Investigative Journalism

I have deep respect for the work of investigative journalists. They often work under very difficult circumstances – risking persecution, law suits and harassment. But investigative journalism is indispensable. We have a saying in my country: The tabloids keep the democracy clean. Journalists are the ones that make sure that the authorities are held accountable for their actions – or lack of action.

In my part of the World, the relationship between journalists and officials has generally been tricky – it is like a love/hate relationship – without much love. Within the public sector many used to live by the saying: “I have the right to remain silent – otherwise I will be misquoted and my statement used against me”. Very few had any interest in speaking to journalists for exact this reason and because speaking to journalists would never ever do you any good in your career. If you where so unlucky to actually talk to a journalist and if – god forbid – you actually got quoted for something – you could be quite sure that the upper ranks were not amused.

This phenomenon is changing in many ways. For start, we know that is it no longer possible to keep a lid on stories. Freedom of speech for public servants as well as for everyone else, the right of access to documents and a generally very high standard of investigative journalism makes it pointless to try to hide information that mostly is available if you know how to look. History has also thought us that it is not the misdeed itself that makes a government fall or cost civil servants their career. No, it is the cover-up after something has been discovered that bring down governments. So the lesson is quite clear – if an investigative journalist is on to something it is generally better to take the issue seriously – maybe even cooperate – in order to try to solve the problem before it is too late. The story will go to press anyway. Journalists would probably say that the government is trying to outsmart them. I would say it is a more professional way of dealing with the press.

I know this reality is very far from the one that investigative journalists are facing in this region but for governments and states that take freedom of press and freedom of speech seriously they have to go down this road. And don’t worry – there will still be stories to investigate.

There is another phenomenon that also is changing. Journalists on established media are no longer alone in doing investigative reporting. New media is transforming the landscape and traditional journalists now face competition from bloggers, You Tubers and informal networks and NGO’s. For the printed press the outlook is not rosy at all. But as with all competition there is also an opportunity – and the opportunity is to be better, be more relevant, and in particular to become much more credible.

Credibility has very much to do with skills and techniques. If a critical investigative story is based on good journalistic research and sound criticism of sources it will become irrefutable. And with increased credibility the readers will come back. Yesterday, to my great interest I heard that Al Masri al Yawm as a result of their recent investigative reporting on the pollution of the Nile had had a substantial increase in sales. Readers want that kind of stories. And this is exactly why government-owned press and papers will face a hard time – they will not be credible in investigating their owners.

We have been told, that “for freedom of press – the sky is the limit”. As Danish ambassador I cannot be more in agreement with that statement – and it saddens me to see, that according to Jordanian journalists themselves, self-censorship is the common rule. Self-censorship is to do the dirty work for the otherwise would-be censors - how can we then reach the sky? It is not enough to stand on our toes – we have to build the ladder ourself.

We have also been told that the level of criticism and boldness in articles should be matched by an equal level of research techniques, fact check and scrutiny. This is a crucial point and not only for investigative journalism. Because what use is freedom of the press if journalists are not capable of conducting proper research? We all have agendas that we want to promote. Good journalists know that and take this into account when researching and writing their articles. I am sorry to say that – based on a number of personal experiences in Jordan – this is not always the case in Jordan. Sources are accepted at face value and let far too easy off the hook. Add to this that systematically fact checking of numbers, dates, names etc. is often absent in articles.

Maybe other journalists should take one of the ARIJ classes on how to prepare for that crucial confronting mother-of-all-interviews? Or at least read and learn from the manual ARIJ published yesterday (.pdf – and really worth a read)

This brings me to ARIJ. Last year we celebrated the first ARIJ conference for Investigative Journalism in the Arab region. It was a milestone and rightly praised by Tim Sebastian in an article in New York Times. This year is also a tribute to all who care for good, professional, solid and not least credible journalism in a region where that is not a given thing.

On the Danish side we are very proud to be part of the ARIJ project since its inception in 2004 through a number of Danish institutions and foremost among them International Media Support.

The team that ARIJ have put together, from the extremely qualified persons on the board over the outstanding and high profile trainers participating in this year’s conference to the amazing general manager Rana Sabbagh is second to none. The mere fact that ARIJ have been able to get such an outstanding group of people involved is a clear sign of its success – and of its necessity both for the region but also for the profession. As I said – the competition is fierce and the product has to become better. Investigative journalism is one of the areas where the traditional press still can have an edge. And it is needed for the sake of society.

(Excerpts of a speech on the occasion of the second Conference for Investigative Journalism in the Arab Region on November 21st)

Torture

Jordan puts its money where its mouth is. As the first Arab country Jordan decided to co-sponsor the annual Anti-torture resolution in the UN last night.

During the last 10 years my country has led the often very difficult negotiations on torture. Torture is – as you would imagine – a very sensitive issue for many countries. It has been difficult to engage some parts of the world in signing up to a co-sponsorship, whereas no country the last number of years has voted against the resolution. But this year Jordan together with Morocco showed the way for the region.

This resolution reminds the world that freedom from torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment is a fundamental right, that has to be protected under all circumstances and without exception.

Mabrook Jordan…

Way to Copenhagen

Denmark being the host for the Climate change summit in Copenhagen in December I have been asked to give a brief overview of progress and expectations for a new climate agreement. 

But before doing that I would like to stress one thing that has become more and more evident to me here in Jordan as we are progressing towards that summit.

It can be stated very simply: Man made climate change is a FACT. The science is conclusive.

Unfortunately, in this part of the world among many citizens and some political circles, climate change is either considered as not an urgent problem or considered as a western invented conspiracy to slow down the developing world.

Regrettably, it is much worse. Climate change is the challenge of the century.

It is perfectly understandable that in this region that faces so many diverse problems, another difficult issue to deal with is very unwelcome. None the less, climate change is also a security issue. When climate change puts regional food security and regional water supply at risk we will have a very serious security issue at hand. And when this happens – it is probably too late to do something about it.

Two reports: The first “Rising Temperatures – Rising Tensions” from this spring and a second report from Arab Forum for Environment and Development (AFED) to be released in two weeks in Beirut will make this point very clear. Climate change is important – and in particular to this part of the world.

-o0o-

So how are we progressing towards a deal in Copenhagen? Two days ago the final UN-negotiation round before Copenhagen concluded in Barcelona. The prospect for a deal in Copenhagen is still there. But the negotiations have progressed much slower than what we had hoped for.

A lot of questions – some political, some technical – are left for Copenhagen.

It now seems almost impossible to be able to conclude a legally binding treaty – with all its nitty-gritty – in Copenhagen. What seems to be possible is a political agreement about the substance in a new climate deal. This agreement will according to a specific deadline be transferred into a legal, global text soon after the COP15 summit.

What now is needed is active global involvement from the highest political level in order to get decisions on the political substance of a new climate deal. Even in the absence of formal UN-negotiations the next four weeks will not run idle.

The major economies will meet; some bilateral summits – not least a crucial one between USA and China – will take place. And there will be various meetings in other formats with the sole purpose of paving the way for a deal in Copenhagen.

-o0o-

Let me now turn to the issue on how we from the Danish side as host look at what is at stake in Copenhagen in December.

At COP15 in Copenhagen we have a choice to make. The moment will be in our hands. We can either seize it – or we can let it go.

Whatever we choose – there is no doubt that future generations will judge us on our ability to make COP15 a decisive moment of change.

We have a responsibility to the future generations as well as towards ourselves. A responsibility to seal the deal in Copenhagen. And deliver a viable solution to one of the greatest challenges of our time.

In Copenhagen we must provide a fundamental response to climate change.

We should initiate a strong global cooperation to transform the world economy. And promote low carbon economic growth and sustainable development.

Our success depends on our ability to reach an agreement that is consistent with science.

In practical terms this means an agreement that limits the rise in global temperature to a maximum of 2 degrees Celsius.

Furthermore – the deal must be based on the principle of equity. It must support, not delay the fight against poverty. It shall be practicable and promote the vision of sustainable development. And it shall send a clear signal to industry to engage in the transition to a low carbon economy.

We have already come a long way. By now many countries have developed far reaching national emission reduction policies and low carbon development plans. And many others are on their way.

This is indeed encouraging. We are all taking action. We are all realizing that the green agenda is both vital to combat global warming and at the same time part of the response to the global economic crisis.

However – as we act, the challenge is also mounting. If we pool all our plans – if we sum up all the national emission reductions under way – the figures do not add up.

We have to acknowledge this harsh fact. And we have to face the only natural consequence: That we have to do more.

Jointly, we can achieve more than the sum of our individual contributions. That is why we need a global agreement.

Allow me to share with you the Danish vision for a global agreement in Copenhagen.

It should be ambitious. It should be binding. It should correspond to the 2 degrees scenario. And it should constitute the overall political framework for future global efforts against climate change – based on the following 5 key elements:

1) First – Industrialized countries will have to commit to substantial reduction targets in the perspective of 80 pct reduction by 2050. At the same time they must offer binding reduction commitments in the near and medium term.

2) Second – Developing countries should commit to reduce growth in CO2 emissions through unilateral and international supported activities. And we should invite developing countries to estimate indicative figures for their projected future emission patterns.

3) The third element is public financing. Developed countries should commit to finance overseas mitigation and adaptation efforts. And we should also accelerate international research in green technology – and facilitate its dissemination all over the world.

4) The fourth element will be market off-sets with an indication of emission reductions purchased abroad through the carbon market.

5) And finally as the fifth element – we must ensure credibility and verification as part of the agreement. Transparency and mutual trust are key words in this regard.

It could be obtained by a system where both developed and developing countries collect and register information to document their individual efforts. That would be an important confidence builder. And it would establish an important direct link between funding and actions.

Concluding a political agreement of this magnitude requires full engagement at the highest political level.

The political will is there. But the agreement is not.

Success will depend critically on the continued engagement of Heads of States and Governments.

As we approach a global agreement, Denmark intents to invite all Heads of States and Governments to come to Copenhagen and close COP15 at the summit level.

Transforming our individual political commitments into a global agreement will take collective political determination at an unprecedented scale.

It is necessary. It is doable. And it is in our hands.

December is the time. Copenhagen is the venue.

And No – there is no Plan B – because there is no Planet B for us to live on.

 Speech on the occasion of the “Way to Copenhagen” conference at the Columbia University Middle East Research Centre the 8th of November 2009.

Fighter

Welcome to post no. 100

  The movie showing in Jordan will have subtitles in Arabic.

Many young people in Europe and the Middle East find that sports and arts is an alternative way to express and challenge themselves. The Danish contribution to the EU Film festival deals with the themes of intercultural dialogue and youth expression through sports; “Fighter” is about a young Turkish-Danish girl who is not only fighting to improve her Kung Fu skills, but also struggling to cope with the intercultural complications and expectations of society, family and friends as she creates her own identity.
 
The Danish Embassy and MS Action Aid would like to invite you to participate in two events together with the leading actress from the movie, Semra Turan, where you will have the opportunity to debate and experience different ways of self expression in company of young engaged athletes and artists from Denmark and Jordan:
 
The 5^th of November in Amman at King Hussein Cultural Centre at 6pm: A debate about ways and limitations of youth expression with engaged young athletes and artists from Denmark and Amman, including the leading actress. Movie starts at 8 pm.
                   
The 6^th of November in Amman at Al-Hussein Cultural Centre at 5pm: You will have another chance to view the movie “Fighter”.
 
The 7^th of November in Zarqa at King Abdallah Cultural Centre at 3pm: Engaged young athletes and artists from Denmark, Amman and Zarqa will perform, share and debate different ways of self expression through sports and arts. The screening of the movie will take place at 6pm and be followed by a joint discussion with the audience.

Freedom of Press

Reporters Without Borders have made their 2009 index of press freedom public. 

Jordan is 112th on the list – an improvement from last year. Reading the Methodology paper RSF mentions that the Index ”measure the level of self-censorship in each country and the ability of the media to investigate and criticise” which is probably what puts Jordan in the lower half.

On top of the list you find a group of Nordic countries (Denmark, Sweden, Norway and Finland – and Ireland) – all at an equal high score of zero points meaning full freedom of Press.

The first 15 countries are all small and highly developed countries and no one more than roughly double the size of Jordan in population. It seems that size does matter…and there is room for Jordan in the club.