The Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) urges the Second Basic Court in Belgrade to ensure access to justice in the case of Serbian journalist Milan Jovanovic, who in 2018 was the victim of an arson attack on his house in Belgrade after investigating cases of corruption of local public officials.

Judicial proceedings against the suspected arsonists started in 2019 and have since then been delayed numerous times after frequent requests of postponement advanced by the defense lawyers. These procedural tactics, which also include attempts to disqualify judges appointed to this case, have seriously delayed justice for Jovanovic. We understand, however, that the court expects to render a verdict in this case during the next hearing on 11 February 2021.

On 11 September 2020, the National Media and Infocommunication Authority (NMHH) announced it would not extend the license for Klubrádió, the last remaining independent radio station in Hungary.

The verdict on 4th February effectively consigns Klubrádió to broadcasting exclusively on the internet and represents a significant win for the ruling Fidesz party and Prime Minister Viktor Orbán in their decade-long campaign to destroy one of the last remaining independent broadcasters which airs voices critical of the government.

Even if Klubrádió now wins its appeal against the Media Council’s decision to block its automatic license renewal, it will be prevented from returning to the airwaves due to the appeal process of a rival broadcaster over the tender, which could take years to conclude. During this time it will be ensnared in legal limbo and will have no choice but to fall silent on 15 February.

Hungary’s government is acting in direct contravention to Article 11 of the European Union’s Charter of Fundamental Rights on freedom of expression and information. The European Commission must urgently address this issue with the government to find an immediate solution without which it is all but certain that Klubrádió will fall silent on 15 February, denying hundreds of thousands of listeners in greater Budapest access to a source of independent and high-quality news and information and sealing the fate of yet another independent media outlet in Hungary.

On February 9, executives and lawyers of Klubrádió will be in court in Budapest to hear the verdict in its legal challenge against the decision by the Hungarian Media Council to reject the automatic renewal of its broadcast license for another seven years.

The court battle comes after the media regulator, which is formed of figures appointed by the ruling Fidesz party, rejected Klubrádió license renewal in September 2020 on the grounds it had violated the media law by twice failing to provide information on its programming content – justifications dismissed by Klubrádió as “absurd”.

If its appeal is unsuccessful, the commercial talk and news station’s license for Budapest FM 92.9 MHz will expire five days later on February 14, relegating Klubrádió to the internet and sealing a major victory for the Fidesz government in its decade-long campaign to destroy the flagship liberal broadcaster.

Even if it wins its legal appeal, however, Klubrádió’s presence on the airwaves is still far from ensured. When the regulator blocked its automatic extension, it also opened the frequency to tender and two other broadcasters submitted rival bids.

The lawsuit hinges on a report L’Espresso published on 24 September 2020 which broke the news that investigations by the Italian Finance Police had implicated the cardinal in the embezzlement of €100,000 of Vatican money to a charity organisation controlled by his brother in the Cardinal Angelo Becciu’s home diocese of Ozieri in Sardinia. At the time of the transfer, Becciu was the second highest official in the Vatican secretariat of state.

Later that day, the allegations of financial misdeeds were presented to Becciu by the Pope in a private meeting, forcing him to step down as the prefect of the Vatican’s saint-making office. On 18 November, a 74-page lawsuit was filed against L’Espresso in Sardinia, describing the report as “slanderous and defamatory”.

The MFRR believes this case illustrates the serious flaws in Italy’s civil defamation laws, which do not provide safeguards against abuse and can be easily instrumentalised to retaliate against legitimate journalistic investigations.

Photo credit: Claude Truong-Ngoc / Wikimedia Commons – cc-by-sa-4.0

On 22 January 2021, Jean Chéritel, the CEO of the Chéritel group, a fruit and vegetable wholesaler in the Brittany region of France, dropped his defamation action against freelance investigative journalist, Inès Léraud. The legal threat related to Léraud’s investigation, published in Basta! on 26 March 2019, which shed light on alleged illegal practices of the company. The manner by which the lawsuit was dropped echoes a previous lawsuit brought against Léraud by Christian Buson, a Breton agri-food business owner, who also dropped his lawsuit a few days before the start of the trial in January 2020. While the MFRR welcomes the dropping of Mr Chéritel’s defamation action, we note the enduring chilling effect of vexatious legal threats and SLAPP actions (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation) to encourage journalists to self-censor, regardless of the initiation of any actual court proceedings.

Across Europe, in countries such as France, Italy, Germany, Albania, Malta, Poland, Croatia and Hungary, prominent business leaders and politicians continue to threaten journalists, media workers and outlets with costly legal threats with the goal of silencing critical and independent journalism. Whether through defamation, privacy and abuse of data protection laws (based on the EU General Data Protection Regulation, GDPR), reporting in the public interest is too often vulnerable to SLAPPs and other legal threats designed to exhaust legal and financial resources, exert psychological pressure and isolate the journalist (especially pronounced if they are freelance), while also sending a signal to other media actors to avoid the topic.

Ristani had previously made public for the first time the ranking of the bursary applications. The leading candidate is expected to be awarded the scholarship. However, the leading applicant on this list was ultimately not successful, as the scholarship was awarded to another candidate. There have been no complaints from the Minister of Defence questioning the authenticity of the list published by Ristani. The article that forms the basis of the legal action includes allegations that Çoku called and threatened the family of the leading applicant on the list late at night after they complained to the authorities. Çoku demands damages from Ristani for publishing “inaccurate and misleading data”. In light of the fact that Ristani has clear evidence to prove her factual statements, we consider the public official’s legal threat against the journalists constitutes an attempt to intimidate her and hinder her work.

On 26 January 2021, Italian investigative journalist Stefania Maurizi appeared before the First-Tier Tribunal (Information Rights) in London. The hearing is the latest development in her long-running, multi-jurisdictional litigation effort to defend the right of the press to gain access to the full set of documents held by various authorities related to the Assange and WikiLeaks cases.

The case at hand relates to Maurizi’s investigation of the 2015 handover of all emails and digital data belonging to Kristinn Hrafnsson, then WikiLeaks’ spokesperson; Sarah Harrison, then WikiLeaks’ investigative editor; and Joseph Farrell, then WikiLeaks’ section editor by Google to the US Department of Justice (DOJ). All were based in the UK, and two are UK citizens.

In June 2017, Maurizi requested disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to the Metropolitan Police (MPS) of any information about the three journalists in correspondence with the DOJ. Initially, the MPS refused to confirm whether it held any information but in 2018 Maurizi successfully challenged this position before the First-Tier Tribunal and in 2019, the MPS confirmed the journalistic status of the three journalists and that it holds such documents. However, the MPS continued to refuse disclosure, partly on unconvincing grounds of safeguarding national security and preventing terrorism. On 27 January 2020, the Information Commissioner upheld the MPS’ decision, after which Maurizi lodged the appeal.