Newspapers, magazines and to a lesser extent also radio and television stations flourish in Afghanistan. More than 150 publications have appeared in Kabul alone. And many of them are independent. There is diversity, but the media is not absolutely free. Certainly, there has been improvement over the years. In a November 2003 briefing paper on the Afghan elections, the Afghanistan Research and Evaluation Unit, an independent research institute, wrote that “Freedom of expression has still not been achieved and political dissenters and journalists are not yet protected by free speech law.”

And reviewing 2003, the International Press Institute commented, “While the Afghanistan government continues to talk of the importance of these rights [i.e. freedom of the press and of expression] the authorities are busy beating up journalists, arresting them and closing down media organizations.”

But in March 2004, a new media law has been signed into force. Earlier restrictions, such as a ban on criticizing the national army or publicizing photos of only partially dressed women, were removed. Now, however, criticism of Islam and insults of officials are officially forbidden. And, say reporters without borders, “The blasphemy law continues to be the biggest menace for journalists.” In the provinces, meanwhile, “local governors do not allow news diversity or criticism.”

And the Ulema Council, led by Supreme Court president Fazl Hadi Shinwari, is against everything it deems un-Islamic. And its attempts to ban such (ill-defined) un-Islamic content seem to be growing, observers believe. On March 13, the Ulema Council asked the government to make the country’s state and privately-owned TV stations stop broadcasting “immoral and anti-Islamic” programs. Earlier, the Supreme Court tried to ban cable television.

One representative of the Council told the Afghan Pajhwok news agency that “We have decided this in accordance with the constitution and we have also called for a ban on telecasts which have dances as this is absolutely contrary to the Sharia.” But whereas Article 3 of the Constitution says no law can be contrary to the Sharia, article 34 protects freedom of expression. “It is up to the public to decide about TV programs,” reacted the press freedom organization Reporters Without Borders in a March 29 letter to President Karzai. “It is certainly not up to the government to say what is good and bad. Such a censorial attitude runs counter to Afghanistan\'s constitution and its press law.”

The liberal minister for information and culture, Sayed Raheen, is also under pressure by extremists to curb liberal programming, he told the March 17 issue of Media Watch, the Internews publication surveying press conditions in Afghanistan. Raheen said he had therefore been advising TV channels “not to put him in a difficult position where it becomes impossible for him to defend them as he supports the work of independent TV stations.”

But conservative clergy are not the only ones to blame. Regional strongmen are usually not fond of broadcast criticism, and journalists are likely to suffer harassment if they have publicized anything displeasing them. Self-censorship is common, therefore.

“The number of incidents must be enormous because for most journalists some form of intimidation, harassment or at least self-censorship has become part of their job description and they don’t even think about it,” said Internews media analyst Aunohita Mojumdar in September 2004 when the first Media Watch was published. “I think one out of three [Afghan] journalists at least will have some personal incident to narrate.”

In the Reporters Without Borders’ 2004 Worldwide Press Freedom Index, Afghanistan ranks a poor 97th, somewhere in the middle of the list between Mexico and Gambia. Some progress relative to other countries seems at least to have been made: in 2003, Afghanistan ranked 104th on the list.