Poland: PKN Orlen media purchase violates EU merger rules…

Poland: PKN Orlen media purchase violates EU merger rules and media pluralism standards

The Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) today said that allowing the acquisition of regional newspaper publisher Polska Press by Poland’s state-controlled oil giant PKN Orlen to go forward would violate both EU and Polish merger rules and undermine media pluralism.

The MFRR supports legal arguments to this effect made by consortium member ARTICLE 19, which recently submitted an amicus brief to the Warsaw regional court of competition. The court is currently hearing the appeal of the Polish Human Rights Ombudsman against the January decision by Poland’s competition regulator, UOKiK, to approve the purchase.

The MFRR and other international media freedom and civil society groups have previously warned that the deal would hand the Law and Justice (PiS) government greater control over the media landscape ahead of upcoming local elections and lead to a purge of critical journalists and editors akin to the takeover of Telewizja Polska in 2016.

The purchase risks the acceleration of state-led media capture in Poland and echoes developments in Hungary in the mid-2010s, when government-backed oligarchs snapped up the country’s regional newspapers, turning them into party mouthpieces.

While Orlen is nominally a private company, the Polish state is the main stakeholder in the company and holds 32 percent of the voting rights. Orlen has itself stated, in recent occasions, that the Polish state has “de facto control” over the company.

Since finalising the sale, Orlen has broken clear commitments to respect editorial independence and staffing by dismissing or pushing out eight editors-in-chief at Polska Press titles, in contradiction of the court’s interim decision suspending the purchase.

Ahead of the ruling, the MFRR supports the appeal brought by Ombudsman Adam Bodnar and joins ARTICLE 19 stressing that the Regional Court in Warsaw must ensure its decision complies with both EU law on mergers and with Poland’s obligations with regards to European standards on media pluralism.

Legal analysis

We believe UOKiK’s failure to examine the extent of the Polish state’s control over Orlen and the clear risks to editorial independence this may pose – in addition its failure to consider the impact the acquisition has on competition and media pluralism – invalidates the entire assessment and constitutes sufficient ground for annulment of its original decision.

Firstly, it is clear that the Polish state wields de facto control over Orlen, with combined voting rights of 32.42%. The company’s CEO was appointed by the government and has clear political allegiances to PiS party leader Jarosław Kaczyński. This raises serious questions about the future editorial independence of Polska Press and the risk of indirect government censorship.

Given the Polish government’s increasingly alarming record on media freedom and concerns about PiS’s use of Orlen to direct public advertising revenue away from critical outlets and distort the media market, UOKiK had a duty to assess the question of state control. However, its original assessment failed to examine this fundamental issue.

Orlen has already replaced the editors-in-chief of numerous Polska Press titles with journalists coming from the state-controlled broadcaster TVP and other pro-PiS media, in a first move to end criticism and ensure favourable coverage. Orlen’s other investments in the media sector, most prominently the creation of the Sigma BIS advertising agency with the state-owned insurance company PZU, is another sign of coordinated state cooperation and control.

Secondly, under EU law media pluralism is one of the factors that must be considered when assessing a merger. In testing the purchase with regards to the Polish Anti-Monopoly Act, which reflects the same test provided by EU merger rules, UOKiK should therefore have taken into account the risk that the transaction may have a negative impact on media pluralism in Poland. Its failure to do so constitutes sufficient ground for annulment of the decision.

Thirdly, by failing to assess whether the proposed takeover led to an infringement of Article 11(2) of the EU Charter regarding the freedom and pluralism of the media, UOKiK violated Article 4(3) TEU and Poland’s obligation of sincere cooperation with the European Union while carrying out its merger control assessment – another significant violation.

Lastly, UOKiK failed to consider media pluralism under the European Convention of Human Rights. By authorising a merger that would negatively impact media pluralism, or at the very minimum by authorising a merger without duly scrutinising the impact it could have on media pluralism, the state, through UOKiK, infringed its duties under Article 10 of the Convention.

Taken together, the MFRR firmly believe these failures by UOKiK warrant a decision by the court to repeal its original decision approving PKN Orlen’s December 2020 purchase of Polska Press from German company Verlagsgruppe Passau. Doing so would not only represent a victory for the rule of law, but also be an important victory for media freedom, pluralism and independence in Poland.

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)

Published first on IPI's website

Slovakia Supreme Court hearing is crucial test in battle…

Slovakia Supreme Court hearing is crucial test in battle against Impunity

On June 15 the Slovak Supreme Court is expected to rule on the appeal brought by prosecutors against last summer’s not guilty verdict in the murder of journalist Ján Kuciak and his fiancée, Martina Kušnírová.

The International Press Institute (IPI) with the European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF), ARTICLE 19, and the European Federation of Journalists (EFJ) as part of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) urge the Supreme Court to carefully and exhaustively examine all available evidence in the case.

IPI Deputy Director Scott Griffen will attend the hearing in Bratislava on behalf of IPI and the MFRR.

Controversial businessman Marian Kočner and a confidante, Alena Zsuzsová, were acquitted last summer of ordering Kuciak’s murder in February 2018. The Specialized Criminal Court in Pezinok, Slovakia, found that there was not enough evidence to rule conclusively that Kočner had ordered the hit.

The ruling was a tremendous setback for the fight against impunity in a case that gripped Slovak society, not least due to Kočner’s links to Slovakia’s political, judicial and security elite. The aftermath of the murder led to the resignation of top political figures, including former Prime Minister Robert Fico.

Three people have already been convicted in the case: gunman Miroslav Marček; getaway driver Tomáš Szabó; and middleman Zoltán Andruskó, who served as a key prosecution witness against Kočner and Zsuzsová. This outcome mirrors a global pattern: while hitmen are sometimes sentenced in journalist murder cases, the masterminds are almost never held to account.

Slovak prosecutors believed they had sufficient circumstantial evidence against Kočner and Zsuzsová to buck that trend. The Specialized Criminal Court disagreed, and the appeals case isfocused in part on whether the judges sufficiently interpreted cryptic messages between Kočner and Zsuzsová that prosecutors say referred to the murder. Around 10 pieces of new evidence have also been introduced, including heart rate monitoring data from Zsuzsová’s phone.

There will be much at stake when the Supreme Court rules on Tuesday. Three journalists have been murdered in the EU since 2017; in addition to Kuciak, Daphne Caruana Galizia was murdered in a car bombing in Malta in 2017, while Greek reporter Giorgos Karaivaz was shot dead earlier this year. In none of the three cases has full justice been achieved, an unacceptable outcome that endangers journalists across Europe.

The Supreme Court can either confirm the Special Criminal Court’s decision or send the case back to be heard again. Regardless of the court’s decision on Tuesday, the MFRR partners underscore that the fight for justice does not end on Tuesday. Slovakia’s institutions cannot rest until the masterminds behind the murder of Ján Kuciak and Martina Kušnírová are behind bars.

Published first on IPI's website

Signed by:

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

Biden urged to address media freedom in Hungary and…

Biden urged to address media freedom in Hungary and Poland during Europe visit

The Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) has published an open letter to U.S. President Joe Biden, urging him to address the deteriorating state of media freedom in Hungary and Poland as he meets with EU and NATO partners this week.

Dear President Biden,

On the occasion of your visit to Brussels to meet with the European Union and NATO partners, the Media Freedom Rapid Response wants to draw your attention to a serious deterioration in media freedom in certain European countries that profoundly threatens the rule of law underpinning our democracies and mutual security.

We are particularly concerned by the situation in Poland and Hungary where the respective governments have set out on a steady path to erode media pluralism and silence critical journalism through a process of state-led capture of the media.

Hungary is the leading exponent of the state capture strategy, by applying regulatory, legal and financial powers and creating a hostile environment that punishes and excludes critical media while building a pro-government propaganda apparatus. Independent media are subjected to a range of state-driven economic pressures such as the withdrawal of state advertising, targeted taxing and the removal of licenses. Most recently, the license of the radio broadcasterKlubrádió was denied on arbitrary grounds, a move that has now prompted an official enquiryby the European Commission.

Poland is now firmly set on a similar trajectory with the governing Law and Justice (PiS) party systematically undermining independent media, including foreign-owned media such as TVN24. Efforts to tighten the screws on independent media include blocking unfavoured mergers, a proposed new advertising tax, the discriminatory use of state advertising and a stream of vexatious lawsuits against its media critics. PiS has engaged PKN Orlen, the state-controlled energy giant, as a vehicle for gaining control over independent media. Its acquisition of regional news publisher Polska Press has already led to an editorial purge ahead of local elections.

These are not isolated cases. Media freedom is under increased pressure as populist politicians around the world, and in Europe, abuse government power to attack free speech. This, in turn, threatens democracy and the rule of law as bedrocks of the transatlantic relationship.

The U.S. has long been a leader when it comes to championing press freedom and free speech around the world. We believe that your visit offers an important opportunity to reclaim that mantle at a critical time and reinforce the U.S.’s commitment to media freedom as a shared value.

We therefore urge you as President of the United States to support efforts by the European Commission to demand reform in Poland and Hungary that guarantee media pluralism and independent journalism

Kind regards

International Press Institute

European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)

European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)

OBC Transeuropa (OBCT)

Published first on IPI's website

Albania: MFRR partners concerned about restrictions on access to…

Albania: MFRR partners concerned about restrictions on access to Parliament

Concerns over new restrictions for journalists and media workers in access to Parliament

To:

Speaker of the Parliament of Albania, Gramoz Ruçi

CC:

European Commissioner for Neighbourhood and Enlargement, Olivér Várhelyi

Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, Dunja Mijatović

Sent electronically

Subject: Concerns over new restrictions for journalists and media workers in access to Parliament

Dear Mr Gramoz Ruçi,

We, the undersigned partners in the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR), are concerned about recently approved restrictions for journalists and media workers reporting from the Albanian Parliament.

On 2 June 2021, the Bureau of the Assembly of Albania published an amended regulation for the Accreditation, Accommodation and Orientation of Mass Media in the Parliament. The rules, adopted without consultation with journalists and media workers’ associations and unions, civil society or other pertinent stakeholders, will come into effect in September 2021.

Compared with the rules currently in force, we are concerned these new restrictions to freedom of movement will negatively affect the ability of journalists and media workers to report and decrease the level of transparency of the Parliament:

Accredited journalists from private media will only be able to report from a designated newsroom and will not be able to follow and report directly from the rooms where plenary or committee meetings take place or freely move around the building, as is currently the case. However, journalists from public broadcaster RTSH and public news agency ATSH will continue to have access.
Access to video broadcasts during the meetings will be provided to the media by the Parliament itself.

These measures will restrict the access of journalists to lawmakers, limiting opportunities to ask critical questions and meaningfully engage. Concerns have been raised also that the control by parliamentary staff over the video feeds could give rise to censorship or manipulation. Moreover, the distinction between journalists working for private media and those working for the public broadcaster will create a dual system of access that is arbitrary and unfair.

In light of these concerns, we respectfully ask you to withdraw these new rules and maintain the current high standards of access for journalists and media workers. Any new changes should be introduced only after consultation with journalists’ associations and unions and civil society stakeholders. Equal, fair and unhindered coverage of parliamentary proceedings is a hallmark of a strong democracy. We urge the Albanian National Assembly to adhere to these principles.

Signed by:

Article 19
European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
International Press Institute (IPI)

Download Letter

Two decades of impunity for murder of Serbian journalist…

Two decades of impunity for murder of Serbian journalist Milan Pantić

To mark the twentieth anniversary of the killing of Serbian journalist Milan Pantić, the International Press Institute (IPI) today expressed support for those continuing the fight for justice and expressed frustration at the lack of progress in bringing indictments against those suspected to have been involved.

While other cases involving the murders of journalists in Serbia during the dissolution of Yugoslavia have made important if stalled progress on achieving justice in recent years, the case of Pantić has remained mired in impunity two decades later.

Pantić, a correspondent at the daily newspaper Vecernje Novosti, was killed after being struck on the head with a blunt object outside his home in the city of Jagodina in central Serbia on June 11, 2001. The targeted attack is widely believed to have been carried out as retaliation for his reporting on corrupt privatization deals following the fall of the Milosevic regime.

Despite efforts by the Serbian commission for investigating the killings of journalists to add fresh impetus into the case, no one has been charged or prosecuted and those responsible continue to evade justice. The Prosecutor’s Office for Organized Crime has declined to reopen the case despite repeated requests by civil society and media freedom groups.

“IPI shares the deep frustration of those in Serbia regarding the unacceptable lack of progress in solving the murder of Milan Pantić”, IPI Deputy Director Scott Griffen said. “While large amounts of information, testimony and evidence have been collected about the motive, background, and alleged perpetrators, little progress has been made in actually bringing those who planned and carried out the assassination to justice.

“Allowing this case to go cold would not only leave a gaping wound in the life of Pantić’s loved ones but it would also undermine the legitimate progress made in other journalist murder cases in Serbia. Law enforcement and special investigators must reignite their efforts to bring indictments and political authorities must ensure any factors blocking progress are removed.

“The convictions and combined prison sentences of 100 years handed down to those accused of murdering leading editor-in-chief Slavko Ćuruvija in 1999 are proof that historic cases of impunity can – and must – be resolved all these years later. We hope that ongoing retrial will result in the same guilty verdicts. Our hope is that on future anniversaries of this tragic killing, the family of Milan Pantić can one day feel the same sense of justice. Time does not heal impunity. As long as cases like those of Milan Pantić remain unsolved, journalists in Serbia will remain at risk.”

“We are standing still and making no progress.”

The reason why Milan Pantic was shot dead 20 years ago appears to be known. Yet no one has ever been charged.https://t.co/cZJ4o4oLrD

— Balkan TJ (BIRN) (@BIRN_BTJ) June 11, 2021

Writing about the lack of progress on the anniversary, Veran Matić, chairman of the Commission for investigating the killings of journalists and an IPI World Press Freedom Hero, said: “If things remain unchanged, I don’t see what else we could do as a governmental Commission, having in mind we are soon entering the third decade since the killing of Milan Pantić.

“The presented, logically supported findings are convincing proof that we are close to the goal. Who, why and for what purpose is preventing the initiation of court proceedings and resolution of one of the greatest traumas of our journalism? The answer is being awaited by his family, the media and journalistic community, Serbian society and the international community. The deceased Milan deserves this answer the most, as all he did was doing his job professionally hoping to contribute to the public interest.”

The murder of journalist Milan Pantić, 20 years later – Statement of Veran Matić, Chairman of the Commission for investigating the killings of journalists https://t.co/NFvzUHs4AE

— UNS (@UNSinfo) June 10, 2021

Flawed investigations

Pantić was one of three journalists suspected to have been murdered in retaliation for their work in Serbia during the tumultuous decade spanning the 1990s and early 2000s. Dada Vujasinović was killed in 1994 and Slavko Ćuruvija was gunned down five years later.

According to the Commission, which has followed the case since its establishment in 2013, Pantić was killed due to his journalistic investigations into allegedly corrupt privatization deals that followed the transition to democracy at the turn of the century. Experts point to his reporting on the privatization of a brewery and a cement factory and on the local drugs trade. The attack took place around 8am as he returned to his apartment block from a nearby store. Pantić was struck three times on the head with an object suspected to be a baseball bat.

While reports suggest that more than 1,000 people were interrogated in the original investigation, the Commission believes the investigation by police working groups and judicial authorities was seriously flawed. It says fingerprints were not taken from the site, Pantić’s clothes were not preserved, and that important investigative actions were not carried out correctly or at all. While the suspected motive and individuals involved have been identified, currently the prosecutor says there is not enough evidence to bring charges. In 2015, the names of two people suspected to have been involved were leaked to the press, yet no indictments have been brought.

In 2018, the Commission, an official government body made up of journalists, associations, and representatives from the police and State Security Agency, called on authorities to assign a Special Prosecutor to take over the case. To this day it has not received a response.

Published first on IPI's website

Poland: Orlen continues editorial purge at Polska Press

A purge of editorial management at regional newspapers owned by Polska Press has gathered pace in the last month, as the shockwaves of the controversial takeover of the publishing house by Poland’s state-controlled oil giant PKN Orlen continue to be felt.

A total of eight editors-in-chief have now been dismissed or pushed out since Orlen acquired the publishing house in March, with other editors and journalists at Polska Press titles across the country resigning in recent weeks.

Their dismissal and replacement by numerous journalists arriving from the state-controlled public broadcaster Telewizja Polska and other pro-government media has heightened fears that a Hungary-style takeover of regional media is now underway in Poland.

The accelerating editorial changes come despite a ruling made by a competition court in Warsaw in April which suspended regulatory approval of the acquisition by Orlen while an appeal brought by the country’s human rights ombudsman Adam Bodnar is examined.

Despite instructions by the District Court in Warsaw for Orlen not to make any personnel changes in the management board, Orlen began to dismiss members and replace them with its own appointments. It has now changed the entire management structure.

Among those appointed to the influential oversight board was Dorota Kania, a pro-government journalist and former editor-in-chief of editor-in-chief of Telewizja Republika. In mid-May, a new Polska Press president with experience overseeing pro-Law and Justice (PiS) media and state owned-companies was appointed following a hiring process in which candidates were given just four days to submit their applications.

Editorial changes

After Oren took over, newsrooms received letters from the oil conglomerate assuring them that editorial independence would not be affected, while the company’s CEO, Daniel Obajtek, explicitly promised journalists there would be no layoffs at Polska Press titles.

These pledges proved to be short lived. In late April, Obajtek backtracked and said that the owner had the right to make “certain personnel decisions in managerial positions”. In April, three editors-in-chiefs at Dziennik Zachodni, Gazeta Codzienna Nowiny and Gazeta Krakowska were dismissed and replaced with figures with clear links to pro-PiS media outlets or TVP.

More changes followed on June 1, with editors-in-chief at Gazeta Wrocławska, Głos Wielkopolski, Gazeta Lubuska and Polish Metropolis of Warsaw all dismissed. The same day it was also announced that the editor-in-chief of the Gazeta Pomorska, Express Bydgoski and News Dziennik Toruński would be leaving.

While some of these editor-in-chiefs left by so-called “mutual agreement” – shorthand for a diplomatic dismissal – others resigned themselves or were shuffled to other positions within the newspapers. Orlen has attempted to stress that employees left voluntarily, however it has also refused to make details of the severance pay public. Many of the replacements have experience working in the state broadcaster or other pro-PiS media.

Following the ownership change, other journalists have resigned from their posts. In May, the first deputy editor-in-chief of the Polska Times resigned citing the ownership changes. The long serving deputy editor-in-chief and another journalist have left Dziennik Zachodni, while another journalist resigned from Głos Wielkopolski. Meanwhile, articles not welcomed by members of the new Polska Press board have been removed from newspaper’s websites.

Polska Press is one of the country’s largest media companies, owning 20 regional dailies, 120 weekly magazines and 500 online portals across the country.

PiS media control

Analysts and Polish media experts have described the managerial and editorial changes as a conservative coup at the publishing company. At best, experts suggest, soft censorship will pressure newspapers to dampen criticism and slowly encourage reporting favourable to the government. At worst, they could now be deformed into propaganda mouthpieces of the PiS.

Either way, the changes have illustrated concerns raised by media freedom organisations including IPI that Orlen ownership would lead to a purge of critical journalists akin to the takeover of the public television and radio at the start of its first mandate in 2015. Further editorial changes at Polska Press titles are now expected to follow.

This state-led capture of local media mirrors the efforts undertaken by allies of Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s Fidesz party in 2016 and 2017 to buy up regional publications, often from foreign owners, as in the case of Polska Press. There too, acquisitions by politically connected owners led to meddling and an exodus of journalists who were dismissed or quit, after which the editorial line was flipped. Virtually all regional media in Hungary are now under the control of the Fidesz party and its allies. Experts have frequently noted that access to independent news in areas outside of Hungary’s largest cities is now heavily limited.

Unlike in Hungary, where government-friendly businessmen were used to snap up media outlets, in Poland the government has instead relied upon the state-controlled oil company headed by a PiS loyalist as its economic engine for buying media.

The takeover of local media in Poland has also been timed for political reasons. In 2023, Polish voters will go to the polls in tightly contested local elections in which PiS is determined to wrestle back control over urban centres. Friendly coverage at Polska Press’s 20 regional dailies and 150 weeklies could provide a valuable campaign tool during the electoral race for shaping public opinion.

On a broader level, Orlen’s acquisition of the publishing house from the German Verlagsgruppe Passau Capital Group is part of PiS’s multi-year efforts to establish greater political control over the private media sector and push foreign capital out of the domestic market, as outlined in a report by the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR). Labelled “repolonisation” and framed as an issue of national sovereignty by the government, these efforts are aimed at cementing more indirect control over the media landscape ahead of elections.

Published first on IPI's website

IPI welcomes EU infringement proceedings against Hungary over silencing…

IPI welcomes EU infringement proceedings against Hungary over silencing of Klubrádió

The International Press Institute (IPI) today welcomed the long overdue launch of infringement proceedings by the European Commission against Hungary over the silencing of the country’s last remaining major independent radio station.

On Wednesday the Commission, the EU’s powerful executive body, announced that it would open the procedure against Budapest over a decision by the government-controlled Media Council to reject Klubrádió’s application to return to the radio waves.

“We welcome today’s announcement by the Commission, which confirms what IPI has long argued: the decision by the Hungarian Media Council to deny Klubrádió’s application was arbitrary, discriminatory and clearly intended to silence the station’s critical voice”, IPI Deputy Director Scott Griffen said. “IPI has long urged the Commission to take concrete steps to defend the rule of law and put a halt to the systematic and ongoing state-led erosion of media freedom and pluralism in Hungary over the last decade.

“While this is a significant step and while we hope this will ensure one of the country’s last remaining independent broadcasters is not silenced ahead of elections next year, infringement proceedings and sanctions on Budapest should have started years ago. Going forward, the case of Klubrádió demonstrates the clear need for an ambitious Media Freedom Act which will give the EU a stronger toolbox for intervening in politically motivated regulatory decisions and defending press freedom wherever it is threatened.”

Klubrádió was forced off air in February after the media regulator, which has long been filled with figures appointed by the ruling Fidesz party of Viktor Orbán, rejected the automatic extension for the renewal of its license for the 92.9 MHz frequency in Budapest.

In March, the Hungarian Media Council then rejected Klubrádió’s fresh application for the tender and ruled its bid invalid, blocking it from returning to the frequency it had broadcast on for two decades and muzzling one of the country’s last critical broadcasters.

IPI said the regulator’s decision-making panel had provided several groundless and discriminatory justifications for its judgment, in which it accused Klubrádió of “illegal management” and cited miniscule material programming errors and unjustified concerns over its business plan.

Announcing the infringement proceedings, the Commission said the decision by the Hungarian Media Council not to grant the license was made on “highly questionable grounds” and breached EU law on proportionality, transparency and non-discrimination.

It said Hungary violated EU telecoms rules regarding powers to grant, prolong, renew or revoke use of licenses on the radio spectrum, adding that it believed that the Hungarian national media law had been applied in a “discriminatory” manner.

EU Commissioner for Values on Transparency Vera Jourová said that the Commission had warned Hungarian authorities and urged them to find a solution so that Klubrádió could continue broadcasting, but that it had not received a satisfactory response. The Hungarian authorities now have two months to respond.

Meanwhile, Klubrádió remains in a legal battle with the Media Council over its decision, which the station appealed. In spite on the ongoing legal dispute, the Media Council allocated a six-month provisional license for the 92.9 MHz to Spirit FM, a broadcaster operated by a company affiliated with an evangelical church close to the ruling party. Klubrádió continues to broadcast online.

Published first on IPI's website

Slovenia: MFRR calls on Prime Minister Jansa to stop…

Slovenia: MFRR calls on Prime Minister Jansa to stop tweeting insults

The partners in the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) are dismayed by Slovenian Prime Minister Janez Janša’s disparaging tweet about Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, Dunja Mijatović. On 6 June 2021, Prime Minister Janša said the Commissioner is “part of #fakenews network” in response to her recent memorandum on freedom of expression and media freedom in Slovenia. The Prime Minister’s tweet quoted Mitja Iršič, a public relations expert at the Ministry of Culture, who said their considerations were not properly represented and called the Commissioner’s report “biased and ill-informed.”

We welcome Commissioner Mijatović’ memorandum and share her concerns about the deterioration of media freedom in Slovenia, which align with the findings of our recent fact-finding mission to the country, the report on which is forthcoming. We also note that the Commissioner’s office functions independently and impartially, which we find is reflected in her recent report. Together with the 16-page memorandum, the Commissioner moreover published a 6-page document with comments from the Slovenian authorities, with whom she also met in April during an online dialogue.

We consider the tone and manner in which Prime Minister Janša opted to voice his disagreement with Commissioner Mijatović’ memorandum to be wholly inappropriate for a leader of a democratic European state. The irony of these remarks about a report that expresses concern precisely about the behaviour of public figures, including the Prime Minister, on social media, where they undermine journalists’ credibility “accusing them of lying, and using offensive hashtags such as #fakenews,” is palpable.

The MFRR calls on Prime Minister Janša to cease denigrating the report and instead take action to address its findings. That includes abstaining from making offensive, mendacious or disparaging comments on social media, which contribute to a hostile environment for journalists and media workers in Slovenia and, specifically with regard to the tweet about Commissioner Mijatović, an unwelcome coarsening of the European public debate.

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)
Osservatorio Balcani e Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT)

Netherlands: 8 out of 10 journalists have experienced violence…

Netherlands: 8 out of 10 journalists have experienced violence or threats

In the Netherlands, more than eight in ten journalists have experienced some form of aggression of threat, according to a new study carried out by I&O research for PersVeilig and published on 5 June 2021.

Almost 700 journalists in the Netherlands responded to the new survey “Aggression and threats towards journalists 2021” which assessed the level of safety of journalists in the country. The results paints a bleak picture with more than 8 journalists out of 10 reporting having experienced violence or threats at some point in the course of their work. Four years ago, the figure was already high, but less so, with 61 per cent having been confronted with such a situation.

Looking at the different forms or aggression of threats, journalists were mainly confronted with verbal abuse (two thirds), threats or intimidation (half), legal threats or abusive lawsuits (one fifth) and physical violence (17%). Of all journalists, cameramen and photojournalists suffer the most and fear physical violence even more as their equipment make them more visible.

The research also shows that the frequency is increasing. Thirty per cent of the respondents have to deal with an incident every month or more, compared to 18 per cent in 2017. Journalists said the attacks come mainly from individuals (60%). While most respondents (3/4) believe that their employers takes sufficient measures to guarantee their safety, freelancers are less positive with 36% saying they are dissatisfied with their clients’ response.

The PersVeilig survey shows that more needs to be done to encourage journalists to report the aggression and threats they face. Thirty per cent did not report the incident, and more than half of these did not think what they experience was bad enough to report it.

PersVeilig project manager Peter Ter Velde said that journalists still consider violence and threats to be part of their job: “They think it’s not that bad and that ‘nothing will be done’ if they file a report. But when people cross the red line and express themselves verbally or violently in such a way that it has mental and physical consequences or equipment is damaged, it goes way too far. We really need to get rid of that attitude that this is part of the job.” However, journalists massively agree (93%) that aggression and threats pose a real threat to press freedom.

As we have documented in the recent months, the survey clearly shows a deterioration in the safety of journalists in the Netherlands. It is worrying to say the least, because it is happening in a country where the attacks are generally taken seriously by the authorities. It is crucial not to let this trend take hold,” said EFJ General secretary Ricardo Gutiérrez.

Recommendations include systematically conducting risk assessments before sending journalists into the field and sending journalists in groups of at least two.

PersVeilig is a unique collaboration between the Dutch journalists’ union NVJ, the Association of Editors in Chief, Police and Public Prosecution Service and help journalists who encounter violence or aggression in the course of their work.

published first

Serbia: Investigative outlet KRIK sued by state security agency…

Serbia: Investigative outlet KRIK sued by state security agency director

The Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) is deeply concerned by the lawsuit targeted at a journalist and the editor-in-chief of the Network for Investigation of Crime and Corruption (KRIK) by the director of Serbia’s Security-Information Agency (BIA).

The MFRR urges the BIA director Bratislav Gasic to immediately withdraw the civil lawsuit against KRIK and to refrain from weaponising the law to intimidate media outlets investigating the nexus between crime, corruption and politics in Serbia.

The lawsuit stems from an article KRIK published on April 9 which reported details of wiretapped conversations played as evidence in the murder trial of criminal gang chief Zoran Jotic, during which Gasic’s name was mentioned.

The article by journalist Milica Vojinovic reported that during one of the recordings one accused gang members said that Jotic did not have to worry about his safety because Gasic was “on the cauldron”, i.e. on the payroll of the clan leader. KRIK asked Gasic to comment before publishing the story but the request went unanswered.

In response to the article – “Political connections of the Krusevac criminal group: ‘Jotka had Gasic on the cauldron’ – the BIA director denied the allegations and accused KRIK’s journalist of presenting “a malicious interpretation of the wiretapped conversation” which damaged his “reputation and honour”. The 500,000 dinars (€4,250) lawsuit called on the court to “let the media know that borders exist and must be respected.”

KRIK editor-in-chief, Stevan Dojčinović, has rightly defended the article and said KRIK is prepared to fight the case in court, stressing it simply conveyed information from evidence presented during the trial, which was held under normal reporting conditions. The article reported numerous other details from the intercepted phone conversations about alleged criminal associations with unnamed government ministers.

Journalists are free to publish anything which is said or given as evidence in a Serbian court. The information reported by KRIK was presented as evidence by the prosecution, it was reported accurately, and the BIA director was given the chance to respond, in line with standard journalistic practice.

Our organisations therefore consider this lawsuit to be groundless and hope it will be swiftly dismissed by the courts. It is an unacceptable attempt to pressure KRIK not to report information which is clearly in the public interest. This lawsuit also comes on the back of a concerted and baseless smear campaign against KRIKs journalists in recent months which has been fanned by certain politicians.

These kinds of vexatious demands for damages against investigative media outlets burden them with costly legal fees and lengthy court battles, distracting from their job of exposing wrongdoing and holding power to account. In Serbia, such lawsuits have all too often been instrumentalised by politicians or powerful individuals to try and stifle independent reporting, as our recent MFRR report outlined.

We call on Director Gasic to withdraw the lawsuit and for public officials and politicians in Serbia to stop using insult and defamation laws as a tool to intimidate critical journalism. Courts must fully comply with international freedom of expression standards when ruling on cases brought by public officials against media which involve claims involving harm in the form of mental anguish.

As our MFRR report notes, press and media freedom in Serbia are in serious need of improvement. An end to baseless lawsuits against journalists and independent media outlets by the country’s public officials would be a good place to start.