Blog

Afgan Sadygov Library

Georgia: MFRR partners demand release of Azerbaijani journalist sentenced…

Georgia: MFRR partners demand release of Azerbaijani journalist sentenced to extradition detention, urging Georgian authorities not to extradite him to Azerbaijan

The partner organisations of the MFRR call on the authorities in Georgia not to extradite journalist Afgan Sadygov to Azerbaijan and to release him from extradition detention. Additionally, authorities should allow Sadygov to freely leave Georgia for a third country.

Georgian authorities arrested Sadygov on 3 August according to the journalist’s wife, who posted footage of him being escorted into a car by law enforcement. The following day, a court in Tbilisi ordered Sadygov to be held in extradition detention. Authorities in Azerbaijan have charged Sadygov with “threatening to spread offensive information” for extortion purposes. Sadygov has faced severe repression in Azerbaijan and was previously jailed in his home country.

 

Earlier, on 17 July, Sadygov was denied permission to leave Georgia, with border control officials saying that he could only return to Azerbaijan. Following the travel ban, Sadigov told Radio Tavisupleba, the Georgian service of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, that they had handed over a letter to the Embassy of France in Tbilisi stating that it was no longer safe for them to stay in Georgia, requesting assistance in relocating to a third country.

 

Sadygov has been living in Georgia since 24 December 2023. He initially traveled for medical reasons but decided to relocate to the country due to recent crackdowns on Azerbaijani journalists.

 

Sadygov had been arrested in Baku multiple times before, including in 2020 on charges of extortion, which resulted in a seven-year prison sentence. During a July 2021 appeal hearing, his sentence was reduced to four years. Eventually, he was pardoned by President Aliyev after spending about two years in prison, during which he went on a hunger strike which deteriorated his health. The website of Azel.tv has been suspended for prolonged periods of time.

 

Azerbaijani journalists have faced security risks in Georgia or have been denied entry on multiple occasions. On 12 January 2023, Azerbaijani opposition leader and journalist Seymour Hazi, an active critic of Ilham Aliyev, was denied entry into Georgia — border control refused him without explanation. On 14 July 2021, Azerbaijani opposition blogger Huseyn Bakikhanov died in Tbilisi under suspicious circumstances.

 

Another case demonstrating the extreme measures Azerbaijani authorities seem willing to take to retaliate against independent journalists in the one of Afgan Mukhtarli. In 2017, Mukhtarli, an Azerbaijani journalist and activist who found shelter in Georgia due to persecution in Azerbaijan, was kidnapped from the country’s capital, forcibly returned to Azerbaijan, and sentenced to six years in prison.

 

The MFRR partners urge the Georgian authorities to uphold international and European standards of freedom of expression and media freedom, and to set Sadygov free.

Signed by:

  • International Press Institute (IPI)
  • The European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
  • The European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)

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. 

MFRR Italy media freedom mission Library

Italy: MFRR calls for constructive dialogue on media freedom…

Italy: MFRR calls for constructive dialogue on media freedom recommendations

The Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) partners stand in solidarity with journalists in Italy and call for an immediate end to all forms of attacks against them. We encourage all key stakeholders, including institutional ones, to join forces in enhancing the protection of journalists and media professionals.

 

Available in Italian here. 

The MFRR is a network of six media freedom organisations committed to working towards a resilient and free media landscape, including through conducting fact-finding and advocacy missions to assess the situation on the ground.

 

Amidst a documented increase in attacks affecting the press and media freedom landscape in Italy recorded by the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) on its Mapping Media Freedom platform, the MFRR consortium organised an advocacy mission to Rome on 16-17 May 2024. The mission aimed to address concerns about the state of media freedom with Italian policymakers, review recent developments and formulate recommendations that align with EU and international standards.

 

Following a transparent methodology that applies to all MFRR missions, the MFRR delegation requested meetings with representatives of several public bodies, journalists from various media outlets, journalists’ trade unions, and civil society organisations in Italy.

 

The consortium always recognises the value of engaging with representatives of the ruling government and opening a dialogue with them to discuss the state of media freedom. This is a standard practice that the MFRR adopts in all country missions across Europe. Despite numerous meeting requests being sent to a number of representatives of the ruling coalition, all of them were either declined or unanswered, which did not allow the MFRR to include their potential input in the mission report published on 29 July.

 

The MFRR regrets that since the publication of the report, some of the journalists with whom the delegation met have been targeted by verbal abuses discrediting their role and work. Under no circumstances should journalists be stigmatised or denigrated. The MFRR wishes to reiterate that the journalists, as well as all the other stakeholders that the delegation met in Rome, were by no means co-authors of the MFRR mission’s report. The mission and the report were carried out with complete impartiality and independence by the members of the MFRR consortium, free from any political bias.

 

The MFRR also emphasises that our report and the European Commission’s Report on the Rule of Law are two independent resources. Both studies are based on thorough and quality research, each employing a concrete methodology.  Nevertheless, it is essential to differentiate them clearly for greater precision.

 

Therefore, we call on everyone reporting on this work, including public officials, to refrain from any kind of attack against journalists or media outlets quoted in the report. The MFRR strongly hopes that the report will instead stir an effective debate about its content and recommendations and prompt competent authorities to address the outlined challenges to press and media freedom in the country.

 

The MFRR will continue to monitor and advocate for press and media freedom in Italy –  as it does for all  EU Member States and candidate countries – and reiterates its willingness to enter into a constructive dialogue with public officials and representatives of the government to ensure a safe, independent and pluralistic media environment, a cornerstone of a democratic society.

Signed by:

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

Italia: MFRR chiede un dialogo costruttivo sulle raccomandazioni sulla libertà dei media

 

Le organizzazioni partner del Media Rapid Response (MFRR) sono solidali con i giornalisti in Italia e chiedono la fine immediata di tutte le forme di attacco contro di loro. Incoraggiamo tutte le parti interessate, comprese quelle istituzionali, a unire le forze per migliorare la tutela dei giornalisti e dei professionisti dei media.

 

MFRR è una rete di sei organizzazioni per la libertà dei media che si impegnano a lavorare per un panorama mediatico resiliente e libero, anche attraverso lo svolgimento di missioni di advocacy volte a valutare la situazione sul campo.

 

Di fronte al documentato aumento degli attacchi alla libertà di stampa e dei media in Italia registrato da Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) sulla sua piattaforma Mapping Media Freedom, il consorzio MFRR ha organizzato una missione di advocacy a Roma il 16-17 maggio 2024. La missione mirava ad affrontare le preoccupazioni sullo stato della libertà dei media con i decisori politici italiani, esaminare gli sviluppi recenti e formulare raccomandazioni in linea con gli standard UE e internazionali.

 

Seguendo una metodologia trasparente che si applica a tutte le missioni MFRR, la delegazione ha richiesto incontri con rappresentanti di diversi enti pubblici, giornalisti di vari organi di stampa, sindacati dei giornalisti e organizzazioni della società civile in Italia.

 

Il consorzio riconosce sempre il valore del confronto con i rappresentanti del governo in carica e dell’apertura di un dialogo con loro per discutere dello stato della libertà dei media. Questa è una pratica standard che MFRR adotta in tutte le missioni nei paesi europei. Nonostante le numerose richieste di incontro inviate a diversi rappresentanti della coalizioneal governo, tutte sono state declinate o non hanno ricevuto risposta, il che non ha consentito a MFRR di includere il loro potenziale contributo nel rapporto di fine missione pubblicato il 29 luglio.

 

MFRR si rammarica che, dalla pubblicazione del rapporto, alcuni giornalisti incontrati dalla delegazione siano stati presi di mira da aggressioni verbali che hanno screditato il loro ruolo e il loro lavoro. In nessun caso i giornalisti devono essere stigmatizzati o denigrati. MFRR desidera ribadire che i giornalisti, così come tutti gli altri stakeholder che la delegazione ha incontrato a Roma, non sono stati in alcun modo co-autori del rapporto della missione MFRR. La missione e il rapporto sono stati condotti con totale imparzialità e indipendenza dai membri del consorzio, liberi da qualsiasi pregiudizio politico.

 

MFRR sottolinea inoltre che il nostro rapporto e il rapporto della Commissione europea sullo stato di diritto sono due risorse indipendenti. Entrambi gli studi si basano su ricerche approfondite e di qualità, ciascuna delle quali impiega una metodologia precisa. Tuttavia, è essenziale differenziarli chiaramente per una maggiore precisione.

 

Pertanto, invitiamo tutti coloro che riferiscono su questo lavoro, compresi i funzionari pubblici, ad astenersi da qualsiasi tipo di attacco contro i giornalisti o gli organi di informazione citati nel rapporto. MFRR spera vivamente che il rapporto stimoli invece un dibattito efficace sul suo contenuto e sulle raccomandazioni volte a migliorare la libertà di stampa e dei media nel paese.

 

MFRR continuerà a monitorare e sostenere la libertà di stampa e dei media in Italia, come in tutti gli Stati membri dell’UE e i paesi candidati, e ribadisce la volontà di avviare un dialogo costruttivo con funzionari pubblici e rappresentanti del governo per garantire un ambiente mediatico sicuro, indipendente e pluralistico, pietra angolare di ogni società democratica.

 

Firmato: 

OBC Transeuropa (OBCT)

The European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)

ARTICLE 19 Europe

The European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)

Free Press Unlimited (FPU)

International Press Institute (IPI)

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

2024 Rule of Law Report: Media freedom organisations urge…

2024 Rule of Law report: Media freedom organisations urge the EU to enforce stronger safeguards

The Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) coalition welcomes the publication of the 2024 European Commission’s rule of law report. Despite progress made in some areas, the report shows that press freedom remains under threat in Europe. We urge Member States and the European Union to intensify their efforts to uphold media freedom, and reinforce their roles in safeguarding this pillar of democracy.

The release of the fifth annual rule of law report, the last one during the Commission’s current term, provides a critical opportunity to evaluate press freedom and democratic governance across EU Member States. 

 

We warmly welcome the fact that the media situation in the candidate countries will progressively become part of the report. We hope that the inclusion of Albania, Montenegro, North Macedonia, and Serbia – four countries that the MFRR is closely monitoring – in this year’s publication will support and hold these enlargement countries accountable in their democratic progress.

 

Alarmingly but not unexpectedly, the latest rule of law report testifies to the severe decline in press freedom and media pluralism that Europe is experiencing. MFRR partners continue to support the rule of law report as a valuable tool, recognizing its vital role of empowering Member State governments to promote and enforce international standards. But as media and journalists confront escalating threats, it is vital that the Commission’s assessment translates into concrete, bold and firm actions to protect media freedom and independent journalism. 

 

Our coalition therefore calls for a poignant response from the Commission in terms of accountability. The MFRR analysis of the report highlights the following action points:

 

A critical need for systematic enforcement

While some countries have taken steps to improve journalists’ safety and working environments, supported by recently-adopted initiatives like the European Media Freedom Act and the anti-SLAPP directive, the report takes into account the ongoing and, in some cases, worsening issues that the MFRR has been consistently denouncing and that demand immediate attention. In Slovakia, for instance, the return of Robert Fico to government was accompanied by increasing verbal attacks on the press, a pattern that has only escalated following the Prime Minister’s assassination attempt. At the same time, cyber attacks against independent media are becoming more and more prominent, particularly in Hungary, while Italy saw a notable increase in documented legal threats.

 

We regret that a comprehensive assessment of the implementation of these new laws and directives is missing in the recommendations, as this is essential for effectively turning policy into reality. The European Commission notes that 32% of its previous recommendations have not been acted upon by Member States, and in certain areas the situation for journalists even further deteriorated. Hungary, for instance, has regretfully made no progress in implementing any of the recommendations laid down by the Commission last year, while media freedom in both Slovakia and Italy is further eroding. Therefore, a systematic approach or dedicated unit within DG JUST for monitoring and enforcement appears as an urgent necessity. 

 

Shortcomings in actionable recommendations

The MFRR finds the report is still lacking actionable recommendations and concrete follow-up mechanisms. The inclusion of detailed country-specific assessments is a non-negligeable positive step, but we advocate for more intersectional analyses and in-depth human rights reviews. For instance, there is still no indication of a specific mechanism for reporting violations to the Commission, or supporting civil society actors facing restrictions in their work to uphold media freedom. 

 

Prioritise journalist safety

We are pleased that the MFRR’s monitoring results have been acknowledged and referenced in the report. However, we regret that the alarming trend of physical and digital harassment and assaults on journalists and media workers, which remains high, has not been given more prominence. 

 

Statements from affected individuals highlight the significant psychological impact of these incidents, creating a chilling effect on reporting crucial issues. While such cases are addressed in individual country chapters and the report notes a disturbing trend of distrust and hostility towards journalists, an overview of these trends at a transnational level is missing.

 

Our coalition is concerned that some conclusions appear somewhat complacent, such as the passing references to a drop in physical assaults on journalists following the lifting of COVID-19 restrictions or the mention of national action plans intended to counter such assaults. We therefore recommend placing a stronger emphasis on journalists’ safety as a category of analysis in the 2025 rule of law report.

 

Political compromises risk eroding the report’s goals

Troublingly, some media reports have suggested that the rule of law’s initial drafts were more critical but that political considerations softened the final text. These reports, together with delays in publication, raise questions about the Commission’s credibility and commitment to transparency and urgency in addressing rule of law issues, and could undermine the report’s impact.

 

Key findings: media governance, ownership transparency, assaults and legal threats

On 15 January 2024, MFRR consortium partners Free Press Unlimited (FPU), International Press Institute (IPI) and the Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT) filed detailed submissions to the rule of law report on the topic of media freedom and pluralism in Hungary, Greece, Italy, Netherlands and the Czech Republic. 

 

Regarding the 31 analysed countries’ situation, we appreciate the European Commission publication’s attention to our contributions and for acknowledging that:

 

Independent governance of public service media is at risk in many countries, where the broadcasters are not sufficiently protected against political interference. Including through its recent mission to Rome, the MFRR coalition has been raising awareness on how Italian public broadcaster RAI has become the latest protagonist of ongoing media capture by Meloni’s government. Slovakia is another blatant case of concern for both the MFRR and the Commission, in which no progress on enhancing the editorial independence of public media has been made.

 

Transparency of media ownership should also be enhanced across Europe to prevent conflicts of interest. It is worth noting the Commission’s concern regarding France about the lack of progress on this topic, which has also been linked to coordinated disinformation campaigns, particularly ahead of elections.

 

State advertising allocation is still not fair and transparent everywhere, prompting an additional risk of undue influence on media outlets. The MFRR has previously underscored how in Romania, some political parties have exponentially increased their financing of private media for political advertising. We have also brought to the Commission’s attention that the channelling of state resources to pro-government media continues to prevent a level playing field in Hungary.

 

Journalists’ protections from threats and violence, ensuring their ability to work freely, are not enough. Malta, Greece, Italy, and Slovakia in particular have made insufficient progress towards guaranteeing the safety of journalists, both physical and against abusive lawsuits. Concerning Greece, the report noted the increase in penalties for defamation despite its decriminalisation in the country’s new Penal Code, and our advocacy work on the lawsuit brought against journalists that reported on the spyware case. Generally, online abuse and online threats against journalists, specifically female journalists, remain a pressing issue.

 

Democratic backsliding is happening in Hungary and other countries, highlighting the pressing need for follow-up by the Commission with Member States in strengthening their commitment to the rule of law. About Italy, the EU Commission report speaks explicitly of a risk of a tangible restriction on the right of citizens to be informed and journalists to be able to do so. The Malta chapter media section mentions “no progress” has been made more often than “some progress”, making it clear that the country has not comprehensively improved the situation for journalists since Daphne Caruana Galizia’s assassination. Only two recommendations from the Public Inquiry Report have been implemented, with the white paper still not being published, and the government’s proposed media legislation currently frozen in the Maltese Parliament. 

 

The EU and its members must reinforce democracy by protecting media

The 2024 rule of law report shows how, even in countries with strong democratic traditions, press freedom is not an acquis and repeated violations risk escalating into a systemic crisis. At a time when media freedom principles are increasingly deteriorating across Europe, it is more necessary than ever for the rule of law report to be critical, specific, and linked to enforcement tools. 

 

Our coalition stresses the need for robust measures from the EU to uphold press freedom and pluralism. The members of the MFRR stress the following urgent needs:

  • Above all, journalist safety from physical and legal threats must be prioritized. To do so, we recommend to include safety and digital safety of journalists as a separate category in future rule of law reports. 
  • In light of widespread political influence on public service media, lack of transparency on media ownership and State advertising, we advocate for the development of a mechanism allowing the EU to challenge legislation not compliant with European standards.
  • We encourage the Commission to give more actionable recommendations to Member States, including a specific mechanism for reporting violations in future reports, as well as for supporting civil society stakeholders facing obstacles in their work to uphold media freedom across Europe.

It is imperative that both national governments and the EU take a proactive stance in monitoring violations and addressing the highlighted gaps urgently.

Signed by:

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

Croatia press freedom mission Library

Croatia: International fact-finding mission to assess status of press…

Croatia: International fact-finding mission to assess status of press freedom

The Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) partners will conduct an international mission to assess the current state of press freedom and safety of journalists in Croatia. The mission will take place online between 9 and 20 September 2024.

The mission follows the assessment of the persistence of attacks against journalists and fact-checkers in Croatia, as well as the growing challenges related to transparency of media ownership and legal threats against journalists. 

 

Since January this year, the MFRR recorded 11 alerts involving 2 journalists and nine entities related to the media. The majority of attacks are verbal abuse, with half instigated by high officials, and online threats, including smears and legal incidents. Recently, the MFRR reported an unprecedented physical attack, which is uncommon in Croatia. Further, according to a recent survey conducted by the Croatian Journalists’ Association (Hrvatsko novinarsko društvo – HND) with 21 media outlets in Croatia, at least 752 lawsuits against the media and journalists are currently active, some of which may be categorised as SLAPPs. 

 

The MFRR mission will be led by ARTICLE 19 Europe and co-led by the European Federation of Journalists, in partnership with HND. The mission will also see the participation of MFRR representatives: the European Centre for Press and Media Freedom, the International Press Institute, Free Press Unlimited and Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa. 

 

The mission will focus on assessing attacks and legal threats against journalists, new media law plans, the implementation of the EMFA and Anti-SLAPP instruments, and media ownership transparency. It will also address recent Criminal Code amendments that risk undermining journalists’ ability to report on public interest issues, and the need to fully decriminalise defamation to comply with international freedom of expression standards.

 

These topics will be discussed with a wide group of interlocutors in Croatia, ranging from journalists, media houses, civil society organisations, lawyers and media experts, government officials and regional bodies.

 

The findings and conclusions will be used to develop a report outlining the current state of press freedom in Croatia, as well as the status of existing initiatives aimed at improving journalists’ safety. It will include a set of recommendations for decision-makers on upholding media freedom in line with European and international freedom of expression standards. 

 

For inquiries, please contact Roberta Taveri, Senior Programme Officer for Media Freedom and Europe at ARTICLE 19 Europe: roberta.taveri@article19.org 

Signed by:

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

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

Behind bars for fake news: Imminent threat to media…

Behind bars for fake news: Imminent threat to media freedom in Cyprus

The Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) strongly condemns a legislative proposal in Cyprus that threatens press freedom under the guise of combating disinformation. This amendment, which criminalises “fake news” and imposes harsh penalties, risks stifling independent journalism and encouraging self-censorship. Our international consortium calls on authorities to align with international human rights standards, promote media ethics, and protect freedom of expression, instead of exerting media control.

These provisions could have a profound chilling effect, leading to widespread self-censorship among media professionals, civil society organisations, activists, and ordinary citizens. Additionally, the ambiguity and contested nature of what constitutes “fake news” exacerbates the potential for arbitrary enforcement, with the risk of those in power ending up repressing legitimate dissent and criticism. 

 

The existence of such vague laws, and their exponential adoption in recent years worldwide, has often been a tool for political control over information rather than one to enhance its quality. Evidence shows that laws against disinformation have repeatedly been exploited by repressive authorities to influence the public opinion on what is considered to be true or false, offensive, dangerous or seditious. Under the proposed law, Cyprus’ Attorney General would have the power to determine what constitutes defamation, which will be reclassified from a civil offense to a criminal one.

 

We oppose the statement of Cyprus’ Deputy Attorney General Savvas Angelides, who claims a need for “drawing the line between freedom of speech and recklessness.” The international community, including the European Union, the Council of Europe, and the United Nations, consistently condemns the criminalisation of fake news. 

 

Likewise, the European Court of Human Rights and the UN have emphasized that prohibitions on false information are incompatible with the right to freedom of expression. The recently enacted Digital Services Act (DSA) and the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA) – if effectively implemented – both provide Cyprus a framework for addressing disinformation without resorting to criminal penalties. 

 

We are also alarmed that similarly, the local administration in Northern Cyprus approved a package of amendments to the penal code and related laws on 20 May. These broaden the definition of “malicious intent”, criminalising activities such as publishing “false news” and insulting state officials, resembling repressive measures seen in Turkey.

 

The MFRR calls on the Cypriot Parliament to reconsider the proposed amendments, aligning legislative efforts with international human rights standards and best practices. We urge authorities to avoid stifling legitimate journalistic work and to adopt non-repressive mechanisms to enhance the media landscape, such as reinforcing media ethics, promoting public service media, and fostering media pluralism.

 

We further encourage lawmakers to listen to and address the concerns of the journalistic community, so that the constitutionally guaranteed right to freedom of expression and investigative journalism in Cyprus is protected.

 

Excessive monetary fines, imprisonment, content controls and corrections all pose significant threats to press freedom, and have no place in laws on media regulation. We stand firm in solidarity with Cypriot journalists in opposing these regressive measures.

Signed by:

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

Mission Report – Silencing the Fourth Estate: Italy’s Democratic…

Mission Report: Silencing the Fourth Estate: Italy’s democratic drift

Media freedom in Italy is under threat, with rising political interference and legal harassment of journalists. Ahead of the 2024 EU elections, the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) conducted an urgent mission to Rome to dive deeper into these issues. Join us on July 29, 2024, for a webinar where we will share our findings and discuss solutions to safeguard Italy’s media freedom.

 

Available in Italian here. 

Media freedom in Italy has been steadily declining in recent years, marked by unprecedented attacks and violations often initiated by public officials in the attempt to silence critical voices. Political interference in public media and the systematic use of legal intimidation against journalists by political actors have long defined the media-politics relationship in Italy. However, these dynamics have reached alarming levels over the past two years.

 

In the lead-up to the 2024 EU elections, amidst a rapidly deteriorating context, the partner organisations of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) conducted an urgent mission to Rome, Italy, on May 16-17, 2024. The mission aimed to engage with state representatives, institutions, and political parties on three critical issues: political interference in public media, legal harassment of dissenting journalists, and the potential acquisition of AGI, one of the country’s main news agencies.

 

This report presents the findings from the mission and MFRR’s ongoing monitoring, offering a comprehensive analysis of the three most urgent issues identified. It evaluates the impact of various measures and bills introduced by Italian decision makers,  in light of the latest EU provisions aimed at ensuring the independence of public media, countering market concentration, addressing conflicts of interest, and equipping the judiciary to handle vexatious lawsuits. The report also provides detailed recommendations for Italian institutional and governmental actors, outlining necessary steps to counter the decline in media freedom and  much needed reforms.

Download the full report

Silenziare il Quarto Potere: La deriva democratica dell’Italia

Negli ultimi anni, in Italia si è assistito ad un costante declino dell libertà dei media, segnato da attacchi e violazioni senza precedenti, spesso iniziati da rappresentanti pubblici nel tentativo di mettere a tacere voci critiche. L’interferenza politica nei media pubblici e l’uso sistematico di intimidazioni legali contro i giornalisti da parte degli attori politici da tempo degfinisco il rapporto tra media e politica in Italia. Tuttavia, negli ultimi due anni queste dinamiche hanno raggiunto livelli allarmanti.

In vista delle elezioni europee del 2024, in un contesto in rapido deterioramento, le organizzazioni partner del Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) hanno condotto una missione urgente a Roma, il 16-17 maggio 2024. La missione di advocacy aveva l’obiettivo di confrontarsi con rappresentanti istituzionali e politici su tre questioni critiche: l’interferenza politica nei media pubblici, le intimidazioni legali nei confronti dei giornalisti critici e la potenziale acquisizione dell’AGI, una delle principali agenzie di stampa del Paese.

Questo rapporto presenta i risultati della missione e del monitoraggio continuo del consorzip MFRR, offrendo un’analisi completa delle tre questioni più urgenti individuate. Valuta l’impatto di diverse misure e proposte di legge introdotte dai decisori italiani, alla luce delle più recenti disposizioni dell’UE volte a garantire l’indipendenza dei media pubblici, a contrastare la concentrazione del mercato, ad affrontare i conflitti di interesse e ad attrezzare la magistratura per gestire le cause vessatorie. Il rapporto fornisce inoltre raccomandazioni dettagliate per gli attori istituzionali e governativi italiani, delineando i passi necessari per contrastare il declino della libertà dei media e le riforme necessarie.

Il report è al momento disponibile in lingua inglese. La versione in italiano sarà disponibile a partire dall’inizio di settembre.

This mission report was coordinated 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. The MFRR is co-funded by the European Commission.

Event

Silencing the Fourth Estate: Italy’s democratic drift

Silencing the Fourth Estate:

Italy’s Democratic Drift

29 July, 14:00 CET.

On July 29, Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT), the European Federation of Journalists (EFJ), and the European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF) will host a webinar to mark the publication of the final report following the MFRR mission to Rome. 

 

Amid unprecedented political interference in public media, widespread use of legal intimidation against dissenting journalists by government officials, a problematic defamation reform put forward by the ruling coalition, and the potential acquisition of AGI by one of Lega’s MPs, the MFRR organised an urgent mission to Italy on May 16 and 17, 2024. 

 

Relying on the findings from meetings held during the mission and MFRR’s ongoing monitoring of the situation in the country, the report assesses the deterioration of media freedom in Italy. These challenges, indicative of a tense relationship between media and political actors, undermine independent and critical journalism, generating worrying implications for Italian democracy. The mission observed that the chilling effect resulting from the contraction of freedom of expression and the governments’ attempts to silence the press signal a worrying democratic decline in Italy’s media freedom landscape.

 

Last May’s MFRR mission to Italy was led by the Osservatorio Balcani e Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT) and the European Federation of Journalists (EFJ). The mission report was prepared by MFRR partner organisations: ARTICLE 19 Europe; European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF); European Federation of Journalists (EFJ); International Press Institute (IPI); Osservatorio Balcani e Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT). 

 

The report will be published  in English on July 29, with a translated Italian version to follow in the first week of September.

Register here

Moderator

Renate

Renate Schroeder

Director of European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)

Speakers

Alessandra Mancuso

Member of Usigrai

Francesca de Benedetti

Journalist at Domani

Davide Sarsini

Journalist at AGI

Final remarks

Serena Epis

Researcher at Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT)

Kosovo media law Library

Kosovo’s media law enables political capture of media regulatory…

Kosovo’s media law enables political capture of media regulatory body

The undersigned Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) consortium partners express deep alarm over the passage of a new media law by the Kosovo Parliament this month. We share local and international concerns that this law does not meet international standards on free expression and threatens media freedom, including by granting the authorities greater control over media regulation.

The MFRR has previously joined civil society organisations in Kosovo in raising alarms over the law for the Independent Media Commission (IMC). Critics have seen the proposed legislation as an attack on the media, expressing worries that the ruling party may use this law to censor them. Now, this risks becoming a reality, with potentially dire consequences for media freedom and independence.

 

In December last year, the draft law was first adopted by the Kosovo government, led by the party Lëvizja Vetëvendosje (LVV). Ignoring local and international criticism, on 7 March 2024 the Vetëvendosje-run Assembly approved the legislative proposal in its first reading. On 11 July, the Kosovo Parliament passed the media law despite contrary advice from the Council of Europe, European Union, OSCE, and other organizations.

 

On 19 July, opposition parties Kosovo Democratic Party and Democratic League of Kosovo challenged the law before the Constitutional Court. The Association of Journalists of Kosovo has asked Kosovo’s President, Vjosa Osmani (aligned with LVV), to form an opinion about the IMC law and to share it with the public. She has been silent so far.

 

Main concerns about the law are related to potential impact on media pluralism, independence, and the broader regulatory landscape governing media outlets in the country. The proposed legislation includes several controversial provisions:

 

  • Greater political Influence on the regulatory body: established by law as an “independent body for regulation, management, and oversight of the broadcasting frequency spectrum”, the IMC is nevertheless already subject to political influence. As they are elected by the Kosovo Parliament (where LVV currently holds 51% of the seats), IMC members often serve their own political agenda. The expansion of the IMC board from 7 to 11 members, the increase of their mandate for up to eight years, and the Parliament’s possibility of dismissing the board, in case it loses its confidence, all planned in the bill, will increase the potential for political capture, enabling even greater governmental influence over media regulation. At the same time, the Press Council of Kosovo (which consists of media representatives) will be weakened since part of online media will be regulated by IMC.
  • Registration of online media: the new law requires IMC to register media based on a new definition of online media that does not exist in EU law, according to the Council of Europe’s legal opinion. This creates legal uncertainty for online media outlets.
  • Fines for violating the rules under the new bill: the legislative proposal set fines ranging from €200 to €40,000 for media outlets that violate its provisions, but lacks specificity regarding which offense corresponds to which exact amount. This raises concerns about arbitrary and excessive penalties that could silence dissenting voices.
  • Removal of gender equity clause: the draft law scraps the previously existing requirement for at least two women on the IMC board, violating the 2015 Law on Gender Equality and raising further worries about representation in media.

The law was passed without incorporating key recommendations from international organizations, prompting concerns about Kosovo’s commitment to maintaining European standards for media freedom. Particularly, the EU and OSCE have raised issues about the law’s impact on the composition, role, and responsibilities of the IMC, as well as its expanded powers over social media. Additionally, the CoE criticised the lack of legal clarity within the provision, proportionality of measures, and deviations from the EU acquis.

 

Legislative changes must be made with genuine involvement of the media sector’s associations and representatives. We thus hope that  the Constitutional Court will assess the new bill in light of the constitutional provisions on the right to freedom of expression and protection of media freedom and independence, as well as international and regional human rights standards. We urge the Court to use its mandate to repeal the law and protect fundamental rights. At the same time, we call upon President Osmani to publicly condemn the law and reiterate her commitment to promote and preserve media freedom in Kosovo.

Signed by:

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

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. 

Melita Vrsaljko Library

Croatia: Faktograf journalist Melita Vrsaljko physically assaulted twice in…

Croatia: Faktograf journalist Melita Vrsaljko physically assaulted twice in a week

The undersigned organisations express deep concerns about the physical attacks targeting Melita Vrsaljko, a journalist working for the Croatian fact-checking website Faktograf.hr and the Climate Portal. Vrsaljko was assaulted twice in the same week, in the street and at her home in Nadin due to her journalistic work. We urge the Croatian authorities not to let these unprecedented attacks go unpunished.

On 15 July 2024, journalist Melita Vrsaljko and a freelance camera operator were working on a documentary co-produced by the Climate Portal, which focused on climate change and waste. While on assignment, they were attacked by an elderly man after passing near his land, which Vrsaljko said had become an emerging illegal waste dump in Nadin. According to the journalist, the man suddenly ran towards them, first threatening the camera operator to damage his camera. The operator reportedly had his camera switched off and was not filming at the time.

 

Vrsaljko, who had identified herself as a journalist, was physically assaulted by the man, who reportedly grabbed her arm and snatched her mobile phone. In self-defence, the journalist reported she had no choice but to kick him to free herself and call the police. Police officers of the Benkovac-Obrovac Police Station intervened on site and considered the incident as a misdemeanor against Public Order and Peace (no criminal offence established) with both the journalist and the attacker equally guilty. The police issued an order for both to stay at least 50 meters away from each other. Vrsaljko stated on her social media that the man attacked her first, based on a short video of him running towards her, which she later published.

 

The following day, Vrsaljko was subjected to a second physical attack, this time in her home. The assailant was the initial attacker’s daughter, Iva Perić, a 36-year-old woman who had been harassing Vrsaljko throughout the day with numerous phone calls and messages, demanding that she delete the footage of her father. Despite Vrsaljko’s assurances that she had no intention of writing about the attack, Perić continued harassing her, and the altercation escalated into a physical assault, which left the journalist injured.

 

“Three hours after her last message, Iva Perić knocked on my door. Thinking it was my mother, I opened the door. After snatching my mobile phone and threatening to delete the footage of her father, she pulled my hair and strangled me,” Vrsaljko told the MFRR partners. “I was forced to bite her hand until it bled to push her away, grab my phone back and call the police,” the journalist added. The Croatian Journalists’ Association (CJA) said that police authorities,  whom the journalist called immediately after the incident, failed to recognise her journalistic work as the motive behind the attack, declaring once again the aggression as a misdemeanor.

 

Vrsaljko sustained bruises and scars from the fight, as well as throat pain from the strangulation. According to her lawyer, the journalist will file a criminal complaint for both attacks she was a victim of with the Zadar State Attorney’s Office.

 

Both attackers are related to Dario Vrsaljko, a councilor in the Zadar County Assembly. All three are distant relatives of the attacked journalist. Despite sharing the same surname, the journalist says she had no personal contact with them and was targeted only for her work.

 

“For years, Faktograf – Association for the Informed Public, has endured violent threats. Our journalists have been repeatedly subjected to harassment and attacks, yet this physical assault on Melita Vrsaljko in her own home marks an unprecedented and appalling escalation of violence,” Faktograf declared on its news portal.

 

Croatian journalists are not often subjected to physical attacks, in comparison to some other EU member states and candidate countries. Since 1 January 2023, only two physical attacks have been recorded on the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) platform. The attack on Melita Vrsaljko is an alarming example of physical violence being used to intimidate and silence journalists. The undersigned organisations urge the authorities to treat this case with the seriousness it deserves. The MFRR joins the SafeJournalists Network in calling on the authorities to prosecute the perpetrators, who have been clearly identified.

Signed by:

  • The European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
  • The International Federation of Journalists (IFJ)
  • OBC Transeuropa (OBCT)
  • The 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. 

Digital security Library

Digital security in Serbia: Another challenge to media freedom

Digital security in Serbia: Another challenge to media freedom

Media outlets in the country are increasingly exposed to cyber attacks, online threats and manipulations. We talked about digital security and its impact on independent journalism in Serbia with Bojan Perkov, digital policy coordinator at SHARE Foundation.

 

Interview originally published by OBCT. Available in Italian here.

SHARE Foundation  is a Belgrade-based NGO that works on privacy protection, security and freedom of expression. The activities of the organisation include training, support and awareness raising on digital security for journalists, activists, civil society and human rights defenders. These are organised around four pillars: freedom of expression online, data protection, digital security, and free access to knowledge. The NGO has also developed the SHARE CERT  , the first special CERT (Computer Emergency Response Team) in Serbia for online media and civil society, offering incident response, training and mentorship to journalists and media organisations that incur in digital issues.

 

What are the main trends that you notice regarding digital security challenges in Serbia?

We recently published our yearly monitoring report in which we track violations in three main areas: cyber attacks, privacy and data protection issues, as well as frauds, threats and manipulations. In 2023, we recorded many threats and manipulations. During the election campaign, for example, opposition politicians faced significant digital threats, including a smear campaign involving an intimate video aired on national TV, which forced a politician to withdraw from the race.

 

Are media outlets and journalists major targets of digital rights violations?

Yes, they are frequently targeted, especially when they expose government wrongdoing. This makes them inconvenient for the authorities. Civil society organizations like CRTA also face attacks from high-ranking officials.

 

Who are the most common offenders and forms of online attacks?

Public officials and politicians are the major offenders. However, we also see attacks from citizens, especially on social media. While these citizen attacks are numerous, those from politicians have more severe consequences. As for the kind of attacks, we mostly observe smear campaigns, accusations, and insults, often through social media and pro-government media outlets. Private actors often use SLAPPs, strategic lawsuits against journalists who write about their activities. Investigative outlets like KRIK, for example, face numerous lawsuits and digital threats from powerful actors.

 

How do these digital security challenges impact journalism?

Journalists continue their work professionally despite threats. However, these attacks amplify public hatred towards them, creating a hostile environment.

 

Is there an awareness of the seriousness of digital threats among journalists and civil society organizations?

Awareness varies. Organizations that have experienced attacks are more vigilant, while others may not realize the severity of these threats.

 

How prepared are media outlets to face digital threats?

There is a gap among media outlets. Smaller local media often lack resources and digital security awareness. Investigative journalists, however, are well-prepared, receiving training and support, especially from international organizations like OCCRP. They often meet confidential sources in person and use encrypted apps like Signal. They implement proper digital security measures tailored to their threat models.

 

How do you assess Serbia’s legal framework regulating the digital environment, especially regarding media freedom?

It can be improved. Most laws are influenced by European integration. For instance, our law on personal data protection is modelled after GDPR but, it combines it with the law enforcement directive, making it complex. We also have the law on information security, primarily focused on critical infrastructure. Efforts to update it were stalled by political events.

 

Do you see a gap between the law and the practice?

Yes, implementation often lags due to a lack of political will. Independent institutions try their best, but the broader system is not supportive.

 

Is there a network or coalition advocating for digital security in the country? Do you have transnational links with counterparts in the EU and other regions?

We are part of the national CERT network and cooperate with other special CERTs. We represent civil society and media in these forums.

The SHARE Foundation is also a member of European Digital Rights (EDRi) and other networks, such as CiviCERT. We receive significant support from these coalitions, which is empowering and essential for our advocacy efforts. We also co-founded the Southeast European Digital Rights Network, involving diverse organizations from across the region.

This publication is the result of activities carried out within the Media Freedom Rapid Response and within ATLIB – Transnational Advocacy for Freedom of Information in the Western Balkans, a project co-funded by the Italian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation. All opinions expressed represent the views of their author and not those of the co-funding institutions.