| Part of a series on |
| Censorship by country |
|---|
 |
| Countries |
| See also |
Censorship in Bhutan refers to the way in which the Government of Bhutan controls information within its borders. There are no laws that either guarantee citizens' right to information or explicitly structure a censorship scheme. However, censorship in Bhutan is still conducted by restrictions on the ownership of media outlets, licensing of journalists, and the blocking of websites.
Through 2008, individuals were able to criticize the government publicly; however, the government did at times attempt to impede criticism and monitor political meetings. [1]
Bhutan has one government majority-owned newspaper, the Kuensel , five private newspapers, several magazines, and three internet service providers. In May 2007, the government proposed controls on advertising; after many unfavorable newspaper editorials, the government withdrew the proposal. [1] Through 2008, newspapers operated freely and published stories critical of the government. Foreign newspapers and magazines were also available.
Bhutan also has three private FM radio stations. [2] : 16 Through 2008, the government allowed foreign broadcasts and did not censor broadcast content. Private radio and television stations were active and expressed a variety of views, although the government may have limited the number of television channels available. International organizations maintained that the cable costs were often more prohibitive than government restrictions. [1]
During the visit of the Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to Bhutan in May 2008, only journalists from the Bhutan Broadcasting Service and Kuensel were permitted to attend the function. Officials respond only to journalists from the government media or 'authorized' private media.[ citation needed ]
Media sources suggested that while there is commitment at the highest levels to provide the media with information, some media professionals continued to find it difficult to get access to information from bureaucrats and public officials, especially on issues of corruption and violations of the law. Bhutan does not yet have any legislation guaranteeing the citizens' right to information. [3] [4] [5]
Individuals and groups are generally permitted to engage in peaceful expression of views via the Internet. Government officials state that the government does not block access, restrict content, or censor Web sites. However, Freedom House reports the government occasionally blocks access to Web sites containing pornography or information deemed offensive to the state; but that such blocked information typically does not extend to political content. In its Freedom of the Press 2012 report, Freedom House described high levels of self-censorship among media practitioners, despite few reports of official intimidation or threats. [6]
The constitution provides for freedom of speech including for members of the press, and the government generally respects these rights in practice. Citizens can publicly and privately criticize the government without reprisal. The constitution states that persons "shall not be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his or her privacy, family, home, or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on the person’s honor and reputation," and the government generally respects these prohibitions. [6]
The official forums of Kuensel online allow open criticism of the government though the forums are moderated, and anyone can post from an Internet café. The forums of news portals such as U.S.-based The Bhutan Times (unrelated to the Bhutan Times newspaper) are much less moderated. The website was temporarily blocked by BICMA, Bhutan's media regulatory body, in 2007. [7] Government officials said forum discussions on bhutantimes.com were too critical of Minister Sangey Nidup, maternal uncle of the king. In August 2007, bhutantimes.com reported that the government lifted its block on service within the country. [1]
BICMA's censorship pattern appears to reflect individual sensitivities of people who may have been discussed online. [8]
Journalists in Bhutan face very little freedom of the media. They are faced with criminal charges just for posts on their personal Facebook accounts. From 2016-2018, there have been two new cases regarding the prosecution of journalists who posted on their personal Facebook accounts about property disputes and child mistreatment. While the facts of these two incidents happened to be true, they both were still sentenced to 3 months in prison and required to pay a heavy fine. Bhutan government officials have enacted new laws that restricts what can be shared on social media. While the constitution in Bhutan guarantees freedom of speech, civil servants, such as journalists, are denied this right because of a law that states, "A civil servant shall not critique his agency and the Royal Government,". Bhutan is praised for its high level of "gross domestic happiness" but its people are beginning to face increasingly strict censorship in the media.
Modernly, Bhutan has regulated its domestic media since enactment of the Bhutan Information Communications and Media Act in July 2006. It created an independent body, the Bhutan Information Communications and Media Authority (BICMA), which was formerly a part of the Ministry for Information and Communications. BICMA is responsible for regulating communications, their technology, and their means in Bhutan [9] [10]
The Act provides for considerable discretion, including that consideration be given to "peace, stability and well-being" in taking over communications services and facilities, [10] : 14 intercepting communications, [10] : 15 regulatory rulemaking, [10] : 33 issuing permits to publish materials, [10] : 97 show films, [10] : 108, 113 and perform dramas, [10] : 115, 120 blocking access to protest websites, [10] : 176 and banning certain foreign publications in the national interest. [10] : 100 The Act further provides penalties for failure to comply with prohibitory orders by BICMA, and empowers the government to enter private property to search and seize when the agency "reasonably suspects" regulatory violations. [10] : 116, 119
According to Freedom House's 2010 annual report, the media law adopted in 2006 led to the establishment of two independent radio stations, but did not provide specific protections for journalists or guarantee freedom of information. Two independent weeklies and the state-owned newspaper generally published articles favorable to the government and covered criticism of the government only occasionally. [3]
The older National Security Act is a series of sixteen articles enacted by Parliament on November 2, 1992. Several of its provisions prohibit criticism of the king and the political system. [3] [11] The Act punishes those who undermine or attempt to undermine Bhutan's security by creating or inciting "hatred and disaffection," including by speech, with imprisonment for up to ten years. Speech and other acts that create "misunderstanding or hostility between the government and people of Bhutan and the Government and people of any foreign country" are punishable by up to five years' imprisonment. [11]
Furthermore, the Act allows up to three years' imprisonment for those who speak or act to promote or attempt to promote "feelings of enmity or hatred between different religious, racial or language groups or castes and communities, or commits any act which is prejudicial to the maintenance of harmony between different religious, racial or language groups or castes or communities, and which disturbs or is likely to disturb the public tranquility." As such, the Act criminalizes hate speech and propaganda harmful to foreign relations. [11] In practice, some criticism of the government was allowed, including critical postings on government Web sites. [3]
Certain other pieces of Bhutanese legislation provide for content-based restrictions on speech. For example, the Tobacco Control Act of 2010 makes depictions of tobacco use in motion media other than for health promotion constitute a petty misdemeanor. [12]
Freedom of the press or freedom of the media is the fundamental principle that communication and expression through various media, including printed and electronic media, especially published materials, should be considered a right to be exercised freely. Such freedom implies the absence of interference from an overreaching state; its preservation may be sought through a constitution or other legal protection and security. It is in opposition to paid press, where communities, police organizations, and governments are paid for their copyrights.
The Tunisia Monitoring Group (IFEX-TMG) is a coalition of 21 free-expression organisations that belong to the International Freedom of Expression Exchange (IFEX), a global network of non-governmental organisations that promotes and defends the right to freedom of expression and freedom of the press.
Censorship in Taiwan was in effect when the government exercised strict media control during the martial law period in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, carried over from the Nationalists which governed mainland China prior to retreating to Taiwan in 1949. Under martial law, the Kuomintang-ruled government engaged in censorship to prevent criticism of it, as part of its opposition to certain cultural products, and as a feature of anti-communist campaigns against the Chinese Communist Party. Media control was greatly relaxed when the state moved away from authoritarianism in 1987.
Censorship in Tunisia has been an issue since the country gained independence in 1956. Though considered relatively mild under President Habib Bourguiba (1957–1987), censorship and other forms of repression became common under his successor, President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali. Ben Ali was listed as one of the "10 Worst Enemies of the Press" by the Committee to Protect Journalists starting in 1998. Reporters Without Borders named Ben Ali as a leading "Predator of Press Freedom". However, the Tunisia Monitoring Group reports that the situation with respect to censorship has improved dramatically since the overthrow of Ben Ali in early 2011.
The mass media in Georgia refers to mass media outlets based in the Republic of Georgia. Television, magazines, and newspapers are all operated by both state-owned and for-profit corporations which depend on advertising, subscription, and other sales-related revenues. The Constitution of Georgia guarantees freedom of speech. Georgia is the only country in its immediate neighborhood where the press is not deemed unfree. As a country in transition, the Georgian media system is under transformation.
The various mass media in Bhutan have historically been government-controlled, although this has changed in recent years. The country has its own newspapers, television and radio broadcasters and Internet Service Providers.
Censorship in Myanmar results from government policies in controlling and regulating certain information, particularly on religious, ethnic, political, and moral grounds.
The current government of Russia maintains laws and practices that make it difficult for directors of mass-media outlets to carry out independent policies. These laws and practices also hinder the ability of journalists to access sources of information and to work without outside pressure. Media inside Russia includes television and radio channels, periodicals, and Internet media, which according to the laws of the Russian Federation may be either state or private property.
The mass media in Armenia refers to mass media outlets based in Armenia. Television, magazines, and newspapers are all operated by both state-owned and for-profit corporations which depend on advertising, subscription, and other sales-related revenues. Armenia's press freedoms improved considerably following the 2018 Velvet Revolution.
Television, magazines, and newspapers have all been operated by both state-owned and for-profit corporations which depend on advertising, subscription, and other sales-related revenues. Even though the Constitution of Russia guarantees freedom of speech, the press has been plagued by both government censorship and self-censorship.
The print, broadcast and online mass media in Burma has undergone strict censorship and regulation since the 1962 Burmese coup d'état. The constitution provides for freedom of speech and the press; however, the government prohibits the exercise of these rights in practice. Reporters Without Borders ranked Burma 174th out of 178 in its 2010 Press Freedom Index, ahead of just Iran, Turkmenistan, North Korea, and Eritrea. In 2015, Burma moved up to 144th place, ahead of many of its ASEAN neighbours such as Singapore, as a result of political changes in the country.
Freedom of speech is the concept of the inherent human right to voice one's opinion publicly without fear of censorship or punishment. "Speech" is not limited to public speaking and is generally taken to include other forms of expression. The right is preserved in the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights and is granted formal recognition by the laws of most nations. Nonetheless, the degree to which the right is upheld in practice varies greatly from one nation to another. In many nations, particularly those with authoritarian forms of government, overt government censorship is enforced. Censorship has also been claimed to occur in other forms and there are different approaches to issues such as hate speech, obscenity, and defamation laws.
The mass media in Ghana, includes television, radio, internet publishing and newspapers.
Human rights in Zambia are addressed in Zambia's constitution. However, the Zambia 2012 Human Rights Report of the United States Department of State noted that in general, the government's human rights record remained poor. The 2021 version of this report noted improvements in many areas.
Mass media regulations or simply media regulations are a form of media policy with rules enforced by the jurisdiction of law. Guidelines for mass media use differ across the world. This regulation, via law, rules or procedures, can have various goals, for example intervention to protect a stated "public interest", or encouraging competition and an effective media market, or establishing common technical standards. The principal targets of mass media regulation are the press, radio and television, but may also include film, recorded music, cable, satellite, storage and distribution technology, the internet, mobile phones etc. It includes the regulation of independent media.
Censorship in Serbia is prohibited by the Constitution. Freedom of expression and of information are protected by international and national law, even if the guarantees enshrined in the laws are not coherently implemented. Instances of censorship and self-censorship are still reported in the country.
Censorship in Ecuador refers to all actions which can be considered as suppression in speech in Ecuador. In the Freedom of the Press Report 2016 by Freedom House, the press in Ecuador is classified as "not free". The 2016 World Press Freedom Index by Reporters Without Borders placed Ecuador in the "noticeable problems" category for press freedom, ranking the country 109 out of 180.
This list of Internet censorship and surveillance in Europe provides information on the types and levels of Internet censorship and surveillance that is occurring in countries in Europe.
This list of Internet censorship and surveillance in the Americas provides information on the types and levels of Internet censorship and surveillance that is occurring in countries in the Americas.
This list of Internet censorship and surveillance in Africa provides information on the types and levels of Internet censorship and surveillance that is occurring in countries in Africa.
This article incorporates public domain material from U.S. Bilateral Relations Fact Sheets. United States Department of State.
| Sources |  | |
|---|---|---|
| Institutions and agencies | ||
| Courts | ||
| Issues | ||
