The media industry in Japan is in a crisis over the proposed Human Rights Protection Law, the planned Personal Information Protection Law and the so-called Basic Law on Social Environment for Young People.

These three proposed laws might superficially appear to reflect good intentions, but they contain elements that could infringe upon the freedom of expression guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution. The proposed laws would allow a public authority to define and interpret what type and scope of personal information, human rights violations and harmful information would be subject to regulation. At risk are freedom of expression by the general public and the freedom of the media to gather and report the news.

The Japan Newspaper Publishers and Editors Association (NSK=Nihon Shinbun Kyokai), the National Association of Commercial Broadcasters in Japan (NAB) and NHK have repeatedly voiced opposition to these bills. The three organizations have launched protest campaigns including the organization of a symposium, while paying heed to developments in the debate at the National Diet since the passage of the budget.

Media organizations are also raising the issue in newspaper pages and in TV programs to inform readers and viewers of the freedoms at stake, calling for a wholesale review of the proposed bills.

The personal information protection bill was submitted to the ordinary session of the Diet in March 2001, and has been carried over to the current Diet. That proposed legislation sets five basic principles as criteria for personal information that allows identification of particular individuals, setting restrictions on the purposes of utilizing personal information, appropriateness of its acquisition, its accuracy, and the safety and transparency of its use.

These principles are made to apply to the gathering and reporting of news. Although the media such as newspapers, news agencies and broadcasting networks are to be generally exempted from obligatory regulations such as rules on disclosure and public scrutiny imposed on providers of personal data, it is left entirely to the discretion of an administrative authority to define what controls should apply to news reporting.

Prior to the government's submission of the bill to the Diet, NSK, NAB and NHK presented their respective written opinions to the government, seeking the complete exemption of the media from the terms of the proposed law. The Japan Magazine Publishers Association, the Japan Book Publishers Association, writers' groups, attorneys, freelance writers and four opposition parties are also opposing the proposed laws, out of fears that they would lead to restrictions of not only media activities, but also of freedom of expression by the general public. On April 5, NSK, NAB and NHK jointly organized a symposium to oppose the proposed legislation.

The human rights protection bill was submitted to the current Diet on March 8. The Justice Ministry Council for Human Rights Protection drafted an interim report in November 2000, proposing the creation of a powerful independent body to help victims of human rights violations.

The panel proposed relief for 1) discrimination; 2) abuses; 3) human rights infringements by public authorities and 4) rights violations by the media. In May 2001, the panel issued a final report that incorporated the idea of providing relief for victims of the so-called "media scrum" or excessively aggressive collective reporting.

NSK said in January and again in June 2001, that it deplored the fact that the proposed law would put human rights violations by the media on a par with abuses and discrimination. In its released written opinions, NSK called for due consideration to be paid to the freedom of reporting, saying that media violations should be rectified through voluntary efforts by the media (see related article in the February issue of the NSK News Bulletin).

However, the proposed bill designates violations of privacy involving victims of criminal offenses and excessively aggressive reporting as matters for "special relief", instead of "general relief," which would lead to forcible measures such as disclosure requirements and warnings.

Moreover, repeated and persistent efforts to contact and elicit responses from news sources via telephone and facsimile for newsgathering is defined as an act that falls in the category of "excessive reporting" eligible for special relief under the proposed law. The bill stipulates that the proposed human rights watchdog is to be able to warn the media to halt newsgathering in order to stop human rights infringements, and in the event of noncompliance by the media, the commission is to be able to publicize the details of its warning. Media organizations are not to be given any chance to file complaints against decisions of the watchdog body.

Another problem is that the secretariat of the proposed third-party body is to be staffed by officials from the Justice Ministry Civil Liberties Bureau, while the work of the commission's regional offices is to be entrusted to the ministry's district legal affairs offices, casting doubt on the independence of the proposed body.

On March 7, NSK, NAB and NHK issued a joint statement saying that the proposed bill would invite unnecessary intervention in news reporting. The statement restated earlier-expressed fears that "enthusiastic newsgathering activities" and "persistent reporting" in the aim of honoring the public's right to know would be hindered and said that as a result, the proposed bill is intolerable.

The three organizations also jointly organized on March 25 a symposium entitled "On the Proposed Human Rights Protection Law Statutory Regulation and Self-Discipline of the Media."

There have been moves within the ruling Liberal Democratic Party to submit the so-called Basic Law on Social Environment for Young People to the Diet in the form of member's legislation. That planned bill would make all forms of expression subject to regulation and would obligate each industry to set up a body for voluntary restraint. While its definition of "harmful" information is obscure, the bill would allow interference with the media in the form of advisories or warnings issued by the respective Cabinet minister in charge or by prefectural governors.

Again, these three bills contain elements that would allow public authorities to intervene in various forms of expression under the pretext of protecting privacy, human rights and youth, while leaving obscure the distinction between fair reporting and harmful information and the distinction between private and public figures.

All these moves are taking place against a backdrop of growing distrust in the media by readers and viewers that has resulted from excessively aggressive or intrusive reporting and violations of privacy and human rights by the media. One way or another, the government and administrative authorities appear determined to capitalize on the prevailing public sentiment against the media in order to tighten the regulation of the media.

On the controversial issue of the so-called "collective media scrum," NSK has been addressing the issue of imposing remedial measures. Toward the end of 2001, for instance, NSK issued a guideline against collective aggressive newsgathering to apply to all news reporters and photographers (see related article in the January issue of NSK News Bulletin).

In March of this year, NSK set up a sub-committee charged with finding solutions to any problems or damage that cannot be solved on-site under that guideline. NSK has agreed to act in close collaboration with the broadcasting industry on this score. The sub-committee is made up of representatives of 15 NSK member companies: Asahi Tokyo, Mainichi Tokyo, Yomiuri, Nikkei, Sankei Tokyo, Hokkaido, Chunichi Tokyo, Nishi-Nihon and four other regional newspapers, along with Kyodo News, Jiji Press and NHK.

An increasing number of newspaper companies are also setting up third-party ombudsman committees made up of outsiders to scrutinize news reporting. Including the Minami-Nihon Shimbun and the Kumamoto Nichi-Nichi Shimbun, which set up such committees on April 1, the total number of newspaper companies with ombudsman committees now totals 25 (see related article in the February issue of the NSK News Bulletin).