More transparency needed amongst government agencies in matters affecting free speech and freedom of expression

March 25, 2025

THE Media Council of Papua New Guinea (MCPNG) is calling for more transparency amongst government agencies in consideration of matters directly impacting free speech and freedom of expression.

It also voiced its concern that government agencies are able to ‘test’ new technology on Papua New Guinean citizens in community spaces like social media, without any warning, and without consideration for the democratic principles of full disclosure and transparent
governance.

This is in relation to what the police minister has described as the testing of new technology to enhance law enforcement against the abuse of social media platforms.

Inquiries by MCPNG Member Newsrooms to the Department of Information and Communication Technology (DICT) and the National Information and Communication Authority (NICTA), and a media statement released around midnight last night by the latter clearly indicate that both these agencies who should be leading any public agenda on social media were completely unaware of what the police minister was referring to.

MCPNG Media Members were also very critical of the lack of urgency by government agencies to provide credible information to the mainstream media to counter growing
misinformation amongst the public.

“The police minister in his vague statement voiced a sense of accomplishment at what he refers to as the successful testing of technology capable of combatting the abuse of social media platforms in the country.

“However, for the government to proceed to conduct tests of new technology on its citizens without their knowledge borders on politically autocracy, and an abuse of human rights,” says MCPNG President, Neville Choi.

Speaking on behalf of the MCPNG, Mr. Choi said for the RPNGC to test new technology
without the knowledge of both NICTA and DICT is now pushing the boundaries of jurisdiction into the private spaces of citizens, and giving too much power to one person to decide what matters constitute threats to national security and justify such action.

These are some of the conclusions that have proliferated public commentary since the weekend. We hope these are not true.

 

Search

RECENT PRESS RELEASES