Haaretz
Adar1 24, 5765
Censorship in general, and military censorship
in particular, does not fit the age of freedom of information in which we
live. The Israeli authorities, like those in other enlightened
democracies, are supposed to be wise enough to understand that governments
cannot and should not control public information. In light of the
Internet, which spans the globe, the use of military censorship, even in
Israel, ought to be sparing. Expanding the censor's powers beyond the
minimum necessary contradicts the core values of transparency and freedom
of information.
It is therefore surprising that the military
censor, Colonel Miri Regev, decided a few months ago to set up a
three-member committee, headed by former district court president Eliahu
Vinograd, whose mandate is in essence to examine the possibility of
expanding the censor's powers.
Given the statements emanating from
the committee, there is a reasonable chance that it will recommend
expanding the censor's powers - a recommendation that, if accepted, would
upset the delicate balance between freedom of expression and national
security. One of the committee's members, Professor Asa Kasher, even said
that he intends to recommend strengthening the censor.
This trend
toward strengthening the censor contradicts the High Court of Justice's
key 1989 ruling, which stated that the censor is not allowed to prevent
information from being published unless said information is almost certain
to cause genuine harm to national security.
Ever since, this
ruling has been the guiding light on this subject, and it served as the
basis for the agreement signed by the media and the defense minister in
1996. Over the years, chief military censors Yitzhak Shani and Rachel
Dolev internalized the spirit of the court's ruling, and in the more than
15 years since it was handed down, many things have been approved for
publication that had previously been forbidden.
The current
military censor has adopted an activist approach, as is evident, inter
alia, from her insistence that a broad range of subjects need to be
submitted to the censor, including items that have already been published
overseas. A joint committee composed of representatives of the army and
the media is currently hearing a complaint filed by the censor against
Haaretz for having failed to submit to the censor for prior approval
articles about a pilotless drone deal between Israel and China, which had
already been reported abroad. Compounding the effects of Regev's activist
approach are the many gag orders - far more than is reasonable - that are
issued by magistrate's courts, which prevent publication of security
affairs with legal ramifications.
For years, the censor has
operated according to an agreement between the defense minister and the
media, rather than according to the Mandate-era defense regulations that
established it. The basic understanding on which this agreement rests is
that the censor's goal is to prevent grave damage to national security,
not to prevent discomfort or embarrassment to the government. Defense
Minister Shaul Mofaz, who has said more than once that the High Court's
ruling strikes a reasonable balance between security needs and individual
rights, must work to restrain the new and troubling winds that are blowing
from the military censor's office.