The right-wing “Multicolor” coalition led by Uruguayan President Luis Lacalle Pou, which is formed by the National Party (to which Lacalle Pou belongs), the Colorado Party, the Open Party, the People’s Party, and the Independent Party, is once again experiencing internal contradictions. Last week, the Colorado Party requested its government partners postpone the vote on the controversial “Media Law” promoted by the Executive.
The Colorado Party has said to the President that if the law is approved as is, the Executive must specifically veto Article 72. This article proposes that “Citizens have the right to receive political communication in a complete, impartial, serious, rigorous, plural and balanced manner… This obligation includes all programs and spaces in which analysis, opinions, comments, assessments, and information of a political nature in the broadest sense of the term are broadcast, including contents of governmental, parliamentary, legislative, administrative, parliamentary, legal, academic and electoral scope.”
However, since Lacalle Pou has not promised anything to his government partners in this regard, the Colorado Party has decided to request the postponement of the approval, since if the law is kept as is, they would vote against it.
The Media Law, among other things, seeks to allow the same person to own more radio and television channels, which would promote greater media concentration by large media companies. This would decrease diversity of opinion in Uruguayan media.
Also as per the proposed law, the owners of the shares of Uruguayan media would no longer have to be Uruguayan (as the current law states), but could be foreigners.
All these aspects were agreed upon by the right-wing coalition that backs Lacalle Pou and that has a great interest in expanding its media power, except for the controversial Article 72, which has generated divisions within the ruling alliance.
Opposition from the Colorado Party
Conrado Rodríguez, senator of the Colorado Party, has reiterated that the refusal of his political group to approve the Media Law in second debate is based on his party’s opposition to the controversial Article 72 of the law.
According to Rodríguez, Article 72 “is a violation of the right of freedom of the press and freedom of expression, which for us is sacred and we want to protect it.” He added, however, that “if we were to reject this article in the vote, we would be rejecting all the articles of the Senate amendments.”
Indeed, several analysts have seen this article as a way of limiting the freedom of the press in Uruguay, as would force journalists to censor themselves if viewed as having a so-called biased opinion.
Opposition from the United Nations, Frente Amplio, and communication workers
In addition, the Uruguayan left and unionized media workers in Uruguay see the Media Law as a method for large media companies to concentrate more media power. In the same vein, the Federation of Journalists of Latin America and the Caribbean (FEPALC) and the International Federation of Journalists (FIP) state that, thanks to Lacalle Pou’s law, foreign capital will be able to acquire television and radio licenses, which puts the jobs of media workers at risk and encourages the foreign ownership of media.
Last Tuesday, June 4, the Unified Telecommunications Union (SUTEL) of Uruguay held a 24-hour strike to oppose the Media Law. In the demonstration, held in front of the Legislative Palace, hundreds of workers demanded the repeal of the law and the defense of the role of telecommunications workers in society, aspects which, according to SUTEL, the Media Law jeopardizes. According to Gabriel Molina, president of SUTEL, “The media law… allows the concentration of media and foreigners to buy Uruguayan networks.”
The law has also been criticized by international organizations. The United Nations asked the Executive to review Article 72, since, if approved, it will jeopardize freedom of the press and, consequently, human rights.
The communiqué signed by Ernesto Fernández Polcuch, representative of the Regional Office of UNESCO in Montevideo, and by Jan Jarab, United Nations Commissioner for South America, requests the revision of the content of the Media Law and that a national discussion on the same be started. “We call on the members of the House of Representatives, who are to vote on this bill, to promote international human rights provisions, as well as their further consideration in consultation with social actors, including media, journalists, and their associations,” the communiqué demands.
The Inter-American Press Association (SIP) joined this complaint. According to its highest representative, Roberto Rock, Article 72 implies a step backward in terms of human rights: “This imposition on the audiovisual media and its journalists to provide information, opinions, and commentaries in a serious, complete, impartial, rigorous and balanced manner is inadmissible.”
Lacalle Pou’s dilemma
This law is very important for Lacalle Pou, as evidenced by the fact that the Executive tried to speed up the approval of the Media Law in an unorthodox manner since it was not discussed in all the legislative instances that are usually activated during the discussion of a bill of this type. In a press release, the Uruguayan Press Association said, “It is striking that to push this accelerated vote in the Senate of the Republic, the minimum political and coordination time between the parties was not even respected”
This attitude of the President of Uruguay is contradictory to his own opinions while he was a candidate. “We are used to voting laws that prohibit, that regulate, that direct,” he said while running for President. “When a law does not generate freedom, it is better not to have it.”
For now, Lacalle Pou will have to decide whether to accept the Colorado Party’s request to repeal Article 72, or to stick to his position regarding the integrity of the Media Law. In any case, unionized communication workers will have to continue their struggle for more democratic and popular communication in Uruguay, even against the private interests of big corporations.
