Georgia: As ruling party intensifies crackdown, media freedom groups…

Georgia: As ruling party intensifies crackdown, media freedom groups demand urgent action to safeguard independent journalism

The undersigned media freedom, journalists’, and freedom of expression organisations strongly condemn the intensifying crackdown on Georgian journalists and press freedom defenders who continue to face institutional repression and physical attacks.

10.10.2025

As the Georgian Dream (GD) regime’s Prime Minister explicitly promises to stifle dissent, we reiterate our urgent call for the EU and the international community to respond forcefully to the ruling party’s clampdown on media and civil society.

Media freedom in Georgia remains dire and continues to deteriorate. At least 14 journalists from both independent and government-controlled media were targeted during the anti-government demonstration on October 4, which took place simultaneously with local municipal elections partially boycotted by the opposition.

While the Prosecutor’s Office has reportedly opened an investigation into the obstruction of professional activities of journalists from the pro-government public broadcaster and the government-controlled outlet Imedi TV, investigations have not yet been launched into attacks targeting independent media. This selective approach to justice is highly alarming and deepens long-standing impunity for crimes against journalists in Georgia.

In addition, the authorities have increased institutional pressure and tightened their grip on media and civil society, including groups supporting independent media. Georgian authorities have launched inquiries of independent online media outlets and media freedom organisations based on the law on grants, which, following amendments in April, prohibits receiving foreign grants without government approval.

Targeted media organisations include Project 64, an organisation which operates Mtis Ambebi (Mountain Stories), the Organized Crime Research Media Centre, which runs investigative newsroom iFact, and Governance Monitoring Center (GMC). The latter manages two media projects: Plangvis Detektori (Squander Detector), focusing on corruption and public governance issues, and Realpolitika, an online media outlet covering international politics.

According to reports, over 60 media and civil society groups were ordered to disclose donor and grant information. The Anti-Corruption Bureau demanded contracts, budgets, work plans, and implementation reports, giving only three business days to comply. The Georgian Charter of Journalistic Ethics (GCJE), a media self-regulation body and a de-facto union of journalists, was also targeted.

In September, up to 30 organizations, including IDFI – Institute for Development of Freedom of Information, Media Center Kakheti, GYLA – Georgian Young Lawyers’ Association, Rights Georgia, Civic Idea, and the Human Rights Center, received similar letters.

Despite objections over their legal basis, the Tbilisi City Court upheld the Bureau’s motions against nine organizations on 17 September.

These inspections follow earlier rounds in June and August 2025, when authorities used Georgia’s “foreign agents” law to demand sensitive data and freeze accounts of groups accused of supporting protests.

Our organisations welcome the statement by EU Vice President Kallas and EU Commissioner for Enlargement Kos condemning Georgian Dream’s crackdown on Georgia’s media and civil society and now urge words to be met with concrete actions.

While we expect the clampdown on media to intensify in the coming months, we reiterate our call for stronger pressure on the Georgian Dream regime, including additional targeted sanctions. Without external support and solidarity, Georgian media and civil society will not be able to survive.

Signed by:

International Press Institute (IPI)
European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
ARTICLE 19 Europe
European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
OBC Transeuropa
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.

Allgemein

Press Freedom at Risk: The Democratic Cost of the…

Press Freedom at Risk: The Democratic Cost of the EU’s “Chat Control” Proposal

The European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF) -on behalf of the MFRR- is alarmed by the draft of the EU Commission’s CSA Regulation, so-called “Chat Control”. We call on the Council to reject the new proposal. Furthermore, we urge Germany to remain committed to its previous stance of developing a human rights-based CSA Regulatory approach that would not infringe on the fundamental rights and freedoms, primarily right to privacy, and eventually press freedom.

10.10.2025

While it is intended as a solution to improve online safety, particularly against the sexual exploitation of children, the mechanism it envisages would allow authorities to force messaging, email, and hosting providers to scan private communications, whether or not there is specific suspicion. This would effectively open the door to the mass surveillance of personal conversations and weaken the technical protections that ensure privacy and confidentiality. If passed, it would also constitute an infringement of press freedom.

According to a recent open letter signed by more than 470 researchers from 34 countries, the proposal would create “unprecedented capabilities for surveillance, control, and censorship and has an inherent risk for function creep and abuse […].” The signatories argue that no filtering system can reliably distinguish illegal content from legitimate private messages at scale without generating false positives and yet the proposal would mandate just that.

Fundamentally, the proposed regulation infringes on the right to privacy. They further warn that scanning devices or communications before encryption, as outlined in parts of the draft, inherently undermines end-to-end encryption and introduces a single point of failure in the system. If encryption loses its trustworthiness, all users, including journalists, face a higher risk of exposure, hacking, or misuse of their data. This view is supported by a wide range of civil society and media freedom organisations.

While the Danish presidency continues to push this problematic legislation, the new German government held a discussion on October 9, but has not yet reached an agreement on whether it will maintain its safeguarding role for the right to privacy. Even though Germany will imminently need to take a stand on the question, both the Justice Department and the so-called Digital Minister remain silent on the matter. The German vote can be crucial here, as the EDRi analysis points out, threatening to swing the vote in favour of this harmful legislation.

ECPMF wants to remind Germany, and other EU council members, that press freedom and democratic accountability depend on the ability of journalists and citizens to communicate securely and without fear of surveillance. The proposed “Chat Control Regulation” would endanger this foundation by creating an infrastructure that allows authorities or private companies to inspect private messages. Such a mechanism is fundamentally incompatible with the principles of press freedom and democracy.

The danger does not lie only in potential misuse by authoritarian regimes. Once such a system exists, it can be exploited by any government, regardless of its political character. Numerous examples have shown that broad surveillance powers, such as the use of spyware, can easily be expanded or reinterpreted over time. Unchecked and broad powers can make a tool intended to detect criminal activity to quickly be redirected toward monitoring political speech or journalistic investigations.

Protecting children from abuse and exploitation is an unquestionable moral duty. However, measures to achieve this goal must respect the fundamental rights enshrined in European law. The chat control proposal, as it currently stands, fails to meet that standard. It would introduce disproportionate surveillance, weaken encryption and create risks that far outweigh its intended benefits.

The ECPMF therefore calls on the European institutions and member states, Germany in particular, to reject the chat control proposal in its current form. Efforts to improve online safety must be effective, proportionate and compatible with fundamental rights. ECPMF stands with journalists, researchers and human rights defenders across Europe in urging lawmakers to defend encryption, protect source confidentiality and uphold the freedoms that define open societies.

This statement was coordinated by ECPMF 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.

Event

Media freedom through transnational lenses: insights from Montenegro and…

Media Freedom Through Transnational Lenses:

Insights from Montenegro and North Macedonia

Monday, 20 October 2025 at 11:00 am CEST.

This webinar presents the findings of two shadow reports assessing the state of media freedom in Montenegro and North Macedonia, highlighting progress, ongoing challenges, and recommendations for EU and national stakeholders.

Montenegro has recently advanced its media legislation, strengthening public broadcaster independence, enhancing transparency, and promoting self-regulation. Yet, challenges remain: key institutions remain vulnerable to political influence, law implementation is inconsistent, and foreign interference continues to pose risks.

In North Macedonia, improvements such as reduced violence against journalists and legal reforms coexist with persistent issues, including disinformation, political and economic pressure, weak regulation, particularly for online media, and declining public trust. Foreign interference and negative rhetoric from officials add to the fragility of the media environment.

Montenegro and North Macedonia are both candidates for EU accession; for this reason, this webinar aims to explore the current media landscape in both countries from a transnational perspective, understanding its implications for the wider EU integration process.

Opening Remarks

Botzios Thomas

Embassy Counsellor; Adriatic and Western Balkans Unit at the Italian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation

Speakers

Maja Sever

European Federation of Journalists

Olivera Nikolic

Montenegro Media Institute

Zoran Richliev

Metamorphosis Foundation

Massimo Moratti

OBC Transeuropa

Moderator

Serena Epis

OBC Transeuropa

Library

Bulgaria wants to criminalise alleged privacy violations

On 8 October 2025, Bulgaria’s parliamentary Legal Affairs Committee urgently approved, at first reading, amendments to the Criminal Code introduced by the “There Is Such a People” (ITN) party. The draft law proposes prison sentences and fines for the dissemination of information about a person’s “personal life” without their consent. The European Federation of Journalists (EFJ) and its Bulgarian affiliate AEJ-Bulgaria condemn this disproportionate restriction on journalists’ right to cover private matters that are in the public interest. We demand the outright withdrawal of these provisions, which contravene European legal standards.

09.10.2025

The proposal defines “personal life” broadly, covering personal, family, intimate relations or health status, and criminalises their disclosure through any medium, including print and online publications. The penalties foreseen range from one to six years in prison and fines between 2,000 and 8,000 BGN (approximately 1,000 to 4,000 euros). The proposal also allows the use of special surveillance means, such as wiretaps, for investigating such offences, which are typically reserved for serious crimes.

The bill, submitted on 7 October, was approved by the committee the following day with support from members of the governing majority and opposition parties. Representatives of the Prosecutor’s Office and judiciary were not present due to the extraordinary and accelerated scheduling of the session. Only members of a centrist-liberal opposition bloc opposed the proposal, warning that it risks being used to restrict media freedom and could breach the Constitution and the European Convention on Human Rights.

Adela Katchaounova, co-Chair and Legal Programme Director at the Bulgarian Helsinki Committee commented that the proposal is “aimed at restricting journalists’ freedom of expression.”. According to her, its adoption would violate both the Bulgarian Constitution and the European Convention on Human Rights, placing journalists in a situation that “guarantees comfort for those in power or represents the next stage of an authoritarian state.” She reiterated that “the right of people to learn details of someone’s personal, family, intimate relationships, or even health status can outweigh the right to privacy. (…) Public interest can prevail, and this is not because people like gossip, but because someone’s private life affects the entire society. Therefore, the public has the right to know, and journalists have the right to disseminate information about people who are in government, about politicians, about candidates for public office, etc.”.

“We are outraged by the proposed legal amendments which, if adopted, will open the doors for unprecedented censorship,” added Maria Cheresheva, President of AEJ-Bulgaria, an EFJ affiliate in Bulgaria. “No democratic country would send its journalists to prison for doing their fundamental job: revealing information of high public interest about politicians and other powerful figures. We call on all political parties to take a firm stance against this assault on freedom of expression that would brush off all the progress Bulgaria has made in the recent year in decriminalising defamation.”

“We fully support the interpretation of the Helsinki Committee and our Bulgarian affiliates. We consider this freedom-destroying proposal to be an act of betrayal, especially since we have just participated in a mission on press freedom in Bulgaria that showed signs of openness on the part of the Ministers of the Interior and Justice,” said Ricardo Gutiérrez, EFJ General Secretary. “This reform of the criminal code completely reverses our optimistic impression. We call on the European Union to respond firmly to this clear violation of the rule of law by the Bulgarian authorities.”

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

What is the state of Freedom of Information (FOI)…

What is the state of Freedom of Information (FOI) in Europe, and what challenges do journalists encounter when seeking access to government data?

Although most European countries have laws guaranteeing the right to information, journalists often face major obstacles in practice. This report reviews 60 documented violations of FOI recorded on the Mapping Media Freedom Platform, analyses the legal frameworks across Europe, and draws on insights from interviews with FOI experts and defenders.

29.09.2025

The report finds that journalists’ requests for information across all focus countries were ignored, partially answered, or rejected. In some instances, authorities went to significant lengths to bar journalists from access by releasing heavily censored documents or contesting access requests before court.

Because there is no single, unified FOI law that standardises access across Europe, conditions vary widely depending on each country’s legislation and political environment. To illustrate these differences, the report takes a closer look at four case studies: Germany, Hungary, Malta, and Ukraine.

Key findings of the report

Germany: The country’s FOI framework is under pressure from the new government, elected in February 2025. Journalists face additional barriers due to administrative inefficiencies and malpractice.
Hungary: Access to information is heavily restricted as part of the ruling government’s broader efforts to undermine independent media and civil society. FOI is frequently curtailed through legal and political pressure.
Malta: The FOI Act itself is designed in a way that restricts transparency. Journalists often encounter long delays, while drawn-out legal proceedings further obstruct access to public information.
Ukraine: Wartime conditions significantly constrain access to information. Authorities face the challenge of balancing national security concerns with the public’s right to know, leaving journalists with limited access to government data.

Freedom of information is an essential right for journalists to do their work. Functioning FOI laws ensure that journalists can shine a spotlight on government misconduct, and facilitate the flow of information between the government and the public.

Download the Report

This report was compiled by the ECPMF 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

MFRR condemns police interference with journalistic work in Germany…

MFRR condemns police interference with journalistic work in Germany and calls for protection of all journalists

Since the beginning of September 2025, Mapping Media Freedom (MapMF) has registered two cases of unlawful police conduct against journalists at pro-Palestinian demonstrations. Ahead of demonstrations “All Together for Gaza”, announced for September 27, Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) partners call on the police to respect the freedom of press.

26.09.2025

On 3 September, two journalists were intercepted by the police while covering a pro-Palestinian demonstration at Alexander Square in Berlin. Italian photojournalist Zaira Biagini was first approached by two police officers and then escorted away, with her press card visibly displayed at her hip. According to the journalist, police officers asked her to hand over photos she had taken during the demonstration for inspection, which she refused to do. In a statement to the nd-aktuell the police later said that they had asked this to ensure that no images of officers were included. After an identity check and legal instructions, she was released.

A similar situation occurred a few minutes later with journalist Ryad Aref. The journalist was approached by a police officer and, despite presenting his press card on police request, he was escorted away and surrounded by several police officers. In a statement to nd-aktuell the journalist reports that he was told by an officer: “You may film anywhere in Germany, just not in Berlin.” According to Aref, he was not given a reason at the time, only the information that he would receive notice by post. Nd-aktuell elaborates that this suggests that he may face charges. Berlin police told the daily that the incident involving Aref was “not known or made known” to them and that they could therefore not comment.

This behaviour amounts to interference in journalistic reporting, and restriction on the exercise of the journalistic profession. Both measures, restricting reporting as well as inspection of media equipment in Germany, and specifically Berlin, can only be imposed by a court, and only under specific circumstances. Furthermore, police officers who are performing a public duty should be transparent and not immune to potential public scrutiny. It is in the public interest to report on the way the police handle assemblies.

We believe that this is a part of a larger pattern, where journalists reporting on protests in Germany are often disproportionately scrutinised. MapMF has recorded 28 cases of police interference against 72 media workers during different types of protests in 2024 and 2025. 11 of these cases involved journalists reporting on the pro-Palestinian demonstrations. Furthermore, journalists, specifically freelance journalists and journalists in exile covering contentious issues in German society, such as pro-Palestinian protests, express a lack of trust in official security and monitoring mechanisms, noting that cases of pressures against them often go unreported. Addressing these concerns, the Council of Europe has called on the German government to uphold the right to freedom of expression and freedom of assembly equally for everyone.

MFRR partners want to firmly recall that it is the duty of the police to ensure that journalists are able to carry out their work without obstruction. This applies not only under normal circumstances but also – and especially – in tense protest situations.

Furthermore, we want to call on journalists to report these cases, and monitoring organisations to engage in objective and unbiased recording of all press freedom violations. No journalist should be pressured for doing their job.

Signed by:

European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
International Press Institute (IPI)
OBC Transeuropa (OBCT)
Free Press Unlimited (FPU)

Allgemein

Bulgaria: Press Freedom Undermined by Political Polarisation and Delayed…

Bulgaria: Press Freedom Undermined by Political Polarisation and Delayed Reforms

Media freedom in Bulgaria faces entrenched challenges in a climate of political polarisation and legislative inertia, with urgent action needed by government and public authorities to push forward both domestic and EU-mandated reforms, a coalition of international press freedom organisations said today.

26.09.2025

Following a three-day mission to Sofia between 24-26 September, the delegation concluded that progress is needed to prevent and prosecute attacks on journalists, resolve the ongoing dispute over the leadership of the public broadcaster, guarantee the independence of the Council for Electronic Media (CEM) and pass anti-SLAPP legislation. Despite the important work of key journalist associations, there is a low level of solidarity within the journalistic profession.

The mission, organised by the Council of Europe’s Safety of Journalists Platform and the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) also found that Bulgaria is lagging behind in implementing the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA), in force since August this year. A government working group has been suspended, with no indication of when discussions involving all relevant authorities and stakeholders will resume.

The mission did not have the opportunity to discuss the issue with the body in charge of media policies, the Ministry of Culture, since it was the only relevant public authority which refused to meet the delegation, despite repeated requests.

Following the mission, the partner organisations jointly call for greater political will and cross-party support to address deepening institutional paralysis and drive forward much needed reforms under the EMFA, which if properly implemented will help safeguard media freedom, pluralism and independence.

Safety of journalists

Though serious physical attacks on reporters and media workers in Bulgaria remain relatively uncommon, some media stakeholders told the mission that general hostility against the journalistic profession had increased in recent years. The mission called on the authorities to promptly investigate several assaults against media workers recorded on the Safety of Journalists Platform and bring those responsible to justice. Political pressures including intimidation and insults against journalists by politicians remain a cause of concern, even though direct political pressures on journalists have lessened compared to previous years.

The Council of Europe’s Platform for the Safety of Journalists currently has 34 active alerts involving attacks on journalists or threats against media freedom. Physical attacks account for one third of the cases, although their number has also dropped compared to previous years. Threats, including death threats, against journalists remain a serious concern but are too rarely sanctioned by authorities.

The mission notes the low levels of trust by journalists in the law enforcement authorities and prosecutors to secure justice in cases of attacks. Previous cases involving attacks on journalists by police have suffered from delayed justice. Certain stakeholders raised ongoing concerns about politicised investigations by prosecutorial authorities against the media. The mission welcomes the support of the Chief Prosecutor’s Office and the President for proposals to monitor and record serious cases and strengthen provisions within the criminal code to introduce higher sanctions for those convicted of attacking journalists.

Council for Electronic Media and public broadcaster

The mission concludes that the ongoing dispute between the Director General of the Bulgarian National Television and the CEM risks undermining public trust in the public broadcaster and the regulator’s appointment process. Two elections by the CEM have failed to reach a majority on appointing a new Director General, with the incumbent continuing in the role three years past his original mandate, as pointed out by the European Commission’s 2025 Rule of Law Report.

A judicial review into the process is ongoing and a new attempt to appoint a Director General is scheduled to take place on 16 October. The mission organisations call for the process to appoint a new Director General of BNT to be conducted in a fair and transparent manner and for parties involved to act in accordance with the law.

The mission also heard criticism from some stakeholders about the editorial independence of BNT, reflecting concerns raised in the EU Rule of Law Report and the Media Pluralism Monitor. It is essential that EMFA-mandated reforms are implemented to strengthen the broadcaster’s editorial independence, which must be also guaranteed by adequate, sustainable and predictable financial resources.

The delegation concludes that reforms are required to both insulate the Council for Electronic Media from political influence and bolster its operational resources. Multiple stakeholders noted perceived political affiliations of certain council members. The mission supports legislative proposals for reforms to strengthen the independence of all future candidates, in line with the provisions of the EMFA.

However, changes to the makeup or election process for the CEM must be conducted under the principles of independence, legality and pluralism. The healthy functioning of the CEM is vital for the effective regulation of the media ecosystem in Bulgaria. The regulator also requires greater operational resources to carry out its expanded mandate. Proposals to merge the CEM with other regulatory bodies risks disrupting its mandate and weakening its regulatory powers.

Legal threats, SLAPPs and defamation

The legal environment in Bulgaria creates persistent risks for journalists. According to journalists the mission met, there are dozens of active Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs) targeted at media and journalists. Investigative journalists and those probing crime and corruption are among the most targeted by SLAPPs, with major businesses and insurance companies, politicians, and judges among the most common plaintiffs. Many of these cases involve extortionate demands for financial compensation.

The mission welcomes the preparations by the Ministry of Justice for the transposition of the 2024 Anti-SLAPP Directive. However, the organisations also express concern that the focus appears to be solely on the implementation of the EU Directive without equal attention to the Council of Europe Recommendation on SLAPPs. A key concern is that criminal defamation remains a legal tool in Bulgaria and politicians missed the opportunity to fully decriminalise defamation during recent criminal code changes.

Recent amendments lowered the minimum fines for insult and defamation and eliminated the automatic aggravated qualification when the person concerned is a civil servant. The reforms also introduced the possibility of waiving criminal liability and replacing it with administrative sanctions in cases concerning insult or defamation of state officials acting in their official capacity. Nevertheless, the continued criminalisation of defamation remains inconsistent with international freedom of expression standards and continues to allow the strategic use of criminal law against the media and journalists.

Legislation, pluralism and media capture

Repeated cycles of elections and the subsequent disruption of government working groups has resulted in delays to reforms that are badly needed to bring about a healthy media ecosystem in Bulgaria. Though initial work was done to prepare for the implementation of the EMFA, which came into full force in August 2025, the mission learnt that the Ministry of Culture has suspended the process.

Implementation of the EMFA is vital for addressing many of the systemic challenges facing media freedom and pluralism in Bulgaria. The mission concluded that the country suffers from some levels of media capture, with the non-transparency of media ownership, particularly anonymous online media, and the non-transparency of state advertising among most acute concerns. At the local and regional level, the economic dependence of media on advertising from local authorities has exposed them to financial pressures and in many cases weakened editorial independence.

Media pluralism in Bulgaria remains limited and independent journalism faces pressures from many sides, including ownership interference, self-censorship, threats to economic viability of watchdog journalism, and lingering concerns over the independence of major television broadcasters. Though Bulgaria has professional investigative journalists probing crime and corruption, they work in a climate of pressure, including death threats, harassment and vexatious lawsuits.

The legislative climate for access to information is inadequate and continues to face challenges, with journalists facing obstructions stemming from a general culture of opacity from state bodies. Requests for interviews with political leaders are routinely rejected and Freedom of Information (FOI) requests are often either ignored or partially answered. Parliamentary reporters continue to face disproportionate limits on their movement within the new parliament building, limiting scrutiny.

The precarious working conditions of many journalists in Bulgaria, including low pay and weak labour protections, pose further challenges for the profession, undermining the ability of media workers to oppose threats to editorial independence in their newsrooms.

Institutional and regulatory dysfunction, problematic media ownership and political influence have combined to weaken public trust in journalism in Bulgaria, with the country ranking among the lowest in Europe for trust in news, and among the highest levels of news avoidance.

This has created a vacuum in which disinformation can more easily spread, particularly on social media. Despite this clear threat, the government has failed to create a national disinformation strategy, with the work of the multi-stakeholder Bulgarian Coalition Against Disinformation remaining frozen since 2023. It is vital that Bulgaria swiftly designate and empower a national Digital Services Coordinator (DSC) and establish rules for penalties under the Digital Services Act (DSA).

Following the mission, the partner organisation call on the European Commission to closely observe the implementation of the EMFA in Bulgaria, provide concrete and measurable recommendations within the Rule of Law Report, deepen conditionality on EU funds, and to use all tools available to ensure compliance with the EMFA, the anti-SLAPP directive and other European standards, such as the Digital Services Act.

Recommendations

The mission outlines the following recommendations to improve the situation for media freedom in Bulgaria. More detailed recommendations will be provided in the full report to follow.

Safety of journalists

Government and political authorities should refrain from and condemn all cases of denigration, vilification, intimidation and threats against journalists, including online attacks
The Bulgarian government should join the Safety of Journalists Campaign, establish contact points for journalists in law enforcement and ministerial bodies, and improve horizontal collaboration between ministries on the safety of journalists.
Review and improve legislation to strengthen the criminal code with stronger sanctions for those convicted of attacking journalists and create a system for specifically recognising and categorising cases of attacks on the press and media workers.
The Bulgarian government should encourage the establishment of, and support the operation of, early-warning and rapid-response mechanisms, such as hotlines, online platforms or 24-hour emergency contact points, by journalists’ organisations or civil society, to ensure that journalists and other media actors have immediate access to protective measures when they are threatened.

CEM and public broadcasters

The process by CEM to appoint a new Director General of BNT must be conducted in a fair and transparent manner and all parties involved must act in accordance with the law.
The government should implement reforms in line with the EMFA which strengthen the safeguards for editorial and institutional independence of BNT and BNR while also guaranteeing adequate, sustainable and predictable financial resources to both broadcasters.
The government should implement reforms in line with the EMFA which insulate the Council for Electronic Media from political influence and interference and strengthen its functional independence, while also providing it with sufficient resources for operational stability.

Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs)

The Ministry of Justice should transpose and implement both the EU Directive and the Council of Europe (CoE) Recommendation against SLAPPs, to ensure that both cross-border and domestic SLAPPs are effectively addressed.
The government should ensure that the indicators for identifying SLAPPs, as foreseen in the CoE Recommendation, are incorporated into national law to assist judges in recognizing such cases. During the drafting process, the Ministry of Justice should make use of the expertise available from the CoE.
Authorities should continue to train judges, prosecutors, lawyers, and police officers on European standards related to media freedom, including defamation, SLAPPs, hate speech, access to information, and the protection of whistleblowers and journalistic sources. This is essential to ensure that court rulings and practices align with the standards of the European Court of Human Rights.
The government and the parliament of Bulgaria should fully decriminalise defamation.

Media legislation and EMFA

The government should swiftly implement and align domestic legislation with the European Media Freedom Act under a transparent and inclusive process.
In addition to reforms to the public service media and media regulators outlined above, the government should implement reforms mandated under the EMFA which require the establishment of a media ownership registry, which must be transparent, functional, up-to-date and easily accessible for journalists and citizens.
The government should implement reforms outlined in the EMFA for fair and transparent distribution of public funds and state advertising to the media. Only media companies which have registered in the ownership database and provided up-to-date information about their direct and beneficial ownership should be eligible to receive state advertising.
In addition, the government should consider establishing conditions that only media outlets which abide by the Ethical Code of Journalists should be eligible for receiving state advertising, as a means of defunding disinformation.
The government should swiftly designate and empower a national Digital Services Coordinator (DSC) and establish rules for penalties under the Digital Services Act (DSA).
Media professionals should unite with journalistic associations and other bodies to strengthen solidarity and cooperation within the journalistic profession.

More detailed recommendations will follow in the full report from the mission.

The mission to Sofia was coordinated as part of the Council of Europe’s Safety of Journalists Platform and the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR). The delegation was composed of representatives from ARTICLE 19, Association of European Journalists (AEJ), European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF), European Broadcasting Union (EBU), European Federation of Journalists (EFJ), Index on Censorship, International Press Institute (IPI), Reporters Without Borders (RSF) and the Osservatorio Balcani e Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT).

The delegation met with a range of stakeholders, including leading journalists and editors from print, online 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 Bulgarian 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.

The mission held a press conference on 26 September in Sofia. A full report is due to be published after the mission and will be shared with all domestic political stakeholders, the Council of Europe, the European Union and international organisations.

Allgemein

France: MFRR condemns new resurgence of police violence against…

France: MFRR condemn new resurgence of police violence against journalists

At least six journalists have been injured since early September while covering the protests against the 2026 national budget plan. The Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) partners condemn the deliberate violence by law enforcement officers and call once again on the French authorities to protect and recognise the work of journalists as essential during protests.

25.09.2025

On 18 September 2025, a journalist from the public television channel France 2 was hospitalised in Lyon after being injured while covering the second day of the “Bloquons tout” (Block Everything) protests against the French government. The journalist suffered burns and tinnitus after a projectile – believed to have been fired by a police officer – hit him in the back and tore his shirt.

This incident is part of a broader pattern documented by Mapping Media Freedom (MapMF), with at least five other assaults on journalists by law enforcement reported earlier this month. On 10 September, on the first day of the national strike in Montpellier, the reporter Samuel Clauzier was strangled and had his camera destroyed. In Paris, four more journalists were assaulted, with two injured while covering the protests: they were subjected to tear gas, beatings and shoving.

The situation is particularly alarming considering the country’s history of police violence targeting journalists and demonstrators during previous social movements. In anticipation of the upcoming protests, the Ministry of Interior quietly published a new document in July 2025, the National Urban Violence Scheme (SNVU), presented as a practical guide for law enforcement. Unlike the National Law Enforcement Plan (SNMO) of 2020, which legally guaranteed protection for journalists covering nationwide demonstrations, the SNVU initially ignored the role of journalists in the specific context of “urban violence”. It stated that “the consideration of journalists’ status as enshrined in the national law enforcement plan does not apply”. Following strong criticism from journalists’ organisations, the Interior Ministry eventually withdrew this wording.

The MFRR partners call for an independent and swift investigation into the registered attacks, and reiterate that journalists who document social movements and police actions do so in the public interest. With a new day of mobilisation now planned for 2 October, we demand an end to police violence, and call for unambiguous protection for journalists, including during clashes, in order to safeguard the fundamental right to information.

Our organisations will continue to closely monitor the situation and provide support to journalists in need.

Signed by:

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

Library

Bulgaria: Mission to examine media freedom and independent journalism

Between 24-25 September, the International Press Institute (IPI) will join a coalition of international media freedom and journalist organisations travelling to Bulgaria to conduct a press freedom mission on behalf of the Council of Europe’s Safety of Journalists Platform and the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR).

24.09.2025

The delegation will conduct a series of meetings over two days in the capital Sofia with stakeholders including the Bulgarian 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 from embassies.

Representatives of the participating organisations will also meet with leading journalists and editors from a range of different media organisations in Bulgaria, as well as media associations and unions, media experts, members of civil society organisations and academics. Separate meetings are planned with the Bulgarian National Radio and the Bulgarian National Television.

The aim is to take the pulse of media freedom in the country, examining issues including the safety of journalists, media regulation, public broadcasting, media pluralism, defamation and SLAPPs, media ownership and the reform process required under the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA).

A press briefing to share the initial findings of the mission and present recommendations to safeguard media freedom in Bulgaria will be held from 09.30-11.00 on 26 September at National Press Club of the Bulgarian Press Agency (49 “Tsarigradsko shose” blvd). The event is open to all media and translation services will be provided.

Participants include ARTICLE 19, Association of European Journalists (AEJ), European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF), European Broadcasting Union (EBU), European Federation of Journalists (EFJ), Index on Censorship, International Press Institute (IPI), Reporters Without Borders (RSF) and the Osservatorio Balcani e Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT).

To schedule interviews with the mission organisations, please contact maria@aej-bulgaria.org or irina@aej-bulgaria.org

This mission is being organised with support 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 on Improving Journalists’ Access to the Albanian…

Open Letter on Improving Journalists’ Access to the Albanian Parliament

Thirty media freedom and civil society organisations – including the SafeJournalists Network, MFRR partners, RSF and leading Albanian groups – have urged the Albanian Parliament to drop proposals that would severely restrict journalists’ access. The letter warns that limiting independent filming and confining interactions with MPs would undermine transparency, accountability, and Albania’s EU commitments.

19.09.2025

Shqip me poshte

To:

Mr. Niko Peleshi, Speaker of the Parliament of Albania

Cc:

Head of the Parliamentary Committee on Human Rights and Means of Public Information

Mr. Taulant Balla, Head of the Parliamentary Group of the Socialist Party
Mr. Gazment Bardhi, Head of the Parliamentary Group of the Democratic Party

Mr. Tedi Blushi, Head of the Parliamentary Group of the Freedom Party

Subject: Concerns over proposals to restrict journalists’ access to Parliament

Dear Mr. Peleshi,

We, the SafeJournalists Network, the partners of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR), Reporters Without Borders (RSF), and media freedom organisations in Albania, express our deep concern regarding recent proposals by the parliamentary majority to significantly restrict journalists’ access to the Parliament of Albania. These proposals, as reported by journalists, foresee abolishing independent filming in the plenary chamber and replacing it entirely with a single official feed, as well as confining all interactions between MPs and the media to a single designated “doorstep” space. If implemented, this would effectively eliminate direct and spontaneous contact between journalists and elected representatives and make accountability voluntary.

Such restrictions would deprive the public of one of the few remaining avenues for holding MPs and ministers accountable. While the protection of MPs’ private communications is a legitimate concern, it cannot serve as a pretext for removing independent cameras from the plenary chamber or for barring journalists from approaching MPs in parliamentary spaces. We have previously raised concerns about the media accreditation rules introduced by the Parliament in 2021, which already curtailed journalists’ freedom of movement inside Parliament and increased reliance on official feeds. Since then we have documented repeated cases of obstruction and a broader pattern of limited access.

In Albania, the broader media environment makes these proposed restrictions even more concerning. Government representatives and majority MPs rarely hold press conferences or appear on independent debate shows, relying instead on curated communication through social media or pre-prepared audiovisual materials produced and distributed by the Media and Information Agency. Delays, refusals, and centralisation already hinder access to public information. Parliament has therefore been the last institutional space where journalists could directly and spontaneously question political representatives. To remove this space would amount to a serious setback for media freedom and democratic accountability.

We therefore urge you, Mr. Speaker, to take the following steps:

Convene an open dialogue with journalists, media freedom organisations, and stakeholders to revise the parliamentary accreditation system so that it balances privacy with transparency and ensures meaningful access.
Align accreditation with existing commitments, including the Parliament’s Strategic Plan 2025–2030 pledges on transparency, accountability, and constructive relations with the media.
Ensure clear protocols for the Guard of the Republic to prevent arbitrary obstruction of journalists, as observed in 2024, particularly during moments of political tension.
Preserve multiple points of access. A doorstep can complement, but must not replace, corridors, lobbies, and courtyard interactions that enable spontaneous questioning.
Guarantee institutional openness by maintaining independent filming in addition to official feeds, publishing schedules and all relevant parliamentary information in a timely and accessible manner, strengthening the Parliament’s press service, and committing to future consultation with journalists and media freedom organisations before any further changes are made.
Strengthen transparency in public communication by instituting regular, journalist-driven media conferences with Parliament, MPs, and ministers, held several times per month.
Introduce an independent appeals mechanism so that accreditation or access decisions can be challenged quickly and fairly, ensuring equal treatment of all accredited outlets, including smaller, regional, and online media and new formats of journalistic profession.
Reaffirm Albania’s EU commitments. Parliamentary openness and media freedom are core elements of Cluster 1 in the EU accession negotiations. Upholding these standards will demonstrate Parliament’s commitment to transparency and accountability, while restrictive measures would undermine democratic credibility at home and abroad.

We reiterate our commitment to supporting Albanian institutions in improving media freedom and freedom of expression, emphasizing that robust protections for journalism and free speech are fundamental to Albania’s democratic development and EU integration path.

Signed by:

SafeJournalists Network

Association of Journalists of Kosovo
Association of Journalists of Macedonia
BH Journalists Association
Croatian Journalists’ Association
Independent Journalists Association of Serbia
Trade Union of Media of Montenegro

Media Freedom Rapid Response

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

Reporters Without Borders (RSF)

Civil society organisations in Albania

Center Science and Innovation for Development (SCiDEV)
Association of Journalists of Albania (AJA)
Albanian Helsinki Committee (AHC)
Albanian Media Council (KSHM)
Albanian Woman in Audiovisual (AWA)
Union of Journalists and Media Workers (SGMP)
Res Publica
Association of Professional Journalists of Albania (APJA)
Amfora
Faktoje
Union of Albanian Journalists (UGSH)
Albanian Center for Quality Journalism (ACQJ)
Civil Rights Defender, Albania
Citizens.al

Reporting Diversity Network

Letër e Hapur mbi Përmirësimin e Qasjes së Gazetarëve në Kuvendin e Shqipërisë

Drejtuar:
Z. Niko Peleshi, Kryetar i Kuvendit të Shqipërisë

Për dijeni:
Kryetari i Komisionit Parlamentar për të Drejtat e Njeriut dhe Mjetet e Informimit Publik
Z. Taulant Balla, Kryetar i Grupit Parlamentar të Partisë Socialiste
Z. Gazment Bardhi, Kryetar i Grupit Parlamentar të Partisë Demokratike
Z. Tedi Blushi, Kryetar i Grupit Parlamentar të Partisë së Lirisë

Lënda: Shqetësime mbi propozimet për kufizimin e qasjes së gazetarëve në Kuvend

I nderuar z. Peleshi,

Ne, Rrjeti SafeJournalists, partnerët e Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR), Reporterët pa Kufij (RSF), dhe organizatat e lirisë së medias në Shqipëri, shprehim shqetësimin tonë të thellë lidhur me propozimet e fundit nga shumica parlamentare për të kufizuar ndjeshëm qasjen e gazetarëve në Kuvendin e Shqipërisë. Këto propozime, sipas raportimeve të gazetarëve, parashikojnë heqjen e filmimeve të pavarura në sallën plenare dhe zëvendësimin e tyre plotësisht me një transmetim zyrtar të vetëm, si dhe kufizimin e të gjitha ndërveprimeve midis deputetëve dhe medias në një hapësirë të vetme të përcaktuar si “doorstep”. Nëse zbatohen, një gjë e tillë do të eliminonte praktikisht kontaktin e drejtpërdrejtë dhe spontan mes gazetarëve dhe përfaqësuesve të zgjedhur dhe do ta bënte llogaridhënien vullnetare.

Kufizime të tilla do t’ia hiqnin publikut një nga hapësirat e fundit për të mbajtur përgjegjës deputetët dhe ministrat. Ndërkohë që mbrojtja e komunikimeve private të deputetëve është një shqetësim legjitim, ajo nuk mund të shërbejë si pretekst për heqjen e kamerave të pavarura nga salla plenare apo për ndalimin e gazetarëve që t’u afrohen deputetëve në hapësirat e Kuvendit. Ne kemi ngritur më parë shqetësime për rregullat e reja të akreditimit mediatik të miratuara nga Kuvendi në vitin 2021, të cilat tashmë kufizuan lirinë e lëvizjes së gazetarëve brenda Kuvendit dhe rritën varësinë nga transmetimet zyrtare. Që prej asaj kohe kemi dokumentuar raste të përsëritura pengesash dhe një model më të gjerë të kufizimit të aksesit.

Në Shqipëri, konteksti i përgjithshëm mediatik e bën edhe më shqetësues këtë propozim. Përfaqësuesit e qeverisë dhe deputetët e shumicës rrallë mbajnë konferenca për shtyp apo marrin pjesë në debate televizive të pavarura, duke u mbështetur më shumë te komunikimi i kuruar përmes rrjeteve sociale apo materialeve audiovizive të parapërgatitura nga Agjencia për Media dhe Informim. Vonesat, refuzimet dhe centralizimi tashmë pengojnë qasjen në informacionin publik. Kuvendi ka qenë për këtë arsye hapësira e fundit institucionale ku gazetarët mund të pyesnin drejtpërdrejt dhe spontanisht përfaqësuesit politikë. Heqja e kësaj hapësire do të ishte një hap i rëndë mbrapa për lirinë e medias dhe llogaridhënien demokratike.

Ne ju bëjmë thirrje, z. Kryetar, të ndërmerrni këto hapa:

Të zhvilloni një dialog të hapur me gazetarët, organizatat e lirisë së medias dhe palët e tjera të interesuara për të rishikuar sistemin e akreditimit parlamentar në mënyrë që të balancojë privatësinë me transparencën dhe të garantojë akses domethënës.
Të përafroni akreditimin me angazhimet ekzistuese, përfshirë Strategjinë e Kuvendit 2025–2030 dhe zotimet e Nismës “Parlamenti i Hapur” mbi transparencën, llogaridhënien dhe marrëdhëniet konstruktive me median.
Të vendosni protokolle të qarta për Gardën e Republikës për të parandaluar pengesat arbitrare ndaj gazetarëve, siç është vënë re në vitin 2024, veçanërisht gjatë momenteve të tensionit politik.
Të ruani pika të shumta aksesi. “Doorstep”-i mund ta plotësojë qasjen, por nuk duhet të zëvendësojë korridoret, lobet dhe oborret që mundësojnë pyetje spontane.
Të garantoni hapjen institucionale duke lejuar filmimet e pavarura krahas transmetimeve zyrtare, duke publikuar në kohë oraret dhe gjithë informacionin parlamentar përkatës, duke forcuar shërbimin e shtypit të Kuvendit, dhe duke u angazhuar për konsultime të ardhshme me gazetarët dhe organizatat e lirisë së medias përpara çdo ndryshimi tjetër.
Të forconi transparencën e komunikimit publik duke vendosur konferenca të rregullta për shtyp, të udhëhequra nga gazetarët, me pjesëmarrjen e Kuvendit, deputetëve dhe ministrave, të mbajtura disa herë në muaj.
Të krijoni një mekanizëm të pavarur apelimi në mënyrë që vendimet për akreditim ose qasje të mund të kundërshtohen shpejt dhe në mënyrë të drejtë, duke garantuar trajtim të barabartë për të gjitha mediat e akredituara, përfshirë ato lokale, rajonale, online dhe formatet e reja të gazetarisë.
Të riafirmoni angazhimet e Shqipërisë ndaj BE-së. Hapja parlamentare dhe liria e medias janë elemente themelore të Klasterit 1 në negociatat e anëtarësimit. Zbatimi i këtyre standardeve do të tregojë angazhimin e Kuvendit ndaj transparencës dhe llogaridhënies, ndërsa masat kufizuese do të dëmtonin besueshmërinë demokratike brenda dhe jashtë vendit.

Ne ritheksojmë angazhimin tonë për të mbështetur institucionet shqiptare në përmirësimin e lirisë së medias dhe të shprehjes, duke theksuar se mbrojtja e fortë e gazetarisë dhe e fjalës së lirë janë themelore për zhvillimin demokratik të Shqipërisë dhe rrugën e saj drejt integrimit në BE.

Nënshkrues:

Rrjeti SafeJournalists

Asociacioni i Gazetarëve të Kosovës
Shoqata e Gazetarëve të Maqedonisë
Shoqata e Gazetarëve të Bosnjë-Hercegovinës
Shoqata e Gazetarëve Kroatë
Shoqata e Pavarur e Gazetarëve të Serbisë
Sindikata e Mediave e Malit të Zi

Reagimi i Shpejtë për Lirinë e Medias (Media Freedom Rapid Response)

Federata Evropiane e Gazetarëve (EFJ)
Free Press Unlimited (FPU)
ARTICLE 19 Europe
Instituti Ndërkombëtar i Shtypit (IPI)
Osservatorio Ballkani Kaukazi Transeuropa (OBCT)
Qendra Evropiane për Lirinë e Shtypit dhe Medias (ECPMF)

Reporterët pa Kufij (RSF)

Organizatat e shoqërisë civile në Shqipëri

Qendra për Shkencë dhe Inovacion për Zhvillim (SCiDEV)
Asociacioni i Gazetarëve të Shqipërisë (AJA)
Komiteti Shqiptar i Helsinkit (KSHH)
Këshilli Shqiptar i Medias (KSHM)
Gratë Shqiptare në Audiovizual (AWA)
Sindikata e Gazetarëve dhe Punonjësve të Medias (SGMP)
Res Publica
Shoqata e Gazetarëve Profesionistë të Shqipërisë (APJA)
Amfora
Faktoje
Unioni i Gazetarëve Shqiptarë (UGSH)
Qendra Shqiptare për Gazetari Cilësore (ACQJ)
Civil Rights Defender, Shqipëri
Citizens.al

Rrjeti i Raportimit të Diversitetit

Kjo deklaratë u koordinua nga Reagimi i Shpejtë për Lirinë e Medias (MFRR), një mekanizëm mbarëevropian që gjurmon, monitoron dhe reagon ndaj shkeljeve të lirisë së shtypit dhe medias në shtetet anëtare të BE-së dhe vendet kandidate.