, the most notable being constitutional guarantees to freedom of the press and liberalisation of airwaves, the media in Malawi continue to operate in a harsh political, legal and economic environment. The media system continues to reflect concentration of media ownership in the hands of a minority elite, who have political or religious power as well as an urban based-production/distribution infrastructure. In addition, the pervasive traditional use of the media as a tool for social control rather than a forum for effective dialogue and participation of the citizenry has accentuated the marginalisation of the majority of Malawians especially those who live in rural areas. In turn, the media have registered negligible direct impact on the welfare of the majority of Malawians. This article highlights some features of the political, legal and economic environment that affected the operations of the media in 2003. 1. Political Environment Political culture has a profound impact on media freedom. While the Malawi political system guarantees media freedom, media practice is immersed in a prevailing political culture, in which power-holders are intolerant to criticism. The resultant animosity is evident in mediagovernment relations and regulation of media operations. Media-Government Relationship In 2003, government-media relations remained substantially antagonistic amid occasional semblances of mutual co-operation. Public images of co-operation encompassed invitations of journalists to government publicity events and occasional get-together events, such as conferences, workshops and seminars involving both parties. There were no reported cases of overt conflict between the judiciary or legislature and the media. The media have enjoyed unabated access to parliamentary and judicial proceedings. While there were no conspicuous clashes between the media and the legislature or judiciary, relations between the media (especially private and community) and the executive branch of government including its attendant political clique were a travesty to media freedom. Instead of defending and consolidating provisions of the Constitution of Malawi as regards rights to communication, the executive back-peddled. Cautioned by accumulated historical experiences on the consequences of criticising ‘government’, many media workers have resigned themselves to self-censorship and silent acquiescence. The trend over the past ten years has been systematic suppression of freedom of the media in order to consolidate political power through silencing of dissenting views using advertisements and sponsorship as economic control over media output, politically motivated litigations as well as physical and mental harassment of media workers. In 2003, politically motivated litigations and harassment prevailed. Head of the executive branch of government, President Bakili Muluzi made public threats to the media and allowed his political acolytes to admonish media institutions and personnel at public meetings, especially those aired live by the Malawi Broadcasting Corporation (MBC). These public statements from politicians on the work of the media sent signals of intolerance and hostility towards the media. When Nation Newspaper journalist, Daniel Nyirenda, was So This Is Democracy? 2003 39 Media Institute of Southern Africa