Bulgaria: Investigative journalists hit by smears and lawsuits after…

Bulgaria: Investigative journalists hit by smears and lawsuits after corruption revelations

Ahead of World Press Freedom Day on May 3, the undersigned partners of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) today raise the alarm about a latest wave of legal pressure exerted against two of Bulgaria’s leading investigative media platforms, BIRD.bg and Bivol.bg, over their recent revelations about alleged crime and corruption.

In recent weeks, journalists from both media have faced attacks and pressure on multiple fronts: a barrage of vexatious defamation lawsuits filed by the associate of a suspected organised crime boss, the deliberate revelation of journalistic source by the Sofia prosecutor’s office, and a discreditation campaign by Bulgaria’s Attorney General Ivan Geshev.

 

The pressure stems from multiple articles, published separately by the two platforms throughout 2022 and 2023, involving alleged corruption at the border between Bulgaria, Turkey and Greece involving food imports, and separate reports about the alleged bribery of police in the cover-up of a high-profile murder.

 

Both media’s investigations centre on suspected organised crime boss Christophoros Amanatidis, who allegedly monopolized control over the food imports and truck parking at the EU’s biggest external border crossing, depriving the Bulgarian state of tax revenue. An additional article revealed how Amanatidis also allegedly bribed police to cover up the murder of wanted crypto fraudster Ruja Ignatova in November 2018.

 

In response, an associate of Amanatidis, Razmig Chakaryan, filed two lawsuits against BIRD journalist Dimitar Stoyanov and three against BIRD editor-in-chief Atanas Tchobanov. A sixth lawsuit was filed against Nikolay Marchenko from Bivol.bg. All six lawsuits are understood to have been filed at the Sofia District Court and each demanded BGN 10,000 (5,130 euros) for alleged defamation and “moral damage”. All lawsuits were brought against the individual journalists, rather than their media outlets.

 

These lawsuits against BIRD and Bivol are the latest in a wave of SLAPPs targeting watchdog journalism in recent years. BIRD and its journalists are currently facing 10 lawsuits, while Bivol and its reporters are facing four. Both media are partners of the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP).

 

In a further development, on 7 April 2023 the Sofia City Prosecutor’s Office published a transcript and screenshots of private chat conversations between Stoyanov and one of his sources, who is currently detained on drug-related charges. This was linked to a story that BIRD published on 17 February, which reported that a document found in the safe of a murdered police chief revealed that Amanatidis had bribed the head of the homicide department at the Bulgarian National Police and others to leak sensitive information to him and cover up his criminal activities.

 

Publication of the conversation came after a press conference held by the Prosecutor’s Office on 16 March 2023, during which Attorney General Ivan Geshev described reporting by journalists as part of an alleged plot to incriminate him and the high-ranking magistrates and police officers. While Geshev did not identify the journalists directly, a screen behind him projected the names of Tchobanov and Stoyanov.

 

Our organisations are deeply concerned by these interconnected attacks on investigative journalists in Bulgaria. While the full details about the lawsuits has not yet been confirmed, our assessment and that of local media associations is that they clearly represent retaliatory and vexatious legal actions intended to pressure legitimate watchdog reporting. These lawsuits display many of the characteristics of Strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs). Our organisations stand ready to provide advice and legal support to all three journalists to help fight these lawsuits.

 

Moreover, the decision by the Sofia City Prosecutor’s Office to publish screenshots of a journalist’s private communications with a source is an unprecedented and deeply alarming violation of source confidentiality. Even if the chats are part of an ongoing criminal probe, the Prosecutor’s Office has a clear responsibility, in line with Bulgarian and European law, not to arbitrarily reveal the journalists’ source, let alone publicly publish screenshots of their conversation. In the course of their investigations, it is standard practice for journalists to communicate with multiple sources if the information they can provide is of public interest.

 

Attempts by the Attorney General to try and discredit the work of Stoyanov and Tchobanov, both respected investigative journalists, are also highly problematic and should be ceased immediately. We are concerned that the allegations launched against both journalists appear to be aimed at muddying the serious revelations published by the media outlet. In the context of Bulgaria’s already weak landscape for press freedom, these pressures have a clear intimidatory effect on media freedom.

 

Concerningly, this case is yet another example of the many threats that journalists probing crime and corruption in Bulgaria regularly face in carrying out their public service mission. Ahead of World Press Freedom Day on May 3, our organisations express our solidarity with BIRD.bg and Bivol.bg and their journalists. We have reported these cases to the Council of Europe’s platform for the safety of journalists and Mapping Media Freedom, and will alert relevant European bodies about this case. We will continue to monitor the situation closely and will respond to additional attempts to pressure or silence investigative journalism in Bulgaria.

Signed by:

  • ARTICLE 19 Europe
  • Balkan Free Media Initiative (BFMI)
  • International Press Institute (IPI)
  • European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
  • Free Press Unlimited (FPU)
  • 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.

MFRR 3 consortium logos

Media Freedom Groups troubled with the CULT report on…

Media Freedom Groups troubled with the CULT report on the EMFA proposal

Apr 28, 2023

Dear Sabine Verheyen,

 

We, the undersigned journalists, press freedom, civil society, trade unions, and digital rights groups, are writing to you with regard to the proposed amendments to the draft  European Media Freedom Act (EMFA) you have written as the Rapporteur on behalf of the Committee on Culture and Education (CULT). 

 

We thank the rapporteur for the timely drafting and appreciate several amendments in the report, such as the strengthening of the independence of the European Board for Media Services. 

 

However, we are very concerned about many changes that dilute the impact of the proposal , as well as the harmonization effort that drives the EMFA.  Moreover, the removal of the explicit reference and guarantee of journalists and editors’ editorial independence throughout the proposal, and the changing of the media pluralism test from mandatory to optional in national rules raise our concern regarding the EMFA’s capacity to adequately protect media pluralism and media freedom in the EU.

 

Our main critical points are the following:  

  • The removal of almost all references to editorial independence in the proposal and the insertion of media owners’ right to assume a leading editorial role (Art 6.2);
  • The insertion of VLOPs into the media plurality assessment and the exchange of a mandatory nature for a voluntary one (Art 21); and
  • The failure to strengthen media ownership transparency rules (Art 6.1).

 

Editorial independence is an essential pillar of media freedom that helps guarantee the integrity of a media’s journalism and protection against the undue influence of vested interests from political or business groups. The latest scandal surrounding Mathias Döpfner, the CEO of Axel Springer, seeking to interfere in editorial policy of Germany’s largest newspaper underlines the vulnerability of our media to vested interests and the necessity to maintain protections on editorial independence across Europe.

 

The inclusion of Very Large Online Platforms under the media plurality test under Art 21 should also be removed as it prejudges the methodology to be developed for protecting news media pluralism in Europe. News media plurality cannot be looked at in isolation and VLOPs as with other actors such as advertising companies have a significant impact on the media economy and this is recognised already in the Digital Markets Act (Regulation 2022/1925). However, to insert VLOPs into the EMFA which is primarily focused on a public interest test for news media is premature and ties the hands of the policy experts assigned to develop the media plurality test.

 

We kindly remind you that the media ownership transparency obligations on media under Article 6.1 should be strengthened as it is only through clear publicly available and verifiable information that the public can make informed decisions about the integrity of the media. This is also a request in the recently published independent research for the CULT Committee on the EMFA. Only this way will we achieve meaningful transparency.

 

We call on you, dear Sabine Verheyen, and on all CULT members as the lead committee, which has been a reliable and vocal campaigner for media freedoms across the European Union, to stick to your principles and help to improve this act as a regulation so much needed in the EU and beyond.

 

With kind regards,

Signed by:

  • Association of European Journalists (AEJ Belgium)
  • Civil Liberties Union for Europe (Liberties)
  • Eurocadres
  • European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
  • European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
  • Global Forum for Media Development (GFMD)
  • International Press Institute (IPI)
  • OBC Transeuropa (OBCT)
  • Ossigeno.info
  • South East Europe Media Organisation (SEEMO)
  • Society of Journalists, Warsaw
  • The Daphne Caruana Galizia Foundation

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 3 consortium logos

Serbia: Independent journalism faces biggest crisis in years

Serbia: Independent journalism faces its biggest crisis in years

Following a visit to Belgrade on April 10 and 11 2023 to commemorate the murder anniversary of editor and publisher Slavko Ćuruvija, the undersigned international press freedom and journalists’ organisations today issue a stark warning over the state of media freedom and journalists’ safety in Serbia.

Ahead of World Press Freedom Day on May 3, our shared conclusion is that 24 years after the murder of Ćuruvija in 1999, poor conditions for the safety of journalists, the weak landscape for the rule of law, media capture and a festering climate of hostility towards critical reporting mean that the likelihood of a serious physical attack on a journalist remains a possibility. Independent journalism in Serbia continues to face a period of crisis.

 

The dedicated work being done by some stakeholders to prosecute attacks on journalists is being undermined by the wider climate of hostility being generated by leading politicians in Serbia. Until this is addressed and the public discourse regarding critical journalism is normalised, tangible progress will remain elusive.

 

These conclusions come after multiple meetings with independent journalists and editors, media associations and unions, the Standing Working Group for the Safety of Journalists, which included a representative of the Ministry of Interior.

 

Serbia exhibits a unique situation in which insults and attempts to discredit watchdog journalism stem overwhelmingly from leading politicians, including the President Aleksandar Vučić, Prime Minister Ana Brnabić  and ruling party MPs. Our assessment is that Serbia is one of the EU candidate states where journalists face the strongest verbal pressure and attacks from the state leadership. Critical and investigative journalism is still viewed by many public officials as an unpatriotic threat to be fought, rather than a healthy and necessary part of the country’s democratic fabric. 

 

This failure of the political class to accept and respect the role of critical journalism is dangerous. Smears launched by political figures are routinely picked up and reported by a network of tabloid media outlets owned by allies of the government who amplify the messaging, fomenting distrust and hatred against certain journalists. This behaviour by politicians normalises hostility towards independent media and, in many cases, acts as a signpost for physical as well as online threats by non-state actors.

 

It is no surprise that Serbia remains one of the most dangerous places in Europe, outside of Ukraine, to work as a journalist. In 2022, the Independent Journalists’ Association of Serbia (IJAS) documented 137 violations: 34 verbal threats, nine physical attacks, four attacks on property and 84 different attempts to pressure the media. Until the end of March 2023, 33 serious incidents were recorded: eight verbal attacks, three physical attacks and 22 acts of pressure on media and journalists. Investigative journalists probing high level crime and corruption are particularly at risk and are demonised as foreign mercenaries and national traitors.

 

While multiple state-backed initiatives have been launched to address the safety of journalists, their effectiveness is undermined by political attacks on journalists which compromise authorities’ efforts. The Standing Working Group on the Safety of Journalists, established in 2016, is an important initiative and a platform for the exchange of information between law enforcement authorities and media, allowing more systematic monitoring. The prosecutor’s office has established a network of dedicated contact points across Serbia which must act quickly in cases of threats. The 24/7 toll-free SOS helpline for journalists whose safety is threatened represents an important instrument for quick responses, along with networking of competent institutions and offering assistance to endangered journalists. In a welcome development, the number of physical attacks recorded in 2022 dropped compared to the previous year.

 

However, while law enforcement authorities have increasingly identified alleged perpetrators and brought indictments, justice has proven much harder to secure. In 2022, 81 criminal reports were submitted to the public prosecutor’s offices, yet just five convictions were reached. Though certain investigations have faced legitimate barriers in securing evidence, in some cases journalists complain that serious threats are assessed by prosecutors as not meeting the threshold of criminal offences. As of March 2023, 41,96% of cases submitted to the prosecutor’s office were dismissed for this reason. Journalists also raised concerns that politically sensitive cases, including attacks involving members of the ruling party, were not addressed appropriately. While the Standing Working Group functions adequately on paper and stakeholders are committed to its success, its work is undermined by a lack of political will and the wider climate of hostility. The separate Working Group for Security and Protection of Journalists, established in December 2020 with the backing of the Prime Minister, has been a failure.

 

On the other hand, the Commission for the Investigation of Murders of Journalists is another important initiative and has been fundamental in the fight for justice for Slavko Ćuruvija. Despite progress in the investigation of the Police Working Group within the Commission in identifying possible killers, the Prosecutor’s Office for Organized Crime continues to hesitate on taking over the investigation into the murder of journalist Milan Pantić, while the mysterious death of Dada Vujasnović remains unsolved.

 

Despite the many challenges, there are some positive developments this year. The March 2023 retrial verdict sentencing perpetrators including a former Belgrade (Grocka municipality) president to five years in prison for the arson attack on the home of journalist Milan Jovanovic is a welcome victory. With an appeal underway, however, justice for this attack has not yet been secured. Swift indictments and prosecutions in early 2023 for the threats made against journalists at OK Radio by a powerful businessman in Vranje were positive. The recent sentencing to one year of house arrest to a man who issued appalling death threats against TV Nova S journalist Jelena Obućina is also a welcome development. However, the willingness and ability to effectively prosecute such attacks appear to extend only to cases where there was political pressure or where the alleged perpetrators lack political connections, indicating a lack of independence of law enforcement bodies.

 

At the wider level, however, no progress has been made in strengthening the landscape for media freedom and freedom of expression. Media pluralism remains particularly weak, with independent broadcast media systematically disadvantaged in the market. The clearest example was the controversial decision in July 2022 by the Regulatory Body for Electronic Media (REM) to again award all four national frequencies to pro-government television channels, overlooking applications by independent media houses. A fifth licence has yet to be allocated. The REM continues to display a lack of functional independence and has failed to carry out its duty of sanctioning violations of broadcast law by private channels close to the government. Delays continue in the long-overdue reform of the law on public information and media and the law on electronic media.

 

The public broadcaster continues to suffer from a lack of editorial independence and displays clear bias in its programming and reporting in favour of the government. State advertising – which has for years been the largest advertiser in media – also continues to be distributed in an arbitrary and non-transparent manner, largely in favour of pro-government media outlets. Rather than being disqualified from the co-financing program for regular violations of journalistic ethics, as identified by the Press Council, tabloid media continue to receive large amounts of public money. This use of state resources is one of the prime levers for the government to co-opt and control media coverage. While the direct ownership of private media by the state is banned, the purchase by state-owned and controlled Telekom Srbija of multiple media assets in recent years has established an indirect state ownership model. This is a prime example of media capture in Serbia. Taken together, these developments have cemented a pro-government narrative at the expense of independent journalism.

 

In addition to physical threats, independent media also face numerous legal challenges. Investigative platforms such as KRIK are being buried under an avalanche of vexatious lawsuits, both civil and criminal, meaning they are forced to dedicate valuable time and money to defending themselves in court. While the courts have recently thrown out clearly vexatious lawsuits, Serbia continues to be one of the worst countries in Europe for Strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs) and the number of documented cases is on the rise. Plaintiffs are most commonly public officials, politicians, businesspeople and companies. A recent case involving two SLAPP cases initiated against BIRN by the mayor of Belgrade is a prime example.

 

Overall, media freedom in Serbia remains in a poor condition. No one has yet been ultimately found guilty of the murder of a journalist. The climate of threats against journalists is at its worst point in many years. Media pluralism continues to be weak, with the ruling party overseeing a captured media ecosystem. The shared view of our international organisations is that, while important work on effectively prosecuting attacks on journalists has had a positive impact, this progress has been undermined by engrained challenges in ultimately securing justice and the wider climate of hostility towards critical journalism being fostered by political leaders. On balance, these combined factors mean Serbia continues to be held back in its commitments to improve media freedom as part of the EU accession process. We therefore recognise no overall progress since the fact-finding mission of the MFRR in April 2021.

 

This status quo must not continue. It is vital that the international community recognise the seriousness of the current situation for independent journalism in Serbia. In the coming months, our organisations will be giving as many platforms as possible to independent Serbian journalists to share their experiences first hand. International pressure will be central to enacting positive change. We therefore call on the European Union to ensure that media freedom in Serbia is a priority in the context of  the rule of law and democracy. We also urge EU leaders and officials to urgently raise the issue of pressure on journalists by high-ranking politicians during meetings with Serbian officials. Future progress reports on EU accession should fully reflect the seriousness of the situation and outline  for meaningful reforms. International bodies such as the OSCE and the Council of Europe must continue to address these issues head on. The upcoming report by the UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of opinion and expression following her mission to the country should be forceful in its assessment of the situation.

 

Twenty-four years after the murder of Slavko Ćuruvija, the conditions for the safety of journalists in Serbia are alarmingly reminiscent of the period in which he was killed. The upcoming appeal court verdict for the murder will be the most consequential for media freedom and journalism in decades, and will act as a litmus test for the rule of law and democracy more widely. If guilty verdicts are secured, we hope this can act as a catalyst for concrete change moving forward. Our international press freedom and journalists’ organisations will do all we can to support free and independent journalism during this time.

 

  • The challenges facing independent journalism in Serbia will be discussed in an upcoming MFRR webinar on May 3. Register here.

Signed by:

Signed:

  • ARTICLE 19 Europe
  • European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
  • European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
  • International Federation of Journalists (IFJ)
  • International Press Institute (IPI)
  • Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT)
  • Reporters Without Borders (RSF)
  • The Daphne Caruana Galizia Foundation

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 3 consortium logos

Turkey: International groups demand release of Kurdish journalists, lawyers,…

Turkey: International groups demand release of Kurdish journalists, lawyers, political party officials detained in pre-election crackdown

Media freedom, freedom of expression, and human rights organisations call on Turkish authorities to stop the systematic harassment and intimidation of Kurdish journalists, media workers, media outlets, the lawyers that defend them, and Kurdish political party officials, give them access to legal counsel, disclose full details of charges brought and to ensure that they are released from detention. We reiterate the need for a free and pluralistic media atmosphere in the run up to the elections that will be held on 14 May 2023.

 

Available in Turkish here.

On 25 April, coordinated dawn raids in Turkey targeted homes and offices of 126 people including journalists, lawyers, rights defenders, political activists and artists in 21 provinces, based on unclear charges. The state-run Anadolu Agency reported that the Diyarbakır-based operation is related to anti-terror investigations led by Diyarbakır Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office.

 

Among those that have been detained so far are 10 journalists and a lawyer who represents arrested journalists. Technical equipment, computers, books and documents belonging to journalists were also confiscated by the police during the raids. It was also reported that arrest warrants were issued against 216 people and the search continues for other journalists.

 

The detained journalists so far include Mesopotamia News Agency (MA) editor Abdurrahman Gök and reporters Ahmet Kanbal and Mehmet Şah Oruç; editor-in-chief of Yeni Yaşam daily newspaper Osman Akın; the publisher of the only Kurdish print newspaper in Turkey, ​​Xwebûn Weekly, Kadri Esen; JinNews reporter Beritan Canözer; and journalists Mehmet Yalçın, Mikail Barut, Salih Keleş and Remzi Akkaya.

 

Lawyer Resul Temur, who represented imprisoned journalists in Diyarbakır and Ankara after similar raids in June and October 2022 respectively, was also detained in the raids.

 

The Diyarbakır Bar Association announced that the charges against the detained people are still unknown due to a confidentiality order covering the investigation and a 24-hour restriction on access to lawyers for those detained.

 

The raids are taking place in the run up to the parliamentary and presidential elections in Turkey which will be held on 14 May 2023, and represent another step in the systematic harassment and intimidation of Kurdish media and political opposition in the country.

 

Previously in June 2022, a similar raid resulted in 20 journalists in Diyarbakır being initially detained of whom 16 were placed in pre-trial detention on terrorism charges pending a trial that begins on 11 July, 2023. In October 2022, a further 11 Kurdish journalists were detained on terrorism charges in the provinces of Ankara, İstanbul, Van, Diyarbakır, Şanlıurfa, Mersin and Mardin in simultaneous house raids as part of an anti-terror investigation led by the Ankara Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office. Their trial begins on 16 May, 2023.

 

The Mapping Media Freedom database records 27 alerts impacting 91 Kurdish journalists, media workers or outlets over the last 12 months. The alerts primarily consist of legal incidents usually leading to arrest, detention, imprisonment, prosecution and convictions.

 

We call on the authorities to immediately give the detained journalists, lawyers and political activists access to legal counsel, to disclose full details of any charges brought and to ensure that they are released from detention.

Signed by:

  • Articolo 21
  • Coalition For Women In Journalism (CFWIJ)
  • Croatian PEN
  • English PEN
  • European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
  • European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
  • Foreign Media Association (FMA Turkey)
  • Freedom House
  • Human Rights Watch
  • International Federation of Journalists (IFJ)
  • International Press Institute (IPI)
  • Media and Law Studies Association (MLSA)
  • Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT)
  • PEN America
  • PEN Canada
  • PEN International
  • PEN Melbourne
  • PEN Netherlands
  • PEN Norway
  • PEN Québec
  • Platform for Independent Journalism (P24)
  • Reporters Without Borders (RSF)
  • San Miguel PEN
  • Scottish PEN
  • South East Europe Media Organisation (SEEMO)
  • Swedish PEN

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 3 consortium logos

Türkiye: Uluslararası gruplar, seçim öncesi baskınlarda gözaltına alınan Kürt gazeteciler, avukatlar ve siyasi parti yetkililerinin serbest bırakılmasını talep ediyor

 

Medya özgürlüğü, ifade hürriyeti ve insan hakları örgütleri olarak; Kürt gazeteciler, medya çalışanları, medya kuruluşları, onları savunan avukatlar ve Kürt siyasi parti yetkililerine yönelik sistematik taciz ve gözdağı uygulamalarına son verilmesi, bu kişilerin avukata erişiminin sağlanması, kendilerine yöneltilen suçlamaların tüm ayrıntılarının açıklanması ve serbest bırakılmaları yönünde Türkiye yetkililerine çağrıda bulunuyoruz. Bu vesileyle, 14 Mayıs 2023 tarihinde gerçekleştirilecek seçimler öncesinde özgür ve çoğulcu bir medya ortamına duyulan ihtiyacı yineliyoruz.

 

25 Nisan’da Türkiye’nin 20 ilinde aralarında gazeteciler, avukatlar, hak savunucuları, siyasi aktivistler ve sanatçıların da bulunduğu 128 kişinin ev ve ofislerine henüz tam anlamıyla belirlenmeyen suçlamalarla şafak vakti eş zamanlı baskınlar düzenlendi. Devlete ait Anadolu Ajansı, Diyarbakır merkezli operasyonun Diyarbakır Cumhuriyet Başsavcılığı tarafından yürütülen terörle mücadele soruşturmalarıyla ilgili olduğunu bildirdi. Toplam 216 kişi hakkında yakalama kararı çıkarıldığı bildirildi.

 

Şu ana kadar gözaltına alınanlar arasında 10 gazeteci ve tutuklu gazetecileri temsil eden bir avukat da bulunuyor. Baskınlar sırasında gazetecilere ait teknik ekipman, bilgisayar, kitap ve belgelere de polis tarafından el konuldu.

 

Şu ana kadar gözaltına alınan gazeteciler arasında Mezopotamya Ajansı (MA) editörü Abdurrahman Gök ve muhabirleri Ahmet Kanbal ve Mehmet Şah Oruç; Yeni Yaşam gazetesi genel yayın yönetmeni Osman Akın; Türkiye’deki tek Kürtçe basılı gazete olan Xwebûn’un imtiyaz sahibi Kadri Esen, JinNews muhabiri Beritan Canözer ve gazeteciler Mehmet Yalçın, Mikail Barut, Salih Keleş ve Remzi Akkaya bulunuyor. 

 

Haziran ve Ekim 2022’deki benzer baskınların ardından Diyarbakır ve Ankara’da tutuklu gazetecileri temsil eden Avukat Resul Temur da baskınlarda gözaltına alındı. 

 

Diyarbakır Barosu, soruşturmada gizlilik kararı olması ve gözaltına alınanların avukatlarıyla görüşmelerine 24 saat kısıtlama getirilmesi nedeniyle gözaltına alınanlara yöneltilen suçlamaların henüz bilinmediğini açıkladı.

 

Baskınlar, Türkiye’de 14 Mayıs 2023 tarihinde yapılacak olan meclis ve cumhurbaşkanlığı seçimleri öncesinde gerçekleşiyor ve ülkedeki Kürt medyasına ve siyasi muhalefete yönelik sistematik taciz ve gözdağının bir başka adımını temsil ediyor. 

 

Daha önce Haziran 2022‘de benzer bir baskın sonucunda Diyarbakır‘da 20 gazeteci gözaltına alınmış, bunlardan 16’sı 11 Temmuz 2023’te başlayacak olan duruşmaya kadar terör suçlamasıyla tutuklu yargılanmak üzere tutuklanmıştı. Ekim 2022‘de, Ankara Cumhuriyet Başsavcılığı tarafından yürütülen terörle mücadele soruşturması kapsamında Ankara, İstanbul, Van, Diyarbakır, Şanlıurfa, Mersin ve Mardin illerinde yapılan eş zamanlı ev baskınlarında 11 Kürt gazeteci daha terör suçlamasıyla gözaltına alındı. Duruşmaları 16 Mayıs 2023’de başlayacak. 

 

Türkiye’nin, terör suçları da dahil olmak üzere, bağımsız gazetecilere yalnızca gazetecilik faaliyetlerinden dolayı ceza davası açma konusunda uzun bir geçmişi vardır. Mapping Media Freedom veri tabanı, son 12 ay içinde 91 Kürt gazeteci, medya çalışanı veya kuruluşunu etkileyen 27 uyarı kaydetmiştir. Bu uyarılar çoğunlukla tutuklama, gözaltı, hapis cezası, kovuşturma ve mahkumiyetle sonuçlanan yasal vakalardan oluşmaktadır. 

 

Yetkilileri, gözaltındaki gazetecilere, avukatlara ve siyasi aktivistlere derhal avukat erişimi sağlamaya ve yöneltilen suçlamaların tüm ayrıntılarını açıklamaya çağırıyoruz. Görevi kötüye kullandıklarına dair inandırıcı bir kanıt bulunmadığı takdirde, bu kişiler derhal serbest bırakılmalıdır.

Media freedom in Serbia: A deepening crisis

Media freedom in Serbia: A deepening crisis

Media freedom in Serbia: A deepening crisis

03 May, 11:00 CEST.

Independent journalism in Serbia faces one of its deepest crises in years.

 

Media workers regularly face orchestrated smear campaigns, verbal harassment, physical attacks, damage to property, and major pressure from state and non-state actors. Leading political figures are adding fuel to the fire, discrediting journalists and undermining their watchdog role. As well as this, powerful individuals abuse the legal system, filing SLAPPs against independent journalists in order to prevent them from carrying out investigations or exposing corruption and abuses of power. As a result, Serbia remains one of the most dangerous countries in Europe to work as a journalist.

 

To mark World Press Freedom Day on May 3, the MFRR hosted a webinar to take a closer look at the conditions which have allowed this hostile climate for independent media to thrive, and what can be done to address it. The webinar follows a recent mission to Belgrade, joined by MFRR partners, to mark the 24 year anniversary of the murder of leading Serbian editor and publisher Slavko Ćuruvija.

Moderator

Roberta Taveri

Media Freedom Senior Programme Officer/Europe Programme Officer

Speakers

Ivana Stevanovic

Executive Director, Slavko Ćuruvija Foundation

Rade Đurić

Researcher and expert for media law and public procurement, NUNS (Independent Journalists Association of Serbia)

Jelena Zoric

Journalist, BIRN

Greek crime reporter Giorgos Karaivaz, who was killed outside his home in Athens on Friday 9 April, 2021

Greece: Impunity continues two years after murder of journalist…

Greece: Impunity continues two years after murder of journalist Giorgos Karaivaz

Two years ago, veteran Greek crime reporter Giorgos Karaivaz was assassinated in Athens. Today, the undersigned partners in the Council of Europe’s Platform to promote the protection of journalism and safety of journalists honour Karaivaz’s memory.

We also renew our call on the Greek authorities to urgently bring to justice all those responsible for this abhorrent murder and to provide more transparency about the investigation. It is wholly unacceptable and deeply saddening that the case must now be categorised as an instance of impunity for murder, considering there has been no significant progress in investigating or prosecuting this crime for two years.

 

Karaivaz was an experienced reporter who worked for the TV channel STAR and ran a news website focusing on crime and policing. On 9 April 2021, he was gunned down outside his home in broad daylight by two men on a scooter. Following the killing, police said the “professional” style of the assassination indicated the involvement of organised crime.

 

In the immediate aftermath, the Greek authorities promised to prioritise the case and make every effort to swiftly bring the perpetrators and masterminds to justice. Yet to date, no arrests have been made, nor have any suspects been publicly identified, despite the collection of large amounts of data, security camera footage and forensic analysis. The authorities have not announced any substantial progress in the investigation. Information about the status of the investigation is being closely guarded by law enforcement bodies, despite repeated calls for more transparency by media freedom organisations, including several of the Platform’s partners. While we recognise the need to keep certain details of the investigation secret, the lack of communication by state authorities around the criminal probe has led to uncertainty and deepened the chilling effect of the assassination on the journalistic community.

 

Impunity arises from States’ failure to effectively investigate cases of serious human rights violations, which is an obligation with an absolute character under the European Convention on Human Rights. Effectiveness entails that an investigation must be capable of leading to the identification and punishment of those responsible, comprehensive in scope and address all relevant background circumstances. It must also be prompt, impartial and independent, and sufficiently open to public scrutiny to maintain public confidence in the authorities’ adherence to the rule of law and to prevent any appearance of collusion in or tolerance of unlawful acts.

 

Karaivaz’s assassination represents a low point for press freedom in Greece. Every day without progress in the investigation and prosecution further tarnishes the reputation of the authorities responsible. We will continue honouring Giorgos Karaivaz’s memory and pushing for justice for him, his family, friends, and colleagues.

Signed by:

  • ARTICLE 19
  • European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
  • European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
  • 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. 

MFRR 3 consortium logos
Data protection and press freedom Greece

Weaponizing GDPR: How EU data protection threatens press freedom…

Weaponizing GDPR: How EU data protection threatens press freedom in Greece

The instrumental use of EU data protection threatens press freedom in Greece, as shown by the case of journalist Stavroula Poulimeni and the independent media outlet Alterthess, sentenced in the first instance to pay compensation of 3,000 euros to Efstathios Lialos, executive of the Hellas Gold gold mine.

Originally published by OBCT, also available in ITA

At the end of March, journalist Stavroula Poulimeni and the independent media outlet Alterthess were ordered in first instance to pay compensation of EUR 3,000 to Greek gold mine (Hellas Gold) executive Efstathios Lialos.

According to the ruling, Poulimeni violated the executive’s privacy by writing his name and position in a 2020 article about Lialos’s conviction for environmental pollution in Halkidiki, northern Greece.

The sum is considerably less than the EUR 100,000 requested by Lialos, but at stake, according to Poulimeni, is a question of journalistic freedom. In a statement, Alterthess referred to the verdict as a ‘blow to press freedom’, and expressed the intention to appeal against the court’s decision. ‘Personal #DataProtection doesn’t justify suppressing info vital to public interest’, Reporters Without Borders stated in a tweet.

In the interview that follows, Poulimeni spoke to OBC Transeuropa about her experience as an independent journalist in crisis-ravaged Greece and her reporting on environment degradation in Halkidiki, and explained why the verdict against her threatens the right of the public to be informed.

OBC Transeuropa: What is the professional path that led you to co-found the independent news outlet Alterthess in the middle of the economic crisis? 

I’ve been a journalist since 2008. In 2011, with a group of people – not only journalists – we decided to establish an investigative, independent and collaborative media project in Thessaloniki. We called it Alterthess, because it told stories from an ‘alternative’ Thessaloniki. We cover grassroots initiatives, social issues, human rights, migration, the rights of the  LGBTQIA+ community, and we are outspoken against racism.

When we started, the economic crisis was in full swing, Greece had entered the first ‘Memorandum’ and the European ‘Troika’ had been established in the country. A lot of protests and demonstrations were taking place against austerity measures, but the mainstream media lacked independent analysis. We decided to try and fill this gap, and invested all our energies into Alterthess. The outlet is well connected with local movements and groups, but it’s hard to survive financially. We are trying to gather support from our readers, as we don’t have state funding to rely on.

 

How did you grow interested in environmental issues, and when did you start reporting on the mining project in Skouries? 

I have been covering environmental topics for twelve years now. There are many stories to be told, especially since the wave of privatisations invested public resources such as water, forests, etc.

Alterthess reported on the mining project – and the struggle against it – from the very start. I have been to Skouries many times. There are no trees now, and mining infrastructure has been built. But for many years, protests have been taking place against the project, facing state suppression, police attacks and legal battles. We covered the story from different angles – economical, social, psychological, and, of course, environmental – and we are deeply connected to the local protest movement, even though in the last years it has grown progressively weaker.

 

You and Alterthess were the target of a vexatious lawsuit connected to your work in Skouries. How did it happen? 

On 27 October 2020, two high-ranking executives of Hellas Gold [The company, owned by Canadian Eldorado Gold, which is working on mining development in Skouries], were convicted in the first instance on water pollution charges. On the same day, I wrote an article about it in Alterthess, and nothing happened.

One year later, in September 2021, the conviction was confirmed, and I wrote about it again. The following month, after the second conviction, a lawsuit initiated by Efstathios Lialos, one of the two executives, was notified to us. The lawsuit referred to the article I had written in 2020, after the first conviction, and was based on an alleged violation of GDPR, the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation: in my article, I had reported the convicted executives’ names.

 

What was your first reaction when you received the lawsuit?

In a way, I was surprised. Firstly, my article dated back to the previous year; secondly, it did not include any false information, nor did it contain any comment. It merely reported what had happened in court; thirdly, the lawsuit did not require us to take down the article, but asked me and Alterthess to pay EUR 100,000 as compensation for illegal processing of personal data related to a criminal conviction.

On the other hand, what happened was not completely unexpected. While the lawsuit against us came from an individual, we knew that companies use legal threats to silence critical reporting. In Greece, private actors usually resort to advertising as a tool to obtain favourable coverage or not be subjected to journalistic scrutiny. When this is not enough, they resort to legal threats.

 

What were the consequences of the lawsuit on your job and personal life? 

Facing a SLAPP is extremely draining. You have to deal with legal matters on a daily basis, and this has both a psychological and an economic impact. For a long time, you cannot be completely focused on your work. We received the lawsuit in October 2021, and the discussion in court only took place in May 2022. For months, we have been waiting and preparing for the trial. During the time we were waiting for the verdict, we felt a lot of anxiety.

We tried not to be discouraged, and started to publish several articles on the subject of SLAPPs and intimidation of journalists. This is more than just a personal matter: SLAPPs have consequences on public interest reporting in general, because in the future, journalists might be afraid of writing about certain issues.

 

What has been the reaction of fellow journalists and institutions to the lawsuit against you? Have you received support and solidarity from society at large?

When we received the lawsuit, we didn’t know what a SLAPP was, and neither did Greek journalists’ unions. Only later, when we started spreading the word about the issue, we found out that other journalists had been targets of such lawsuits too. International organisations such as the International Press Institute (IPI), Amnesty International and the European Centre for Press & Media Freedom (ECPMF) had more experience; they issued announcements and supported us from the very first day.

As for institutions, our case was raised in the European Parliament by SYRIZA MP Kostas Arvanitis, and there were statements and parliamentary questions in the Greek Parliament as well. However, it was the solidarity of common people and grassroots movements in Skouries and elsewhere that showed us that people recognized the importance of our public interest reporting.

The Greek mainstream media, on the contrary, did not support us much, and this is a problem. As said, I think there is a problem of financial interests exerting control on the media narrative.

 

The first instance verdict partly upheld Lialos’s complaint that his privacy had been unfairly violated. What are the implications of this ruling? 

Our case is quite unusual because it has to do with data protection. If confirmed, a ruling against us could trigger a new wave of prosecutions weaponizing GDPR regulations to inhibit public interest journalism and its ability to call things – and people – by their names. The true stake is not the money we are being asked to pay, but the right of the public to be informed.

 

You hinted at systemic problems in the Greek media landscape. How has the situation evolved over the last few years, and how do SLAPPs fit into the wider picture of declining press freedom in Greece?

The problem of press freedom in Greece has deep roots. It is a complex issue, which also has to do with the economic situation: many media outlets were shut down during the crisis, fellow journalists were laid off, and still today most media workers struggle to make ends meet.

In many respects, things have gotten worse in recent years, not only because of SLAPPs. It is a widespread perception among journalists that private and government actors can more often and easily attack press freedom compared to a few years ago.

The wiretapping scandal has uncovered a worrying surveillance network, but also part of the picture are the frequent police attacks on journalists and photojournalists at demonstrations, and the character assassination on social media, especially against colleagues who cover migration issues and are portrayed as “foreign agents”.

The good news, and hopefully also a turning point, is that the debate on press freedom in Greece has finally opened.

This interview 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. 

MFRR 3 consortium logos
Greek journalist Stavroula Poulimeni, of the cooperative and independent media outlet Alterthess. Photo credit: Konstantinos Tsakalidis

Greece: MFRR to fund legal appeal for lawsuit against…

Greece: MFRR to fund legal appeal for lawsuit against Alterthess

The partner organisations of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) today express dismay over the recent court ruling involving a SLAPP lawsuit against independent Greek media outlet Alterthess and one of its journalists, Stavroula Poulimeni. Using the MFRR Legal Support fund, our consortium will help provide funding to cover legal fees for their appeal.

In early 2023, a court in Athens partially accepted the civil lawsuit filed by the former high-ranking executive of a gold mining company, Hellas Gold, and ordered the cooperative media outlet to pay a total of €3,000 in damages to the plaintiff.

 

As previously reported, the lawsuit stemmed from a court report that Poulimeni had published in October 2020 regarding the first-instance criminal conviction of two executives from Hellas Gold over the company’s alleged pollution of water sources in North Halkidiki. Following a first appeal, the convictions were initially confirmed at the Appeal Court in September 2021, as Alterthess reported at the time.

 

A month later in October 2021, one of the executives, Efstathios Lialios, filed a lawsuit based partly on the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) regulation which demanded €100,000 in compensation, arguing that the journalist had defamed him and illegally violated his private data by publishing his full name and position when reporting the first-instance conviction. After a second appeal, both executives’ convictions were then overturned by a higher court in May 2022, as Alterthess also reported at the time.

 

In 2023, the Court of First Instance in Athens dismissed Lialios’ defamation allegation but sided with the plaintiff on the GDPR claim, awarding compensation for “moral damage”. While the damages were significantly lower than the €100,000 originally demanded, we believe the implications of this ruling go far beyond money and touch upon principles fundamental to media freedom.

 

Firstly, in convicting a journalist for reporting details about a first-instance criminal conviction, the court’s verdict undermines the principles of both open justice and court reporting. The trial in question was held in open session, without reporting restrictions, and the first-instance verdict was publicly announced in court. Reporting news about the conviction, including the individuals’ names and positions, is standard journalistic practice across the world. The conclusion of the judge that the journalist should have sought the individual’s consent for his name and position when this conviction is reported to be published is entirely unjustifiable.

 

Moreover, citizens living in Halkidiki and northern Greece have a right to receive timely information about individuals found guilty in the first-instance, especially when it involves a matter of serious public interest such as the pollution of water in their local area. The right of the media to publish such information therefore clearly outweighs a convicted individual’s expectation of privacy. While the executives’ guilty verdicts may later have been overturned on appeal, at that moment in October 2020 it was clearly in the public interest to report the first stage of the judicial process.

 

In ruling the other way, this judgment sets a dangerous legal precedent. As Poulimeni has rightly warned, if this verdict stands it could trigger a wave of similar lawsuits based on GDPR regulations to muzzle public interest media reporting and keep certain information secret. This ruling therefore risks encouraging other powerful individuals or companies to weaponise GDPR regulations to try and keep certain information or names out of the public domain. We believe this verdict therefore poses a threat to press freedom in Greece, which is already under considerable strain.

 

Through our Legal Support Fund, the MFRR organisations have therefore decided to provide funding to cover the legal fees required to challenge this verdict at the Court of Appeal in Athens. Moving forward, we hope the court will recognise the principles at stake here and ultimately overturn out this worrying first-instance verdict. Ensuring a just outcome will be important not just for Alterthess and Stavroula Poulimeni, but for all journalists carrying out similar watchdog reporting in Greece.

Signed by:

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

MFRR 3 consortium logos
RTUK Turkey Elections

Turkey: Broadcast regulator must stop punishing critical reporting ahead…

Turkey: Broadcast regulator must stop punishing critical reporting ahead of elections

The partners of the MFRR have joined 20 press freedom, freedom of expression and human rights organisations to call on Turkey’s broadcast regulator (RTÜK) to immediately stop fining broadcasters for their critical reporting. Journalists and broadcasters must be allowed to do their jobs of informing the public over critical issues and holding the government to account.

 

Available in Turkish here.

Instead of upholding freedom of expression and media pluralism in the country, RTÜK is being weaponised by the governing parties to silence legitimate criticism and provide them with an unfair advantage in the May 2023 elections. This suppression of public debate is undermining the electoral process.

 

On April 5, 2023, İlhan Taşcı, a CHP-nominated member of the Radio and Television High Council (RTÜK), reported on Twitter that RTÜK had once again fined several news channels over critical content.

 

FOX TV was fined three percent of its monthly ad revenue after news anchor Gülbin Tosun criticized the government’s approach to women’s rights by saying “the ruling alliance does not want you to work or study, but to have babies and stay at home” during a live broadcast. Tosun had been targeted by members of the ruling AKP party, following her comments.

 

RTÜK imposed the same penalty on Halk TV for “preventing the free formation of opinion” after a presenter and her guest cited a news article claiming that Turkey’s Disaster Management Authority (AFAD) had charged earthquake survivors to hire out its machinery to help rescue their relatives from the rubble.

 

TELE1 was also fined three percent of its monthly ad revenue for “humiliating a municipality” after the hosts of “18 Dakika” program criticized the AKP-ruled Şanlıurfa Municipality and cited allegations that the municipality had transferred funds, provided by foreign governments to Turkey, to the Taliban in Afghanistan.

 

These fines come on the back of a series of penalties already issued in February 2023 imposed on Halk TV, TELE1, and FOX TV and in March 2023 against Halk TV, TELE1, FOX TV, Show TV, and Yıldız EN TV. RTÜK also imposed temporary bans on numerous programs because of their critical coverage.

 

In 2022 RTÜK issued 54 penalties to five independent broadcasters totalling 17.335.000 Turkish Lira (approximately 823.000 Euros) of fines. By contrast, pro-government channels received a total of four penalties totalling 1.674.000 TL (approximately 80.000 Euros).

 

The government’s censorship is not limited to domestic news channels as, earlier in March 2023, the Ministry of Industry and Technology did not renew the operating license of German broadcaster Deutsche Welle’s (DW) Turkish service after it was blocked in June 2022 at the request of RTÜK. DW is no longer able to operate in Turkey as a legal entity, forcing its reporters and editors to continue working as freelancers, deprived of stable work contracts and social security benefits.

 

We view these incidents as part of the Turkish government’s systematic attempt to stifle critical reporting and to control the information flow ahead of Turkey’s presidential and parliamentary elections on May 14, 2023.

 

We call on the Turkish broadcast regulator, RTÜK, to immediately end the persecution of independent broadcasters and act according to its mandate to secure freedom of expression and media pluralism in the country.

Signed by:

  • Association of European Journalists
  • ARTICLE 19
  • Articolo 21
  • Coalition For Women In Journalism (CFWIJ)
  • Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ)
  • Danish PEN
  • English PEN
  • European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
  • European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
  • Freedom House
  • International Federation of Journalists (IFJ)
  • International Press Institute (IPI)
  • Media and Law Studies Association (MLSA)
  • OBC Transeuropa (OBCT)
  • PEN International
  • Platform for Independent Journalism (P24)
  • Reporters Without Borders (RSF)
  • South East Europe Media Organisation (SEEMO)
  • Swedish PEN
  • World Association of News Publishers (WAN-IFRA)

Türkiye: Uluslararası gruplar, seçim öncesinde eleştirel haberlerin cezalandırılması nedeniyle RTÜK’ü kınadı

 

Medyanın baskı altına alınması toplumun bilgiye erişimini engellemekte ve seçim sürecinin meşruiyetini zayıflatmaktadır 

 

Uluslararası Basın Enstitüsü (IPI) ve 19 medya özgürlüğü, ifade hürriyeti ve insan hakları alanında faaliyet gösteren örgütler, Türkiye’nin yayın düzenleyici kurumu Radyo ve Televizyon Üst Kurulu’na (RTÜK), eleştirel haberlerinden dolayı yayıncılara para cezası vermeyi derhal durdurması çağrısında bulunmaktadır. Gazetecilerin ve yayıncıların eleştirel konularda kamuoyunu bilgilendirme ve hükümetten hesap sorma yükümlülüklerini yerine getirmelerine izin verilmelidir. 

 

RTÜK, ülkede ifade hürriyeti ve medya çoğulculuğunu desteklemek yerine, meşru eleştirileri susturmak ve 14 Mayıs 2023 seçimlerinde kendilerine haksız bir avantaj sağlamak için iktidar ittifakı tarafından bir araç olarak kullanılıyor. Kamusal tartışmanın bu şekilde bastırılması seçim sürecini baltalamaktadır.

 

Radyo ve Televizyon Üst Kurulu’nun (RTÜK) CHP’li üyesi İlhan Taşçı, 5 Nisan 2023 tarihinde Twitter‘da RTÜK’ün eleştirel içerikler nedeniyle bazı haber kanallarına bir kez daha ceza verdiğini bildirdi.

 

FOX TV, haber sunucusu Gülbin Tosun’un canlı yayında “iktidar ittifakı çalışmanızı, okumanızı değil, çocuk doğurup evde oturmanızı istiyor” diyerek hükümetin kadın haklarına yaklaşımını eleştirmesinin ardından aylık reklam gelirinin yüzde üçü oranında para cezasına çarptırıldı. Tosun, yorumlarının ardından iktidardaki AKP üyeleri tarafından hedef gösterilmişti.

 

RTÜK, bir sunucu ve konuğunun, Afet ve Acil Durum Yönetimi Başkanlığı’nın (AFAD) depremzedelerden yakınlarını enkaz altından kurtarmak için iş makinelerini kiraladığını iddia eden bir habere atıfta bulunmasının ardından Halk TV’ye de “kanaatlerin serbestçe oluşmasını engellediği” gerekçesiyle aynı cezayı verdi.

 

TELE1 ayrıca, “18 Dakika” programının sunucularının AKP’li Şanlıurfa Belediyesi’ni eleştirmesi ve belediyenin yabancı hükümetler tarafından deprem yardımı için Türkiye’ye sağlanan fonları Afganistan’daki Taliban’a aktardığı iddialarını dile getirmesi üzerine “belediyeyi küçük düşürmek” suçundan aylık reklam gelirinin yüzde üçü oranında para cezasına çarptırıldı.

 

Bu cezalar, Şubat 2023’te Halk TV, TELE1 ve FOX TV’ye ve Mart 2023’te Halk TV, TELE1, FOX TV, Show TV ve Yıldız EN TV’ye verilen bir dizi cezanın ardından geldi. RTÜK ayrıca, eleştirel yayınları nedeniyle çok sayıda programa geçici yasaklar getirmiştir.

 

RTÜK 2022 yılında beş bağımsız yayıncıya toplam 17.335.000 Türk Lirası (yaklaşık 823.000 Avro) para cezası olmak üzere 54 ayrı ceza vermiştir. Buna karşılık, iktidara yakın kanallara toplamda 1.674.000 TL (yaklaşık 80.000 Avro) tutarında dört ceza almıştır.

 

İktidar sansürü yerel haber kanallarıyla sınırlı değil; Sanayi ve Teknoloji Bakanlığı, RTÜK’ün talebi üzerine Haziran 2022’de yayını engellenen Alman yayın kuruluşu Deutsche Welle’nin (DW) Türkçe servisinin lisansını Mart 2023’te yenilemedi. DW artık Türkiye’de tüzel kişilik olarak faaliyet gösteremeyecek ve muhabirleri ile editörleri, istikrarlı iş sözleşmelerinden ve sosyal güvenlik yardımlarından mahrum olarak serbest çalışmaya devam etmek zorunda kalacak.

 

Bu olayları, Türkiye’de 14 Mayıs 2023 tarihinde yapılacak cumhurbaşkanlığı ve milletvekili seçimleri öncesinde, iktidarın eleştirel haberciliği engellemeye ve bilgi akışını kontrol etmeye yönelik sistematik girişiminin bir parçası olarak görüyoruz.

 

Yayın düzenleyici rolünü yürüten RTÜK’ü, bağımsız yayıncılara yönelik baskıya derhal son vermeye ve ülkede ifade hürriyeti ve medya çoğulculuğunu güvence altına alma vazifesine uygun davranmaya çağırıyoruz.

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 3 consortium logos
Slavko Ćuruvija. Photo by Slavko Ćuruvija Foundation / Predrag Mitić

Serbia: Press freedom groups mark anniversary of Slavko Ćuruvija…

Press freedom groups visit Serbia to mark Slavko Ćuruvija murder anniversary

The MFRR (Media Freedom Rapid Response) partners, alongside other international press freedom organisations, are currently in Belgrade to mark the 24th anniversary of the murder of Serbian editor and publisher Slavko Ćuruvija. Their visit aims to renew calls for justice and draw attention to the unsafe conditions that journalists face in Serbia today.

To mark the twenty-fourth anniversary of the murder of Serbian editor and publisher Slavko Ćuruvija, international press freedom organisations are today visiting Belgrade to renew our calls for justice and issue fresh warnings about the current climate for the safety of journalists.

 

The mission to Belgrade comes 24 years after Ćuruvija was shot dead in cold blood outside his apartment on 11 April 1999, and a matter of weeks after the final hearings began in the retrial of four state security officials accused of planning and executing his assassination. With justice almost within reach, this year’s anniversary offers a timely opportunity to consider the past, the present and the future.

 

First and foremost, our organisations today pay our respects to the work and life of Slavko Ćuruvija, who was killed for upholding the highest of journalistic values: the unwavering quest to hold power to account through fiercely independent reporting. Despite repeated attempts by the Milošević regime to shut down his newspapers, the journalist refused to be cowed into silence and paid the ultimate price for his bravery.

 

Secondly, we will stand in solidarity with his loved ones, former colleagues, and all those who continue the more than two-decade fight to ensure those responsible for this crime cannot act with impunity. This includes journalist and media associations, the Commission to Investigate the Murder of Journalists and the Slavko Ćuruvija Foundation – whose tireless efforts have been so crucial for the slow push towards accountability.

 

Thirdly, we will renew our hopes for the upcoming ruling, which will either confirm or dismiss the two previous guilty verdicts. The Court of Appeal’s ruling will be the most consequential for media freedom and journalism in Serbia’s modern history, and will act as a litmus test for the rule of law and democracy more widely.

 

Fourthly, we will meet editors, civil society groups and the government’s Working Group to review the current situation regarding the safety of journalists in Serbia. Our visit comes amidst a spate of recent death threats and pressure, which reflect a wider toxic climate for independent and investigative journalism. It is alarming that leading journalists are still receiving death threats and being branded with the same dangerous labels of “traitors” and “foreign mercenaries” that were used to lay the groundwork for Ćuruvija’s assassination. 

 

This hostility against the press has been emboldened by the behavior of high-level political figures, who continue to demonstrate little will to condemn attacks against journalists and in many cases initiate verbal attacks themselves. In addition, Serbia provides one of the most fertile grounds in Europe for abusive lawsuits against public watchdogs. A handful of public officials routinely sue journalists over their critical reporting – including filing multiple cases for the same publication. 

 

While some progress in punishing crimes against journalists has been achieved in recent months and the authorities appear to prosecute new attacks on journalists with greater efficiency, Serbia remains one of the most dangerous places to work as a journalist in Europe. Looking ahead, we will renew our calls to the current government and state authorities to uphold their international commitments to protect journalists’ safety now to ensure that such an appalling crime can never be committed again in the future.

 

Almost a quarter of a century after Curuvija’s murder, the pending appeal verdict represents a moment of possible transition for media freedom in Serbia. So much will depend on the upcoming verdict and political will to turn this possible legal milestone into a catalyst for meaningful change. As we honour Curuvija and the principles he fought to uphold, our organisations hope that in the coming months the vicious cycle of impunity for the murder of journalists in Serbia will be broken, and that justice will, finally, be secured.

Signed by:

  • ARTICLE 19 Europe
  • European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
  • European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
  • International Federation of Journalists (IFJ)
  • International Press Institute (IPI)
  • Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa
  • Reporters Without Borders (RSF)
  • The Daphne Caruana Galizia Foundation
  • Safejournalists Network
READ MORE

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, Candidate Countries and Ukraine.

MFRR 3 consortium logos