The local media industry has, over the past few weeks, been abuzz with highly passionate lobbying, largely with the intentions to build a stronger fraternity. Leadership, naturally being the rallying point for any meaningful reforms, has been the centre of all the discussions, formal or not.

In particular, talk has revolved around the Rwanda Journalists Association (ARJ) and the need to elect new leadership. I happen to be part of the outgoing executive committee, but this Column, as has always been the case, reflects entirely my own personal views.Calls for change are justified. I will not attempt to justify why the current committee has served one-and-a-half years beyond its legitimate two-year mandate. Yet it is also important to understand the dynamics under which the Gaspard Safari-led committee has kept at the helm, without conducting fresh elections, while at the same time, it largely continued to run office with members’ consent and goodwill. That many members do not actively partake in the association activities is not down to the term expiry issue; it is a problem that, by far, predates the time we were serving our legitimate term; it could probably be traced from a decade ago or so ago. Yet the squabbling and controversies that have characterized ARJ since its establishment 17 years ago should not necessarily be interpreted as outright failure on the part of leaders or members in general. Journalists are generally articulate about what they need, but do little to get it done. More often than not, we hardly fully subscribe or submit ourselves to a process because we want to retain a level of freedom that will allow us to unreservedly report about that process we are otherwise associated with. We like to stand on the margins, watch closely and unilaterally determine when to pounce and point fingers.While that sort of indifference has largely defined the ARJ membership, I’m happy to note that I have observed a completely different trend over the past one month or so. A group of ‘concerned journalists’ – never mind the fact some of them are not registered as ARJ members – has recently taken the lead in spearheading a change in the running of the association. Chances were higher that the clandestine nature of the initial consultations amongst them, largely motivated by ill-conceived speculations, could have resulted into direct and ugly confrontations with the incumbent leadership. Yet, that initiative instead spurred the current ARJ leadership into taking the right action which it should probably have taken a year or so ago. That gesture encouraged more honesty and open consultations, resulting in last Monday’s impromptu general assembly, which eventually set February 19 as the date for next elections. Since then, I have participated in two preparatory meetings, and there should not be a reason why the elections should not go on as planned. Nonetheless, one issue was brought up in the second meeting which has since rendered irrelevant the one-and-a-half years the incumbent leadership had spent, albeit sluggishly, leading the transition from the association status into a labour union. Instead of picking leaders of a union, journalists will just elect a new committee of ARJ.Two years ago, an ARJ general assembly decided that the association be turned into a union for reasons that were well understood among all members and which I have, in the past, explained at length in this Column. About a year later, another general assembly tasked the incumbent committee to fast-track the transition to the Rwanda Journalists Union (RJU), agreeing that the current team should leave office as soon as that process was over. Of course, the transition took more time than was required, something that resulted into members’ frustration and a feeling that the committee members were keener on extending their ‘stay in power’ more than ensuring a smooth, fast transition into a workers’ union. Personally, I have advised that the elections should be for union leaders since we have a draft constitution and have carried out all the necessary consultations to move in that direction. The current committee and members spent resources and valuable time on this process and it would be utterly wrong to take it back to square one without any genuine reason. It is a position I share with the majority of other committee members and many journalists.Nonetheless, we have only a week to the elections. Many people have been told they will be voting in a committee for ARJ, not RJU. In view of that reality and considering the tense atmosphere that usually characterizes these elections, it’s important we move on with the idea of voting for the association leadership. But that leadership should be given mandate to complete the transition process (to a union) in, say six months. That period should be more than enough to validate the draft constitution and finalise with the registration and whatever other technical requirements. It’s important that we create a strong platform that addresses labour/welfare needs for journalists, including remuneration, firing and hiring, contracts, etc. These are things journalists can hardly promote and achieve, with their employers having as much, or even stronger, say in the association in its current form. Like government, media employers should be one of the partners a journalists union should be able to engage. That would be a win-win for everyone. Address the welfare issues of local journalists and you are going to have a more professional, responsible media sector. Ignore the welfare aspect, and we will never get out of this vicious circle.