Initial analysis of state media law and resolution passed Friday, Aug. 28, 1998

Mongolian media has experienced a gradual freedom since Democracy was instituted in the country eight years ago. But the most radical change so far will occur when the state's new media law goes into effect on Jan. 1, 1999: the government will take itself out of the business of providing news.

At that time, the two state newspapers will be dissolved and the physical assets privatized. The state owned TV, Radio and news wire agency will continue to receive government money, but will be run independent of government (it will become, essentially, a public broadcasting company). This a good step towards breaking the state's monopoly on news, but the law itself is vague-there is no mention of access to information, of

protecting the rights of journalists to print the truth, or how, in fact, the state tv, radio and news wire agency will operate as a "national public" entity. Even the politicians admit this, and say many amendments to the new law will be created. This is a tremendous opportunity for journalists to push for the inclusion of the above-mentioned rights-BUT THEY MUST ACT QUICKLY.

Parliament is expected to establish a working committee on Oct. 1, and amendment drafts are expected by Oct. 15. Contained here is a brief history of the law and its origins, as explained by parliament member T. Ochirhuu, one of the drafters of the legislation, who spent an hour with the Press Institute staff to answer questions on Sept. 5, 1998. Ochirhuu is a Communist and therefore in the minority party, has a reputation as an intelligent, politically savvy person-it's rumored he may one day be a prime minister candidate. He's also married to a journalist, which is important because he's quite sympathetic to the needs of journalists.

PRESS LAW HISTORY AND CONTENTS:

It seemed almost too abrupt when the Mongolian government swiftly passed a freedom of media law on Aug. 28, 1998. But this law has been a long time in the making--several drafts have been sitting in parliament since democracy was instituted in 1990.

The first draft, presented in 1991, was put together by politicians who were used to working under a socialist regime and didn't understand the nature of an independent press, says Ochirhuu. "There was a danger the press was limited, so we decided to wait to let the press develop," he said. It was the same with future laws, he continued: they wanted to wait until the journalists had time to adjust to working under a free system.

This law contains two major concepts which need to be developed: the idea of both public and private media. By Jan. 1, the state won't own any media organizations-but this doesn't mean, in all cases, that they will stop paying for it.

State newspapers will no longer receive money from the government and cannot use their name for five years. The physical assets (such as the printing press, the building, etc.) will go to the state property committee, where it will be determined how to privatize the industry. State radio, tv, and the state Monsame newswire agency, on the other hand, will continue to receive the same amount they've always gotten from the government, Ochirhuu says, at least at first during this transition period. Ideally, this should function like a public broadcasting company in the western world: the media organization would get money, but would not answer directly to the government. These new entities will have a board, which will be in charge of hiring and firing an executive manager. This leaves media outlets in the countryside. At the moment, there are no specific laws relating to this, but Ochirhuu says the local government will be allowed to decide whether aimag newspapers, tv and radio should continue to be given money (functioning as a public organization) or whether they should stop funding them and make them private. (one special provision has been made for the Kazakh-speaking region of Mongolia-the media there will become public, just like tv, radio and the newswire agency).

WEAKNESSES:
Ochirhuu admits that there will need to be many additional amendments to carry out this ambitious plan. He and the Press Institute staff noted the following holes:

1) It's virtually impossible for countryside media to operate as a private company-there is no ad base nor circulation revenue to be generated in most places (that doesn't mean media isn't popular: its pretty standard in the countryside, for example, for one person to buy a paper and pass it to six or eight different people). But because the local government can determine whether to continue to fund the media, that still gives them power over countryside journalists.

2) There is no mention of access to information (right now, the only place to see laws and other official government documents is the state-owned newspapers. After Jan. 1, there will be no such entity. The state says it will publish a brochure with official parliament actions, but it doesn't say anything about meking that available to journalists).

3) There is only a weak slander law now that allows journalists to be sued for libel if they print lies. However, journalists must pay court costs even if they win the case. There are no laws protecting journalists from harassment for writing stories.

4) There is no definition of how these "national public" news entities will work.

5) There are no details about how the state newspapers will be privatized-will the staff get the option to buy out the papers, or will it go up for a public auction?