When ministers and bureaucrats supplant media spokespersons

Syed Badrul AhsanSyed Badrul Ahsan
Published : 15 Oct 2016, 01:50 PM
Updated : 15 Oct 2016, 01:50 PM

The President's Office, meaning Bangabhaban, did the right thing the other day. The media briefing on the talks between visiting Chinese President Xi Jinping and President Abdul Hamid came from presidential Press Secretary Joynal Abedin. That is the way it should be with all media interaction relating to significant occasions. That is the way it has been with Bangabhaban. Protocol, in its proper sense, was maintained.

But that is not what we can say about other areas of the government. The press briefing on the talks between Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina and President Xi and on the ceremony where twenty seven deals on Sino-Bangla cooperation were initialled was given by Foreign Secretary Shahidul Haque. And all the while the Prime Minister's Press Secretary Ihsanul Karim sat beside him. Had proper procedure been followed, especially since the Hasina-Xi talks were held at the Prime Minister's Office (PMO), it would be the prime ministerial Press Secretary who would acquaint the media with the outcome of the talks. For the Foreign Secretary to speak for the government was effectively to play a role that was certainly not his.

The Foreign Secretary was effectively part of the delegation led by the Prime Minister at the talks with the Chinese President. And since the PMO does have a functioning Press Secretary, there is hardly any point in the Foreign Secretary speaking for the government. Where does that leave the Press Secretary to the Prime Minister? One might as well argue, and rightly too, that it is all a matter of one's turf being claimed or taken by another. It is indeed quite disturbing to see the unbridled manner in which the Foreign Office or more precisely those who are at the top of it have systematically tried to keep the spotlight on themselves.

There is a Director General (External Publicity) who has never been in the limelight, not now, not in the past. No DGEP has ever appeared before the media to inform them of the foreign policy or economic initiatives undertaken by the government. One now feels impelled to ask: Is the job of the DGEP merely to oversee the production of pamphlets and posters and diaries for the government and have them sent to Bangladesh's missions, for distribution abroad, by the weekly diplomatic pouch? And how have the Press Wings at our missions, particularly the important ones in London, Washington and Delhi, traditionally fared? In a very significant number of cases, Press Ministers, who are generally media practitioners and serve as political appointees, have had running battles with the Foreign Office men at the missions. Again, there are all the instances to show that Ambassadors and High Commissioners have gone over the heads of Press Ministers to send home news items relating to embassy activities. Proper procedure was ignored, unless it was an assertive Press Minister who made it clear he would brook no nonsense.

There is an absolute need for a clear demarcation of responsibilities where governmental interaction with the media is concerned. All too often, Foreign Minister A.H. Mahmood Ali has been seen – and such an occasion, among others, was the recent visit of US Secretary of State John Kerry – briefing the media on his talks with a visiting dignitary. Why should the Foreign Minister himself brief the media, with the Minister of State and the Foreign Secretary and others seated beside him, when the occasion calls for a proper spokesman of the Foreign Office to speak to the press on the outcome of any interaction with an important visitor? Or are we to suppose that the Foreign Office, unlike other Foreign Offices around the world, has no spokesperson who can do the job? If it hasn't, let it appoint one, for it is not a sign of healthy governance when ministers arrogate to themselves roles that are clearly not theirs. The same goes for the Foreign Secretary, any foreign secretary.

Indeed, it is deeply worrying when ministers and senior bureaucrats in any ministry emerge before the cameras to speak of developments on the watch of their departments. That is not the way it should be. Every ministry needs to have a media spokesperson or department, in the way the country's armed forces have their Inter Services Public Relations (ISPR) to speak for them. Protocol matters, in every area of government. One could point, sadly, to the absolute freedom with which ministers, ignoring their remit or their portfolios, speak of subjects and themes that are not part of their ministerial responsibilities. It is a tradition that must draw to a close, for it threatens to take ministers away from doing their actual jobs. Every minister is a politician, but not every minister should speak on politics. If he or she does, it will be to the detriment of the ministry he or she happens to be responsible for.

Protocol, let us say again, matters. When the issue is one of keeping the media posted on questions of vital national concern, there must be a clear understanding of the nature of the job involved. Every time the Prime Minister returns home from a tour abroad, the country is informed about a media briefing she plans to do at her official residence. The question now is: Will the Prime Minister brief the media or will she address a press conference? There is a difference between the two. If it is a question of briefing that can be done by her Press Secretary, for that essentially is his job. If it is a press conference she means to have, that is a different matter altogether.

But, again, a prime ministerial press conference is something we really have not had. Yes, at Ganobhaban, seated before the head of government is a large number of journalists. But count the number of people in the room or on the lawn, as the case may be. There are, together with the media people, all the ministers and ministers of state and advisors present, along with Members of Parliament and senior government officials, besides people from other areas of life. That is not what or how a press conference or even a media briefing should be. In that room or on that lawn there cannot be anyone who is not part of the media. But that is a convention that has not been followed.
It should all change. The President's Press Secretary has shown how things can be done.

An intellectual dimension must be brought into the system, the better to give it a dash of the modern.