- I am not the state’s candidate, and I present myself as head of the syndicate for all journalists
- There is no law for raising the allowance, and the strong head of the syndicate is the one who brings the increase
- The journalists’ training centre has been in my programme since 2017 and cost 50 million
- At the end of my term as head of the syndicate, I allocated land for the hospital and paid its first instalment
- I stood against the imprisonment of journalists, and there will soon be a breakthrough in this file
- My experience at Al-Ahram says that investment and development are the solution to the crisis of the national press institutions
- I am against blocking websites and in favour of facilitating their legalisation, and opening the door to affiliate membership for websites is dangerous
- The syndicate’s stairs are for journalists only, not for parties or protesters.
His syndicate history began at the start of the current century. He served as a member of the syndicate’s board and as its deputy head before the January Revolution, then returned afterwards to become head of the Journalists Syndicate for two years. His experience as head of the syndicate was not long, but according to his statements he worked to implement his programme, including a training centre for journalists and a hospital for them. During his term as head of the syndicate, the press regulation laws were issued, which are dogged by accusations of restricting the profession, and he is dogged by accusations that he placed the famous scaffolding on the syndicate’s stairs, and that he stood against the appointment of temporary staff at the national newspapers.
In his interview with “Zawia3”, Abdel Mohsen Salama reveals his vision for the file of imprisoned journalists and the file of appointing temporary journalists at the national newspapers, and presents his vision for the allowance, which he sees as the fair yardstick for all journalists, but he stresses that it is the strength of the head of the syndicate in negotiation that brings it. He also reveals his position on the syndicate’s stairs and the demonstrations held on them, as he believes that the stairs are for journalists only.
Do you consider yourself the state’s candidate in the race for the post of head of the Journalists Syndicate?
There is no such thing as a state candidate and a candidate who does not belong to the state. And then, which state are we talking about? The state is Egypt, not Israel and Egypt or America and Egypt. We are talking about the Egyptian state only, and there is no competition between states, and this question should not be asked in the first place. I consider myself a candidate for all journalists and a candidate for all currents, and my experience says so, because I am not new to public work for me to be pushed forward: I am a member of the board of directors of Al-Ahram and a member of the Journalists Syndicate, and I was first deputy head of the Journalists Syndicate and head of the Journalists Syndicate, so I am not new to the scene. But there are those who want to divide the elections into groups, which harms the profession and harms the syndicate, because the head of the Journalists Syndicate must represent all journalists and be head of the syndicate for all currents, not head of the syndicate for a clique or a particular current.
You spoke of an unprecedented increase in the allowance, and the social support package came without it. What happened? And how do you view the use of the allowance in this form as an electoral weapon?
I did not say that the allowance increase would come in the social package; the other side is the one who said that. But on the main subject, there are those who want to distract voters from the main issue. Is there a law or a decision that says the allowance is increased by a certain percentage at a certain time? Unfortunately not, and as a journalist I wish this law existed, but it does not exist. So how does the allowance increase? In short, it increases through the strength of the head of the syndicate and his ability to negotiate, and that has been so since the first day, under the former head of the syndicate Ibrahim Nafie, who introduced the concept of the allowance. So the allowance increases through the strength of the head of the syndicate and his ability to negotiate, but when we say this, some try to play on colleagues’ emotions, and this is not right, and it should not happen, because we must rally around our syndicate and the strength of its head in order to wrest the greatest gains for fellow journalists in various areas, including the allowance, because it is the only mechanism, or, as I call it, the only fair yardstick for all journalists, because salaries and wages are not the same in all institutions, because the way salaries are applied differs from one institution to another, especially given the different sources of funding between national, private and party outlets. In addition, there are arbitrary practices against some colleagues, to the extent that a segment of them unfortunately receives no wage from their institutions and relies on the allowance as the main source of their income. It is therefore the only fair yardstick for all institutions, national, party and private, and it is the only fair source, and there is no alternative to it, and it is the fair yardstick for increasing journalists’ incomes at the present time. Other solutions could be discussed, such as a wage scale or others, but there are many details governing this climate.
There is an ongoing controversy over two points: the first you consider one of your achievements amid denial by some colleagues, and the second is one of your electoral promises that colleagues believe will not be implemented: the training centre and, second, the journalists’ hospital. What is your response to that?
One of the items of my programme in 2017 was establishing a world-class training centre on the vacant floors of the syndicate building, in cooperation with educational institutions abroad and at home. The truth is that our colleague Yehia Qallash, to his credit, had proposed establishing a social and cultural club, but my view was to create a training centre. Colleague Yehia Qallash wrote to Sheikh Sultan Al-Qasimi, and there was cooperation on the idea of the social club. The training centre is my idea, and it has been in my programme since 2017; it is not new, and certainly there are colleagues who have a copy of the programme. It is my idea and I developed it. It is true that colleague Yehia Qallash contributed to the funding with 20 million as support and funding from Sheikh Sultan, which came for the social club, while the training centre cost about EGP 50 million, not EGP 20 million.
As for the journalists’ hospital, it is a promise I am making to journalists, and I am certain that I will fulfil it, because I am the one who started it in the 2017–2019 syndicate term. There is an existing letter allocating land for the journalists’ hospital in 6th of October City, and its first instalment was also paid on 25 February 2019, that is, a month before the end of my syndicate term, so I will complete this project in the coming term. But what is troubling in the matter is the state of bankruptcy that drags us towards things far removed from the interest of the profession and the syndicate. I have a project and a programme that I aspire to implement, and I will not pay attention to what is said here or there.
There is an important file called imprisoned journalists. How do you see dealing with this file?
There is a claim that I have nothing to do with the file of detainees, and that I did not work on it during the period in which I held the post of head of the syndicate, and this is not true. I intervened in several crises, including a case of imprisonment of a journalist at Al-Gomhuria, and he was not imprisoned for a single hour, and the same was repeated at Radio and Television Magazine, where the colleagues were not imprisoned for a single hour. I did my utmost, and my efforts succeeded, and I was in constant contact with all colleagues who had problems relating to imprisonment cases. As for what is new that I offer in this file, it is that there will be a breakthrough in this file, and there is a major movement in this file soon, which may come before the elections. I will not abandon this file; I will work to move it forward and to close it, and I stand in solidarity with imprisoned fellow journalists of all currents and all spectrums.
Given the state of journalism now, what do journalists need: freedoms or services?
There is no choice between this or that; the two lines must run in parallel. There is no dignity for any citizen while he finds it difficult to obtain his daily bread, and therefore I must first provide the journalist with his daily bread and a decent life, just as I provide him with a ceiling of freedom. Services and freedoms go together. It is not right for me to say freedom without economic security, nor economic security without freedom. What I believe is that the two go together.
There is a problem related to wages, freedoms and their ceiling, which is the problem of the concentration of newspaper ownership. How do you see its effect on journalism, on the future of journalism?
I have always believed that journalism has a future and has no alternative, and the alternative is nothing but an evolution in the forms of journalism. We have several problems in private newspapers or national newspapers, but through our understanding that journalism does not end, they can be solved. For example, I have an experience at Al-Ahram, which I moved from one place to another, and I solved many of its problems, which is what I did at the syndicate, and many colleagues agree on that, whether at Watani, Al-Shorouk, Al-Ahaly or Al-Wafd. And when ideologically different journalists agree on you, this is called a victory and a professional track record.
As for the legislative environment supportive of journalism, what is your vision?
We need tremendous development, especially the Freedom of Information Law, which must see the light, because a journalist who publishes wrong information cannot be held to account when he does not have the correct information. It is true that the journalist’s role is to seek information from its source, but let us suppose that the journalist was unable to obtain the information from its source after searching seriously. I am not talking about freedoms issues or about national security issues. For example, a journalist is preparing a file on wheat; he should find a complete file with all the data and information, but instead the ministry threw the journalist out, and he was unable to obtain the information after knocking on the ministry’s door dozens of times. What does the journalist do? He will do his best. Here it is very important that there be a law on freedom of information.
Speaking of freedom of information, there is a crisis close to freedom of information, which is the blocking of websites, the latest of which was the website of “Zawia3”. How do you see the solution to this crisis?
I am against closing any website or any newspaper. For me, closing a website or a newspaper is closing a window of light, and it closes an outlet for journalism. Blocking websites, for the journalist, is equivalent to cutting off air and light from the world, and I am against this. But I am also in favour of legalising websites, and of there being facilitation in legalisation rather than obstruction, and in favour of the freedom to issue websites and newspapers.
There is a huge file called online journalists. What is your opinion on it?
There is a big crisis relating to online journalists, but I was against the decision to open the door to affiliate membership, because there must be a legislative amendment to regularise the status of news websites, and there must be a disciplined formulation for accepting journalists working on news websites, because the syndicate’s register is one of the most dangerous things within the syndicate, and tampering with it is a ticking time bomb that threatens the future of the profession, not now but in the future, for coming generations. Therefore the syndicate’s register must be regulated in a disciplined manner.
Opening the door to affiliate membership will lead to a huge distortion of this register, and we will find numbers of non-professional affiliates. Therefore I am in favour of regularising the status of websites, and of making legislative amendments that guarantee a disciplined mechanism for registration, and not just the interview, which is nothing but an appearance check: you enter the registration committee and it casts a glance at you. Rather, a disciplined registration mechanism that is applied to Al-Ahram, to your website, and to the independent and the private newspaper. This can be done, and there are successful international experiences in this matter, but what is happening now requires a pause.
- Online Journalists’ Demands: Towards Amending the Syndicate’s Registration Conditions
- Does the Egyptian Journalists Syndicate Do Justice to Those Working in Online Journalism?
You are a son of a national institution. How do you see the file of developing the national institutions, especially with the debts and losses? How can the idea of developing the national institutions work, and do you see this as including the sale of some assets to support these institutions?
I have an important experience in this regard, which is my experience with Al-Ahram, whose board of directors I chaired. I took it over while it was in one place and moved it to another, and I solved nearly 75% of its problems, while 25 or 30% of its problems still need work, and I did not sell a single asset to solve these problems; rather, the secret lay in investment and development. We invested land in Hurghada and the Smart Village, and even the Al-Ahram building, we invested part of it in the banks complex, and we developed the university that bears the name of Al-Ahram, expanded it and doubled its revenues. I see that the national institution has a great opportunity to recover if its assets are exploited, and the Al-Ahram experience bears witness to that. I am against merging institutions and against cancelling publications, because closing any publication, exactly like blocking, is closing an outlet of light. I see journalism as a profession that has a future and has challenges, and saying that journalism is over is untrue talk, as evidenced by the fact that it continues in every country of the world. We have problems that can be solved.
The halt to appointments at the national newspapers, or the file of temporary staff? You are accused of being part of the crisis. What is your response?
This is one of the rumours that pursue me, even though my heart and mind are open to everyone, and we are in a pleasant electoral climate in which we are searching for the most suitable, and it is no place for polarisation, violence and mudslinging. On the issue of temporary staff, I believe in the justice of their cause, and I say this all the time and not only for the sake of the elections. It is an inherited file, so to speak, and it is being used for outbidding in an incorrect way for electoral purposes. I am in favour of appointing temporary staff, unequivocally, for two reasons: the first is the justice of the cause of these colleagues who have been working for several years, and the second is pragmatic, or from the standpoint of interest, because it is in the interest of these institutions to open the door to appointing temporary staff so that these institutions do not grow old; and not only appointing temporary staff, but opening the door to appointment on a permanent basis at certain percentages, which guarantees the injection of new blood into the national institutions all the time.
In previous boards there was division within the syndicate. If you win, how will you stop this division?
All the candidates and board members are my friends on a personal level, and I have no enmity with any of them. By nature I hate ideological, political and professional fanaticism, and I will extend my hand to everyone, and it is important that everyone extends their hands for the public good, because in the end we are in one syndicate and one profession. The syndicate needs great effort, and a strong head to wrest our rights through free negotiation, as in the allowance issue. The issue now is choosing a strong head capable of negotiating and of obtaining fellow journalists’ rights in a legal manner, and I am running in the elections on this basis, and I extend my hand to all journalists and colleagues on the board from all spectrums, because I always say: take off your party robe at the syndicate’s door, because if the syndicate is run with the mentality of a clique or a current, we will all lose.
The syndicate’s stairs have a particular syndicate and political symbolism… How do you see dealing with them?
I am against any demonstrations on the syndicate’s stairs. The symbolism of the stairs belongs to journalists, and the syndicate’s stairs and the syndicate itself are for journalists, not for demonstrating or for protesters.
Is this why scaffolding was placed on the syndicate’s stairs for a period?
These are lies. No scaffolding was placed on the syndicate’s stairs during my tenure, and neither the syndicate nor its stairs were closed for a single hour during my tenure; rather, that happened after me and was pinned on me. But I also do not see that any group or current has the right to demonstrate on the syndicate’s stairs; the syndicate’s stairs are for journalists only. It is a syndicate of journalists, not a syndicate of parties or protesters.
