Blog

Allgemein

Hungary: New EU Media Board should assess Blikk acquisition…

Hungary: New EU Media Board should assess Blikk acquisition by pro-government media group

The undersigned Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) partners and Médiafórum today raise alarm about the recent acquisition of Hungary’s most-read tabloid newspaper by a pro-government media group and calls on the newly established European Board for Media Services to launch an assessment of the merger and its potentially negative impact on media pluralism in Hungary.

21 November 2025

Our organisations call on the European Board for Media Services (Media Board) – the independent EU advisory body established by the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA) – to initiate an advisory opinion on the takeover, which we hope will be an important test case for ensuring free and pluralistic media inside the bloc.

 

In early November 2025, it was announced that Indamedia, a pro-government media group, had reached a deal with Ringier, a Swiss media company, to purchase its portfolio of media titles in Hungary for an undisclosed sum. The purchase includes Blikk, the country’s most popular tabloid, which has three million monthly online readers as well as several regional newspapers.

 

The acquisition represents yet another example of the consolidation of media under government-aligned ownership. Indamedia is linked to the Prime Minister’s business circle through the influence and partial ownership of Miklós Vaszily. Vaszily owns 50% of Indamedia and is also president of TV2, a major pro-government television channel. His career includes leading roles at other Orbán-aligned outlets, including Origo, which was transformed into staunchly government-friendly media under his stewardship.

 

Indamedia already owns Index, a formerly independent online news website which was captured in 2020. If the same policies enforced at Index and Origo are now implemented at Blikk, a market leader, it would further shrink the space for citizens to access pluralistic media content. With the recent appointment of a new editor-in-chief aligned with the new owners, the threat of editorial adjustments appears high.

 

Crucially, this merger comes less than six months before the April 2026 election in which the ruling Fidesz party is facing its biggest challenge in a decade and tails in the polls. The acquisition therefore looks timed to tighten media control ahead of the vote and increase the ability of the government to reach voters.

 

The takeover, and its timing, must also be viewed against the backdrop of the Hungarian government’s long term media capture strategy, in which media titles owned by foreign owners retreating from the market have been bought up at opportune moments in strategic acquisitions led by business interests linked directly or indirectly with the government or the Prime Minister, after which new editors are brought in, the editorial line is recalibrated, and overt criticism and watchdog journalism is silenced, and to differing levels replaced with political propaganda. Examples include the sale in 2016 – also by Ringier – of the newspaper Népszabadság to Mediaworks, a company with close ties to the government who promptly closed the paper.

 

Over the past 15 years, the government has successfully orchestrated this strategy to the point where it is estimated the government holds sway or indirect control over 80% of the media market. This has been combined with capture of the public broadcaster, the installation of former Fidesz MPs to control the key media regulator, and the deliberate bloating of state advertising budgets to prop up media towing the government line. As a new report published this week outlines, the result is the most sophisticated system of media capture and control ever developed within the European Union.

 

The EU Commission’s flagship European Media Freedom Act (EMFA), which entered into full force in August 2025, was developed in part to address the systemic challenges to democratic systems posed by such state-led media capture. With this new regulatory framework in place, all key obligations under the EMFA are now mandatory for Member States. The Media Board, established specifically to advise the European Commission, now has a mandate, and a duty, to act.

 

Under EMFA, any media merger that could have a significant impact on media pluralism and editorial independence qualifies for assessment. Under the new rules, the Media Board can issue an opinion after being consulted by the relevant national regulator. In Hungary, the Media Council and the Hungarian Competition Authority (GVH) are tasked with assessing such mergers. However, there has been no indication so far that either body will do so. As the Hungarian government has challenged EMFA before the European Court of Justice seeking to have it nullified, any interaction with Hungarian regulators appears unlikely.

 

Even if it were to launch its own assessment, the Media Council is dominated by former Fidesz MPs and is the target of infringement proceedings by the Commission over its discriminatory decision to reject the license renewal of one of the country’s last critical radio broadcasters. It is therefore unlikely that any assessment conducted by the Media Council on this merger would be transparent, objective, proportionate and non-discriminatory – the criteria set out under EMFA for such assessments.

 

Instead, in the absence of an independent consultation by the national regulators, rules state that the Media Board may issue an opinion on its own initiative, or when requested by the European Commission. Given the clear impact the merger in Hungary will have, our organisations believe this represents an important first potential case for the Media Board. Rather than wait for the Commission’s appeal, the Board should swiftly launch its own assessment. This advisory opinion should address the wider landscape for media pluralism in Hungary, and examine the editorial practices imposed by Indamedia after previous acquisitions, as well as its connections to government.

 

When completed, the Media Board can then present its assessment to the Hungarian Media Council, which is, under EMFA rules, obliged to take its opinion “to the fullest extent possible”. If this opinion is disregarded, the regulator is obliged to submit its reasoning to the Board and the Commission explaining its position and why the opinion was not followed.

 

While any conclusions made by the Board assessment are non-binding, we believe this impact assessment can still play an important role in highlighting the undemocratic nature of the takeover at the European level. In addition, any actor seeking to challenge the merger under domestic law will be able to cite in the Board’s advisory opinion in court. Moving forward, assessments of the Media Board on Hungary must be combined with close monitoring of implementation of the EMFA in Hungary by the Commission, which should use all tools at its disposal to enforce the rules.

 

While our organisations recognise that the EMFA alone cannot and will not be a silver bullet for addressing systemic challenges in Hungary, its provisions must be utilised to the fullest extent to roll back entrenched media capture, to the benefit of a free and pluralistic media market, and more widely the country’s democracy. The EMFA’s new rules are now in place. No time should be wasted in using them.

Signed by:

  • International Press Institute (IPI)
  • European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
  • European Federation of Journalists (EFJ) 
  • Médiafórum Egyesület (Hungary)
  • Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT)

This statement was coordinated by the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR), a Europe-wide mechanism which tracks, monitors and responds to violations of press and media freedom in EU Member States and Candidate Countries.

Allgemein

Serbia: Election of REM Council undermines democratic principles

Serbia: Election of REM Council undermines democratic principles

The Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) today expresses renewed concern over the undemocratic process by which the National Assembly conducted the latest election for the Council of the Regulatory Authority for Electronic Media (REM), Serbia’s key media regulator.

20 November 2025

After a delay of more than one year, the National Assembly last week appointed eight members to the REM Council, including four candidates seen by media experts as independent. However, it failed to approve the ninth appointee representing the country’s national minorities after the ruling majority abstained, drawing criticism of obstruction and leading to the resignation of four of the elected members.

 

Our organisations warn the European Union that the deliberate exclusion of the representative of the national minority councils, which followed non-transparent adjustments to the nomination criteria and procedure, represents yet another effort by the ruling majority to retain government influence over the body and block democratic reform of the media ecosystem.

 

The recent vote violates Article 12 of the country’s Law on Electronic Media, undermines the right of minority communities to legitimate representation on the REM Council, and further undermines public trust in the independence of the regulator.

 

MFRR partners stress that this election follows two previous processes favouring pro-government candidates, which we previously criticised as making a mockery of EU mandated reforms. This latest vote repeats this unsatisfactory process and provides yet another example of an entrenched strategy of media and regulatory control.

 

In light of the recent resignations of elected members, the MFRR underscore to the EU that the only acceptable outcome remains the lawful and complete appointment of the REM Council, with independent members and a legitimate minority representative. Without this, the regulator will lack credibility and cannot fulfill its role in protecting media pluralism and media ethics.

 

European standards under the newly adopted European Media Freedom Act (EMFA) are clear: national media regulatory authorities must be legally, functionally, and financially independent, shielded from political interference and influence, and appointed through fair, transparent and merit-based procedures. This recent process again violates these rules.

 

The MFRR consortium therefore urges the international community and institutions such as the OSCE and the European Union to refrain from legitimising this outcome. We stress that any assessment of progress on media freedom in Serbia must be conditioned on a complete, lawful and transparent appointment of the REM Council.

 

More widely, Serbia remains in a period of deep crisis for media freedom and has experienced significant backsliding on media freedom and freedom of expression in the past year, as rightly recognised by the European Commission in its latest EU Enlargement Package.

 

Moving forward, the MFRR will closely watch the response of the European Union and the European Commission to this alarming development and continue to update European institutions on all future latest developments regarding the REM Council.

Signed by:

  • ARTICLE 19 Europe
  • European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
  • European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
  • Free Press Unlimited (FPU)
  • International Press Institute (IPI)
  • Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT)

This statement was coordinated by the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR), a Europe-wide mechanism which tracks, monitors and responds to violations of press and media freedom in EU Member States and Candidate Countries.

Allgemein

European Democracy Shield Bolstering independent media at the core…

European Democracy Shield Bolstering independent media at the core of democratic resilience

In the face of rising digital manipulation, shrinking civic space and collapsing media business models, the European Democracy Shield offers an important opportunity to ensure safety of journalists and media viability, among other things, but only if turned into concrete action. This is what MFRR aims to follow.

18.11.2025

On 13 November 2025, the European Commission adopted its European Democracy Shield, the first comprehensive, flagship strategy for strengthening democratic resilience within the bloc, with a key focus on free and independent media, fighting disinformation and creating healthier information ecosystems to protect European values and security. 

 

The Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) partners welcome the fact that many priorities from our submission on media freedom and security of journalists, as well as EPD-led joint submission of 65 organisations, have been incorporated in the text. 

 

Strengthening the economic viability of media, and updating the EU Recommendation on the safety of journalists and to combat Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs), which have become a pervasive tool for silencing critical voices, are important priorities. Media and press freedom priorities are defined under the umbrella of the second focus of the European Democracy Shield, aimed at strengthening democratic institutions, free and fair elections and free and independent media. A comprehensive list of commitments has been developed to address economic viability, safety of journalists, influence of AI and disinformation. 

 

The MFRR calls for these protections to be retained and enforced. We also call for further protections of journalists from digital pressures and harmful legislation to be introduced. The MFRR also calls for the strict implementation and timeline for the implementation of these commitments, as well as for strengthening the European Democracy Shield enforcement in relation to the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA), and Digital Services Act (DSA).

 

Below we outline  how the EU Commission’s priorities reflected the MFRR submission on media freedom and protection of journalists. 

 

Economic viability

 

Tackling the changing business models for media and the advertising market, now increasingly dominated by online platforms that divert funding away from independent media, is one of the main issues that media is facing in terms of its viability. The commitment to reviewing the Audiovisual Media Services Directive and the Directive on copyright in the Digital Single Market is a positive step toward ensuring the economic viability of the media sector. However, the MFRR cautions that these measures must be implemented swiftly and effectively to prevent further erosion of media pluralism.

 

The Shield’s detailed section on funding for democracy support is particularly significant. The organisations note the Commission’s acknowledgment that additional financial resources are necessary to sustain independent media, especially in the EU neighbourhood and candidate countries. Prioritisation of core funding for independent media is vital for countering the economic pressures imposed by dominant online platforms. The creation of the Media Resilience Programme and the new MFF Global Europe could be important additions to ensure impartiality and core support in the media ecosystem. It is welcoming that media is recognised as a part of defence budgets, but we urge for the precise clarification of the timeline and understanding of the scope Media Resilience Programme and MFF will have.

 

Safety of journalists

 

One of the key priorities detailed in the document is ensuring the safety and protection of journalists, including in the EU external action, in line with the highlighted needs of our submission. To intensify its efforts to protect journalists against undue pressure, threats and attacks, the Commission commits to updating its Recommendation on the safety of journalists, which is very welcomed by our consortium.

 

Reinforcing and strengthening measures on the safety of journalists and combating abusive litigation (SLAPPs) by reviewing its anti-SLAPP Recommendation remains crucial to addressing pressures on journalists. We hope that a high-level event on combating SLAPPs will translate into concrete policies, as indicated by this document. We highlight again that the revisions should include measures that foster a sustainable support system for journalists and media targeted with SLAPPs, ensuring that they are compensated for the damages incurred; as well as to equip the judiciary and legal community with the knowledge to recognise and address SLAPPs while upholding public participation rights. 

 

That being said, our organisations stress the need for robust legal safeguards against the criminalisation of defamation and the use of foreign-agent laws, which continue to drive self-censorship and force journalists into exile.

 

The Shield also highlights that it will continue assisting the civil society actors and journalists under authoritarian regimes to ensure that “tools for digital censorship circumvention, antisurveillance and anti-shutdown solutions are available to citizens, by scaling up the rapid response work with trusted partners”. It would, nevertheless, be important to ensure that the protection from digital repression, surveillance and online pressures is strengthened both within the EU member states as well as candidate and potential candidate countries. As indicated in the MFRR submission, journalists and media professionals are increasingly targeted by spyware across Europe, with the most recent examples in Serbia and Italy. Further protections from the misuse of spyware are essential to ensure that journalists feel free to conduct their roles in protecting democracy.

 

Moreover, the Commissions’ commitment to continue funding mechanisms to monitor press freedom in EU Member States and candidate countries, such as MFRR, is an essential way of contributing to the overall goal of supporting media freedom and pluralism, as recognised in the document.

 

Finally, we are happy to see that the Commission commits to supporting quality independent media and journalism in the EU and candidates and potential candidate countries, with a specific emphasis on core funding for independent media. In addition, continued core support to exiled independent journalists and media outlets, who are working from within the EU and its neighbourhood is essential. We also hope that the support and protection will be ensured in specific cases of transnational repression of exiled journalists. These proposed funding streams should be established in the upcoming Multiannual Financial Framework, and in line with the GFMD recommendations for media. 

 

AI and new technology 

 

As highlighted in the MFRR submission, the Democracy Shield recognises that AI poses significant threats to media viability and the integrity of the information ecosystem. These threats to media viability and information ecosystem are planned to be tackled through a welcomed review of the Directive on copyright in the Digital Single Market, with a focus on ensuring that the use of AI respects intellectual property rights and does not further destabilize media business models. Developing guidance to maintain fair competition in the digital environment is mentioned as well, particularly in light of the growing influence of AI-driven platforms that can distort media markets and advertising revenues.

 

The Commission also commits to investing in AI literacy and digital skills for both citizens and media professionals, aiming to strengthen societal resilience against AI-facilitated threats to democracy and media freedom. Though a large part of the document is focused on developing mechanisms for increased media literacy, such as the creation of European Centre for Democratic Resilience, which will host a multi-stakeholder platform, we welcome the fact that the document recognises the DSA as an important tool for media pluralism and media literacy. 

 

We therefore underscore the importance of the Digital Services Act’s provisions, which require very large online platforms and search engines to actively identify and mitigate systemic risks to media freedom and pluralism. Though the Commission commits to monitoring and enforcing these obligations, it falls short of providing actions for their implementation. We urge the Commission to formulate more concrete steps for ensuring the implementation of the DSA and to develop a risk-assessment that is reflective of the real needs of journalists on the ground. To ensure this, among other things, we call for inclusion of data from the protection mechanisms, such as MapMF, in the risk assessment process.

 

Final considerations

 

While the European Democracy Shield represents a strong initial commitment, these six organisations, alongside their partners on the ground, will remain actively engaged to ensure that the Shield not only meets but exceeds its stated goals, adapting to new challenges as they arise. The document’s success will ultimately be measured by its ability to translate promises into concrete actions that protect and sustain independent journalism in an increasingly hostile environment. 

 

We agree with Commissioner McGrath that the Shield will need to be adjusted and adapted, therefore we see the document as a strategy to enhance media viability, and safety of journalists, among many other things. In this context, we call for a development of a comprehensive action plan, that would provide clarity on how these commitments will be enforced, and in which timeline. We as MFRR commit to following the situation on the ground, and to alerting the Commission on the new developments, as well as to follow the implementation of all named commitments in the scope of our mandate.

 

An increased number of attacks against journalists and media professionals across Europe demonstrates the urgency of these commitments and recommendations. If action is not taken now, independent media risk collapse, democratic institutions will be further undermined, and the information space will remain dominated by hostile actors.

Signed by:

  • European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
  • International Press Institute (IPI)
  • Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT)
  • European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
  • Free Press Unlimited (FPU)
  • ARTICLE 19 Europe

This statement was coordinated by the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR), a Europe-wide mechanism which tracks, monitors and responds to violations of press and media freedom in EU Member States and Candidate Countries.

Library

Bulgaria: Media Capture Monitoring Report 2025

Bulgaria: Media Capture Monitoring Report 2025

The International Press Institute (IPI) and the Media and Journalism Research Center (MJRC) today launch the second in a series of Media Capture Monitoring Reports for 2025, examining the state of play in Bulgaria.

14.11.2025

The report reviews developments regarding media capture in the country in 2025 and examines Bulgaria’s compliance with the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA) since the EU Commission’s regulation entered into full force in August.

It concludes that Bulgaria has made no tangible progress since EMFA came into force. Although a cross-ministerial and institutional working group was previously established and made some initial progress, its suspension stalled much needed reforms. While the Ministry of Culture has said a new working group has been formed to implement EMFA reforms to the Radio and Television Act, no information has been provided about plans for wider implementation of any other Articles of EMFA and the timeline for additional reforms remains unclear.

 

The report provides detailed recommendations on a variety of measures and policies necessary to address media capture in Bulgaria and create a free, pluralistic and democratic media ecosystem, in line with EMFA provisions.

This report is part of a broader series covering seven other EU countries: Finland, Greece, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Spain. IPI and MJRC will also publish an overview report, summarising major developments across the EU in the past year. The next reports will be published over the following weeks.

These reports are intended as a vital resource for media rights organizations, civil society groups, policymakers, and advocates dedicated to monitoring and fostering media freedom across the EU.

EXPLORE THE METHODOLOGY

For more information or media inquiries, please contact:

This report was coordinated by IPI as part of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR), a Europe-wide mechanism which tracks, monitors and responds to violations of press and media freedom in EU Member States and Candidate Countries.

Library

Croatia: EFJ condemns court convicting assaulted journalist Melita Vrsaljko…

Croatia: EFJ condemns court convicting assaulted journalist Melita Vrsaljko of ‘disturbing public order’

On 7 November 2025, Croatian journalist Melita Vrsaljko, a contributor to Faktograf and Klimatski portal, was found guilty by the Municipal Court in Zadar, of disturbing public order after defending herself from a physical attack that occurred in July 2024 while she was reporting on illegal waste dumping. The European Federation of Journalists (EFJ) joins its affiliates in Croatia — SNH and HND — and the SafeJournalists Network (SJN) in condemning this ruling, which sets a dangerous precedent for press freedom and Croatian journalists.

13.11.2025

The attack dated back to 15 July 2024, when Melita Vrsaljko was assaulted in the village of Nadin, along with her camera operator. The perpetrator, an elderly man who was reportedly drunk, admitted he intended to prevent them from filming on a public street. In response, the police issued an order for both to maintain a distance of at least 50 metres away from each other. Vrsaljko reportedly had no choice but to act in self-defence to get rid of her attacker and to call the police for assistance. The following day, the attacker’s daughter strangled Vrsaljko at her home, attempting to force her to delete footage recorded of the aggression committed by her father.

 

In an interview for the EFJ podcast PressTalks, which was recorded at the 2025 Voices Festival in Zagreb, Vrsaljko bravely recounted both attacks and her fight for justice. “Much more painful are the scars in my head”, and “feeling not safe in my own house,” the journalist told us. Vrsaljko is in the process of filing an appeal.

 

“By ruling Vrsaljko equally guilty of disturbing public order as her initial attacker, the Zadar Municipal Court judge Maria Stopfer Mišetić sends a deeply concerning message regarding journalists’ safety, particularly in local communities where journalists are more easily identifiable and consequently more vulnerable to violence,” stated EFJ President Maja Sever.

 

Earlier this year, Vrsaljko faced another instance of violence. She was assaulted and subjected to misogynistic insults at a local festival in Benkovac.

 

From the outset, the EFJ and its Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) partners have denounced flaws in the police response and the legal classification of offences in Vrsaljko’s case. As assessed during our fact-checking missions to Croatia, the authorities considerably failed to classify the two related incidents as criminal offences. As a result, the incidents were excluded from government safety protocols jointly signed by the Ministry of the Interior, HND, and SNH, and established to enhance journalists’ safety.

 

Furthermore, the Municipal State Attorney’s Office in Zadar has yet to issue a decision on the criminal complaint filed more than a year ago for the assault by the perpetrator’s daughter.

 

Discussions with the Croatian Ministry of Culture and Media, Ministry of Justice, and Ministry of the Interior have raised additional concerns, as officials questioned the link between the attacks and her journalistic work, despite clear evidence that she was targeted for her reporting.

 

Journalists, and in particular women journalists, in the Balkan region are working in an increasingly hostile environment, where gender-based harassment and attacks are on the rise.

 

The EFJ urges the judiciary to reconsider its ruling and requests that the authorities ensure the journalist’s professional activity is duly considered from the initial incident through to the court’s final ruling. We also call on the Zadar Municipal Court to rule without further delay on the criminal complaint filed for the second attack.

 

Listen to the story of Melita Vrsaljko in the EFJ podcast PressTalks available on Spotify and YouTube.

This statement was coordinated by EFJ as part of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR), a Europe-wide mechanism which tracks, monitors and responds to violations of press and media freedom in EU Member States and Candidate Countries.

Allgemein

EU Enlargement Package: Assessments must now translate into meaningful…

EU Enlargement Package: Assessments must now translate into meaningful media freedom action

The Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) today welcomes the publication of the 2025 EU Enlargement Package and highlights key media freedom developments and concerns that should shape negotiations with candidate countries moving forward.

13.11.2025

Our organisations welcome the sharpening of criticism of certain countries engaging in egregious media freedom violations by the Commission in this year’s report, particularly Serbia and Georgia, and stress that assessments for all countries must now translate into effective progress on media freedom, media pluralism and freedom of expression.

 

The Enlargement Package recognises freedom of expression, media freedom, and pluralism as key pillars of a democratic society in the accession process. Although some improvements have been noted, the media sector in most candidate countries remains marked by persistent and systemic challenges, including political interference, lack of regulatory independence, and limited pluralism, as well as threats to the safety of journalists.

 

The report emphasises that the European Commission insists on the highest quality of reforms, especially regarding the rule of law, democratic institutions, and fundamental freedoms. However, some crucial media freedom issues deserve more attention in this report, which we highlight here.

 

The MFRR, which monitors national media landscapes and advocates for free media in all EU Candidate Countries as part of its mandate, seeks to spotlight the main concerns we want to be tackled in the enlargement process, as well welcome positive steps forward. 

 

Backsliding on media freedom

Georgia: The report accurately highlights severe backsliding, leading Georgia to decline to an early stage of preparation in the area of freedom of expression. This is the second consecutive year of backsliding, illustrating an escalating press freedom crisis driven by the ruling Georgian Dream party.  Since the protests were sparked by the government’s decision in November 2024 that Georgia would halt its EU membership negotiations until the end of 2028, the government’s crackdown on media and civil society intensified. Since the start of the protests in November, the MFRR’s Mapping Media Freedom (MapMF) platform documented 175 attacks affecting 288 media workers with the police and security forces as well as government officials being the major source of the attacks. Since MFRR started active monitoring of Georgia, in December 2023, MapMF has documented a total of 262 media freedom violations in the country affecting 433 media workers, which is the highest number of alerts recorded during the same period among EU candidate countries. 

 

Each day, Georgia moves closer to becoming a fully consolidated authoritarian regime, as the ruling Georgian Dream party intensifies its efforts to erode democracy and stifle dissent. Journalists have been viciously beaten, verbally assaulted, threatened, and detained. Their equipment has been confiscated and destroyed, and their work repeatedly obstructed. At the same time, government smear campaigns to discredit independent journalism have continued unabated. The Georgian Dream is adopting repressive legislation at an alarming rate, making it nearly impossible for independent media and civil society organisations to operate. As the report outlines, new legislation, including amendments to the Law on broadcasting, the Foreign Agents Registration Act and the legislative package on family values and protection of minors, all negatively affect the right to freedom of expression and the ability of the media to operate freely. Additionally, the Georgian Dream Parliament adopted amendments to the Law on Freedom of Speech and Expression, and the Organic Law on Common Courts. 

 

The country report on Georgia adequately assesses the capture of the Georgian Public Broadcaster (GPB), noting that it “lacks independence, has biased editorial policy and contributed to the promotion of anti-EU rhetoric.” MFRR repeatedly  raised concerns about the GBP, which has long been an instrument of the Georgian Dream government, and suppressed efforts by journalists who try to report free of political control, including firing several journalists. It further acknowledges the deterioration of journalists’ safety, including the use of arbitrary arrests, fines, and SLAPPs against journalists, and mentions the unjust imprisonment of Mzia Amaglobeli, founder and director of the online media outlet Batumelebi. The report brings into focus the severe crackdown on journalistic freedoms by the government, which make Georgia one of the key flashpoints for media freedom in Europe in need of urgent international attention. At this stage, the EU considers Georgia a “candidate country in name only” and urges authorities to reverse course. In the face of rising authoritarianism, Georgian media demonstrate exemplary resilience and refuse to be silenced. MFRR reiterates our call on the Georgian Dream to stop the crackdown on independent media and repeal repressive legislation. We also renew our call on the European Union and its member states to step up pressure on Georgia and stem the rapid descent into authoritarianism.

 

Serbia: The report is explicit in its assessment of backsliding on freedom of expression in Serbia, emphasising the current crisis and polarisation of society following the student-led anti-corruption protests initiated in November 2024. Attacks against free media continue to take place effectively unaddressed by authorities. Since November 2024, MapMF has documented 190 attacks affecting 341 media professionals, media outlets and journalists’ representatives. Of these, 82 journalists were targeted during demonstrations, with 51 media actors assaulted. The report also notes the smear campaigns and verbal attacks from government officials targeting journalists and media, denigrating critical journalists as enemies of the state. The latest example of these attacks is the orchestrated smear campaign against the Independent Journalists’ Association of Serbia (NUNS) from the newly established journalists’ association ANS and pro-government tabloids, who falsely accused NUNS of plotting violence during demonstrations by distributing protective equipment to journalists ahead of demonstrations.   

 

Amidst a perilous environment for independent reporting, the future of independent media outlets remains uncertain. A recent investigation by the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP) suggested efforts by President Vučić to “weaken” the editorial autonomy of the two remaining critical privateTV stations, N1 and Nova TV. These same broadcasters were labelled by Vučić as “doing pure terrorism”, and were removed from the SBB network as of 16 April 2025, retaining only their online platforms. Political interference is also contaminating newsrooms. The MapMF platform has documented several cases of journalists being dismissed or forced to resign in direct retaliation for defending ethical journalism and/or resisting censorship. Journalists at the public broadcaster, RTS, which was criticised for its unbalanced coverage of the protests, have not been spared pressure

 

While media freedom has been in a state of crisis for decades in Serbia, the current escalation of events over the past year represents one of the deepest downturns in press freedom  in the country’s recent history. The lack of independence of regulatory bodies is particularly concerning and it is demonstrated inter alia by the repeatedly obscure process of appointment of the members of the Commission for Electronic Media (REM). SLAPPs and other forms of intimidation continue to represent a threat for journalists in Serbia. MFRR organisations, which conducted a solidarity mission to Belgrade and Novi Sad earlier this year, have repeatedly called for a tougher stance by the EU in response to clear Serbian backsliding on media freedom and freedom of expression. While we welcome the long overdue hardening of language in the current report, we now call for the EU to exert maximum effort into ensuring sustained and concrete democratic reforms as part of Serbia’s accession process.

 

Türkiye: Türkiye remains at an early stage of preparation in freedom of expression, with further backsliding observed in the overall state of democracy and media freedom, according to the 2025 report. Judicial actions against journalists and media intensified through politically motivated prosecutions and arrests, often relying on vague legal definitions and selective application of the law. The implementation of criminal laws related to national security, counterterrorism and defamation continued to hinder freedom of expression. The reporting period saw a further increase in arrests and detentions of journalists, underscoring the disproportionate use of legal measures to intimidate and silence media. For instance, Furkan Karabay, a journalist whose social media posts were deemed “insulting the president” was arrested. The 2022 Disinformation Law and the new Cybersecurity Law have also introduced vague provisions enabling censorship and surveillance.

 

Media ownership in Türkiye already remains highly concentrated among pro-government business groups. Türkiye’s broadcast regulator RTÜK maintained issuing discriminatory administrative and monetary fines against independent and opposition media outlets, further undermining media pluralism. Nearly 100 million liras in fines were imposed, along with 25 days of broadcast bans — including two full blackouts — and a government-appointed trustee took control of a TV channel. The selective allocation of public advertising and control over print distribution also damaged financial sustainability of independent and minority media outlets. Independent media outlets receiving foreign funding were frequently subjected to hostile rhetoric and smear campaigns by pro-government media. Online freedom is likewise restricted, as authorities frequently block access to critical websites, news articles, and social media accounts, and impose temporary shutdowns or throttling of platforms during protests or crises.

 

As the overall trend remains deeply concerning, marked by political interference and instrumentalisation of the judiciary, the MFRR reiterates the urgent need for Türkiye to overhaul its restrictive legislation and broadcasting frameworks. Reflecting the report’s assessment, we further echo the call for the release of detained journalists and human rights defenders, and urge the authorities to safeguard independent reporting as a cornerstone of media freedom and pluralism in Türkiye.

 

No progress on media freedom

Bosnia and Herzegovina: While the report  indicates that Bosnia and Herzegovina shows ‘some level of preparation’ in the area of freedom of expression, an ongoing political crisis at the entity level and a series of restrictive legislative changes have severely stalled paths for any meaningful improvement. The EU correctly reports ‘no progress’ achieved during the reporting period in guaranteeing freedom of expression, media freedom, and the protection of journalists. According to MFRR monitoring, the first half of 2025 instead saw a rise in attacks compared to the same period the previous year of threats including verbal attacks often perpetrated by politicians, physical assault, and interference with journalists’ work.The sudden closure of Sarajevo-based AlJazeera Balkans in July 2025, due to the cited financial issues, after 14 years of broadcasting further undermines media pluralism in Bosnia and Herzegovina and across the region. The closure has left over 200 media professionals in Sarajevo, and other cities in the region without a job. 

 

The situation remains particularly challenging in Republika Srpska. In March 2025, the region’s National Assembly adopted a foreign-agent style law which targets independent media and civil society organisations that receive foreign funding, subjecting them to onerous reporting requirements under the risk of sanctions if they fail to comply with the new rules. In addition, criminal defamation, reintroduced into the Penal Code in 2023, forms part of a disturbing trend of expanding liability for dissenting opinions and creates a chilling effect, undermining previous progress as it was decriminalised more than 20 years ago. Our organisations consistently oppose criminal defamation laws, as they constitute a disproportionate interference with the right to freedom of expression and are incompatible with international human rights standards. While the continuing political standoff in Republika Srpska continues, progress on media freedom looks set to face sustained hurdles without considerable democratic reform.

 

Kosovo: The country has some level of preparation but made no progress in the past year. The MFRR believes that this evaluation is well justified, considering that the government passed a heavily criticised media law, titled Law on the Independent Media Commission (IMC). The Law was then annulled by the Constitutional Court demanding the prompt drafting of a new proposal. The boards of the public broadcaster and the media regulatory body remain dysfunctional due to a lack of quorum, as the parliament failed to elect new members. The public broadcaster faced turbulent times due to political interference, which culminated in the removal of six editors from its TV programs. This led the Ombudsperson to open an investigation into censorship. The situation further deteriorated in August when the staff of the public broadcaster received their salaries almost a month late – a situation that has been repeated in November.

 

Journalists continue to face difficulties in accessing information, as institutions remain largely closed to journalists and activists. The number of complaints filed with the Agency for Information and Data Protection over refusals of Freedom of Information (FOI) requests continues to rise on a yearly basis. Verbal and other forms of attacks and incidents also marked the year 2025, with government officials, including Prime Minister Albin Kurti, publicly attacking journalists and media outlets. Verbal and other forms of attacks and incidents also marked the year 2025, with government officials, including Prime Minister Albin Kurti, publicly attacking journalists and media outlets.

 

To improve the media situation, the MFRR urges the government and members of the ruling party Vetëvendosje to immediately stop their anti-journalist rhetoric. We further urge the incoming government to commit to preparing a comprehensive package of laws related to media freedom, ensuring that this package aligns with EU and Council of Europe standards and enjoys broad political support. We further call on the government to immediately release the funds owed to RTK so that salaries can be paid and the broadcaster can continue to operate, and for the Assembly of Kosovo to restore RTK’s legal governance structures and appoint the remaining board members to ensure the election of a permanent Director General without delay. Unless steps are taken to address converging crises, long term democratic media freedom reform in Kosovo risks heading into reverse.

 

Limited progress on media freedom

Albania: Although considered a frontrunner among candidate countries, when it comes to freedom of the media and freedom of expression, our organisations stress that Albania continues to suffer from numerous structural weaknesses and challenges to its still fragile media ecosystem. While the 2025 enlargement report assesses Albania as having some and a moderate level of preparation, the MFRR warns that recent legislative initiatives risk severely undermining recent tangible progress. In particular, draft amendments to the Penal Code on provisions related to defamation, insult and influencing judicial independence pose direct threats to media freedom and the fundamental right to freedom of expression. Our organisations have criticised these proposed changes and called for them to be amended. 

 

Further proposals by the parliamentary majority to significantly restrict journalists’ access to the Parliament of Albania, though not yet implemented, pose a threat to the public’s right to information. The non-execution of court decisions and the obstruction of journalistic activity at the Tirana premises of Focus Media Group also emerged as a key flashpoint for media freedom in 2025. Elsewhere, the country still faces serious challenges due to concentrated media ownership, strong ties of media owners to vested political and business interests, which undermines independence and public trust, as well as some instances involving the intimidation of journalists – all of which require sustained attention and action.

 

North Macedonia: The European Commission correctly observes a moderate level of preparation on freedom of expression in North Macedonia. The report accurately reflects the main challenges facing the media sector in the country, including the partial alignment of media legislation with European requirements, the need to strengthen the independence and capacity of the regulator (AAAMS), the ongoing reform of the public broadcaster (MRT), and the persistent risks to the safety of journalists (including physical attacks and online harassment). While the media environment in North Macedonia is generally stable, the difficult working and economic conditions faced by many journalists – especially in local and small media outlets struggling to remain viable – needs to be given more emphasis and considered as prerequisites for moving forward in the EU enlargement process. 

 

Of particular concern are also the lack of specific safeguards against abusive litigation (anti-SLAPP legislation) and the growing use of abusive lawsuits. Furthermore, the MFRR emphasises the need to undertake a comprehensive reform of the Media Law to address the evolving media landscape, particularly in the digital sphere. North Macedonia’s small and highly fragmented media market remains economically fragile, leaving media outlets exposed to political and financial pressures. State funding and advertising continue to reflect strong political influence over the media. Particularly concerning is the lack of transparency in the allocation of state budget funds for political advertising during election campaigns, a practice that distorts the market, increases media dependence on major political parties, and weakens editorial independence and media pluralism.

 

Some progress on media freedom

Ukraine: Overall, the media freedom situation in Ukraine remains positive, despite numerous and serious war-time pressures. Restrictions imposed within the scope of martial law regulations are “overall proportionate”, according to the Commission. While the most serious issues putting in danger the physical safety of journalists are caused by Russia’s war of aggression, the media also face a number of concerns created by domestic actors. Authorities typically react promptly to physical attacks, direct intimidation and harassment of journalists, by opening criminal cases to investigate the events. However, these criminal cases often fail to produce concrete results, and those responsible for the attacks are seldom identified and prosecuted.

 

Authorities must  ensure that restrictions imposed temporarily by martial law comply with key public rights and interests, such as access to information and media freedom. This is especially the case of Ukraine’s “United News” telethon: a government-funded project, the telethon pools Ukraine’s main TV channels into a common television broadcast, the content of which has been criticised domestically and abroad as unreliable and failing to meet objectivity standards. In its report, the Commission called upon Ukrainian authorities to reassess the format of the telethon “at latest by the time of the eventual suspension of martial law”. The independence of Ukraine’s national media regulator should be strengthened, and the transparency of media ownership increased, in line with the provisions of the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA). Efforts already made to implement the European anti-SLAPP directive are commendable, however these are only at a first stage of development. Overall, despite significant war-time pressures and challenges, the domestic situation for media freedom in Ukraine remains broadly positive, yet fragile.

 

Montenegro: Montenegro demonstrates moderate preparedness in freedom of expression, yet significant concerns persist regarding media independence and pluralism. The MFRR welcomes the overall positive trend noted by the Commission regarding Montenegro but notes a troubling increase in attacks against journalists and media outlets, with 17 recorded incidents affecting 25 individuals and organizations since January 2025, a sharp rise from six incidents in 2024. While physical assaults are rare, verbal abuse, often perpetrated by private individuals, including serious death threats, both online and offline, is particularly alarming. Furthermore, public officials and politicians have been primarily responsible for discrediting journalists’ work, underscoring a lack of understanding of the media’s democratic role. Additionally, the absence of a signed sectoral collective agreement contributes to poor working conditions and a lack of social dialogue. 

 

Public broadcasters, the Radio and Television of Montenegro and the Agency for Audiovisual Media Services (AMU) are particularly exposed to political pressure. The fact that AMU’s Council has been operating without its full composition since December 2024 due to the non-election of two members remains another serious issue. In parallel, ongoing court proceedings challenging the legality of the RTCG Director General’s appointment, and the recent conviction in first-instance proceedings against RTCG Council members for abuse of official position during the election, further raise concerns about transparency and adherence to legal procedures. However, at a time when national legislation requires further alignment with European media laws, the Ministry of Culture and Media’s newly formed working group to implement the European Media Freedom Act and the Digital Services Act into Montenegrin legislation is a positive step forward. Further action is needed to consolidate existing gains and push for further progress on media freedom and freedom of expression.

 

Good progress on media freedom

Moldova. Moldova is assessed as having between having some and a moderate level of preparation in freedom of expression and has made tangible progress, notably in adopting new legislation on access to information, implementing the law on the Media Subsidy Fund, amending the audiovisual media services code (AVMSC) and on advertising, as well as on the protection of journalists. Rules for selecting members of the public service broadcaster and the Audiovisual Council have been reviewed. While the overall climate for free and independent journalism remains relatively healthy compared to other EU candidate countries in the region, local divergences remain acute and all media face intense challenges to their financial viability.

 

In a landscape characterised by the division between pro-Western and pro-Russian politics, journalists face challenges in navigating polarised news environments and disinformation. The fragility of the media and public interest journalism due to the small advertising market is particularly concerning. While the media environment is overall healthy in most of the country, in Transnistria, a region occupied by pro-Russian military forces, no media are allowed to freely function. Issues also persist in the largely Russian-speaking regions of Gagauzia and Taraclia, where independent journalists report being regularly intimidated by local authorities and the population. The MFRR welcomes recent progress on freedom of expression and media freedom in Moldova and urges national authorities to continue on the trajectory as part of its EU aspirations.

This analysis was coordinated by the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR), a Europe-wide mechanism which tracks, monitors and responds to violations of press and media freedom in EU Member States and Candidate Countries.

Allgemein

Hungary: Media Capture Monitoring Report 2025

Hungary: Media Capture Monitoring Report 2025

The International Press Institute (IPI) and the Media and Journalism Research Center (MJRC) today jointly launch a new series of Media Capture Monitoring Reports for 2025, with Hungary the first country report to be published.

12.11.2025

The new report reviews developments regarding media capture in the country in 2025 and examines Hungary’s compliance with the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA) since the EU Commission’s regulation entered into full force in August.

It concludes that Hungary remains the EU Member State with the most sophisticated model of media capture ever developed within the bloc, and that rather than take any steps to implement the EMFA, the Hungarian government has framed it as a tool of foreign interference and legally challenged the regulation before the European Court of Justice seeking to have elements annulled.

 

Ahead of the April 2026 election, the report explores the opportunities and challenges posed by the EMFA for improving Hungary’s media environment, including strengthening regulatory independence and public service media governance, increasing ownership transparency, strengthening safeguards for media pluralism and guaranteeing the fair distribution of state funds.

 

It also provides detailed recommendations on a variety of measures and policies necessary to unwind entrenched media capture in Hungary and create a free, pluralistic and democratic media ecosystem, in line with EMFA provisions.

 

This report is part of a broader series covering seven other EU countries: Bulgaria, Finland, Greece, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Spain. IPI and MJRC will also publish an overview report, summarising major developments across the EU in the past year. The next reports will be published over the following weeks.

 

These reports are intended as a vital resource for media rights organizations, civil society groups, policymakers, and advocates dedicated to monitoring and fostering media freedom across the EU.

EXPLORE THE METHODOLOGY

For more information or media inquiries, please contact:

This report was coordinated by IPI as part of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR), a Europe-wide mechanism which tracks, monitors and responds to violations of press and media freedom in EU Member States and Candidate Countries.

Allgemein

Open letter regarding the dismissal of journalist Gabriele Nunziati

Open letter regarding the dismissal of journalist Gabriele Nunziati

The undersigned organisations of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) are writing to you to express our shared concern and dismay over the decision by Agenzia Nova to terminate its collaboration with journalist Gabriele Nunziati, following a question he addressed to the spokesperson of the European Commission on October 13, 2025.

12.11.2025

Da: redazione@balcanicaucaso.org 

A: redazione@agenzianova.com 

 

Direttore responsabile Riccardo Bormioli

Agenzia Nova. Agenzia di stampa quotidiana

Redazione Via Parigi 11, 00185 Roma

November 11, 2025

Subject: Concern over the dismissal of journalist Gabriele Nunziati

 

Dear Editor-in-Chief Bormioli,

 

The undersigned organisations of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) are writing to you to express our shared concern and dismay over the decision by Agenzia Nova to terminate its collaboration with journalist Gabriele Nunziati, following a question he addressed to the spokesperson of the European Commission on October 13, 2025.

 

As organisations dedicated to defending press freedom across Europe, we share the opinion that the dismissal of a journalist for asking a question deemed “inappropriate” to a representative of a political body represents a violation of media freedom and of the journalistic profession, which should be immediately remedied.

 

It is our view that the justifications provided by Agenzia Nova regarding the dismissal are neither convincing nor sufficient to justify this decision. They also serve to undermine the management’s asserted neutrality and objectivity. 

 

Journalists have both the right and the duty to ask questions, including critical or difficult ones, to ensure the democratic accountability of political decision-makers. Any attempt to silence such voices constitutes an unjustifiable form of censorship.

 

Nunziati was doing his job, professionally posing a legitimate question that sought to clarify the position of the European Commission regarding what UN experts have determined is the ongoing genocide in Gaza, a position that remains subject to legitimate questioning and public debate.

 

With respect to your concern about possible reputational damage, we believe that such damage does not stem from the legitimate work of your collaborator, but rather from the decision to censor his work on flawed grounds.

 

The silencing of those who carry out their watchdog role by posing legitimate public interest questions regarding the situation in Gaza represents a serious blow to freedom of information and a worrying sign for democracy in Italy, which harms not only journalists’ right to work without fear of retaliation but also citizens’ right to free, independent, and impartial information.

 

We therefore join the many organisations and colleagues, domestically and internationally, who have condemned what we consider to be an unfair and unjustified dismissal, express our solidarity with Gabriele Nunziati, and call on Agenzia Nova to review its decision and proceed with his immediate reinstatement.

Signed by:

  • Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT) 
  • European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
  • European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
  • Free Press Unlimited (FPU)

This statement was coordinated by the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR), a Europe-wide mechanism which tracks, monitors and responds to violations of press and media freedom in EU Member States and Candidate Countries.

Oggetto: Sconcerto per il licenziamento del giornalista Gabriele Nunziati

 

Gentile direttore Bormioli,

 

Le organizzazioni sottoscritte del consorzio europeo Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) le scrivono per esprimere il proprio sconcerto e la propria preoccupazione per la decisione dell’Agenzia Nova di terminare la collaborazione con il giornalista Gabriele Nunziati, a seguito di un quesito da lui rivolto alla portavoce della Commissione Europea lo scorso 13 ottobre 2025.

 

In quanto organizzazioni impegnate nella difesa della libertà di stampa in tutta Europa, condividiamo l’opinione che il licenziamento di un giornalista per aver posto una domanda ritenuta “fuori luogo” a una rappresentante di un organo politico rappresenti una chiara violazione della libertà dei media e della professione giornalistica, a cui andrebbe posto immediato rimedio. 

 

A nostro avviso, le giustificazioni fornite da Agenzia Nova in merito al licenziamento  non appaiono né condivisibili né sufficienti a giustificare la decisione. Tali spiegazioni contribuiscono inoltre a minare la presunta neutralità e obiettività della direzione. I giornalisti hanno il diritto e il dovere di porre domande, anche critiche o scomode, per garantire la responsabilità democratica dei decisori politici: qualsiasi tentativo di silenziare queste voci rappresenta una forma di censura ingiustificabile.

 

Nunziati ha esercitato il proprio lavoro, ponendo un quesito legittimo volto a chiarire la posizione della Commissione Europea riguardo alla situazione a Gaza che gli esperti delle Nazioni Unite hanno definito come genocidio, una posizione soggetta a legittimo scrutinio e dibattito pubblico. 

 

Rispetto alla vostra preoccupazione legata a un eventuale danno d’immagine, riteniamo che tale danno non derivi dal legittimo lavoro di un vostro collaboratore, quanto piuttosto dalla vostra stessa decisione di censurare tale lavoro su basi infondate.

 

Silenziare la voce di chi svolge il proprio ruolo da “cane da guardia” ponendo domande di pubblico interesse sulla situazione a Gaza rappresenta un grave colpo alla libertà di informazione e un segnale preoccupante per la democrazia in Italia. Ciò danneggia non solo il diritto dei giornalisti di lavorare senza timore di ritorsioni, ma anche quello dei cittadini a un’informazione libera, indipendente e imparziale.

 

Ci uniamo quindi alle numerose organizzazioni e ai colleghi, in Italia e all’estero,  che hanno condannato quello che consideriamo un licenziamento ingiusto e immotivato, esprimiamo la nostra solidarietà a Gabriele Nunziati, e invitiamo l’Agenzia Nova a rivedere la propria decisione e a procedere con il suo immediato reintegro.

Firmato:

  • Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT) 
  • European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
  • European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
  • Free Press Unlimited (FPU)
Library

Impunity Day: MFRR renews urgent call for justice for…

Impunity Day: MFRR renews urgent call for justice for murdered journalists around Europe

To mark the International Day to End Impunity for Crimes against Journalists on November 2, the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) honours the memory of those who have lost their lives in the pursuit of truth and demands justice for the crimes committed against them.

3 November 2025

The killing of a journalist is an attack on freedom of expression, an assault on the public’s right to know and a fundamental threat to democracy. Tragically, this past year alone has seen a disturbing pattern of violence and inaction, with four killings of journalists in Europe in October alone: three in Ukraine and one in Turkey.

 

The most recent murder occurred on October 23 in Ukraine, when Olena Hubanova and Yevhen Karmazin were killed in a Russian drone attack in Kramatorsk. Earlier that month, on 3 October, French photojournalist Antoni Lallican was killed in a targeted drone strike. Reporting confirmed that Lallican was killed with the use of an FPV (first-person view) drone, which allows operators to visualise their targets at the moment of the strike with the use of a camera. Lallican was visiting visible PRESS markings at the time of his death.  

 

The ongoing and apparently deliberate targeting by the Russian military of journalists in Ukraine, and the fact that Russia refuses to investigate or even limit strikes on media workers, are stark reminders of the dangers journalists working in conflict zones face and the urgent need for protection and accountability.

 

These risks are not only confined to war zones, as demonstrated by the death of Victoria Roshchyna, a Ukrainian journalist detained and held in custody for over a year at an undefined location by Russian authorities. Roshchyna, whose death was confirmed in October 2024, weighed only 30 kilograms at the time of her death. Her body showed signs of torture while in Russian captivity.

 

In Turkey, Hakan Tosun, a journalist and activist known for his reporting on ecological destruction and local corruption, was brutally beaten in Istanbul and died from his injuries on 13 October 2025. The Büyükçekmece Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office is reportedly investigating the case. With two arrests made, authorities must now swiftly confirm whether his journalistic work was the motive behind the attack.

 

Impunity meanwhile continues for dozens more journalists killed in Europe in recent years. In total, 15 journalists were killed in relation to their activities since the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine on 24 February 2022. To date, no one has been held accountable for any of these killings.

 

Within the EU, seven years after the assassination of investigative reporter Ján Kuciak and his fiancée Martina Kušnírová in Slovakia, the alleged mastermind has been acquitted multiple times. In Malta, while two men were recently sentenced for their roles in the car bombing that killed Daphne Caruana Galizia in 2017, the alleged mastermind has yet to face justice, with a trial expected to start next year. In Greece, the murder of Giorgos Karaivaz in April 2021 remains unsolved, with two suspects acquitted due to insufficient evidence.

 

These tragedies are not isolated incidents but part of a global crisis of impunity for the killing of journalists, both in and outside of conflict zones. This lack of justice sends a chilling message that those who target journalists can do so without accountability and that violence is an acceptable means to silence the press. We call on governments to ensure thorough and independent investigations, to protect journalists at risk, and to support independent media in their vital work.

 

On this day, MFRR partners reaffirm our commitment to pushing for justice for journalists who have lost their lives. We will continue to monitor these cases, advocate for justice, and demand an end to the culture of impunity at the international level. Justice delayed is justice denied. The time to act is now.

Signed by:

  • ARTICLE 19 Europe
  • European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
  • European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
  • Free Press Unlimited (FPU)
  • International Press Institute (IPI)
  • Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT)

This statement was coordinated by the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR), a Europe-wide mechanism which tracks, monitors and responds to violations of press and media freedom in EU Member States and Candidate Countries.

Allgemein

Report: Fragile media freedom progress in Bulgaria at risk…

Report: Fragile media freedom progress in Bulgaria at risk of backsliding without urgent reform

While Bulgaria has experienced modest progress on media freedom in the last four years, the situation remains undermined by persistent structural, legal and political challenges, with urgent action needed by government and public authorities to push forward both domestic and EU-mandated reforms.

29.10.2025

While Bulgaria has experienced modest progress on media freedom in the last four years, the situation remains undermined by persistent structural, legal and political challenges, with urgent action needed by government and public authorities to push forward both domestic and EU-mandated reforms.

 

These are the key findings of a media freedom report published today following a three-day joint fact-finding mission to the country between 24-26 September by the partner organisations of the Council of Europe’s Safety of Journalists Platform and the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR).

 

The full report – Bulgaria: Fragile media freedom progress in Bulgaria at risk of backsliding without urgent reform – is available to download.

 

It provides an executive summary of the key challenges facing media freedom and pluralism in Bulgaria in 2025. Thematic sections explore the safety of journalists, the Council for Electronic Media and the public broadcaster Bulgarian National Television. Additional sections address legal threats, SLAPPs and defamation, media pluralism and independent journalism, and access to information, public trust in media and disinformation.

 

The report also provides detailed recommendations to national authorities and government on measures that can be taken to improve the climate for media freedom in Bulgaria, as well as general recommendation to the journalistic profession within the country.

 

The report was produced following the mission, which was joined by ARTICLE 19 Europe; Association of European Journalists (AEJ); European Broadcasting Union (EBU); European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF); European Federation of Journalists (EFJ); International Press Institute (IPI); Reporters Without Borders (RSF); Osservatorio Balcani e Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT) and Index on Censorship. The local partner was the Association of European Journalists Bulgaria.

 

During the visit to Sofia, the delegation met with a range of professional media stakeholders, including leading journalists and editors from print, online, broadcast and investigative media, as well as media associations and unions, media experts and civil society. Separate meetings were held with the Bulgarian National Radio and the Bulgarian National Television.

 

Meetings were also held with the President; Ministry of Justice; Ministry of Interior; Council of Electronic Media (CEM); Office of General Prosecutor; Commission for Personal Data Protection; Central Election Commission and representatives of embassies.

Click here for more information about the Council of Europe’s Safety of Journalists Platform.

This mission was coordinated by the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR), a Europe-wide mechanism which tracks, monitors and responds to violations of press and media freedom in EU Member States and Candidate Countries.