By Rene Anthere Rwanyange
Rwanda’s 2011 Media Policy was developed at a critical stage in the country’s socio-economic and institutional transformation, with the overarching objective of strengthening the media sector and enhancing its capacity to contribute to national development, good governance, social cohesion and democratic participation.
Its formulation was informed by the evolving needs of the media industry, recommendations arising from the Universal Periodic Review (UPR), Vision 2020, national development programmes and Rwanda’s broader long-term aspirations. More than a decade after its adoption, the transformation of Rwanda’s media landscape -driven by legislative and institutional reforms, digitalisation, the expansion of online and social media platforms, and efforts to strengthen professional standards- provides an important basis for assessing the policy’s relevance and implementation.
This review therefore examines the rationale, achievements, institutional and legal reforms, persistent challenges and implementation gaps associated with the 2011 Media Policy, while identifying key priorities and recommendations to inform the development of a more responsive, professional, sustainable, independent and digitally resilient media sector.
Background and Context of the Media Policy
The development of the 2011 Media Policy was driven by the need to strengthen and professionalise Rwanda’s media sector and enhance its capacity to contribute effectively to national development. The policy reform process was influenced by recommendations arising from the Universal Periodic Review (UPR), the evolving needs of the media sector, Rwanda’s Vision 2020, the Government’s seven-year programmes, the Economic Development and Poverty Reduction Strategy (EDPRS), and the country’s long-term development aspirations, including the promotion of national unity and reconciliation.
At the time, the media sector faced a number of significant challenges, particularly in relation to professional standards, the legal and regulatory framework, journalistic ethics, and the broader socio-economic environment in which media organisations operated. The limited economic capacity of media institutions and the prevailing social context also constrained the sector’s ability to develop into a strong, sustainable and professionally managed industry.
Assessment of the Implementation of the 2011 Media Policy
Institutional and Legal Reforms
Significant institutional and legislative reforms were undertaken following the adoption of the 2011 Media Policy. The 2009 Media Law was subsequently revised in 2013, contributing to the consolidation of the legal framework governing the media sector and accompanying institutional reforms.
The transformation of ORINFOR into the Rwanda Broadcasting Agency (RBA) represented an important institutional change. The establishment of the Office of the Government Spokesperson (OGS) also strengthened the mechanisms through which government information could be communicated to the public and made accessible to journalists.
The media legal framework further introduced mechanisms for media self-regulation and strengthened the legal right of access to information. Certain provisions concerning criminal liability for media-related offences, including defamation and other media offences, were subsequently removed from the Penal Code in 2018.
These reforms demonstrate considerable progress in establishing a more modern legal and institutional framework for the media sector.
Assessment of the Policy Objectives
Professionalisation of the Media Sector
The Code of Ethics governing journalists and other media practitioners was revised through a process led by media professionals themselves. The revised ethical framework has served as an important instrument for strengthening professional standards and accountability within the media sector.
Findings from the Rwanda Media Barometers indicate that journalistic professionalism has improved. A range of training and capacity-building initiatives have also been undertaken to strengthen journalists’ professional competencies. Some of these initiatives involved journalists travelling across different parts of the country to report on development activities and communicate them to the public, in collaboration with the Media Council.
Journalists who violated professional standards were subject to professional scrutiny, while members of the public were able to bring complaints before the Rwanda Media Commission (RMC). A number of complaints were addressed through the Code of Ethics and professional self-regulatory mechanisms rather than through conventional judicial proceedings.
Numerous training programmes have been organised on the Code of Ethics and other aspects of journalism. In addition, an increasing number of journalists have obtained formal academic qualifications in journalism and related fields. Some received their education from universities, while others benefited from professional development programmes supported by organisations such as GLMC, as reflected in RMC data. Entry requirements into the journalism profession have also evolved, with greater emphasis placed on knowledge, competence and professional capacity.
Remaining Professional Challenges
Despite this progress, significant challenges remain. Limited financial resources within the media industry, combined with the rapid pace of technological change -particularly the expansion of social media- have affected the capacity of many media organisations to maintain strong editorial structures capable of consistently producing reliable and professionally verified information. Some members of the public remain reluctant to provide information to journalists, while self-censorship continues to affect some media practitioners.
Promoting a Competitive Media Sector
The 2011 Media Policy articulated a clear objective of developing a competitive media market. However, this objective has not been fully achieved.
Although the number of media organisations increased, the broader competitive media environment envisaged by the policy did not materialise to the expected extent. The implementation of measures intended to establish a genuinely competitive media sector has therefore produced limited tangible results.
Based on the assessment undertaken, this policy objective should be retained and strengthened in a revised media policy.
One possible approach would be to establish a new public financing model for the national broadcaster, enabling RBA to operate as a genuinely public-service institution supported through transparent and independent public financing mechanisms. There is also a need for clearer regulatory mechanisms governing the role of the private sector in supporting and investing in an independent and sustainable media industry.
Media Self-Regulation
The establishment of the Rwanda Media Commission (RMC) created a mechanism through which complaints and disputes involving the media could be addressed without necessarily resorting to the courts.
Actually, the Commission received 618 complaints, of which 606 were resolved through mediation and application of the Code of Ethics.
Challenges Facing Self-Regulation
Despite these achievements, the RMC continues to face institutional and resource constraints. The assessment of the implementation of the 2011 Media Policy indicates that the Commission’s mandate, institutional structure and financial resources were not sufficiently defined or supported in line with the expectations of the policy.
The institutional arrangements appear not to have been developed with sufficient depth, limiting the Commission’s ability to deliver the full range of outcomes originally envisaged.
The Cabinet resolution of 30 March 2011 assigned responsibilities to the relevant institutions but did not provide adequate resources to enable those responsibilities to be effectively implemented.
Promoting Rwanda’s image through a strong and independent media
Although the new operational mechanisms envisaged under the 2011 Media Policy were not fully established, significant developments nevertheless took place.
The transition from traditional media to digital platforms resulted in the emergence of a greater number of media outlets and expanded opportunities for online publishing and social media engagement. These developments have contributed to broader opportunities for independence and freedom of expression.
The existing Rwanda media legal framework recognises and protects media plurality, independence and freedom of expression. These principles are also supported by various institutions, including the National Commission for Human Rights, the Rwanda Media Commission, the Rwanda National Police and other security institutions, as well as through Universal Periodic Review mechanisms and dialogue platforms between security institutions and the media, including engagement with the Police and the Rwanda Investigation Bureau (RIB).
Awareness and advocacy initiatives concerning implementation of the Access to Information Law have also been conducted in collaboration with institutions including RGB, the Office of the Ombudsman, MINALOC, RALGA, media associations and civil society organisations.
The establishment of the Office of the Government Spokesperson played a significant role in improving the dissemination of government information and facilitating journalists’ access to official government positions. The appointment of a dedicated Government Spokesperson and Deputy Government Spokesperson represented a notable institutional development.
Remaining challenges
Despite these achievements, the new operational mechanisms envisaged by the policy were not fully established. The challenge of improving Rwanda’s image and influencing public perceptions therefore remains relevant.
An Informed Citizenry through Engagement and Collaboration
The policy envisaged the development of strategies to provide citizens with timely and relevant information so that they could participate more effectively in decisions and activities affecting their lives.
Such strategies were expected to strengthen the capacity of government institutions and civil society organisations to improve public access to information. They were also intended to enhance the capacity of public institutions to communicate effectively with citizens through the media, thereby contributing to an informed and engaged citizenry.
This objective is also reflected in Prime Ministerial Instructions No. 184/30 of 9 February 2021, particularly Article 7, concerning the relationship between public institutions and the media.
Key challenges identified in the 2011 Media Policy
i. Public Perceptions and the Role of Media
Through capacity-building initiatives, the media has played an important role in influencing public perceptions and contributing to efforts to address the consequences and wounds resulting from the Genocide against the Tutsi.
Guidance materials were developed to help journalists use appropriate language when reporting on genocide-related issues. These included materials developed in collaboration with the National Commission for the Fight against Genocide (CNLG), as well as publications produced by the Media Council.
However, the digital environment has introduced new challenges. Social media platforms have facilitated the spread of hate speech and harmful narratives. There is therefore a continuing need for strategies that strengthen the media’s role in helping citizens critically assess and evaluate the information they encounter.
Media and Information Literacy (MIL) should become a central component of this effort.
ii. Limited capacity to produce competitive information and insufficient Media investment
The challenge of limited investment in the media sector remains significant.
A substantial proportion of audiences continue to consume content from foreign media outlets despite the availability of domestic media. At the same time, entertainment content often attracts greater public attention than content intended to provide knowledge and contribute to public understanding.
Domestic media production has, in some cases, remained heavily focused on conventional news rather than developing broader content capable of addressing issues affecting citizens’ livelihoods and quality of life.
Both public and private investment in media production and the development of high-quality domestic content therefore remain major challenges.
The continued prevalence of sensational and breaking-news-oriented content further underscores the importance of strengthening Media and Information Literacy. Citizens need stronger skills to distinguish credible, professionally produced information from rumours, misinformation and sensational content.
There is consequently a need for sustained investment and coherent strategies to strengthen the production and dissemination of high-quality domestic information.
iii. Public trust in the Media
According to the Rwanda Media Barometers, public trust in the media within Rwanda has increased. At the regional level, reforms undertaken in the media sector have contributed to Rwanda’s growing credibility in this area.
At the international level, Rwanda has also recorded improvements according to international assessments. For example, the 2022 Reporters Without Borders (RSF) ranking placed Rwanda at 136th, compared with 156th previously. The assessment attributes such progress, in part, to commitments and changes in approaches resulting from engagement between assessment institutions and relevant stakeholders in Rwanda.
Nevertheless, continued investment in capacity-building, professionalisation, access to information and institutional strengthening remains essential to further improve public confidence in the media.
iv. Strengthening the legal and regulatory framework
Significant progress has been made in reforming the legal framework governing the media sector, with many media-related laws undergoing revision.
The removal of provisions perceived as restricting media freedom from criminal legislation, including certain media offences, represents an important development in the protection of freedom of expression and the advancement of media self-regulation.
However, the rapid pace of technological development continues to create new regulatory and policy challenges. The legal and regulatory framework must therefore remain responsive to technological change and the evolving nature of the media environment.
v. Continuing gaps in professional standards
Journalists have acquired greater knowledge and professional competence, partly as a result of the expansion of journalism education and training institutions. Nevertheless, significant gaps remain in specialised journalism skills and access to modern professional tools, including appropriate equipment, qualified personnel and institutional support.
Journalism education has increasingly adapted to changing professional requirements, but the working and living conditions within the media sector continue to discourage some highly qualified professionals from pursuing long-term careers in journalism.
Some media practitioners also deliberately violate professional standards. There is therefore a need for stronger and proportionate enforcement mechanisms to ensure that established professional standards are consistently respected.
There is also limited knowledge of professional journalism standards among some social media users, despite the fact that sections of society may perceive them as journalists or information providers. Appropriate measures should therefore be developed to promote responsible information dissemination while preserving legitimate freedom of expression.
vi. Public perceptions of Rwanda’s Media sector
Research indicates that limited reading culture has contributed to the decline of print media. There is therefore a need for strategies aimed at strengthening citizens’ interest in news, reading and critical analysis, particularly within primary and secondary education systems.
Media and Information Literacy should be integrated more systematically into educational and public awareness programmes.
The digital era has also created major challenges because of the sheer volume and diversity of information available to the public. Some of this content consists of misinformation, fabricated stories and sensational material, which can attract significant public attention.
User-generated content distributed through social media platforms can sometimes consist of unverified, sensational, misleading or false information produced for financial or other interests, without sufficient consideration for the public interest or established standards governing responsible information dissemination.
Recommendations for the Revised Media Policy
The media policy currently being implemented is no longer reflects the changing media landscape. It needs to be reviewed and updated to align with current realities and emerging trends in the media sector.
The revised Media Policy should establish comprehensive strategies to strengthen citizens’ ability to assess, analyse and interpret information disseminated through social media and other digital platforms.
There is a need to modernise the media policy by strengthening Media and Information Literacy, building the capacity of digital content creators, and establishing effective self-regulatory mechanisms to promote responsible and public-interest communication. The policy should also provide clearer distinctions between professional journalism and other forms of digital content, while strengthening content classification and audience protection through appropriate age ratings and safeguards, particularly on digital and broadcast platforms.
The 2011 Media Policy provides that its implementation should involve various institutions coordinated through the ministry responsible for media affairs. The ministry responsible for the media sector was expected to oversee policy objectives, policy choices and implementation strategies, monitor progress towards the policy’s vision and objectives, and coordinate periodic assessments. It was also expected to consult stakeholders and subsequently submit proposals for policy review to the Cabinet.
However, an assessment of the responsibilities assigned to the ministry indicates that there is limited evidence that it effectively led or coordinated the implementation of the policy in the manner originally envisaged.
The policy further anticipated the development of a detailed implementation programme and accompanying strategies through consultation with experts and stakeholders. Such a programme was expected to establish specific activities, implementation timelines and corresponding budgets. The assessment indicates that these arrangements were not fully implemented.
Had the policy been implemented as originally envisaged, it could have contributed to the development of a stronger, modern, professional and independent media sector capable of contributing significantly to citizens’ well-being and social cohesion, while supporting good governance, democracy and sustainable development.
To further strengthen freedom of expression and media freedom, as provided for under Article 38 of the Constitution of Rwanda of 2003, as revised in 2015, consideration should be given to strengthening the Media Freedom Committee (MFC) as an independent mechanism.
Such a body could complement the work of relevant public institutions by providing an independent platform for promoting, monitoring and supporting freedom of expression and media freedom, while contributing to constructive engagement among government institutions, media organisations, journalists and other stakeholders.
