DOES THE PASSAGE OF CONTROVERSIAL ARGENTINE MEDIA

C O N F I D E N T I A L BUENOS AIRES 001132 SIPDIS PASS TO EEB/CIP/BA TFINTON EEB/TPP/MTA/MST CHENNINGER USTR FOR KKALUTKIEWICZ E.O. 12958: DECL: 10/15/2039 TAGS: PGOV PHUM ECON EINV WTRO AR SUBJECT: DOES THE PASSAGE OF CONTROVERSIAL ARGENTINE MEDIA LEGISLATION MEAN THAT THE KIRCHNERS ARE BACK? REF: A. BUENOS AIRES 1101 ¶B. BUENOS AIRES 0750 Classified By: DCM Tom Kelly for reasons 1.4 (b,d) ¶1. (C) Summary: The government of Argentine President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner (CFK) took a step back from the political grave in winning congressional approval of a controversial media bill. The Argentine Senate approved the bill (44-24) in the early hours of October 10, three weeks after the House approved it (reftels). CFK signed it into law the same day, and it was immediately published in the Official Bulletin, an unprecedented turnaround time for a law. The new law will implement regulatory changes in three key areas: ownership of mass communication channels, requirements for on-air content, and regulatory oversight (ref A). The law's passage was viewed by many as an indication of the Kirchners' recrudescent political clout, thought to have been irretrievably weakened following mid-term election losses (ref B). The hapless opposition, unable to block congressional approval, is now looking to slow down implementation of the legislation while at least one provincial government, several corporations, and some political leaders may challenge the new law in court. Nonetheless, the Kirchners' legislative victory may presage the successful movement of additional legislation through the Kirchner-dominated lame-duck Congress before it changes hands in December. It does not, however, alter the fact of the first couple's unpopularity. End Summary. The Government Wins a Big Vote -------------- ¶2. (SBU) By securing Senate approval by an ample margin in the early hours of October 10, President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner (CFK) succeeded in getting a controversial media bill passed without any modifications. To prevent maverick Vice President Julio Cobos with tampering with the just-passed law while CFK was on a week-long trip to India that started later that evening, she signed it into law just before stepping on the plane. It was immediately published in the Official Bulletin, an unprecedented turnaround time for a law. ¶3. (SBU) The new law will implement regulatory changes in three key areas: ownership of mass communication channels, requirements for on-air content, and regulatory oversight (ref A). After more than 15 hours of debate, Argentina's Senate approved the bill by 44 votes in favor to 24 against (four senators, including ex-President Carlos Menem, were absent for health reasons). At different points, 31 senators, including some ruling party senators, had called for changes to some articles. President CFK and her husband, former President Nestor Kirchner, had let it be known that modifications in the Senate were not acceptable, in part because the bill would then revert to the Chamber of Deputies for reconsideration, delaying passage with less than two months to go before the government would lose its majorities in both chambers. Even when it was pointed out that the bill mistakenly called for broadcasting licenses to be reviewed on a "semi-annual" basis rather than "bi-annually," the Senate leadership did not allow the problematic word choice to be corrected. ¶4. (SBU) In the end, the government secured the votes of all ruling party senators plus the votes of a Radical Party senator, a Socialist senator, and two nominally opposition senators from Tierra del Fuego. The Senate vote came a little over three weeks after the September 17 Chamber of Deputies vote, also without modifications. (147 votes in favor, 4 against, 1 abstention, and over 100 deputies walking out before the vote in protest of what they designated as procedural irregularities and undue haste, ref A.) Some 5,000 government supporters celebrated outside Congress in the pre-dawn hours after the Senate vote. ¶5. (C) In the wake of the Kirchner-allied Victory Front's (FpV) perceived defeat in the June 28 congressional midterm elections (ref B),it was clear that the Kirchners still had a majority in the Congress until the new Congress is seated December 10, but many thought that its political defeat was so overwhelming that it would be difficult for the GOA to retain effective control over its deputies and senators. The congressional votes showed that this expectation was wrong. Nestor and CFK, wielding the power of the purse and any other sources of leverage that occur to them, remain in command of their legislators and retain the ability to wheedle the support of some others. Their lobbying succeeded in ensuring that controversial articles 161 and 14 were not modified, according to local press. Article 161 weakens the government's ostensible foe in this battle, Clarin Media Group, by requiring media companies to divest themselves within one year of licenses in excess of 10. Article 14 strengthens the Kirchners' hand over the media by giving the Executive Branch significant authority to renew and revoke media licenses. Government Senators Criticize Media Monopolies -------------- - ¶6. (SBU) During the marathon debate, FpV senators accused the bill's critics of supporting monopolies. Senator Nicolas Fernandez, from NK's home province of Santa Cruz, asserted that while there is "always tension when talking about monopolies, politicians must decide which side they are on," adding "we side with those that cannot express themselves." Cordoba Senator Haide Giri described "the worst censorship" as "the one that cannot be seen and that which is happening today with the largest media monopolies." La Pampa Senator Ruben Marin asserted that "all monopolies or oligopolies are against freedom of expression," adding that the bill seeks to ensure that "the ability of a few to accumulate power does not affect the society and its governments." In lengthy closing remarks, FpV Senate majority leader Miguel Pichetto underscored that the law did not provide "perfect regulation" and at some point would require amending. Opposition Accuses the Government of Limiting Press Freedom -------------- -------------- ¶7. (SBU) Having failed to mount effective resistance to the government, opposition senators preoccupied themselves with attacking the government's motives. They charged the GOA with seeking to limit freedom of expression and questioned the constitutionality of some parts of the bill's text. Expressing the views of her opposition colleagues, Civic Coalition Senator Estenssoro said "this law enables only one monopoly, a national government monopoly." Other opposition senators, such as Tucuman Senator Delia Pinchetti, questioned the government's motivations in pushing legislation that appeared to be aimed at clipping Clarin's wings. La Pampa Radical Party Senator Juan Carlos Marino asked why the government was not also altering the customs code, also from the military dictatorship, and which enables the government "to squander" farm sector resources by setting agricultural taxes. U.S. Companies' Concerns -------------- ¶8. (C) U.S. companies in the broadcasting industry have quietly expressed concerns to GOA decision-makers regarding provisions unrelated to the Kirchner-Clarin dispute that they hope will be addressed when the implementing regulations are drafted. The companies were promised this by top government officials, and warned that if they expressed opposition before the bill's passage their concerns would be ignored in the regulatory promulgation phase. According to some analysts, procedural requirements and quirks in the new legislation could hold up its implementation for at least another year or two. Public Polling on Media Law -------------- ¶9. (C) During the Senate debate, several speakers who voted for the legislation voiced anger or resentment at how the media had treated them, and the government was clearly helped by the views of many in the political class that Argentine media companies, especially Clarin, often report the news irresponsibly. At the same time, recent polling suggests that despite widespread consensus for reforming the media law, a high percentage of the public questions the government's motivations. According to a Management and Fit poll of 1200 citizens in 13 electoral districts, which was taken before the Senate vote, 69% of those questioned said the media bill represented a fight between the government and Clarin Media Group. In addition, 67.7% of those polled believed the bill is intended to "control the media" while only 23% believed it would level the media playing field. At the same time, 64.3% said the law would infringe on free speech and result in the proliferation of government media. Court Challenges Likely -------------- ¶10. (SBU) It was widely reported that Clarin and other media companies will challenge key aspects of the new law in Argentine courts. The provincial government of San Luis, led by dissident Peronist governor Alberto Rodriguez Saa, also let it be known that it was going to the Supreme Court with a constitutional challenge of the new law's alleged usurpation of provincial prerogatives. The legal challenges may slow down implementation of key provisions, including forced divestments by media groups of their outlets. Although opposition leaders have made noises about revisiting the media legislation after the new Congress is seated in December, the fact is that the opposition is very unlikely to muster the two-thirds majority in each chamber required to override the expected presidential veto of any attempts to undo this legislation. Comment -------------- ¶11. (C) There was much hyperbole on both sides of the highly partisan debate over this legislation, with government forces arguing its monopoly-busting virtues and the opposition insisting it is a knell for press freedom. At the end of the day, however, we suspect that Argentina's media environment one or two years from now will look largely the same as it does today: multiple media outlets covering a range of opinions, some harshly critical of the people in power, and others willingly co-opted by government advertising revenue. ¶12. (C) It should have come as no surprise that the Kirchners were able to railroad this bit of legislation through a Congress, where they still retain a majority in both houses. For many local observers, this law's passage was nonetheless evidence of the Kirchners' renewed political clout, thought only two months to have been irreparably weakened following mid-term election losses. The law's ability to move through Congress unscathed also indicates the fractious opposition's failure, thus far, to outmaneuver the Kirchners. This equation may presage the successful movement of additional legislation -- such as the 2010 budget, a suspension of the "fiscal responsibility law," a new banking law, and maybe even legislation requiring political parties to conduct primaries -- through the Kirchner-dominated lame-duck Congress before it changes hands in December. What it does not change, however, is the unpopularity in Argentina of Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner and her husband Nestor. Their negative ratings continue to far outweigh their positives in public polling. MARTINEZ