KABUL: Journalists and legislators in Afghanistan have been outraged by the intelligence service’s new media guidelines that bar interviews with Taliban leaders and criticism of foreign troops.

The 24-point list was delivered to editors of newspapers and television stations in Kabul in a document that bears only the name the “Islamic Republic of Afghanistan” and carries no signature or official stamp.

It is widely agreed to have been issued by the intelligence service, following an agency briefing to editors on the same subject.

Considering the “present situation,” media reports should not “weaken people’s morale and affect the national interests,” it says, referring in part to stories about the regular Taliban attacks.

The list, marked “not for publication,” says there should be no interviews with “terrorist commanders” and that criticism of the Nato and US-led forces based in Afghanistan is forbidden.

Also frowned on are “enemy” statements that portray the government as un-Islamic or suggest the security forces are weak. Stories of attacks, such as the regular suicide blasts and car bombings, should not lead news bulletins.

And former mujahideen, the commanders of the resistance to the 1980s Soviet occupation and orchestrators of a devastating civil conflict who still hold sway today, should not be described as warlords.

The list indicates no penalties and President Hamid Karzai’s office said the government had merely “requested the local media organisations in Afghanistan to refrain from glorifying terrorism, or giving terrorists a platform.”

But many say the notice is an attempt to intimidate editors into self-censorship.

“The media obviously have a role to play in promoting peace, but it is absolutely outrageous that the Afghan authorities should harass the privately owned media in this manner and tell them what to say and write,” said Paris-based Reporters Without Borders.

“Criticising the Afghan authorities or the coalition forces is not the same as condoning terrorism.”

The Afghan Nai organisation that supports open media said the move was unlawful and called for an investigation.

Nato said meanwhile it believed “strongly” in press freedom. It is “entirely appropriate that what we do should be open to scrutiny, debate and criticism,” Nato civilian representative Mark Laity told reporters. Journalist and political analyst Sayed Silaiman Ashna said the document was like a “night letter” — the copied statements that were secretly distributed after dark during Afghanistan’s decades of political turmoil.

The government did not have the right to instruct media through an unsourced document “handed over by an unknown pick-up truck”, he said, adding they would need to amend the law if they wanted to make any changes. Lawmaker Shukria Barikzai, a former editor of a women’s magazine, said the restrictions violated the constitution.

“From any angle we look at this, it cannot be in the interest of Afghanistan and its commitment to the international community,” which has been pushing the country towards democracy, she said.—AFP