Artificial Intelligence for Govt. spokesmen

Transport, Highways and Mass Media Minister is playing many roles in his time as the minister of mass media.

He speaks of protecting the media of this country and many other things. His versatility was seen in the past few days: flaunting his knowledge of films -- he has produced a film on his own -- lecturing to university academics on the morals of professional interests as against trade union action and then presiding over a ceremony for distribution of buses donated by the Indian government as the Minister of Transport.

At a media conference at the Information Department on World Press Freedom Day, he said it was “he Government's responsibility to give journalists the opportunity to behave freely without threats and intimidation and the Government had fulfilled that duty to the letter.”

“The current government had never acted against journalists even when the media criticised the Government and presented false statements, the Government did not act on it,” a state-run newspaper quoted the minister as saying.

He was in praise of President Ranil Wickremesinghe who “changed the criminal defamation law that hindered the freedom of the media.

“Freedom of the media has been established in such a way that he too received insults. But the media have the responsibility to use this freedom intelligently,” the report said.

For whatever reason, Minister Bandula Gunawardena seems to be stone-deaf to the subject of vital importance to the media -- the resounding criticisms and protests raging against the Anti-Terrorism Bill now tabled in parliament to replace the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA).

Apart from protests of journalists, trade unions, academics and civic rights activists, the minister does not seem concerned by expressions of concern by international organisations such as the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ), International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) and Human Rights Watch among other watchdogs of democratic freedom.

The IFJ which represents more than 600,000 journalists in 40 countries in a statement on the issue says the Anti-Terrorism Bill threatens to exacerbate the restrictions on the right to assembly and grossly curtails the freedom of expression and press freedom. The IFJ journalists join its Sri Lanka affiliates in strongly condemning the bill and urging the Sri Lanka authorities to withdraw the proposed draft and repeal the PTA.

The IFJ identifies the bill's potential to crack down on dissent and civic space amidst ongoing instability across the island.

It further states that the law would expand the legal definition of terrorist offences beyond the international guidelines and include the infliction of serious damage to any place of public use, the obstruction of essential services and participation in an unlawful assembly deemed by the Government to be connected with terrorism and criminalising the distribution of materials or services that allow others to possess terrorism publications.

It also says that the ATB provides for non-judicial detentions by a Deputy Inspector General of Police. Previously such detentions were only invocable by the Minister of Defence.

The International Commission of Jurists has expressed concern that the ATB, if adopted as currently formulated, would give rise to a panoply of human rights violations and as much as the existing PTA is often misused. The ICJ has expressed extreme concern about clause 4(1)a of the bill, which it says, if adopted in its current form, would introduce the death penalty for the terrorism offence of murder. Purported threats to national security whether or not arising in connection with terrorism should not be used as justification for the death penalty. It is pointed out that Sri Lanka has been a de facto abolitionist country for decades. Moratorium on executions had been in place since 1976.

Human Rights Watch in a statement has said that the ATB would empower the authorities to systematically violate fundamental rights.

Even if the media minister considers local criticisms of the ATB as 'anti-government propaganda' -- as criticism of the Government is usually dismissed by government spokespersons -- what does he say to the reactions of these highly respected and authoritative international organisations? Many governments ignored criticisms and allegations made against them by international organisations such as the UNHRC and Bandula Gunawardena should be well aware of the fallouts on incoming governments. Should these criticisms by the IFJ, ICJ and Human Rights Watch be dismissed as an 'international conspiracy against the RanilRajapaksa Government'?

A minister defending and praising his president in the Sri Lankan setup deserves empathy but as journalists, we are unable to comprehend his statement that it was “the Government's responsibility to let journalists behave freely without threats or intimidation and the government has fulfilled that duty to the letter of the law.”

Could it be said that journalists were free to behave freely without threats or intimidation after Ranil took over as the prime minister and after he became president in the atmosphere he created? The person who had declared his support for the Aragalaya, soon after he had control over the defence and police forces cracked down on activists in and around the Galle Face Green with the utmost severity. Low flights making spectators scamper off the Green was the first demonstration of power. The treatment accorded to journalists covering protests of activists -entitled by the law of the country -- by the police did not give enough confidence for them to believe that the president was 'acting to the letter of the law'.

The ATB now hangs over their heads like the Sword of Damocles which could make them vulnerable to charges of terrorism for reports or criticisms of government activity.

The media spokesman has asked journalists to use their freedom intelligently. We are inclined to request politicians too to use their power and privileges lawfully with intelligence not just according to the letter of the law.

In this context, we suggest the latest development in Information Technology for use by government spokesman: Artificial Intelligence. Last week we saw on an international TV channel an attractive woman as news anchor giving us the news. She, we were told, was not real -- only an image. And the news read by her was not those provided by reporters but by computers making the text sound real. She or he is called a Botspot and could produce any kind of fake news as desired or do it on her own.

Since Minister Gunawardena has suggested journalists use their freedom intelligently, why not the politicians? A botspot was the government spokesperson?

But it could be argued that the AI news is not real and fake. In turn, a botspot may ask whether human spokespersons are giving the real news.

We must confess that although we have ventured into discussing AI, we are clueless about it and have reported what we have read and heard.

All this boils down to a question of matter and mind. Our final conclusion is that old adage: No matter never mind.

P.S. The ATB is being held back till May 31 for consideration of proposed amendments.