Greece: The government must not cover up “Greek Watergate”

Greece: The government must not cover up “Greek Watergate”

By The Manifold, an investigative media outlet covering Greece

Despite mounting pressure, the Greek government is still refusing to provide substantive answers regarding the revelations that two journalists and an MEP and leader of an opposition party have been targeted for surveillance by EYP (the Greek Intelligence Service), as well as by yet unknown operators using the spyware “Predator”.

The affair concerns two distinct operations. The first is EYP’s spying on two journalists, Stavros Malichoudis, a reporter with independent outlet Solomon, and Thanasis Koukakis, a freelance journalist investigating banking and business stories; and also Nikos Androulakis, an MEP and leader of opposition party PASOK. These surveillance operations were carried out through EYP’s “normal” procedure for listening in on a target’s communications, following approval by a prosecutor. The second was the hacking of Koukakis’s and Androulakis’s mobile phones with Predator, a spyware tool that is able to access even encrypted services.

 

Although the surveillance of journalists and political opponents by state services hardly seems like the hallmark of democratic governance, the first procedure can be legal, not only for “national security” reasons, but also in cases of serious crime like drug smuggling or human trafficking. The legal framework in Greece, however, lacks any provision for technically supervising the use of spyware, which in practice makes it illegal.

 

No conclusive link between the two operations has been proven — yet. The fact, though, that they took place one right after the other (in the case of Koukakis) or simultaneously (in the case of Androulakis) raises reasonable suspicions that they are related. Further suspicions about both the use of spyware and the ostensibly legal procedure used against two journalists and a politician are raised not only by the Greek government’s handling of the affair, but also a number of key decisions it has made in the last three years.

 

Legislating against transparency

Soon after being elected in July 2019, the New Democracy government implemented new legislation in two crucial areas regarding the intelligence service: first, it brought it under the direct purview of the office of the prime minister, Kyriakos Mitsotakis; second, it amended the required qualifications for the position of director of intelligence, so it could appoint the prime minister’s favourite, Panayiotis Kontoleon, who fell short of the previous criteria.

 

Less than two years later, in March 2021, it made another controversial move: it introduced a rushed legislative amendment, piggybacked on unrelated legislation, that changed the provisions which allowed citizens to be informed whether they had been under surveillance (provided such surveillance had been terminated), if their surveillance had taken place for reasons of “national security”. In other words, up to that point, ADAE (the Hellenic Authority for Communication Security and Privacy) could, following permission from a prosecutor, inform a citizen who requested it that they had been under surveillance in the past, which meant that there was at least a theoretical possibility to seek redress in the courts, if one believed they had been targeted unfairly. Since the law changed, it is sufficient for EYP to claim reasons of “national security” and ADAE cannot divulge anything. What is more, the law applies retroactively, so all past surveillance is now effectively beyond scrutiny.

 

Members of the ADAE board, albeit in a non-official capacity, had protested at the time and had pointed out that such legislation contravenes the European Convention of Human Rights, as it practically deprives victims of illegal surveillance of access to due process. There is no indication that the government even considered their protests.

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.

From migrants’ rights to Predator

In November 2021, Efimerida ton Syntakton, a prominent left-wing daily, published a report which revealed that EYP had targeted numerous individuals for surveillance, apparently without legitimate reason. Among them, there were participants in anti-vaccination rallies, but also a civil servant who supported migrant workers’ rights, a lawyer who defended an immigrant in court, and a journalist who was trying to locate an unaccompanied minor in a refugee camp.

 

When Stavros Malichoudis, the journalist in question, recognised himself in the report, Solomon, the independent website where he works, published a scathing article, asking: “In which system of government does the state record the movements of journalists?” No justification for the surveillance was ever made public.

 

In December 2021, in a seemingly unrelated development, two reports, one by Citizen Lab of the University of Toronto and one by Meta (Facebook’s parent company), pointed out the threat of Predator, a new spyware developed by so-called “cyber-mercenaries” of the global surveillance-for-hire industry. Predator closely resembles Pegasus, a similar spyware tool implicated in illegal hackings across the world since 2016.

 

The reports did not exactly rock the Greek mainstream media’s news cycle. However, one independent, investigative website, Inside Story, picked up on the fact that the reports mentioned the possibility of Predator “customers” in Greece. It followed up on the reports and published a story showing that a corporate structure had been established in Greece to market Predator, and also most disquietingly that dozens of fake urls had been created to resemble existent Greek webpages, in an apparent phishing set-up for potential Predator targets. Despite the obvious implications for the security of communications, there was no official response from competent authorities.

 

A private citizens’ affair

Inside Story’s next feature, however, in April 2022,  launched the torrent of revelations that have been termed the “Greek Watergate” — a title repeated by no less an authority on the matter than The Washington Post. It showed that investigative journalist Thanasis Koukakis’s phone, analysed by Citizen Lab, had been hacked with Predator, the first such confirmed case in Europe. It also showed that Koukakis, alerted by a source that his communications might have been monitored, had submitted a request to ADAE to be informed if he had been a surveillance target in the past. ADAE replied that “no event that contravenes relevant legislation has been noted”. Inside Story pointed out that the “relevant legislation”, which could have compelled ADAE to inform Koukakis of his surveillance, had been hastily amended.

 

The publication provoked the first reaction from the government, which amounted to no more than a dismissal: the government spokesman Yiannis Oikonomou simply said there should be an investigation if “one private citizen had another private citizen under surveillance”.

 

The “private citizen” argument, though, was immediately questioned when, a few days after Inside Story, another independent investigative website, Reporters United, published a report that proved that EYP had Koukakis under surveillance, citing “national security”, under its “normal” procedure, for three months in 2020. EYP broke off the surveillance on the very day that Koukakis filed his request with ADAE. His phone was hacked with Predator immediately after that.

 

The government neither confirmed nor denied the “normal” surveillance of Koukakis by EYP, following the same pattern it had established a year earlier with Malichoudis, but it continued to deny any involvement with Predator. Moreover, EAD (the National Transparency Authority, created by the New Democracy government), which had been tasked with investigating Koukakis’s phone hacking, issued a report absolving the government of any wrongdoing, although it failed to even consider important evidence. This is not the only time that EAD has been criticised for incomplete and pro-government investigations. Its report on illegal pushbacks of refugees had met with international ridicule when it found no wrongdoing by the Greek authorities, based solely on the testimony of the police and coastguard.

 

Denials and resignations

Barely a few days after EAD had cleared the government, Nikos Androulakis revealed that according to the EU Parliament’s security experts, there had been an attempt to hack his phone with Predator. Under pressure for answers, EYP revealed in July that it had been spying on him under its “normal” procedure, for reasons of “national security”, during the time he was a candidate for PASOK’s leadership. This surveillance had taken place simultaneously with the attempted Predator attack.

 

Meanwhile, the two independent outlets, Inside Story and Reporters United, had persisted with their investigations, and through a series of stories had established that EYP and the Greek police services had been in the market for spyware in the past, and that Intellexa, the company that markets Predator, was active in Greece and was indirectly connected, through a web of corporate entities, with government contracts. The more recent of these reports, by Reporters United, also published in Efimerida ton Syntakton, indirectly tied some of these corporate entities to Grigoris Dimitriadis, the general secretary of the Prime Minister’s office.

 

Initially, Dimitriadis had defended his business activities as legal, and had denied any involvement with Predator or related corporate entities. After a few days, though, under the weight of the revelations, both Grigoris Dimitriadis and Panayiotis Kontoleon, the director of EYP, submitted their resignations. Dimitriadis, however, followed his resignation with lawsuits against Reporters United, Efimerida ton Syntakton and Thanasis Koukakis, demanding exorbitant sums for alleged defamation.

 

It is worth noting that during the four months since Inside Story’s revelation that Koukakis’s phone had been hacked with Predator, there has barely been a mention of the affair in Greek mainstream media, whose overwhelming pro-government bias we have analysed in a previous article. It has only been since Androulakis made the attempted Predator attack on his phone public that most mainstream media saw fit to cover the scandal to a limited degree — presumably because he is a centrist politician rather than an independent journalist.

Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis. Image via Shutterstock/Alexandros Michailidis

Greece: The government must not cover up “Greek Watergate”

Greece: The government must not cover up “Greek Watergate”

Revelations about wiretapping and spyware surveillance of journalists underscore press freedom concerns.

 

By The Manifold, an investigative media outlet covering Greece

Despite mounting pressure, the Greek government is still refusing to provide substantive answers regarding the revelations that two journalists and an MEP and leader of an opposition party have been targeted for surveillance by EYP (the Greek Intelligence Service), as well as by yet unknown operators using the spyware “Predator”.

The affair concerns two distinct operations. The first is EYP’s spying on two journalists, Stavros Malichoudis, a reporter with independent outlet Solomon, and Thanasis Koukakis, a freelance journalist investigating banking and business stories; and also Nikos Androulakis, an MEP and leader of opposition party PASOK. These surveillance operations were carried out through EYP’s “normal” procedure for listening in on a target’s communications, following approval by a prosecutor. The second was the hacking of Koukakis’s and Androulakis’s mobile phones with Predator, a spyware tool that is able to access even encrypted services.

Although the surveillance of journalists and political opponents by state services hardly seems like the hallmark of democratic governance, the first procedure can be legal, not only for “national security” reasons, but also in cases of serious crime like drug smuggling or human trafficking. The legal framework in Greece, however, lacks any provision for technically supervising the use of spyware, which in practice makes it illegal.

No conclusive link between the two operations has been proven — yet. The fact, though, that they took place one right after the other (in the case of Koukakis) or simultaneously (in the case of Androulakis) raises reasonable suspicions that they are related. Further suspicions about both the use of spyware and the ostensibly legal procedure used against two journalists and a politician are raised not only by the Greek government’s handling of the affair, but also a number of key decisions it has made in the last three years.

Legislating against transparency

Soon after being elected in July 2019, the New Democracy government implemented new legislation in two crucial areas regarding the intelligence service: first, it brought it under the direct purview of the office of the prime minister, Kyriakos Mitsotakis; second, it amended the required qualifications for the position of director of intelligence, so it could appoint the prime minister’s favourite, Panayiotis Kontoleon, who fell short of the previous criteria.

Less than two years later, in March 2021, it made another controversial move: it introduced a rushed legislative amendment, piggybacked on unrelated legislation, that changed the provisions which allowed citizens to be informed whether they had been under surveillance (provided such surveillance had been terminated), if their surveillance had taken place for reasons of “national security”. In other words, up to that point, ADAE (the Hellenic Authority for Communication Security and Privacy) could, following permission from a prosecutor, inform a citizen who requested it that they had been under surveillance in the past, which meant that there was at least a theoretical possibility to seek redress in the courts, if one believed they had been targeted unfairly. Since the law changed, it is sufficient for EYP to claim reasons of “national security” and ADAE cannot divulge anything. What is more, the law applies retroactively, so all past surveillance is now effectively beyond scrutiny.

Members of the ADAE board, albeit in a non-official capacity, had protested at the time and had pointed out that such legislation contravenes the European Convention of Human Rights, as it practically deprives victims of illegal surveillance of access to due process. There is no indication that the government even considered their protests.

From migrants’ rights to Predator

In November 2021, Efimerida ton Syntakton, a prominent left-wing daily, published a report which revealed that EYP had targeted numerous individuals for surveillance, apparently without legitimate reason. Among them, there were participants in anti-vaccination rallies, but also a civil servant who supported migrant workers’ rights, a lawyer who defended an immigrant in court, and a journalist who was trying to locate an unaccompanied minor in a refugee camp.

When Stavros Malichoudis, the journalist in question, recognised himself in the report, Solomon, the independent website where he works, published a scathing article, asking: “In which system of government does the state record the movements of journalists?” No justification for the surveillance was ever made public.

In December 2021, in a seemingly unrelated development, two reports, one by Citizen Lab of the University of Toronto and one by Meta (Facebook’s parent company), pointed out the threat of Predator, a new spyware developed by so-called “cyber-mercenaries” of the global surveillance-for-hire industry. Predator closely resembles Pegasus, a similar spyware tool implicated in illegal hackings across the world since 2016.

The reports did not exactly rock the Greek mainstream media’s news cycle. However, one independent, investigative website, Inside Story, picked up on the fact that the reports mentioned the possibility of Predator “customers” in Greece. It followed up on the reports and published a story showing that a corporate structure had been established in Greece to market Predator, and also most disquietingly that dozens of fake urls had been created to resemble existent Greek webpages, in an apparent phishing set-up for potential Predator targets. Despite the obvious implications for the security of communications, there was no official response from competent authorities.

A private citizens’ affair

Inside Story’s next feature, however, in April 2022,  launched the torrent of revelations that have been termed the “Greek Watergate” — a title repeated by no less an authority on the matter than The Washington Post. It showed that investigative journalist Thanasis Koukakis’s phone, analysed by Citizen Lab, had been hacked with Predator, the first such confirmed case in Europe. It also showed that Koukakis, alerted by a source that his communications might have been monitored, had submitted a request to ADAE to be informed if he had been a surveillance target in the past. ADAE replied that “no event that contravenes relevant legislation has been noted”. Inside Story pointed out that the “relevant legislation”, which could have compelled ADAE to inform Koukakis of his surveillance, had been hastily amended.

The publication provoked the first reaction from the government, which amounted to no more than a dismissal: the government spokesman Yiannis Oikonomou simply said there should be an investigation if “one private citizen had another private citizen under surveillance”.

The “private citizen” argument, though, was immediately questioned when, a few days after Inside Story, another independent investigative website, Reporters United, published a report that proved that EYP had Koukakis under surveillance, citing “national security”, under its “normal” procedure, for three months in 2020. EYP broke off the surveillance on the very day that Koukakis filed his request with ADAE. His phone was hacked with Predator immediately after that.

The government neither confirmed nor denied the “normal” surveillance of Koukakis by EYP, following the same pattern it had established a year earlier with Malichoudis, but it continued to deny any involvement with Predator. Moreover, EAD (the National Transparency Authority, created by the New Democracy government), which had been tasked with investigating Koukakis’s phone hacking, issued a report absolving the government of any wrongdoing, although it failed to even consider important evidence. This is not the only time that EAD has been criticised for incomplete and pro-government investigations. Its report on illegal pushbacks of refugees had met with international ridicule when it found no wrongdoing by the Greek authorities, based solely on the testimony of the police and coastguard.

Denials and resignations

Barely a few days after EAD had cleared the government, Nikos Androulakis revealed that according to the EU Parliament’s security experts, there had been an attempt to hack his phone with Predator. Under pressure for answers, EYP revealed in July that it had been spying on him under its “normal” procedure, for reasons of “national security”, during the time he was a candidate for PASOK’s leadership. This surveillance had taken place simultaneously with the attempted Predator attack.

Meanwhile, the two independent outlets, Inside Story and Reporters United, had persisted with their investigations, and through a series of stories had established that EYP and the Greek police services had been in the market for spyware in the past, and that Intellexa, the company that markets Predator, was active in Greece and was indirectly connected, through a web of corporate entities, with government contracts. The more recent of these reports, by Reporters United, also published in Efimerida ton Syntakton, indirectly tied some of these corporate entities to Grigoris Dimitriadis, the general secretary of the Prime Minister’s office.

Initially, Dimitriadis had defended his business activities as legal, and had denied any involvement with Predator or related corporate entities. After a few days, though, under the weight of the revelations, both Grigoris Dimitriadis and Panayiotis Kontoleon, the director of EYP, submitted their resignations. Dimitriadis, however, followed his resignation with lawsuits against Reporters United, Efimerida ton Syntakton and Thanasis Koukakis, demanding exorbitant sums for alleged defamation.

It is worth noting that during the four months since Inside Story’s revelation that Koukakis’s phone had been hacked with Predator, there has barely been a mention of the affair in Greek mainstream media, whose overwhelming pro-government bias we have analysed in a previous article. It has only been since Androulakis made the attempted Predator attack on his phone public that most mainstream media saw fit to cover the scandal to a limited degree — presumably because he is a centrist politician rather than an independent journalist.

A televised smokescreen

The prime minister’s attempt to contain the scandal by giving a televised address to the nation failed to provide answers to pressing questions. Kyriakos Mitsotakis spoke only of the surveillance of Androulakis, which he said was legal, but “politically wrong”. Despite the EYP being under his personal purview, he said he did not know about it, and would never have allowed it if he did. Which begs the question: in what sense would the prime minister have prevented a legal action for political reasons?

The prime minister announced vague measures to bolster the transparency of EYP’s activities, “without hindering its mission”. But he said nothing about the legality of the surveillance of journalists — in fact he didn’t mention them at all — or about the free hand that “national security” had lent the intelligence service to monitor his political opponent. Above all, he said nothing about Predator, despite mounting evidence that the spyware hacks are not unrelated to EYP’s ostensibly legal procedures.

The government’s unwillingness to really uphold transparency is exacerbated by the fact that the investigation ordered by the Supreme Court prosecutor, Isidoros Doyiakos, concerns only the circumstances under which EYP’s classified activities became public, and not the legality of the activities themselves.

While the scandal is increasingly unnerving EU authorities and is being covered by media across the world, the government has reluctantly agreed to shorten the Parliament’s summer recess, in order to allow for a thorough parliamentary discussion.

Surveillance for reasons of “national security” in Greece has increased to 15,000 orders last year, according to ADAE’s records. In combination with the knowledge that at least some of these orders concern journalists, lawyers, pro-migrant rights activists and politicians, this staggering rise truly prompts the question if Greece is sliding back to its undemocratic past. Given the current government’s track record of withholding answers, it is no small consolation that independent journalists are still digging.

This article 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
Ukraine 6 month anniversary

Ukraine: MFRR partners reiterate call for safety and support…

Ukraine: MFRR partners reiterate call for safety and support of media 6 months after invasion 

Today, 24 August, marks both the Ukrainian day of Independence and six months since the beginning of the Russian war of aggression. On this occasion, the partners in the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) reiterate our continued solidarity with the journalists and media workers who risk their lives and safety to bring the world independent, balanced, and accurate information from the frontlines.

The killing, kidnapping, and other attacks on journalists must stop and those responsible must face justice for their crimes under national and international law. The safety of media workers is essential to inform the world about the realities of the war, including the humanitarian consequences, and to hold the powerful accountable. 

In the six months since the invasion, at least 100 media freedom violations linked to the conflict in Ukraine have been recorded on Mapping Media Freedom. Journalists, both Ukrainian reporters and international correspondents, have been actively targeted and killed by the Russian troops. To date the MFRR consortium identified and verified eight journalists who have been killed in the line of duty. They are Yevheniy Sakun, Brent Renaud, Pierre Zakrzewski, Oleksandra Kuvshynova, Oksana Baulina, Maks Levin, Mantas Kvedaravičius, and Frédéric Leclerc-Imhoff. According to the definition and the status of research other platforms and organisations publish higher numbers. Five were killed by gunfire, while the other three were killed by shelling. 

There is evidence that at least five more Ukrainian media workers and citizen journalists may have been killed or executed by Russian troops in occupied territory in apparent connection to their profession, though these have not yet been verified and the motive remains unclear. From the beginning of the war, reports emerged of the Russian army intentionally targeting media infrastructure, with many journalists being placed on so-called “wanted lists”. The immediate safety of journalists and media workers on the ground is of paramount importance and must be respected.

The invasion has also seen a complete collapse of the advertising market for news outlets. Without this key source of revenue for media, the long-term financial sustainability of news organisations has been severely threatened. Outlets have been forced to shut down and journalists have been placed on involuntary, unpaid leave. The lack of long-term, sustainable funding mechanisms, combined with an inability to make concrete future plans amid the uncertainty of war, leaves the media landscape severely weakened. In this context, citizens are much more susceptible to manipulative disinformation operations that distort available information, leading public opinion farther from facts and reality. 

With the start of the invasion, the MFRR partners joined international efforts to offer support and expand its mandate to cover journalists and media workers in Ukraine. Practical support was offered to cover the immediate needs of journalists in Ukraine to support the flow of information. In addition, the partners initiated new Journalists-in-Residence programmes in Germany and Kosovo with the support of local authorities in both countries. 

Despite ongoing efforts and an influx of foreign funding for media, increased support is still needed for journalists on the frontline, for media outlets struggling financially, and for media workers who are forced to work in exile as a consequence of the aggression. We reiterate our support for these independent voices from the region as they remain committed to providing invaluable independent journalism and keep the world informed of what is happening in Ukraine.

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, Candidate Countries and Ukraine.

MFRR 3 consortium logos
Patricia Schlesinger, Intendantin des rbb und ARD-Vorsitzende, spricht auf dem Eröffnungspanel der Medientage Mitteldeutschland in Leipzig. Bei den Medientagen Mitteldeutschland diskutieren bis Donnerstag (02.06.2022) Medienexperten über aktuelle Entwicklungen in der Branche.

Germany: Misuse of funds at RBB highlights need for…

Germany: Misuse of funds at RBB highlights need for greater accountability in publicly funded media

The partners of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) denounce the obvious misuse of public funds by Patricia Schlesinger, former director of Berlin’s public broadcaster Radio Berlin Brandenburg (RBB). We welcome her instant dismissal while demanding a thorough investigation and calling for improved accountability in publicly funded media.

On 15 August, the Rundfunkrat, which supervises the broadcaster, decided to instantly dismiss Ms. Schlesinger following her decision to step back from her position as director on 7 August. The dismissal was made in response to a wave of allegations related to mismanagement of public funds. Among the allegations are the allocation of a €100,000 consultancy contract to Schlesinger’s husband, Gerhard Spörl, and an alleged €1,400,000 renovation of the director’s office floor. It was also revealed that Schlesigner recently received a 16% pay rise, which left her with an annual salary totalling €303,000. These revelations have come forth at a time when the financially-strapped RBB has been cutting positions and programming costs.

 

While the MFRR reiterates EFJ’s call for the German authorities to conduct a proper investigation into suspicions of corruption, the partners also express concern at the wider reputational damage it has already caused to RBB. This particular concern has been backed up by reports of abuse directed at RBB journalists and media workers in the wake of the scandal. According to t-online.de, “Criticism, insults and abuse have become the order of the day” following the accusations against Schlesinger scandal have put a great strain on the journalists’ work. “The vast majority of them are freelance reporters, who encounter viewers on the streets who do not hold back their criticism and are also carried away by insults and abuse.”

 

In addition, the reputational damage will have a wider impact on public service media both in Germany and across Europe. In recent years, governments throughout Europe have been cutting funding to public service media and questioning its funding system. The compulsory broadcasting licence fee has been a source of debate, with the German Government set to discuss renegotiating the fee with the Pubweb network of broadcasters in the coming months. In addition, distrust of and negativity towards public service media in Germany has been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic, with opposition groups accusing public service media of bias and pushing a particular agenda. At a time when support for public interest media is at a major crossroads, Ms. Schlesinger’s actions will inevitably have a negative impact on its reputation in Germany. 

 

We fully support RBB’s journalists who continue working to offer a vital public service despite the ongoing controversy and condemn any attacks and abuse levelled at them as a result of the scandal. We also ask the German Public Service Media to substantially strengthen the auditing bodies and compliance departments within the broadcasters. The controlling bodies must be adequately staffed and resourced to balance the power of the directorate. Ms. Schlesinger’s case shows that without addressing these systemic issues, there remains a clear risk of misuse.

Signed by:

  • European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
  • Free Press Unlimited (FPU)
  • European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)

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
The Shift News Malta

Malta: IPI supports Shift News in unprecedented freedom of…

Malta: IPI supports Shift News in unprecedented freedom of information battle

The International Press Institute (IPI) and its global network stand behind our member The Shift News as it faces an unprecedented legal battle with the Maltese government over freedom of information requests it submitted linked to expenditure of public contracts.

IPI sees the case as emblematic of the problematic climate for transparency, journalists’ access to information and media freedom in Malta. We support The Shift in its public interest mission to scrutinize power and provide citizens with information about the use of taxpayer money.

 

The Shift, a small independent news outlet, today launched a fresh crowdfunding campaign to help pay the legal costs of fighting the FOI cases in court. The estimated expense of challenging all the cases is €40,000 – half of its operational budget for one year.

 

To safeguard its independence, the online newspaper is the only media outlet in Malta which refuses to accept funding or advertising contacts from the government or any political party and is instead run on a community-funded model.

 

The Shift is facing identical, taxpayer-funded appeals from 40 different government entities against the decision of the Maltese Information and Data Protection Commissioner to side with the media outlet and grant it access to contracts and payments made by public entities to Malta Today co-owner Saviour Balzan and his commercial entities.

 

The Appeals Tribunal has so far ruled on 12 of those cases, siding with The Shift and the Commissioner in all of them. Five state entities have so far filed secondary appeal lawsuits. Dozens more government bodies could eventually end up making additional appeals, initiating yet more time consuming and costly legal battles.

 

IPI and our global network stand firmly behind our member The Shift News, its Managing Editor Caroline Muscat, and the news outlet’s vital watchdog journalism mission in Malta”, said IPI Deputy Director Scott Griffen. “The clear public interest in releasing the requested information has already been recognized not once, but twice.

 

The continued efforts by the government to needlessly challenge these decisions drag out the process is inexplicable and seriously undermines transparency and the freedom of the press. We are concerned these coordinated appeals are also aimed at draining The Shift of time and resources that could otherwise be spent carrying out public service reporting.

 

We call on the government entities to immediately drop outstanding appeals, put an end to this absurd waste of taxpayer money, and provide the requested contacts in a timely manner. IPI also calls on its members around the world to join us in expressing support for The Shift and to consider donating to its crowdfunding campaign.

 

IPI is currently working with partner organizations to secure funding to help support The Shift’s legal defence and hopes to make further announcements in the coming days.

 

This statement by IPI is 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, Candidate Countries, and Ukraine. The project is co-funded by the European Commission.

MFRR 3 consortium logos
Panagiotis Kontoleon Greece Surveillance

Greece: EFJ demands full disclosure on illegal surveillance of…

Greece: EFJ demands full disclosure on illegal surveillance of journalists

The European Federation of Journalists (EFJ) condemns the legal actions aimed at muzzling and intimidating the press in the context of the scandal of illegal government practices in Greece, in particular the tapping of journalists and politicians.

The EFJ condemns the abusive legal proceedings launched on Friday 5 August by Grigoris Dimitriadis, resigning adviser and nephew of Greek Prime Minister Kyriákos Mitsotákis, against journalists Thanasis Koukakis, Nikolas Leontopoulos and Thodoris Chondrogiannos, as well as against the website Reporters United and the newspaper EfSyn.

 

“We demand the immediate withdrawal of these complaints, which are only intended to intimidate the press and prevent the exposure of the illegal and undemocratic practices of those in power in Greece”, said EFJ President Maja Sever.

 

On 29 July, the Director of the Greek National Intelligence Service (EYP), Panagiotis Kontoleon, who also resigned after the scandal was revealed, admitted to a parliamentary committee that his services had been monitoring journalist Thanasis Koukakis from 15 May to 12 August 2020. It was learned that the journalist had also been monitored by Predator spyware from 12 July to 24 September 2021.

 

“We call on the Greek judicial authorities to activate judicial investigations into private and public actors, including those close to the Prime Minister, who use Predator software to spy on journalists,” said EFJ General Secretary Ricardo Gutiérrez. “We call on them to shed light on the illegal tapping of journalists by the intelligence services and to identify and convict those responsible. Journalism is not a crime, but obstructing the work of journalists is a crime against democracy.”

This statement is 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, Candidate Countries and Ukraine.

MFRR 3 consortium logos
Serbian flag

Serbia: REM’s awarding of TV licences underscores media pluralism…

Serbia: REM’s awarding of TV licences underscores media pluralism and media diversity failure

Partners of the MFRR have expressed concern about the Serbian Regulatory Body for Electronic Media (REM)’s decision to award TV licenses to media outlets all supportive of the ruling Serbian Progressive Party.

Serbia’s Regulatory Body for Electronic Media (REM) has recently concluded the process of awarding four national FTA TV licences. The Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) consortium and the Independent Journalists’ Association of Serbia (NUNS) previously criticised the process around this decision, which lacked transparency and did not comply with international media freedom standards. The decision taken by REM to award the available national TV licences to the same four pro-government outlets has perpetuated a deeply unbalanced commercial broadcast media market and is another example of the authority’s failure to protect media diversity and pluralism in Serbia.

 

In its decision published on 29 July 2022, the REM awarded TV licences to Pink, Happy, B92 and Prva televisions – media all supportive of the ruling Serbian Progressive Party. On 5 August, the REM published a summary explanation of its decision, affirming that it was made to achieve a greater quality and diversity of content and through a comparative quality analysis of their fulfilment of criteria to award the licences. These However, all four outlets have been repeatedly criticised by civil society for their lack of respect for a variety of national laws and regulations, and for spreading hate speech and smearing political opponents to the current government. According to data from Serbia’s Coalition for Media Freedom, “in 2020 alone, over 12,000 violations of the Advertising Act were committed by these four television stations, and several reports were filed for hate speech and broadcasting of violence”.

 

Furthermore, the REM’s process of awarding TV licences failed to meet the requirements set under its own guidelines on the minimum conditions for the provision of media services. These include that licences should be awarded to broadcasters that respect the programming parameters for broadcasting licences and should be distributed in a manner that favours the provision of a plurality and diversity of views and ideas. The REM’s decision is yet another worrying indication of its lack of functional independence from political forces and another major failure of its regulatory responsibilities, one which further undermines media pluralism and democracy in Serbia.

 

International standards on freedom of expression prescribe media diversity and a fair and transparent process for awarding TV licences. As set out by the Principles on Freedom of Expression and Broadcast Regulation, promoting diversity in broadcasting services “implies pluralism of broadcasting organisations, of ownership of those organisations, and of voices, viewpoints and languages within broadcast programming as a whole. In particular, diversity implies the existence of a wide range of independent broadcasters and programming that represents and reflects society as a whole.” (Principle 3). Furthermore, “licence applications should be assessed according to clear criteria set out in advance in legal form (laws or regulations)”, which must be respected during the decision making process (Principle 21).

 

Two national organisations, the Slavko Curuvija Foundation and CRTA, have announced their intention to file a lawsuit against REM before the Administrative Court in accordance with the Law on Administrative Disputes and on the basis that the awarding process of TV licences violated the relevant laws and regulations. Such legal action is intended to push the REM to issue TV licences on the basis of the parameters set out by its own guidelines and by national law.

 

The REM also announced that a fifth TV licence might be awarded later in the autumn. There is speculation that this delay could be intended to favour Hungary’s TV2, which is owned by a key ally to the ruling Fidesz party of Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, to enter the Serbian market. Research conducted by the International Press Institute has shown how Hungarian business interests allied to the government have increasingly been investing in media across the Balkans which are aligned with Fidesz’s political allies, including in Hungarian language media in Serbia.

 

The MFRR and NUNS stress the impact that REM’s problematic licensing decision will have over media freedom and independence in the country and over Serbia’s citizens’ right to receive diversity of information from a plurality of media. We call for REM to review its decision and comply with national rules and regulations in the allocation of TV frequencies. We urge the Administrative Court to provide a swift response to any legal action taken as a result of this process, in full compliance with international freedom of expression standards. Finally, we stress the need for a comprehensive reform of the REM’s composition to ensure its independence from political interference and its functionality.

Signed by:

  • ARTICLE 19 Europe
  • European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
  • European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
  • Independent Journalists’ Association of Serbia (NUNS)
  • International Press Institute (IPI)
  • Free Press Unlimited
  • 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, Candidate Countries and Ukraine.

MFRR 3 consortium logos
15.03.2022. Polish Commissioner for Human Rights Marcin Wiacek. PAP/Darek Delmanowicz

Poland: Ombudsman must appeal acquisition of newspaper by state-controlled…

Poland: Ombudsman must appeal acquisition of newspaper by state-controlled oil company

Partners of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) have written to Marcin Wiącek, Polish Human Rights Ombudsman, expressing concern at his decision to refrain from appealing the acquisition of regional newspaper publisher Polska Press by PKN Orlen, a state-controlled media company.

Office of the Ombudsman

Aleja “Solidarności” 77, 

00-090 Warszawa, 

Poland

 

4 August 2022

 

Dear Polish Ombudsman, Marcin Wiącek

 

The undersigned organisations write to you regarding your decision to refrain from appealing the acquisition of regional newspaper publisher Polska Press by Poland’s state-controlled oil company PKN Orlen. Challenging this damaging decision is pivotal for upholding media freedom and competition in the media market in Poland. We therefore encourage you to reconsider an appeal before the deadline of 10 August. 

 

On 7 June 2022, the Warsaw regional court of competition dismissed the appeal of the Polish Human Rights Ombudsman brought by your predecessor Adam Bodnar against the takeover of the biggest and most influential regional publisher in Poland, Polska Press. Our organisations take note of your official statement issued on 3 August 2022. We support your call for a public debate about better and stronger guarantees of media pluralism. We hope that such calls will be listened to by, first among many, the European Commission in its upcoming proposal for a European Media Freedom Act. We remain at your disposal to engage in a dialogue on this issue. Nevertheless, we must again underscore that lodging an appeal to contest the regional court’s decision, and asking for the annulment of the Poland’s competition authority’s approval of the Polska Press acquisition by PKN Orlen, is currently of utmost importance. 

 

On 1 June 2021, ARTICLE 19 Europe submitted an amicus brief challenging the UOKiK’s decision which has been rejected by the court twice. It explained that the decision by Poland’s competition regulator, UOKiK was taken in violation of EU merger rules, as it completely failed to assess that the buyer, PKN Orlen, is de facto a state-controlled company (as confirmed, among others, by the same PKN Orlen in a recent merger case before the European Commission). In turn, this vitiated the entire assessment of the merger’s impact on competition in the Polish media market. Therefore, even without recurring to a media plurality test, ARTICLE 19 showed the court that the UOKiK’s decision should be annulled, and the competition assessment performed again, taking into due account the impact of the state control of Orlen. 

 

Furthermore, ARTICLE 19 Europe argued that as media pluralism is guaranteed both by the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and the European Convention of Human Rights, the Polish State, as well as its independent authorities, have the duty to include it in their assessment.  The undersigned organisations support the legal arguments laid out by ARTICLE 19 Europe and underscore that the final ruling should comply with both EU law on mergers and with Poland’s obligations regarding European standards on media pluralism. 

 

In addition, our organisations have previously warned that such acquisition would hand the ruling Law and Justice (PiS) party greater indirect control over the regional media landscape ahead of the 2023 national elections as well as lead to a purge of critical editors and journalists in local newspapers. 

 

We are concerned that the acquisition of Polska Press by a state-controlled company headed by figures close to PiS leadership is a central element of PiS’s stated plans for “repolonization” of the media landscape. Though couched in language of pluralism and national sovereignty, these efforts have in reality been aimed at engineering the takeover of independent press by entities linked to the ruling party and strengthening the market influence of pro-government media. 

 

This approach emulates developments in Hungary where regional newspapers were acquired by business interests with strong ties to the government and eventually turned into mouthpieces for supporting Fidesz’s political agenda. These fears were not misplaced: PKN Orlen did not abide by the court’s decision to suspend the purchase for the time of hearing the appeal and either dismissed or pushed out more than a dozen editors-in-chief at newspapers owned by Polska Press since March 2021, with many more leaving in protest, leading to a visible shift in coverage, self-censorship, and a marked drop in editorial standards at some titles.

 

We respect the vital role the Polish Ombudsman plays in promoting and protecting the enjoyment and full realisation, by all people in Poland, of all human rights, which includes the right to information. In this regard, we strongly believe that your intervention and appealing the court’s verdict is indispensable to ensure that the pillars of media pluralism and media independence in Poland are safeguarded. We thus hope you will reconsider your decision. 

 

Our organisations will continue to closely monitor how the events unfold and would be glad to offer our expertise on media freedom and pluralism, as well as support in the appeal process. 

 

We ask you to take our concerns into consideration and look forward to your response. 

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, Candidate Countries and Ukraine.

MFRR 3 consortium logos

Tackling Impunity: Lessons from the Public Inquiry into the…

Tackling Impunity: Lessons from the Public Inquiry into the Assassination of Daphne Caruana Galizia

The murder of investigative journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia sent shockwaves across Europe and was a grim reminder of the risk reporters face while uncovering abuses of power. It was the first assassination of a journalist worldwide to be investigated through an independent Public Inquiry. To mark one year since the damning findings were unveiled, ARTICLE 19 Europe and The Daphne Caruana Galizia Foundation today publish a report that explores the efficacy of the Maltese Public Inquiry model, assessing whether it stands up as good practice.

The Public Inquiry into the circumstances of Daphne Caruana Galizia’s assassination was the first Public Inquiry to have taken place in Malta in nearly 20 years. It followed a strong public demand for a strengthened capacity to tackle corruption and wider rule-of-law reforms. The research from ARTICLE 19 Europe and The Daphne Caruana Galizia Foundation, ‘Tackling Impunity: Lessons from the Public Inquiry into the Assassination of Daphne Caruana Galizia’, assesses the significance of the Maltese Public Inquiry in the fight for truth, accountability and justice for Daphne’s assassination and the vital role civil society and international organisations play in ensuring an independent investigation is carried out. In addition, the report identifies lessons that can be learned from the Public Inquiry process so far, summarises its key achievements, and makes recommendations to the Government of Malta, to European Union institutions, and to international civil society.

Download the Report

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

MFRR 3 consortium logos

Malta: Public Inquiry report recommendations must be implemented

Malta: Public Inquiry report recommendations must be implemented

A year on from the publication of the Public Inquiry report into the assassination of Malta’s leading investigative journalist, Daphne Caruana Galizia, the undersigned organisations urge the Maltese authorities to comply with their international human rights obligations and implement the report’s recommendations without further delay to ensure effective protection of journalists going forward. We are concerned at the lack of implementation of the recommendations of this milestone Public Inquiry.

Today, 29 July, marks the one-year anniversary of the publication of the landmark Public Inquiry report into the assassination of Daphne Caruana Galizia, which was found to be both predictable and preventable. The Inquiry found ‘[T]he State should bear the responsibility for the assassination by creating a climate of impunity, generated from the highest levels at the core of the administration … and spreading its tentacles to other entities such as regulatory institutions and the Police.’1 This, the Board found, led to the collapse of the rule of law; a failure to acknowledge the real and immediate risk to Daphne Caruana Galizia’s life; and a failure to take effective preventive measures to protect her.

 

In its report the Board of Inquiry made a number of key recommendations to restore the rule of law and avoid that an assassination like that of Daphne Caruana Galizia can ever happen again. The recommendations provided an historic opportunity for the Government of Malta to implement its international human rights obligations to create an enabling environment for journalism and to protect journalists. 

 

The Daphne Caruana Galizia Foundation and Article 19 Europe publish a report today on the Public Inquiry including an evaluation of the implementation of its recommendations. It finds that to date, with minor exceptions, the Government of Malta has failed to implement these recommendations and has rejected proposals to implement anti-corruption legislation. The changes introduced so far are token gestures, rather than urgently needed, radical and effective change. 

 

In particular, the Government has failed to implement the recommendation to introduce laws tackling financial crime and corruption. Notwithstanding the changes made to the appointment of the Attorney General and Police Commissioner as part of the recommendations of the Venice Commission, serious concerns prevail that the Malta Police and the Office of the Attorney General still fail to truly initiate investigations and carry out effective prosecutions on the trails of corruption leading to the murder of Daphne Caruana Galizia, as well as on related scandals that emerged post her death, alongside ongoing magisterial inquiries. 

 

The persistent lack of political will to prosecute corruption revealed by journalists, including Daphne Caruana Galizia, has been seriously criticised. The European Public Prosecutor (EPPO), the EU’s financial crime watchdog, Laura Kövesi, has questioned whether there is political will to tackle corruption commenting that, “Malta is paying lip service in its efforts to crack down on EU fraud and corruption.” Even where investigations have been initiated, the profound delays in prosecuting corruption, including in the Pilatus Bank scandal uncovered by Daphne Caruana Galizia in 2016, contribute to a context of impunity for corruption. The delay in implementing the Public Inquiry recommendations on anti-corruption are prejudicial to journalists who continue to report on the corruption which Daphne Caruana Galizia was killed for exposing and on other malfeasance and who remain at serious risk. 

 

While some initiatives have been taken within the Maltese police force to establish a main contact point with journalists, much work remains to be done both in terms of training of the police on international standards as they relate to freedom of expression and in securing the trust of journalists. Offers of assistance in this regard from international media freedom organisations have gone unanswered. 

 

A “Committee of Experts on Media” was announced on 11 January 2022 and tasked to provide Prime Minister Robert Abela with feedback on draft law reform proposals pertaining to freedom of expression and media freedom which the Prime Minister submitted to the Committee. The Terms of Reference for the Committee fail to require that the committee is independent, made up of individuals of demonstrable integrity and expertise, and that it should have cross-societal support. The lack of transparency and consultation with which the committee has operated since receiving its ToR poses a major concern to its legitimacy. The committee has not met with civil society, media or journalists nor the Caruana Galizia family. It has also refused to participate in conferences relating to media freedom in Malta. While it is understood that the Prime Minister was presented with the Committee’s advice on his draft legislation and that the Committee is continuing its work, the process it has opted to follow lacks transparency.

 

The Government of Malta has put forward two draft legal proposals for the committee to examine: one to “to amend the Constitution and various other laws to strengthen the right to freedom of expression and the right to privacy and to implement various measures for the protection of the media and of journalists”; and another “to provide for the establishment of structures for the protection of democratic society including the protection of journalists, other persons with a role in the media and in non-governmental organisations and persons in public life.” The OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media and ARTICLE 19 have analysed the proposals for their compliance with Malta’s obligations under international human rights standards and have made important recommendations to strengthen the proposals including to ensure better protection of journalists, the right to information and comprehensive protection for journalists against SLAPPs. 

 

One year on from the publication of the Public Inquiry report and almost five years since the assassination of Daphne Caruana Galizia, we urge the Government of Malta once again to live up to its international obligations and implement the recommendations of the Board’s report, along with those of the OSCE, Venice and GRECO Commissions, in a transparent manner without further delay and in full consultation with all stakeholders. 

Signed by:

  • ARTICLE 19 Europe
  • Association of European Journalists
  • Committee to Protect Journalists
  • European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
  • European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
  • IFEX
  • International Press Institute (IPI)
  • PEN International
  • Reporters Without Borders

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