‘The Daily Mail’ privileged Faraz’ ‘British citizenship’ in
the story on the incident. Navi Pillay
of the UNHRC picked up on the ‘journalist’ element of his identity. Sri Lanka bashers salivated about media
freedom. The local media duly condemned,
again because this was a member of the tribe.
Everyone jumped the gun, so to speak. Fingers were pointed at the President and the
Government. Faraz, now on his way to
recovery, has thanked the President for all the support extended immediately
upon hearing of the attack.
Those with egg on the face may very well say ‘His statement
was made under duress’. This would of
course amount to someone saying ‘I know better than Faraz what goes on in
Faraz’ head’.
The point is that people wear many hats and until
investigations are concluded we cannot determine the name of the hat that
warranted the aim-and-shoot. Should the media be ‘perturbed’ only when a
fellow media person is attacked, treating other attacks as per the
newsworthiness (for the most part)? Is
Faraz Shauketaly the businessman made of heart, blood, vein, bone, sinew etc.,
that are different from what makes Faraz Shauketaly the freelance
journalist?
Not too long ago, Colombo Telegraph revealed that the late
Lasantha Wickramatunga, then Editor of the Sunday Leader had a professional
life outside that of being a professional journalist. Colombo Telegraph hinted that Lasantha was
killed on account of those ‘professional’ activities. Lasantha, however, received many accolades
posthumously for ‘journalistic courage’ and for ‘laying down his life in the
course of being a journalist’.
There are certain conclusions we can draw.
First of all, there is an unholy and scandalous readiness to
interpret events in Sri Lanka in a particular matter. Trigger-happy is a term we can use. It points to a penchant for sentencing
without trial. There is a strange
readiness to up the ‘media’ strain of a person’s identity, if that is
possible. Makes better ‘news’, one
supposes. It sounds better when you say
‘a journalist was killed’ as opposed to ‘a spy was killed’, especially if you
want to point the finger at a regime you want overthrown.
More importantly, there is another element to the context
that makes for such outrageous and irresponsible claims, i.e. quite apart from
political hate: the fact that attacks on journalists (especially those whose
‘journalistic hat’ is more of an identity marker than anything else) have not
been investigated to conclusion.
Lasantha, for example, did not die in a shoot-out. He was
murdered. The reason for murder is
irrelevant except of course to the extent that ‘motive’ helps identify
murderer(s). What is pertinent is that
it is the duty of the state to ensure that all citizens are protected. Whether or not Lasantha was involved in
something shady is also irrelevant. If
he violated the law, then the law enforcement agencies should have arrested
him. There is a thing called ‘due
process’.
The case remains ‘open’. That’s an indictment on the Police
and other investigating agencies. It is
this ‘openness’ with respect to attacks on citizens and especially media
personnel that makes people pick up ‘journalist’ over ‘businessman’ as in the
case of Faraz Shauketaly. It doesn’t
of course make such privileging valid or defensible, but when we are talking
politics of convenience and selectivity as such we see every year when the UN’s
human rights outfit has its meetings, it is prudent not to make things easier
for the spoiler.
The attack on Faraz Shauketaly, then, once again shows up a
lot of people. It is also another
wake-up call to the Government with respect to investigations into attacks on
journalists. It just cannot afford to
give more ammunition to its detractors.
Faraz has undressed many people, unintentionally, perhaps more than he
ever has with his journalism.
2 comments:
this is a country where people get tangled them self to trees, Majors were beaten by themselves and etc. so there is no any surprises should we heard that Faraz telling that he shoot himself...isn't it?
Coincidentally just a week before the shooting, Faraz Shauketally was highly critical of the lifestyles enjoyed by the Jayawardene's of Golden Key fame. The alleged embezzlement of the Rs.26 Billion fortune is capable of buying a lot of shooters but I might add that that probably was not the case.
Post a Comment