After Czech elections, new push for public media independence…

After Czech elections, new push for public media independence (HlídacíPes)

Vojtěch Berger, HlidaciPes.org

The nationalization of the Czech Television and the Czech Radio has not taken place yet. On the contrary, they are to receive a “vaccine” against political pressures, writes HlidaciPes.org.

Back in September, just before the parliamentary elections, then-Czech Prime Minister Andrej Babiš attacked Czech Television for allegedly “dividing society” during the pandemic. The far-right SPD movement spoke openly about its plan to nationalize both Czech Television and Czech Radio. However, after the elections, in which Babiš lost and the radical populists remained behind their own expectations, everything is (somewhat unexpectedly) different. After many years, there is a chance to cut the public media as much as possible from political influence.

MPs could get draft amendments to the acts on Czech Television and Czech Radio to be examined and scrutinized in the coming months. Senator David Smoljak is involved in their drafting, along with the Endowment for Independent Journalism and a non-profit organisation, Reconstruction of the State. The changes in the acts concern, in particular, how media councils, which in the Czech Republic serve as a “buffer” between political power and editorial independence of public-service media, are formed and elected.

“Firstly, they should strengthen the diversity of the Council, so that it is not elected by only one chamber of the Parliament, which has been the case so far, and thus it is not absolutely dependent on the current winner of the election. There is an emphasis on the competence of the councillors and on the reviewability of their decisions,” Smoljak lists the main objectives of the acts.

Smoljak spoke about the preparations for the amendments last year, but he assumed that the Parliament, in its then composition, would not approve such changes. The past year and a half showed the weaknesses of the current system of nominating and electing the members of the media councils. This is true for both the television and radio councils.

A significant number of the Czech Television Council members have been replaced in the last two years when, after last year’s election of six new members, another five out of a total of fifteen were to follow this year. The nominations of candidates, as well as the selection of the finalists, often noticeably correlated with the parliamentary voting alliance of the ruling ANO movement, the far-right SPD and the Communists.

This alliance often selected candidates without the necessary expertise, but with an openly hostile attitude towards, for example, the management of Czech Television. In the Television Council in particular, this led to the Council meetings becoming hours-long skirmishes between some of the councillors and the Director General, instead of the councillors addressing the control agenda that appertains to the Council members.

It was precisely because of the doubts about the competence of the candidates supported by the ANO government that this spring, the then-parliamentary opposition decided to block the election of four new members of the TV Council by obstructions, resulting in its being incomplete for several months.

Elections also interfered in the staffing of the media councils this year when some councillors themselves decided to run for Parliament. One of the councillors resigned because of this, while another councillor was removed. The act foresees that councillors are not to work for the benefit of any political party. However, the resignation/removal of two councillors has contributed to the vacancies in both of the councils, namely in a situation whereby the Parliament has been unable to elect new councils members due to the obstructions and the upcoming elections.

The aforementioned amendments to the Czech Television and Czech Radio acts therefore prefer to expressly ban councillors from running for political office. However, they bring about an even more fundamental change elsewhere: After twenty years, the acts change the very manner in which media councillors are recruited in the Czech Republic and who is allowed to nominate them and who elects them.

While today any social organization or association – even an absolutely marginal one or one that was founded briefly before the nomination – can send a candidate to the council, the amendment stipulates that the nominating organization would have to have at least a decade-long tradition. They would also have to have been active for a long time in one of an exhaustive list of fields, such as, in addition to the media, culture, trade unions, education, science and protection of human rights. According to the authors of the act, this is a safeguard to ensure that “only active entities, and not ‘shell companies’, nominate the candidates”.

The amendment also sets a minimum threshold of expertise for councillors themselves. They should have experience holding a senior position in public administration or a private company and be knowledgeable in fields such as economics, law or finance or management and, of course, the media.

“There was no political support for the German form of the act,” Senator Smoljak said on the examination and scrutiny of the amendment so far, referring to the way media councils are formed in Germany. What is common there is an enumeration of specific social organizations that are allowed to nominate candidates to the councils, for example churches or trade unions.

Another major change is the election of television and radio councillors, which is now entirely in the hands of the Chamber of Deputies. Under the new arrangements, half of the councillors would be chosen by the Chamber of Deputies and half by the Senate at each election. At the same time, the number of councillors would be reduced to 12 for the television council and to six for the radio council.

However, according to David Smoljak, this would also mean building both councils on a completely new basis. In other words: removing the existing councils, with their current members. “My view is, and not everyone agrees, that when this act comes into force, the existing council should end and a new one should be created because it is difficult to combine that,” Smoljak confirms.

But even if the media acts arrive to the Chamber of Deputies soon, it will probably take many months before the Chamber of Deputies discusses them. The aforementioned vacant positions on the Council of the Czech Television and one position on the Council of the Czech Radio will have to be filled much earlier. And even that could be a problem.

When the election committee of the Chamber of Deputies selected the 12 finalists – candidates for the Television Council – in the spring, some media experts failed to be selected, while open critics of the current management of the Czech Television got the green light. The then-opposition, which became the government majority after the October elections, resorted to the aforementioned obstructions and prevented the election.

The option now is for MPs to start the whole election once again. “Now the election committee has a new composition and the same applies to the whole Chamber of Deputies, so the process will have to be done again,” says Senator Smoljak. Petr Gazdík, the deputy chair of the STAN movement and a member of the election committee in the previous Chamber of Deputies, feels the same way: “In my opinion, nominations and selection should start from the beginning.”

However, representatives of the ANO movement, which led the election committee for the past eight years, disagree. “I don’t like it, but I can’t do anything about it, I have to respect it. I’m curious to see how the former ‘democratic opposition’ will behave now. Whether they outvote us by force and push through their 12 members in the committee,” said Martin Kolovratník, a deputy and member of the committee for ANO.

“In addition to the fact that it’s not all that fair, it also involves a risk that the same obstructions may occur which would replicate the previous obstructions. Looking at it this way, the council is actually unelectable forever,” said another ANO MP, Patrik Nacher, criticizing the announcement of new elections for the television council.

The amendments to the act on Czech Television and the act on Czech Radio, however, envisage other significant changes. Not only the decisions of the councillors themselves, but also their election or dismissal by the Parliament should be subject to judicial review. The review would be carried out by the Supreme Administrative Court.

In addition, the acts also address the issue of sustainable funding of Czech Television and Czech Radio. The Act on radio and television license fees proposes to insert a procedure for adjustment of fees so that they are automatically increased on a regular basis by the current inflation rate announced by the Czech National Bank for a specific calendar year.

The draft act is now undergoing final examination and Senator Smoljak claims that public service media “have priority”. Whether this will remain the case in light of all the gigantic problems awaiting the new government – from COVID-19 and the national debt to expensive energy – remains to be seen in the coming months.

This piece is part of a content series on threats to independent media in Central Europe in collaboration with leading independent media in the region. Read more.

The shredding of the free press in Hungary (Telex)

Viktor Orbán’s takeover of the media didn’t come overnight. It’s been a long time in the making. Hungary’s Telex.hu traces the evolution of media capture.

For 30 years Viktor Orbán and his old political colleagues have held the view that the press is against them, that journalists always help their opponents. If Fidesz loses, they think, the power of the press has won. If Fidesz wins, it does so in spite of the media headwind. The same line was taken in Orbán’s 2019 governmental press conference— when he told members of the Hungarian and foreign press that more journalists were against him than for him, “but even in such circumstances it is possible to win” — as in the analysis of the 1994 election result, where Fidesz’s defeat was blamed on a media superiority stacked up against the party. However, the party did not always view the press this way.

In this article we look at the development of the Hungarian media over those 30 years. Today, Hungary is in a dismal 92nd position in the World Press Freedom Index, which is put together by Reporters without Borders (RSF). How did it reach the point where ownership of most of the Hungarian TV, radio, printed and internet media is in some way tied to the government and its politicians.

Read the full article on Telex.hu

This piece is published as part of a collaboration between IPI as part of the MFRR with Telex.hu as part of a content series on threats to independent media in Central Europe.

MFRR to hold press freedom mission to Greece

The Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) will hold an online fact-finding mission to Greece in the first half of December to assess increasing concerns about media freedom and the safety of journalists in the country.

The online mission will be led by the European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF) and implemented together with its partners in the MFRR and representatives from other international press freedom groups. The delegation will meet with a range of domestic stakeholders, including journalists and editors, journalists’ unions and associations, civil society and academics, and representatives of government and state institutions.

The aim of the mission is to better understand key developments and help develop solutions to the challenges media actors face. It will follow up on a host of recent concerns. These include primarily: the murder of veteran crime reporter Giorgos Karaivaz and the limited progress of the investigation into the crime; numerous attacks on journalists; interferences faced by reporters specialising in migration, including surveillance by state authorities; the impact of the recent changes to the criminal code regarding so-called “fake news”; and, problems with weak media pluralism.

A mission report with findings and recommendations will be published following the online fact-finding mission. Depending on travel restrictions and sanitary measures, an in-person advocacy mission is expected to follow in the first quarter of 2022.

The MFRR monitors violations of press and media freedom in the EU Member States and Candidate Countries and responds with practical and legal support and advocacy. Since the project’s start in March 2020, a number of similar missions have been organised to Montenegro, Poland, Serbia, Spain and Slovenia.

Poland: Journalist must not be jailed for refusing to…

Poland: Journalist must not be jailed for refusing to disclose source

MFRR urges district prosecutor to drop legal case. The undersigned partners of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) today call on the District Prosecutor’s Office in the Polish city of Gdansk to drop its legal case against Gazeta Wyborcza reporter Katarzyna Włodkowska and to respect the journalist’s right of source confidentiality protected under the European Convention of Human Rights.

If the prosecutor issues a second demand for Włodkowska to reveal the identity of her source for a report on the investigation into the assassination of the city’s mayor, and she refuses to comply, she could face a prison sentence of up to 30 days. The threat of imprisonment puts undue pressure on Wlodkowska and, beyond her, has a chilling effect on the journalistic community in Poland.

The unjustified demand for the disclosure of Włodkowska’s source stems from an article she published in Gazeta Wyborcza and its supplement Duży Format in January 2020, entitled “Killer of Paweł Adamowicz: I will sit for two years and leave“. The report, published on the first anniversary of the murder of the mayor, published a fragment of a letter written by the alleged killer while in detention in which he said he would face a milder sentencing because he had been assessed as criminally insane.

At the time, the initial investigation by a group of expert psychiatrists had concluded that the man, who is accused of fatally stabbing Adamowicz on stage at a Christmas charity event in December 2019, was mentally ill at the time, meaning he could not face criminal liability. The ruling Law and Justice (PiS) party has claimed the liberal mayor’s killing was not premeditated and that the murder was instead the act of a mentally deranged individual.

Włodkowska’s reporting, and the information provided by an anonymous source with knowledge of the psychiatric assessment, presented a different version of events: that the assailant was fully conscious of his actions and had been planning the murder since December 2018. The report caused a scandal in Poland and led to significant media attention and criticism of the government. Since then, additional assessments have deemed the defendant mentally fit enough to stand trial and have suggested that his drive to murder Adamowicz may have been fuelled by reporting by the government-controlled state broadcaster, Telewizja Polska.

Following publication of the article, the Gdańsk prosecutor’s office initiated an investigation and Włodkowska was questioned. She declined to disclose her source, who believes their safety would be jeopardised if they were identified. After multiple failed attempts to pressure the journalist into revealing her contact, the prosecutor appealed to a court to try and force the disclosure. In January 2021, the Gdańsk district court sided with the prosecutor and ordered her to reveal the source. After multiple appeals, the verdict was upheld by the Court of Appeal in Gdańsk on 15 October.

Two weeks later, the District Prosecutor’s Office again interrogated Włodkowska about the source. With the backing of her newspaper, she again refused to reveal the source’s identity, citing journalistic confidentiality. On 5 November, she was ordered to pay a fine of PLN 500 (€108), which she rejected. An appeal is currently underway. If the prosecutor again orders her to reveal the source, and she refuses for a second time, under the Polish criminal code she could be fined again and/or jailed for up to 30 days.

If this happens, Poland could become the only EU member state to have a journalist in prison for doing their job. The protection and confidentiality of journalists‘ sources is a fundamental element of press freedom. It allows the media to report on matters of public interest without fearing that confidential sources or whistleblowers will face retaliation, and helps ensure that people with information feel comfortable approaching reporters. It is also a right protected under Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights and repeatedly recognised by the Council of Europe and the OSCE. Exceptions to this rule are extremely rare and European jurisprudence is clear: such disclosure can only be justified if there is an overriding public interest for the source’s identity to be revealed.

Our firm assessment is that this case comes nowhere near the threshold required to force the disclosure of a journalistic source. Rather, this prosecution appears aimed at punishing a journalist working for the country’s biggest critical newspaper over a story which undermined the prosecutor’s office and damaged the credibility of the state’s probe into Paweł Adamowicz’s murder. If Włodkowska is jailed, it would have a chilling effect on the country’s entire journalistic community and lead to a further deterioration in Poland’s standing on the freedom of the media. We urge the district prosecutor to drop the legal case immediately.

Our organisations stand in solidarity with Katarzyna Włodkowska. If she is arrested for upholding basic journalistic ethics and refuses to disclose her source, we stand ready to support Gazeta Wyborcza with further legal appeals, including taking the case to the European Court of Human Rights. In the meantime, we urge international human rights bodies and the Council of Europe’s Commissioner for Human Rights to intervene immediately to ensure Włodkowska is not jailed for doing her job.

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)
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.

France: EFJ statement on four journalists who were shot…

France: EFJ statement on four journalists who were shot at in Martinique

Four French journalists covering the protests against the Covid-19 rules and civil unrest in Martinique have been fired upon three times. The European Federation of Journalists (EFJ) joined its affiliates in France (SNJ, SNJ-CGT, CFDT-Journalistes) in expressing full support to the targeted journalists and strongly condemning a new attack on press freedom, which must be promptly investigated by the French authorities.

On the night of the 25 and 26 November 2021, photographer Loïc Venance from Agence France-Presse (AFP), journalists Maureen Lehoux and cameraman Julien Taureau from BFMTV/RMC Sport and journalist Raphaël Lafargue from Abaca Press were filming and taking pictures of a burning roadblock from a quiet street near the Levassor canal in Fort-de-France. The street was at the time deserted when two men on motorbikes drove by and started firing at them. No bullets hit them and they managed to flee the scene quickly, going for cover in their vehicle parked nearby and drove away.

Authorities on the Caribbean island of Martinique ordered a curfew yesterday after protesters looted stores and burned barricades amid strong protests over Covid-19 measures in the French overseas territories. A general strike started five days ago, notably against the compulsory vaccination of health workers. It is reported that seven policemen have been injured last night in Fort-de-France.

EFJ General Secretary Ricardo Gutiérrez said: “The civil unrest in Martinique reflects a complex situation that is exacerbated by the virus and all that it entails, so it is crucial that journalists be able to do their work freely and safely in order to best inform the public and the rest of the world about what is happening there. We give them all our support. We have taken the matter to the Platform for the protection of journalists of the Council of Europe.”

Nous condamnons fermement ces attaques contre des travailleurs de l’information et saisissons immédiatement nos instances européennes. @EFJEUROPE @CoEMediaFreedom
Tout notre soutien aux collègues journaliste et technicien de @BFMTV @RMCinfo cc @sdj_rmc_bfm @rmcengreve https://t.co/sNZnZGBtWx

— SNJ-CGT (votez pour nous ! ✊🏽) (@SnjCgt) November 26, 2021

First published on EFJ's website

Slovenia: Concerns over controversial changes to RTV programming

The undersigned partners of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) today express concern over proposed modifications to news programming at the Slovenian public television RTV, which would reduce the broadcaster’s ability to inform the public and scrutinise power. We therefore urge the broadcaster’s management to enter into dialogue with its editorial board to ensure adjustments are proportionate and in the best interest of public interest reporting.

Under the draft Program-Production Plan (PPN) for 2022, shows such as the flagship foreign policy programme, Globus, and many news talk shows would be cancelled. Daily news programs such as Dnevnik and Slovenska kronika would be shortened, while others would be shifted to the broadcaster’s second channel, which has far lower viewership. Election programming would likewise be transferred to the secondary channel, where it would be broadcast in the absence of major sporting events.

The proposed shakeup has already proven controversial. In October, the editor-in-chief of the TV Slovenia news program, Manica Janežič Ambrožič, stepped down in protest. She was followed by three other TV Slovenia editors: Dejan Ladika, Meta Dragolič and Mitja Prek. A letter criticising the scale of the changes was recently signed by more than 90 percent of employees, who argued it would limit their ability to produce quality public service reporting.

Since the letter was sent to the management, headed by new RTVSLO director Andrej Grah Whatmough, only minor amendments have been made to the draft changes. RTV management has said the alterations to programming are necessary due to the current financial situation, the departure of employees and low ratings of news shows. RTV’s program council is due to vote on the proposals during its next meeting on Monday, November 29.

The country’s biggest journalistic unions, the Slovene Association of Journalists (DNS) (DNS) and the Trade Union of Journalists of Slovenia, have spoken out against the changes, which they argue are unrealistic, unfeasible and will be detrimental to the quality of journalistic content and the future development of the broadcaster.

Our organisations are concerned that, in their current form, these changes will marginalise public interest reporting and undermine the broadcaster’s core mission: to provide the country’s citizens with professional and informative reporting on both domestic and foreign current affairs. We are also concerned that these changes have been developed without sufficient consultation. It is vital that such changes to programming must be proportionate and, crucially, have the support of the editorial board.

The quality and content of a country’s public broadcasting is a mirror to the overall strength of its media landscape. Despite its financial challenges, RTVSLO has historically ranked among the best and most independent public service broadcasters in the region. While all parties agree that reform to its funding model is urgently needed to improve its finances, it is crucial this is done without jeopardising its core journalistic mission.

We therefore call on the Radiotelevizija Slovenija program council to postpone its meeting until further dialogue is conducted by management with RTV employees. Separately, we also urge the National Assembly to ensure adequate and sustainable funding for RTVSLO that allows it to provide a high standard of news reporting, as well as uphold the commitment to public service news determined by the RTV Slovenija law.

Over the last year, journalists at RTV have faced increasing intimidation and threats both on social media and on the streets. Conspiracy theorist protesters recently stormed the headquarters and impeded broadcasting. Editors have endured relentless disparaging smears and attempts to discredit their work by elected politicians. Concerns have meanwhile been raised about politicised appointments to oversight bodies. We hope the proposed changes to RTV programming and production will not create additional pressures in the coming months.

Signed by:

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

Poland: Journalists must be allowed access to Belarus border

Reporting crews facing increasing intimidation by border guards. The undersigned partners of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) today call on the Polish government to respect and facilitate the free flow of information by allowing journalists access to the border with Belarus to report on the humanitarian situation. We also urge Polish police and military personnel to refrain from arbitrary detentions and intimidation of media workers working in the area around the restricted zone.

Since early September, journalists have been unable to report from inside a three-kilometre-wide stretch of land along the Belarusian border placed under a state of emergency. The measure limits the ability of journalists and aid workers to enter the restricted area and prohibits the taking of photographs or video footage that shows the border or its infrastructure. Those convicted of violating the state of emergency can face a prison sentence of up to 30 days or a fine of up to 5,000 Polish złoty.

Concerns about the lack of information and transparency about what is happening within the restricted areas escalated in November as thousands of migrants and asylum seekers attempted to enter Polish territory via Belarus, sparking a geopolitical dispute that Polish and EU leaders have accused authoritarian leader Alexander Lukashenko of orchestrating in retaliation for Western sanctions.

The disproportionate restrictions have severely limited the ability of journalists and media organisations from Poland and around the world to cover this dire human rights situation and ensure adequate protection is given to those stranded in inhumane conditions. The state of emergency is also resulting in the criminalisation of journalists trying to report on a matter of significant public interest. Such restrictions on media freedom within a member state of the European Union are unprecedented.

Earlier last week, two journalists from RT France were detained by police near the city of Usnarz Gorny for allegedly violating the state of emergency. A police spokesperson said that the two French nationals, reporter David Khalifa and cameraman Jordi Demory, were detained for working without a permit inside the restricted zone. They were interrogated at a police station and ordered to pay a fine.

In late September, three journalists from French-German broadcaster ARTE TV were arrested, held in a cell overnight and then taken to court the next day in handcuffs to face charges of violating the state of emergency. They were released without a fine. Earlier in September, Onet journalist Bartłomiej Bublewicz and his camera operator faced criminal charges from police for violating the same rules due to their reporting.

In the last week, even those reporting from outside the restricted zone have faced arbitrary detention and intimidation from police and military personnel. On 16 November, three photojournalists, Maciek Nabrdalik, Maciej Moskwa and Martin Divisekwere, had been taking photos at a temporary army base outside the zone when they were detained by soldiers in the Polish Army. They were aggressively pulled from the car and handcuffed for over an hour. The guards searched their car and memory cards on their cameras, violating journalistic privacy. The trio were later released without charge.

On 14 November, a reporting team from the Balkan Investigative Reporting Network (BIRN) was pulled over outside the zone near a checkpoint in Czeremcha and briefly detained by police and border guards, who demanded the unique identifier of their mobile phones, which can be used to track the device. When reporter Claudia Ciobanu and photojournalist Jaap Arriens questioned the legal basis of the demand, the officers said they were suspected of stealing the phones. The guards also falsely claimed the emergency zone had been extended to where the journalists were at that time.

These acts of intimidation and restrictions mean journalists are facing major barriers in verifying information from the border. Allegations of rights abuses remain extremely difficult to either verify or debunk, including claims of illegal pushbacks by Polish border guards. With media barred, the only snippets of news and images from the barbed wire border come from Belarusian and Polish authorities’ social media posts. The result of this information blackout is that disinformation is thriving and facts are hard to come by, meaning a severe humanitarian crisis, likely involving serious human rights violations, is going unreported.

Despite protests by Polish media and rights groups, the state of emergency remains in place. We find it hard to avoid the conclusion that part of this decision by Polish authorities has been to intentionally keep the media from documenting the scale and nature of the crisis and shielding itself and border security services from scrutiny. The free and uninterrupted flow of information at the border is vital. We therefore join the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, Dunja Mijatović, in urging the Polish authorities to immediately allow journalists to re-enter the border zone.

Signed by:

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

Greece: Answers needed over alleged state surveillance of journalist

Intelligence service leak reveals monitoring of investigative platform and journalist in Greece. The undersigned partners of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) today urge the Greek government to immediately provide clarity over allegations that a state intelligence agency conducted surveillance on journalist Stavros Malichudis and the investigative media organisation Solomon, which focuses on refugees and migration in Greece.

The revelations published by Greek newspaper Efimerida ton Syntakton (EFSYN), which indicated the government’s National Intelligence Service (EYP) had secretly been conducting monitoring of Malichudis, pose serious questions over journalistic source protection and the right to privacy in Greece, which is already facing growing questions over a decline in media freedom.

The November 14 report revealed that the EYP, which gathers intelligence on national security, had requested information on citizens, including a lawyer, a journalist, a worker for a United Nations agency focused on migration and protest organisers. The information was leaked to the newspaper by a whistle-blower. The newspaper redacted the names and private information of the journalist and others who were monitored. However, Malichudis recognised the description of events and identified himself as the journalist in the story.

The alleged surveillance relates to an article that Malichudis and the director of Solomon, Iliana Papangeli, had published in April 2021, seven months prior to the newspaper’s revelations. Their article had reported on a 12-year-old boy from Syria living in a refugee holding camp on the island of Kos, whose artwork was exhibited in a museum and then published on the website of the French newspaper Le Monde. In April, Malichudis, a freelance journalist who works for AFP, is a member of Solomon and collaborates with Investigate Europe and Reporters United, had tried to track down the boy to interview him about his artistic success and the experiences of his family reaching Europe. The journalists had not informed anyone outside Solomon of their plans.

A redacted file published by EFSYN showed that while Malichudis was researching the story, officials at EYP’s headquarters sent a request to colleagues based on Kos asking them to confirm whether the boy and his family were being held in the camp and to gather information. The request included Malichudis’s name and ID number and said the EYP had information “from a source of high reliability” that the journalist was planning to speak with the family. Solomon was also mentioned by name. It also requested information on an employee of the International Organization for Migration (IOM) in Greece, a source with whom Malichudis had spoken on the phone before the conversation switched to an encrypted messaging app.

#Greece: IPI is deeply concerned by reports that investigative journalism outlet @we_are_solomon & @AFP reporter @Malichudis were secretly monitored by the National Intelligence Service.@EFSYNTAKTON @reporters_gr @MediaFreedomEU https://t.co/t87XjpPXl4

— IPI-The Global Network for Independent Journalism (@globalfreemedia) November 16, 2021

The Greek authorities have yet to deny the alleged surveillance of the journalist. Given the seriousness of the allegations, and the paucity of information provided by authorities so far, our organisations urge the government to provide immediate answers to parliament as to why the National Intelligence Service had knowledge of Malichudis’s reporting before it was published. Information should also be made public about exactly how this information was gathered and the nature of the “reliable sources” the EYP had on his work. Details must also be provided about why a request was made to monitor the journalist’s confidential source, with whom he spoke only in a telephone call and an encrypted messaging app, and how the EYP had knowledge of these private communications.

The evidence provided so far indicates that Malichudis and possibly other members of the team at Solomon have had their communication illegally monitored without their knowledge and that this information was then shared with a state security agency tracking their work. In addition to raising serious privacy concerns, this surveillance would constitute a clear interference in the freedom of the press and a serious violation of the confidentiality of journalistic sources, which is protected under Article 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights. These rights are a fundamental element of media freedom, and confirmation of their violation would have a chilling effect on watchdog journalism and undermine transparency by discouraging whistle-blowers to come forward.

Given that the EYP’s mandate is to investigate threats to Greece’s national security, we also question why a journalist’s reporting on a refugee’s experience in a holding camp should even be justified as a legitimate target for intelligence gathering of any form. Immediate justification should be provided as to why this was the case. If such a human-interest story drew the attention of the EYP, it then begs the question to what extent the security services are monitoring the work of investigative journalists probing an issue such as illegal pushbacks. We hope this case is not the tip of the iceberg of wider surveillance of journalists by state authorities, which we have recently observed in other EU member states. The longer the Greek government remains silent or dodges questions, the longer it will invite scrutiny. The Special Standing Committee on Institutions and Transparency should examine this case as a matter of priority.

Our organisations stand in solidarity with Stavros Malichudis and the journalistic team at Solomon, which is a current grantee of the Investigative Journalism for Europe (IJ4EU) fund led by the International Press Institute (IPI), and whose work documenting the stories of unaccompanied minors in Moria’s refugee camp was nominated for a major European journalism award. Moving forward, we will continue to monitor this case closely and will demand concrete answers from the government on this issue during an MFRR media freedom mission to Greece later this year. In the meantime, we also urge the European Commission and European Parliament to seek immediate responses from the Greek government about these extremely serious allegations.

Signed by:

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

Dutch journalist forced to leave Greece after threats and…

Dutch journalist forced to leave Greece after threats and intimidation

The IPI global network today expresses regret over the involuntary departure of Dutch journalist Ingeborg Beugel from Greece, after she faced physical and online threats following a heated exchange with the Greek prime minister over refugee pushbacks in the Aegean Sea. IPI stands in full support and solidarity with Beugel and calls on Greece to provide a safe working environment for all journalists.

On 17 November 2021, Beugel, a Dutch freelance correspondent, revealed she planned to leave the country over fears for her safety after she experienced an aggressive smear campaign online and in pro government media following her questioning of PM Kyriakos Mitsotakis on 9 November over allegations of his country’s illegal pushbacks.

During the joint press conference with the Dutch PM Mark Rutte, Beugel openly asked the Greek PM when he would “stop lying” about the pushbacks, to which Mitsotakis responded: “Look, you will not come into this building and insult me. Am I very clear on this?” The exchange was shared widely on social media, garnering both praise and criticism.

Beugel was then targeted with insults and accused of spreading Turkish propaganda. She was also the focus of attempts to discredit her by numerous media in Greece, including comments which accused her of spreading lies and being a “pro-Turkish” agent. Other reports delved into her personal life. Recently, she was hit by a stone thrown at her by a man in a dark street, who called her a “Turkish spy”.

“The threats and violence against Beugel, as well as her involuntary departure from Greece, are unacceptable”, IPI Deputy Director Scott Griffen said. “Journalists fulfilling their watchdog role and asking uncomfortable questions – however pointedly – about a matter of clear public interest should never face such extreme intimidation. The shameful and coordinated attempt to discredit Beugel work and bully her out of the country raises yet more worrying questions about press freedom in Greece. IPI stands in full solidarity with the journalist and will offer practical assistance through the Media Freedom Rapid Response project.”

Since the press conference, the threats directed at her have become increasingly severe, Beugel told IPI. “I cannot return to the island of Hydra where I have a house, because people will throw stones and tomatoes at me, and I will be attacked. I cannot leave the house unaccompanied anymore. Some newspapers now write multiple negative stories about me each day. My life here has become very unsafe.”

Beugel, who is a permanent resident and has lived in Greece for 40 years, said that the online harassment and threats she was facing had made it impossible to remain in the country. “People write that my head should be shaved, that I should drown together with the refugees, that I deserve to be tarred and feathered. Many of the comments are very sexist. I cannot read it anymore.”

#Greece 🇬🇷: Attempts to discredit Dutch journalist @IBeugel after exchange with PM Mitsotakis

Read the alert 👉🏻https://t.co/64MoszJobL
Report new threats 👉🏻 https://t.co/t9qqwS3PAd
#MFRR #ReportIt pic.twitter.com/zyZQKDjeKm

— Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) (@MediaFreedomEU) November 10, 2021

Beugel said the harassment was part of a wider campaign to silence critics of Greece’s migration policies. “They intimidate, demonize and criminalize aid workers and NGOs that help refugees, and all those who question the policies and the pushback of migrants”, she said. “Many journalists on the Aegean islands are arrested and interrogated, their material is taken from them and from TV crews. Many get slapped with court cases. I have two court cases against me. The only goal is to make people afraid and to have a chilling effect on others to speak out.”

Beugel made the decision to leave the country after security advice from the Dutch Foreign Ministry and the Dutch embassy in Greece, as well as the Dutch Journalists’ Association NVJ. “They all told me my safety is not guaranteed here”, she said. “Then the only right decision is to come home for a while at this point.” She said she would return home for an “indefinite period” and one day wished to return to Greece.

The journalist will file a complaint with the Greek police over some of the threats she received. When exactly she will return to the Netherlands has been kept a secret for her safety. She was previously arrested in June 2021 and is currently facing trial in Greece on charges of illegally hosting an Afghan refugee in her house, which carries a 12-month prison sentence and fine of €5,000.

Despite the threats, her questions at the press conference have also led to some positive development, she added: “After my remarks, a fierce debate has finally exploded in Greek society about the close government involvement in the media”, she said. People tell me that I have brought both matters – lies about pushbacks and the quality of journalism – on the political agenda with just one question.”

IPI is concerned about Greece’s deteriorating state of press freedom, after multiple violations against journalists occurred this year. On April 9, the Greek journalist George Karaivaz was brutally murdered by unknown individuals in a suburb of Athens. More recently, parliament voted to approve a vaguely-worded legal amendment to the criminal code which allows journalists to be prosecuted and jailed for publishing “false news” deemed capable of causing “concern or fear to the public or undermining public confidence in the national economy, the country’s defense capacity or public health”. On November 15, the Greek journalist Stavros Malichudis was reported to have been secretly surveilled and monitored by the National Intelligence Service over a report about a refugee child from Syria.

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 and Candidate Countries.

First published on IPI's website

SLAPP lawsuit in Greece underscores need for swift EU…

SLAPP lawsuit in Greece underscores need for swift EU directive

The undersigned partners of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) today express serious concern over a SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) targeted against the small independent media outlet Alterthess and its journalist Stavroula Poulimeni by a Greek gold mining executive convicted of serious environmental crimes. Our organisations note that this case again underscores the need for a swift European Union directive and Council of Europe Recommendation to protect journalists and media outlets reporting in the public interest from this kind of abusive litigation.

On 19 October 2021, the cooperative journalistic website Alterthess in Thessaloniki received the lawsuit filed against them by Efstathios Lialios, an executive at the firm Hellas Gold. It demanded €100,000 in damages over an article the site had published on 27 October 2020, alleging it had illegally processed his “sensitive personal data” when it reported his criminal conviction. It argued the plaintiff’s names should not have been published and that Lialios’s reputation was damaged as a result, jeopardising his ability to find new work. The lawsuit also threatened Poulimeni with criminal sanctions.

The article, ‘Two high-ranking executives of Hellas Gold were convicted of water pollution in North Halkidiki’, reported the first instance conviction of Lialios and a colleague, the then CEO of Hellas Gold, for the company’s responsibility in the systematic pollution of the local water in Halkidiki with heavy toxic metals and liquid waste. The pair were accused of failing to monitor, control or report to authorities the pollution of surface water, which vastly exceeded the legal limit and caused serious environmental degradation. Hellas Gold is a subsidiary of the Canadian Eldorado Gold Corporation.

The article by Poulimeni reported the initial verdict, which was made by the Court of First Instance of Polygyros. The Court of Appeal of Thessaloniki later confirmed the verdict on 1 September 2021, with the two executives handed a suspended sentence. Shortly after this second decision, Lialios filed the lawsuit: a full year after the original article was written. The legal case against Alterthess and Poulimeni is due to be heard in court on 25 November 2021.

Rather than aimed at settling a legitimate legal dispute, our organisations believe it is clear that this lawsuit is aimed at silencing Alterthess and Poulimeni by forcing them into a time-consuming and costly legal battle, draining them financially and discouraging them from further reporting. For the last decade, Alterthess and Poulimeni have documented the impact of Hellas Gold’s mining operations on the environment and the local community. The extortionate financial demands seem to be an attempt to intimidate the publication and drive it to financial ruin. We therefore consider this a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP).

The grounds for the lawsuit are baseless. Court reporting by journalists and media is legally protected because of the importance of informing the public at large how justice is done. The trial was held in open court, without reporting restrictions, and the verdict was publicly available. Given the seriousness of the environmental crimes, publishing the names of the plaintiffs was both standard journalistic practice and overwhelmingly in the public interest. We cannot avoid the conclusion therefore that this lawsuit is an effort by Lialios to shield himself and Hellas Gold from critical coverage and punish Alterthess for its reporting.

This lawsuit is not a proportionate or principled attempt to seek legal redress. We therefore urge Mr. Lialios to withdraw the claim and refrain from trying to weaponise civil law in the future. If the case ends up before a court, our organisations hope that the court will take into consideration the European Court of Human Rights standards on article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Concerningly, this is not the first time that Hellas Gold has used the threat of legal action to bully those critical of its operations. This is, however, the first time that a media outlet has been the target.

This case is yet another reminder of the need for an EU Anti-SLAPP Directive that creates preventive measures and procedural safeguards to better protect journalists from abusive lawsuits by rich and powerful individuals. The overwhelming adoption by MEPs on 11 November of a report on SLAPPs was a timely reminder of the seriousness and urgency of this issue, one that sends a clear message to the European Commission that far-reaching legislation is needed. Our organisations stand by to assist the Commission and are preparing our submission to its public consultation on anti-SLAPP regulation.

With such a Directive in place and legislation implemented at the national level, we hope cases such as this involving Alterthess will be immediately dismissed or avoided altogether. Until then, the MFRR expresses our full support and solidarity with the affected journalists and all other battling abusive gag lawsuits. We will continue to monitor this case closely, have reported the lawsuit to the Council of Europe’s platform for the protection of journalism, and will provide immediate financial support to help fund Alterthess’ legal defence.