page 2

SBC GIVES SUPPORT TO SPPF ELECTION CAMPAIGN

The long presidential election campaign of James Michel, which according to most knowledgeable observers is going rather badly, got a boost last Sunday from the state owned SBC. During their prime time news broadcast the state owned television station, the only one that exists in the Seychelles, while reporting a government statement, the news reader was made to read as well, a very overt political statement in support of the SPPF.

The propaganda broadcast was in the form of a government statement supposedly refuting a claim made by Regar newspaper that the island of Felicité has been given over to a company connected with the leaders of the SPPF who already control the l’Union Estate on La Digue . Regar is published by members of the Seychelles National Party (SNP), whose leader is a declared candidate in the next presidential election contest due this year.

The statement read by SBC did not reveal which government department – whether State House or the Ministry of Land Use and Habitat which is responsible for selling or leasing state land – or which government official had issued it. The purpose of the statement, which the newsreader read from an obvious government script, purported to refute Regar. In the same breath, however, the newsreader went on to read a condemnation of the newspaper article as a “cheap political ploy at election time” by the opposition.

This line is not a statement of fact but rather a matter of opinion. Since the government is not a contender in the election why is it indulging in an obvious political statement? Ever since the multiparty system was restored after 15 years of one-party state dictatorship, SPPF has reneged on its promise to disengage the party from the government if they came to power through the ballot box in free and fair elections.

By publishing very obvious and blatant election propaganda, SBC has clearly allowed itself to be used as a propaganda instrument of the SPPF. According to its mandate under the Constitution, SBC should be above politics just like the BBC. In this context it should have edited out the obvious opinion from the statement and kept to the facts – that the government refuted the allegation. It should also have insisted that any statement coming from the government should bear the name of the official, department or Ministry authorised to issue it for the sake of transparency and accountability.

As usual, SBC did not solicit the statement from the government as a result of a journalistic inquiry to verify the veracity of the Regar article. Indeed, SBC itself did not repeat the Regar allegation. Nonetheless, it was commanded by the government, behind which SPPF was hiding, to read its statement containing an obviously overt political opinion design to influence voters.

This subliminal manipulation of the state media for overt political purposes smacks more of the desperation of the official candidate of the SPPF – which currently occupies State House - than the opposition, as the statement tried to claim. Once again it underlines the confusion inside the great SPPF political machine. It is fast running out of steam.