EU Enlargement Package: Assessments must now translate into meaningful…

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

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

13.11.2025

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Backsliding on media freedom

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

No progress on media freedom

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Limited progress on media freedom

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Some progress on media freedom

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Good progress on media freedom

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

 

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

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

Hungary: Media Capture Monitoring Report 2025

Hungary: Media Capture Monitoring Report 2025

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

12.11.2025

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

EXPLORE THE METHODOLOGY

For more information or media inquiries, please contact:

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

Open letter regarding the dismissal of journalist Gabriele Nunziati

Open letter regarding the dismissal of journalist Gabriele Nunziati

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

12.11.2025

Da: redazione@balcanicaucaso.org 

A: redazione@agenzianova.com 

 

Direttore responsabile Riccardo Bormioli

Agenzia Nova. Agenzia di stampa quotidiana

Redazione Via Parigi 11, 00185 Roma

November 11, 2025

Subject: Concern over the dismissal of journalist Gabriele Nunziati

 

Dear Editor-in-Chief Bormioli,

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

Signed by:

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

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

Oggetto: Sconcerto per il licenziamento del giornalista Gabriele Nunziati

 

Gentile direttore Bormioli,

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

Firmato:

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

Report: Fragile media freedom progress in Bulgaria at risk…

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

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

29.10.2025

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

One year on: Media freedom and journalist safety in…

One year on: Media freedom and journalist safety in Serbia

Tuesday, 4 November 2025 at 14:00 CET.

One year on from the Novi Sad train canopy collapse tragedy on 1 November 2024 and the start of nationwide anti-government protests, this webinar takes stock of the dramatic decline in media freedom and the safety of journalists in Serbia that has resulted from the government’s heavy handed response to the crisis.

 

To mark the anniversary, journalists and media experts will take stock of how the government’s efforts to stifle protests and control information have led to serious political pressure on the media, and a significant rise in attacks on reporters covering demonstrations on the streets.

 

To mark the UN’s International Day to End Impunity for Crimes Against Journalists on November 2, the webinar will put a particular spotlight on the rampant impunity for attacks on journalists by protesters and police alike during the last year, examining how this has contributed to a generational low for media freedom.

Speakers

Natasa Kovačev

Freelance Journalist

Verica Marinčić

Journalist at IN Medija

Dušan Mladenović

Journalist at N1

Moderator

Jasmijn de Zeeuw

Legal Advisor and Researcher, Free Press Unlimited

Turkey: Journalists reporting LGBTQ+ issues risk criminalisation: Withdraw the…

Turkey: Journalists reporting LGBTQ+ issues risk criminalisation: Withdraw the proposed law!

As press and freedom of expression organisations undersigned below, we call for the removal of the reported anti-LGBTQ+ provision from the 11th Judicial Package which would restrict and possibly criminalise media reporting on the community.

22.10.2025

The draft of the 11th Judicial Package was shared with the members of the press last week and is expected to be submitted to Parliament in the coming days. Under the heading “Obscene acts,” the draft introduces a so-called “Turkish-style ban on homosexual propaganda.” It stipulates prison sentences of up to three years for any behaviour or attitude that is “contrary to one’s biological sex and public morality,” as well as for praising, promoting, or encouraging such behaviour. In its current form, the proposal is even broader and more vague than Russia’s 2013 “gay propaganda ban,” posing a grave threat to freedom of expression and press freedom in Turkey.

 

If enacted, this regulation would restrict LGBTQ+ people of their right to access and share information central to their lives.. Journalists reporting on  LGBTQ+ issues such as human rights violations, sexual health, Pride marches etc. risk criminal prosecution on the grounds of “promotion.”

 

Since 2025 was declared the “Year of the Family,” numerous violations have occurred targeting LGBTQ+ journalism in Turkey. In February, Yıldız Tar — Editor-in-Chief of KAOS GL, the country’s largest and oldest LGBTQ+ news platform, and a prominent LGBTQ+ rights advocate — was arrested.

 

In June, the KAOS GL news website and its social media accounts were blocked for allegedly “publicly inciting to commit crimes.” That same month, journalists covering the LGBTQ+ Pride March in Istanbul’s Beşiktaş district were detained and later prosecuted.

 

T24 correspondent Can Öztürk was questioned by prosecutors after publishing a story about sexual harassment allegations against an academic who claimed to offer “conversion therapy” to LGBTQ+ children. The Radio and Television Supreme Council (RTÜK) also fined streaming platforms such as Netflix for hosting LGBTQ+ content.

 

Following all these violations, the inclusion of the proposed provision in the 11th Judicial Package would escalate rights violations even further and criminalize the already difficult task of reporting on LGBTQ+ issues. Moreover, vague terms such as “contrary to one’s biological sex” or “contrary to public morality” would allow arbitrary interference with the press and civil society.

 

This proposal would not only target LGBTQ+ individuals but also place journalists reporting on LGBTQ+ issues and related rights violations under threat of criminal punishment.

 

For all these reasons, as the undersigned press and freedom of expression organizations, we urgently call for the immediate removal of this provision from the 11th Judicial Package.

Signed by:

  • Media and Law Studies Association (MLSA)
  • Dicle Fırat Journalism Association
  • European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
  • DİSK Basın-İş
  • P24 Platform for Independent Journalism
  • International Press Institute (IPI)
  • Progressive Journalists Association (ÇGD)
  • Journalists’ Union of Turkey (TGS)
  • European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
  • Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT)
  • International Federation of Journalists (IFJ)
  • Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ)
  • PEN International 
  • Foreign Media Association Turkey
  • PEN Norway
  • Media and Migration Association (MMA)
  • Balkan Investigative Reporting Network (BIRN)
  • Norwegian Helsinki Committee

LGBTİ+ haberciliği suç değildir, gazetecilik suç değildir: Tasarıyı geri çekin!

 

Aşağıda imzaları bulunan basın ve ifade özgürlüğü kuruluşları olarak, 11.Yargı Paketi’nde yer aldığı iddia edilen LGBTİ+ karşıtı düzenlemenin paketten çıkartılmasını talep ediyoruz. Türkiye’de özellikle LGBTİ+’ların ifade ve basın özgürlüklerini ortadan kaldıracak olan bu düzenleme, ifade ve basın özgürlüklerinin özünü ortadan kaldıracak, LGBTİ+’lar hakkında haber yapmayı suç haline getirecektir.

 

11. Yargı Paketi taslağı, geçtiğimiz hafta basınla paylaşıldı ve önümüzdeki günlerde Meclis’e sunulması bekleniyor. Düzenlemede ‘Hayasızca hareketler’ başlığı altında, Türk tipi bir eşcinsel propaganda yasağı düzenlemesi öngörülüyor. Düzenleme, doğuştan gelen cinsiyete ve genel ahlaka aykırı her türlü davranış ve tutumun yanı sıra bunları övmeyi, özendirmeyi ve teşvik etmeyi de üç yıla kadar hapis cezasıyla cezalandırıyor. Bu düzenleme, taslakta yer alan haliyle, Rusya’da 2013 yılında kabul edilen ‘Eşcinsel propaganda yasağı’ yasasından çok daha ağır ve muğlak ifadeler içererek, Türkiye’de basın ve ifade özgürlüğüne yönelik ciddi bir tehdit oluşturuyor. 

 

Yasalaşması halinde, LGBTİ+’ların haber alma ve haber verme haklarını ortadan kaldıracak olan bu düzenleme, LGBTİ+’lara yönelik hak ihlallerini, trans cinayetlerini, cinsel sağlıkla ilgili yayınları, Onur Yürüyüşlerini ve daha birçok LGBTİ+’ları ilgilendiren haber yapmayı ‘teşvik etmek’ gerekçesiyle suç unsuru haline getirecek.

 

2025 yılının Aile Yılı ilan edilmesiyle, Türkiye’de LGBTİ+ haberciliğine yönelik birçok hak ihlali meydana geldi. Şubat ayında, Türkiye’nin en büyük ve en eski LGBTİ+ haber platformu KAOS GL’nin Genel Yayın Yönetmeni ve LGBTİ+ hakları savunucusu Yıldız Tar tutuklandı

 

Haziran ayında, Kaos GL’nin internet haber sitesi ve sosyal medya hesapları ise ‘suç işlemeye alenen teşvik’ iddiasıyla erişime engellendi. Yine Haziran ayında, İstanbul Beşiktaş’ta LGBTİ+ Onur Yürüyüşü’nü takip eden basın mensupları gözaltına alındı, haklarında dava açıldı. 

 

T24 muhabiri Can Öztürk, LGBTİ+ çocuklara ‘dönüşüm terapisi’ adı altında terapi yaptığını iddia eden bir akademisyen hakkındaki cinsel taciz iddialarını haber yaptığı için şikayet üzerine soruşturmaya uğradı, ifade verdi. Radyo ve Televizyon Üst Kurulu (RTÜK) ise Netflix gibi platformlarda yayınlanan LGBTİ+ içerikler hakkında platformlara ceza verdi.

 

Bütün bu hak ihlallerinin ardından 11. Yargı Paketi’nde yer alacağı iddia edilen düzenleme, hak ihlallerini farklı bir boyuta taşıyacak, zaten zor olan LGBTİ+’lar hakkında haber yapmayı suç haline getirecektir. Öte yandan ‘doğuştan gelen biyolojik cinsiyete aykırı’ veya ‘genel ahlaka aykırı’ gibi muğlak ifadeler, basına ve sivil topluma yönelik keyfi müdahaleleri arttıracaktır.

 

Teklif yalnızca LGBTİ+’ları değil, onları ilgilendiren konuları, onlara yönelik hak ihlallerini haber yapan basın mensuplarını da ceza tehdidi altına sokacak, haber yapılmasını kriminalize edecektir.

 

Bu gerekçelerle, biz aşağıda imzaları bulunan basın ve ifade özgürlüğü kurumları olarak, 11. Yargı Paketi’nde yer alacağı iddia edilen bu düzenlemenin derhal tekliften çıkartılmasını talep ediyoruz. 

İmzalayanlar:

  • Medya ve Hukuk Çalışmaları Derneği (MLSA)
  • Dicle Fırat Gazeteciler Derneği  (DFG)
  • Avrupa Basın ve Medya Özgürlüğü Merkezi (ECPMF)
  • Punto24 Bağımsız Gazetecilik Derneği (P24)
  • Çağdaş Gazeteciler Derneği (ÇGD)
  • Uluslararası Basın Enstitüsü (IPI)
  • Avrupa Gazeteciler Federasyonu (EFJ)
  • Uluslararası Gazeteciler Federasyonu (IFJ)
  • Türkiye Gazeteciler Sendikası (TGS)
  • Balkanlar, Kafkasya ve Transavrupa Gözlemevi (OBCT)
  • Gazetecileri Koruma Komitesi (CPJ)
  • Yabancı Medya Derneği
  • Uluslararası PEN
  • PEN Norveç
  • Medya ve Göç Derneği (MGD) 
  • Balkan Araştırmacı Gazetecilik Ağı (BIRN)
  • DİSK Basın-İş
  • Norveç Helsinki Komitesi

This statement was coordinated by Media and Law Studies Association (MLSA) and signed by members 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.

Italy: Car bomb attack on investigative journalist Sigfrido Ranucci…

Car bomb attack on investigative journalist Sigfrido Ranucci rings alarm for media freedom in Italy

The undersigned journalists and media freedom organisations strongly condemn the car bomb attack on one of Italy’s leading investigative journalist Sigfrido Ranucci and his family. We welcome the opening of an investigation by the Anti-Mafia Investigation Division and call for an urgent assessment of the effectiveness of the protective measures applied to the journalist.

17 October 2025

On 16 October 2025, at around 10 p.m. a bomb consisting of 1kg explosive detonated near the car of Rai journalist Sigfrido Ranucci in Pomezia, near Rome. The bomb went off 20 minutes after Ranucci’s daughter parked the car. No one was injured in the attack, which damaged the two vehicles and a nearby home.

 

Ranucci is a longtime host of Report, the investigative programme broadcast on Rai 3, known for its in-depth reporting on corruption and organised crime. In recent years, he has been the target of numerous threats and intimidation. He was granted police protection in 2010, which was enhanced in 2021, following threats from mafia-style organisation N’drangheta. 

“Last summer, a year ago, we found two P38 bullets outside our house. Since then, a series of unusual situations have occurred in recent months, starting with the attempt to discredit me,” he told Il Fatto Quotidiano. Earlier this year, Ranucci appeared before the European Parliament, where he denounced that he had been under surveillance by the Italian secret services.

 

Following the attack, Interior Minister Matteo Piantedosi said that he has given instructions to strengthen the journalist’s protection “to the maximum”. The journalist was provided with an armoured car and armed escort, as he himself announced when leaving offices of the Carabinieri, where he had filed a complaint. Opposition parties have urged the Anti-Mafia Committee in the parliament to grant an urgent hearing to Ranucci, in order to acquire his position on the case.

 

Ranucci joined the public broadcaster Rai in 1991 and devoted most of his career to investigative journalism. Recently, he has been vocal on the growing difficulties in carrying out investigative journalism in Italy, especially at Rai. He often highlighted the tensions with the management of the public broadcaster and the government, which ultimately culminated in a number of vexatious lawsuits and disciplinary measures against him. He also denounced that four episodes of his investigative programme Report had been cut following an unprecedented decision by the Rai management in the programme’s 30-year history. 

 

Alessandra Costante, the General Secretary of the Italian journalists’ trade union, the Federazione Nazionale Stampa Italiana (FNSI), said the attack on Sigfrido Ranucci was “setting democracy in Italy back by several decades”: “It is an attack not only on our colleague at Report, but on freedom of information, on Article 21 of the Constitution, on the basic principles of civil coexistence and democracy. The FNSI demands that clarity be provided quickly on what happened. The attack on Ranucci shows an escalation in actions against journalism,” she added. 

 

The editorial committee of Rai Approfondimento has called a meeting of editors in the Rai headquarters today at 12 p.m. This will be followed at 4 p.m. by a sit-in organised by FNSI, Usigrai and Stampa Romana together with colleagues from other editorial offices.

 

We stand alongside our Italian partners in expressing solidarity with Sigfrido Ranucci and the wider journalistic community in Italy. This attack is particularly troubling as it coincides with the anniversary of the death of Maltese journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia, who lost her life to a car bomb on 16 October 2017. 

 

The undersigned organisations strongly condemn the attempted murder of a journalist, which constitutes a direct assault on media freedom, and urgently call for a thorough investigation to ensure that the perpetrators are identified and brought to justice. 

Signed by:

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

Webinar: Freedom of Information (FOI) in Europe

Freedom of Information (FOI) in Europe:

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

Wednesday, 22 October 2025 at 15:00 am CEST.

This webinar will explore the importance of Freedom of Information/Access to Information (FOI/ATI) for journalists in Europe. In theory, most European countries have laws in place that ensure journalists and citizens can access government information. However, in practice, journalists frequently see their requests for information ignored, delayed, or rejected. Participants will get an overview of the critical role that FOI plays for journalism. Media freedom experts from three select European countries – Hungary, Ukraine, and Malta – will offer additional insights into national experiences and challenges journalists face when using FOI for their reporting.

Speakers

Tamás Bodoky

Átlátszó, Director and Co-founder

Galyna Petrnko

Detector Media, Director and Editor-in-Chief

Michaela Pia Camilleri

Daphne Caruana Galizia Foundation, Researcher and Advocacy Officer

Moderator

Cara Räker

Monitoring Officer, European Centre for Press and Media Freedom

Flowers and light candles are put in memory of murdered journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia at a makeshift memorial outside the law courts in Valletta, Malta on November 25, 2019. (Photo by Emmanuele Contini/NurPhoto)

In Memory of Daphne: Media reform public consultations must…

In Memory of Daphne: Media reform public consultations must lead to National Action Plan

On the eve of the anniversary of the murder of Maltese investigative journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia, press freedom and journalists’ groups are calling on the national authorities to set up a National Action Plan on Media Freedom and Journalist Safety.

15.10.2025

Our groups reiterate our calls for all perpetrators of the murder to be brought to justice and we continue to monitor the progress of ongoing legal proceedings.

 

  1. Overview:

 

Press freedom and journalist organizations welcome the call by the Maltese authorities for public consultations on media freedom and are, in this paper, submitting a set of recommendations for consideration.

 

The implementation of such recommendations would be an appropriate and meaningful way to continue to mark the life and legacy of Daphne Caruana Galizia, who was killed in a car bomb attack on 16 October 2017.

 

The move to open up public consultations follows an ongoing exchange on institutional and rule of law reforms in Malta, whose record has been the subject of international scrutiny since the journalist’s murder eight years ago.

 

Such reforms present a historic opportunity for press freedom in both Malta and Europe. Press freedom and journalists’ groups call for draft legislation related to reforms to be considered for consultation, including by national and international civil society, journalists’ organizations, media freedom experts, the Council of Europe, and the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), prior to being enacted by parliament or published by legal notice.

 

Our organizations are tracking the reform proposal put forward by the Maltese authorities in

response to the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA). Some recommendations below identify areas of concern that continue to require a more effective state response than outlined in the August 2025 legal notice.

 

This statement seeks to provide an overview of key international standards or texts that would provide a basis for shaping the planning and implementation of future legislative and non-legislative measures to protect journalists. It also provides a list of recommendations, in consideration of Malta’s press freedom context.

 

Such reforms should be brought together in a National Action Plan on Media Freedom and Journalist Safety. Such an initiative should seek to concretely address the complex set of challenges facing all Maltese journalists, and guarantee an ambitious vision for Malta’s compliance with its European Union, Council of Europe and OSCE obligations.

 

 

  1. Relevant international standards and expert sources:

 

The following international standards and texts provide guidance on the questions raised in the consultation, including safeguarding an enabling environment for journalists to operate, preserving full and independent access to information, and aligning all measures with international standards on the protection of the reputation or rights of others.

 

United Nations

 

– Civil and Political Rights, including the Question of Freedom of Expression, the right to freedom of opinion and expression, Report of the Special Rapporteur, Ambeyi Ligabo, 30 December 2005 (E/CN.4/2006/55)

 

– General Comment No. 34, Article 19: Freedoms of opinion and expression, United Nations, Human Rights Committee, 11-29 July 2011 (CCPR/C/GC/34)

 

– General Assembly, Resolution 68/163, The Safety of Journalists and the Issue of Impunity, 18 December 2013 (A/RES/68/163)

 

– General Assembly, Resolution 39/6, The Safety of Journalists, Human Rights Council

27 September 2018 (39th Session) (A/HRC/RES/39/6)

 

UNESCO, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation

 

– UN Plan of Action on the Safety of Journalists and the Issue of Impunity (2012)

 

Council of Europe, Parliamentary Assembly

 

– Parliamentary Assembly, Recommendation 1506 (2001), Freedom of expression and information in the media in Europe, Council of Europe, 24 April 2001

 

– Parliamentary Assembly, Recommendation 1589 (2003), Freedom of expression in the

media in Europe, Council of Europe, 28 January 2003

 

– Parliamentary Assembly, Resolution 1535 (2007), Threats to the lives and freedom of expression of journalists, 25 January 2007

 

– Parliamentary Assembly, Resolution 2035 (2015), Protection of the safety of journalists and of media freedom in Europe, 29 January 2015

 

– Parliamentary Assembly, Recommendation 2062 (2015), Protection of the safety of journalists and of media freedom in Europe, Council of Europe, 29 January 2015

 

– Parliamentary Assembly, Resolution 2317 (2020), Threats to media freedom and journalists’ security in Europe, Council of Europe, 28 January 2020

 

Council of Europe, Committee of Ministers

 

– CM/Rec(2024)2 – Recommendation of the Committee of Ministers to member States on countering the use of strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs), adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 5 April 2024

 

– CM/Rec(2022)16 – Recommendation of the Committee of Ministers to member States on combating hate speech, adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 20 May 2022

 

– CM/Rec(2016)4 – Recommendation of the Committee of Ministers to member States on the protection of journalism and safety of journalists and other media actors, adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 13 April 2016

 

European Court of Human Rights case-law on state interference or restriction on freedom of expression:

 

Stoll v. Switzerland, App No 69698/01, (ECtHR [GC] 10 December 2007)

Morice v. France, App. No. 29369/10, (ECtHR [GC] 23 April 2015)

Pentikäinen v. Finland, App No 11882/10, (ECtHR [GC] 20 October 2015)

Khadja Ismayilova v. Azerbaijan, App Nos 65286/13 and 57270/14, (ECtHR 10 January 2019)

Yılmaz and Kılıç v. Turkey, App No 68514/01, (ECtHR 17 July 2008)

Bahçeci and Turan v. Turkey, App. No. 33340/03, (ECtHR 16 June 2009) para 26.

 

Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, OSCE

 

Legal analysis on the draft law of Malta to implement various measures for the protection of the media and of journalists, October 2021

 

Legal analysis on the draft law of Malta to implement various measures for the protection of the media and of journalists, February 2022

 

 

European Commission

 

Commission Recommendation (EU) 2021/1534 of 16 September 2021 on ensuring the protection, safety and empowerment of journalists and other media professionals in the European Union

 

Commission Recommendation (EU) 2022/758 of 27 April 2022 on protecting journalists and human rights defenders who engage in public participation from manifestly unfounded or abusive court proceedings (“Strategic lawsuits against public participation”)

 

Commission Recommendation (EU) 2022/1634 of 16 September 2022 on internal safeguards for editorial independence and ownership transparency in the media sector

 

 

  • Recommendations

 

  1. Establish a National Action Plan

– In line with the Council of Europe’s “Journalists Matter” campaign, develop and adopt a National Action Plan on Media Freedom and Journalist Safety to provide a strategic framework to coordinate action across all state institutions. Such an action plan should integrate the recommendations listed below (to the fullest extent possible), and should follow further broad, public and transparent consultations, timeframes, clear and measurable benchmarks for progress, and effective and independent evaluation processes. It would have full political backing; would be led by a person or persons with experience and knowledge of the media (and the threats to the media); and would have the full trust of the journalist community and their representative organizations.

 

  1. Set up an institutional response structure

– Establish an interministerial, cross-institutional structure for the protection of journalists and journalism, with a view to implementing the National Action Plan, setting up rapid response protocols and early warning mechanisms, regular communication and dialogue on press freedom concerns affecting Malta’s journalists, and building state accountability for protecting journalists. Such a structure should ensure effective engagement with civil society and media organizations, and have, as its purpose, the full implementation of the 2016 Committee of Ministers Recommendation on journalism safety and the European Commission’s 2021 Journalist Safety Recommendation. This requires that the current mechanism be transformed to meet international standards including by taking into consideration the OSCE legal analysis of the draft law setting up this mechanism.

 

  1. Undertake Constitutional reform

– Undertake Constitutional reform to enshrine journalism as one of the pillars of a democratic society, with an explicit requirement of the State to guarantee it and protect it.

– Recognize the right to access information held by the State and public administration and the obligation of public authorities to provide such information.

– Provide all relevant state officials with training and support to promote and protect the spirit of such constitutional reforms.

 

  1. Foster an enabling environment for journalists

– High level officials should regularly communicate publicly, with a view to reaching a wide audience, that verbal attacks, threats, and hostility against the press should never in any way be tolerated; underscore the important role that journalists play in society and call for their full protection. Such statements could coincide with the celebration of international days, including World Press Freedom Day, as well as parliamentary debates, or public and official events.

– State officials and public figures should refrain from undermining or attacking the integrity of journalists and other media actors, or coercing or pressuring journalists.

– Provide journalists and other media actors who are victims of crime with quick access to preventive measures of protection, including court-issued protection orders and other personal protection measures taken by the police.

– Provide training for judges, prosecutors, lawyers, and police officers on relevant Council of Europe (and other relevant international) standards on freedom of expression and media freedom.

 

  1. Support female journalists

– Monitor and prioritize measures to protect female journalists against all forms of psychological pressure, intimidation, harassment, or physical threats, including as a result of online harassment, in line with the European Commission’s 2021 Journalist Safety Recommendation and the OSCE’s 2023 Guidelines for monitoring online violence against female journalists.

 

  1. End vexatious lawsuits, including SLAPPs

– Undertake further legislative reforms to address SLAPPs, in addition to the government’s recent transposition of the EU anti-SLAPP Directive, to extend judicial protection to domestic SLAPPs cases.

– Implement in full the European Commission’s Recommendation on SLAPPs as well as the Committee of Ministers Recommendation on SLAPPs; and, in doing so, extend Malta’s actions to both judicial reform and nonjudicial measures, such as victim support, judicial training, and public awareness.

– Reform the Media and Defamation Act to bring it in line with the recommendations included in the Legal Analysis of the OSCE Office of the Representative on Freedom of the Media of November 2017.

 

  1. Strengthen access to information

– Take immediate steps to improve the swift delivery of information held by public authorities, and grant greater transparency with regards to the publication of official information in the public interest. Such improvements should be user friendly, efficient and embedded in a culture of accountability and openness.

– Disclose, in full, the legal advice received by the Government on the Freedom of Information Act, and undertake a full, transparent, and effective consultation for its reform.

 

  1. Build accountability by implementing the public inquiry recommendations

Ensure the full implementation of all the recommendations from the Daphne Caruana Galizia public inquiry, including those recommendations that relate to economic wrongdoing and financial crime, in their intersection of addressing the work of Maltese investigative journalists regarding state accountability, including:

  1. Amendments to criminal laws;
  2. Administrative practices which regulate relationships between public administration and business people;
  3. The fight against financial crime;
  4. Public officials who interfere with or attempt to interfere with the police;
  5. The introduction in the Criminal Code of the new criminal offence of “abuse of office” committed by a public official;
  6. The introduction into the Criminal Code of the criminal offence of obstruction of justice;
  7. The introduction of legal provisions in the Code of Ethics to counter inappropriate behavior by public officials.

 

  1. Ensure self-regulation contributes to safeguarding international standards

– Ensure that any changes to the regulatory ecosystem for media in Malta do not risk being misused for increased state interference. Self-regulation should be promoted and enabled by the authorities and all relevant stakeholders. Effective and independent systems of self-regulation must have the trust and confidence of the Maltese journalist community, and to the fullest extent possible, apply the European standards defined by the European Press Councils as part of the research and best practice developed by the European Union’s PressCouncils.eu project.

 

  1. Safeguard source confidentiality

– Develop protocols for law enforcement to embed the legal protection of legitimate and journalistic sources, including as part of investigations or operations. Such protocols should ensure that if investigative or intelligence collecting work by the Malta Security Service and or the police involves or touches upon the relationship of journalists and sources or whistleblowers, that the identity of that source or whistleblower will not be disclosed.

– The Protection of the Whistleblower Act must be reformed to provide whistleblowers with avenues for safe reporting, independent from government.

 

  1. Guarantee independent public service media

– In line with Article 5 of the EMFA, undertake reform of the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) to develop stronger institutional safeguards which protect it from all forms of political pressure and influence and increase its editorial independence, thus building public trust.

– Include transparent and democratic procedures for the election of all management staff and members to its oversight boards, to reduce potential political interference. Heads of public service media should in particular be required to adhere to transparent and impartial criteria in their appointment procedures, with a view to preventing undue political influence.

– Provide adequate, predictable and sustainable funding to the public broadcaster in order to create additional institutional barriers to prevent pressure from the government. Multiyear budgeting should be adopted to facilitate long-term strategic planning and enhance predictability.

 

  1. Ensure full transparency over the allocation of state advertising to media and establish an independent body to oversee this system

– In line with Article 25 of the EMFA, establish a registry for oversight of state advertising, which must be transparent, functional, and provide up-to-date and easily accessible data for journalists and citizens.

– Ensure this body is independent and issues annual reports on the distribution of funds, identifying any instances of preferential treatment or political influence.

– Award state advertising in accordance with transparent, objective, proportionate, and nondiscriminatory criteria. This should apply to allocation of advertising via public tenders, directly or indirectly, and via advertising agencies.

– Government agencies and state-run or -controlled companies should provide full transparency on advertising expenditure, while all media should disclose the total amount they receive from public funds.

 

  1. Increase transparency over media ownership

– In line with Article 6 of the EMFA, establish a national media ownership database which is public, transparent, up-to-date and easily accessible online. This centralized online registry should require data regarding the ownership structure, including both direct and nondirect ownership, as well as the identity of any beneficial owners.

– Document swiftly all acquisitions and mergers of media in the database. Noncompliance with requests for information on all aspects of ownership should be addressed through administrative measures or penalties.

 

  1. Prevent a high degree of concentration of ownership in the media sector

– In line with Article 22 of the EMFA, establish a coordinated system for the assessment of all new market developments that could lead to concentrations and have a significant impact on media pluralism and editorial independence.

– Adopt procedural rules to assess the impact of new acquisitions or mergers on media pluralism, as the Maltese media legislation does not contain specific thresholds or other limitations in order to prevent a high degree of horizontal and cross-media concentration of ownership in the media sector.

– Introduce measures that guarantee transparency and provide clear thresholds to prevent market concentration, including in the online environment.

– Designate an appropriate authority to monitor and measure media pluralism and to advise the competition authority in order to stop ownership changes that damage media pluralism and threaten editorial independence.

– Provide proper statistics on market shares and media revenues.

– Codify protections to journalists from political interference. Cooperate with the Institute of Maltese Journalists and other stakeholders to make sure protections are adequate.

Signed by:

  • Association of European Journalists (AEJ)
  • Civil Liberties Union for Europe
  • Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ)
  • European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
  • European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
  • Free Press Unlimited (FPU)
  • Global Forum for Media Development
  • IFEX
  • Institute for Reporters’ Freedom and Safety (IRFS)
  • International Federation of Journalists (IFJ)
  • International Press Institute (IPI)
  • Media Diversity Institute
  • Ossigeno per l’Informazione
  • PEN International
  • Reporters Without Borders (RSF)
  • Society of Journalists (Warsaw)
  • South East Europe Media Organisation (SEEMO)
  • Spanish Federation of Journalists (FAPE)

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.

IPI denounces fatal attack on journalist Hakan Tosun, urges…

IPI denounces fatal attack on journalist Hakan Tosun, urges swift and transparent investigation

The International Press Institute (IPI) strongly condemns the fatal attack on journalist and environmental activist Hakan Tosun and calls on authorities to conduct a thorough and transparent investigation to bring all perpetrators to justice.

14.10.2025

Hakan Tosun, an independent journalist and environmental activist known for his reporting on ecological destruction, was attacked on October 10 while returning home in Istanbul’s Esenyurt district. When his family and colleagues could not reach him for an extended period, they reported Tosun missing.

 

It was later revealed that he had been found severely injured and taken to Çam Sakura State Hospital as an unidentified patient. His family and loved ones learned about his hospitalization eight hours after the incident.

 

According to recently released security camera footage, two individuals on a motorcycle were seen approaching Hakan Tosun and attacking him. Footages show that the assailants struck him repeatedly on the head and neck. Tosun remained in intensive care with life-threatening injuries and later died on October 13.

 

According to Tosun’s lawyers, authorities notified them on October 12 that two suspects connected to the assault had been arrested. The exact details of their alleged roles remain unclear, and no public disclosure has yet been made regarding Tosun’s murder.

 

IPI is deeply concerned that the attack may be linked to Tosun’s journalism, particularly his reporting on environmental issues and local corruption. We urge authorities to thoroughly investigate all possible motives, including his journalistic work.

 

Attacks on journalists are attacks on the public’s right to know. The killing of Hakan Tosun is a grave reminder of the dangers faced by reporters and activists in Turkey, and of the urgent need to ensure their safety and protect press freedom.

 

IPI stands in solidarity with the family, colleagues, and community of Hakan Tosun, and with all journalists in Turkey who continue to pursue truth and accountability in the face of increasing hostility.

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