Media Freedom Mission to Romania questions fairness of electoral…

Media Freedom Mission to Romania questions fairness of electoral coverage

Urgent reform of political funding for ‘press and propaganda’ needed to end media dependency on political parties

Members of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR), after completing a mission to Bucharest, concluded that much of the media coverage of Romania’s electoral campaigns is seriously compromised by political capture and that media are failing to provide the fair and balanced political reporting necessary for the public to make informed electoral choices.

Romania also boasts some highly professional media outlets providing excellent political coverage. Those that do, either refuse political funds completely, or ensure that when they do accept them, the content is clearly marked and fully transparent.

The MFRR’s two-day mission to Romania, 17-18 June, was held just one week after the European and local elections had been held. With presidential elections due in September and parliamentary elections in December this year, the MFRR calls for an urgent reform of the system of party funding to remove political money from the media system.

Any political expenditure that does exist must be restricted to clearly marked political advertising, with full disclosure of the budgets spent by each political party for each media. The overall level of state subsidies used for ‘press and propaganda’ must also be reduced.

The provision of annual state funding to political parties which are then used to pay media for ‘press and propaganda’ content is, currently, the biggest instrument of political capture of the Romanian media. The huge income it provides for media distorts political reporting creating an unfair electoral playing field. The sums used have risen rapidly in recent years with approximately 24 million euros in 2023 and with this set to rise significantly in 2024.

The problem is exacerbated by a lack of transparency over which parties fund which media, how much they fund and for what media content. Political parties are required to report their expenditure to the Permanent Electoral Authority on a monthly basis. While the PEA issued more detailed reports during the 2024 local and European campaign periods, which makes more transparent how much is spent in which media by which party, outside of the official campaign none of this detail is made public.

The mission’s key findings

Political Influence and Media Coverage:

The pervasive influence of political party funds on media results in biassed coverage primarily in favour of the governing coalition.
The political funding creates a pliant media that fails to hold government to account and undermines public trust in media.
The lack of transparency over the distribution of state advertising funds controlled by elected officials, further exacerbates the capture of media, particularly at the regional and local level.
The lack of transparency over other sources of funding, business ties and other conflicts of interests between media and politicians also compromise the capacity of media to serve the public.

Vexatious SLAPP Lawsuits:

Romanian media are targeted with an alarming number of Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs) aimed at silencing investigative journalism and critical reporting. These lawsuits, often initiated by powerful political figures and business interests, rarely win in court, but instead succeed in intimidating and financially draining media outlets.

Safety:

Online harassment and threats directed at journalists – particularly women journalists – create a growing climate of hostility designed to silence journalists. The authorities must do more to address this problem and protect journalists, particularly from online trolling and smear campaigns.

For the full mission set of findings and recommendations, see annex below.

The mission called for the government to swiftly implement new Europe-wide rules designed to improve media freedom including the European Media Freedom Act, the Anti-SLAPP Directive and the Regulation on the Transparency of Political Advertising as well as the European Commission’s recommendations on the safety of journalists. The EMFA, in particular, introduces new rules on transparency of ownership, conflicts of interest and the receipt and distribution of state advertising to media.

The mission welcomed commitments by the Ministry of Justice and the General Prosecutor to support training programmes for judges, prosecutors and policemen on SLAPPs, protection of sources and the safety of journalists.

The mission welcomed the High Court’s decision to instruct the re-opening of the investigation into possible political interference in the investigation into the smear campaign against investigative journalist, Emilia Sercan. The mission also welcomed the General Prosecutor’s assurances that Sercan’s case will be overseen by a highly competent and fully independent prosecutor with the resources to resolve the case before the end of the statute of limitations.

The mission also called for closer co-operation between the broadcast regulator (CNA) and the Permanent Electoral Authority (PEA) in verifying the expenditure of political funds in media to ensure its use does not breach either the electoral or broadcast law.

Finally the mission called on the parliamentary committees for mass media to conduct a public inquiry into the role of political funds and its impact on media independence and electoral fairness.

The mission confirmed findings set out by MFRR partners in their April report, Media freedom in Romania Ahead of Super Election Year.

The mission held meetings with Iulian Bulai, Chair of the Parliamentary Committee for Culture, Arts and Mass Information Means of the Chamber of Deputies; Alex Florin Florența, General Prosecutor; Mihai Pașca, Secretary of State for the Ministry of Justice; the Romanian Institute for Human Rights (IRDO); Dan Santa, Director of International Relations at Radio Romania; Constantin Rada, General Director at the Permanent Electoral Authority; Valentin Alexandru Jucan, Vice President of the National Audiovisual Council (CNA) and Mircea Toma, member of CNA and Council of Europe focal point for the safety of Journalists in Romania; and Renate Weber, Ombudsperson. The mission further met with leading journalists and media freedom groups, in a debate hosted by the Centre for Independent Journalism.

The mission was led by the International Press Institute and included the Osservatorio Balcani e Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT), European Centre for Press and Media Freedom, Free Press Unlimited and the Romanian media freedom organisation, ActiveWatch.

The MFRR is particularly thankful for the support of the Centre for Independent Journalism and of ActiveWatch in organizing the mission.

Annex

Key Findings

Media Capture and Electoral Coverage

Romanian elections are compromised by the political capture of mainstream media, primarily through the use of political party funds expenditure on ‘press and propaganda’.

The main political parties spent in 2023 over 24 million euros on press and propaganda funds and this figure is set to rise significantly in 2024.

While the election campaign rules provide for detailed reports of all political party expenditure, which were made more transparent by the Permanent Electoral Authority (PEA) during the June 2024 electoral campaigns, the detail of expenditure between campaigns is withheld.

There is considerable evidence, unveiled by investigative journalists, of political funds being illegitimately used to buy media coverage between election periods, in breach of the legislation on financing the activity of political parties and electoral campaigns and broadcast laws.

Public funds are being spent by political parties on media content which is not properly marked, making it often impossible for audiences to distinguish between journalistic and paid-for content.

- The lack of transparency over the distribution of state funds controlled by elected officials, means that this is also likely to further exacerbate the capture of media, particularly at the regional and local level.

There is no obligation on either political candidates, or media, to make public any conflicts of interest such as candidates ownership, or influence over media, further compromising the fairness of electoral campaigns.

This has resulted in a distortion of the electoral coverage as parts of the mainstream national and local media provide pliant coverage of the big political parties and hostile coverage of other political candidates.

While the problem is particularly acute during elections, political money has become embedded in the media system creating an unhealthy interdependency between the media and political parties throughout the political cycle.

The electoral and media regulators and political parties have a democratic duty to ensure full transparency over their use of public, and private, political funds spent on media.

There is an equal obligation on the media companies to declare all sums received from political sources and to clearly label the content that has been paid for.

The problem is further exacerbated by a public broadcaster which lacks the independence to be able to hold government to account and is in urgent need of reform.

Media Capture Recommendations

Romania must prioritise the fight against media capture including the following actions:

The parliamentary committees for mass media, should organise a public inquiry into the impact of political money on media independence and electoral fairness.
Closer co-operation between the broadcast regulator (CNA) and the Permanent Electoral Authority (PEA) in verifying the expenditure of political funds in media to ensure its use does not breach either the electoral or broadcast law. If necessary, the regulatory framework should be changed to guarantee the role of CNA in verifying the use of political funds.
The obligations of the European Media Freedom Act should be swiftly implemented, particularly those related to media capture including independence of public service media, transparency of ownership and conflicts of interest, regulatory independence, guarantees of media pluralism and fair distribution of state advertising.
The Regulation on Political Advertising should also be swiftly implemented to ensure fully transparent labelling of all political advertising in the media and online.

Legal Obstacles

Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs)

Romanian media are targeted with an alarming number of Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs) aimed at silencing investigative journalism and critical reporting. These lawsuits, often initiated by powerful political figures and business interests, rarely win in court, but instead succeed in intimidating and financially draining media outlets.

Freedom of Information

The Freedom of Information law is frequently ignored by Romanian authorities forcing media to appeal through the courts which can take several years to complete. By the time it is resolved the information is often no longer useful.
The mission heard of cases where political parties prefer to pay the fine and damages issued by the courts rather than give up the information. At that point the courts declared the case to be resolved despite the ongoing breach of the law, as the public interest information had not been disclosed.

Protection of Sources

Courts and the police have pressured journalists to reveal their sources against the provisions and case law of Article 10 of the European Court of Human Rights.

Legal Obstacles: Recommendations

Journalists and media support groups must do more to document and raise awareness about the threats posed by SLAPPs to the media’s ability to hold the powerful to account.
The government has an opportunity to reduce the threat of SLAPPs by ensuring that the European Union’s Anti-Slapp Directive is fully transposed into law and that the measures are extended to include domestic SLAPP cases as well as cross-border cases.
The Freedom of Information law must be fully implemented with clear consequences for individuals or institutions that are found by courts to have deliberately withheld information in breach of the law.
The rules and procedures for authorising surveillance of journalists must be updated to come into line with Article 4 of the European Media Freedom Act and of the ECHR which provide extensive safeguards against abuse of surveillance to target journalists.
Training should be provided to prosecutors and judges on SLAPP cases and the protection of sources and the protections offered by the European Convention of Human Rights.

Safety and protection of journalists

Online harassment and threats directed at journalists – particularly women journalists – create a growing climate of hostility designed to silence journalists. The authorities must do more to address this problem and protect journalists, particularly from online trolling and smear campaigns.
The mission welcomed the High Court’s decision to instruct the re-opening of the investigation of possible political interference in the investigation into the smear campaign against investigative journalist, Emilia Sercan.

Recommendations on the safety and protection of journalists

The General Prosecutor should organise a regular dialogue with journalists on how to reduce crimes against journalists. This should include trainings with the police and prosecutors on how to protect journalists from growing online and offline threats.
The new Prosecutor to be appointed to Emilia Sercan’s case must be highly competent, fully independent and provided with the resources to resolve the case before the end of the statute of limitations.

Local Journalism

Local journalists have seen a steep decline in professional standards, independence and public trust due in most part to the financial dependence – of the majority of local media to state and political advertising funds, enabling local politicians to buy the silence and loyalty of media. Furthermore, local journalists are far more vulnerable to vexatious lawsuits, threats and intimidation where political elites are able to apply influence on the judiciary, police and business communities with comparative ease.

Recommendations Local Journalism

The local government advertising budgets must be depoliticised to end the political capture of local media and ensure the fair distribution of funds. The rules for distribution and transparency outlined in the EMFA should apply to all local governments regardless of size.

Action should be taken to ensure the professional development of journalists, the promotion of sustainable business models, and the expansion of community audiences that help guarantee their independence and integrity.

Signed by:

International Press Institute (IPI)
The European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
The European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
OBC Transeuropa (OBCT)
Free Press Unlimited (FPU)

Text updated on 27 June 2024

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.

Library

Lithuania: Joint letter from mediafreedom organisations

Draft amendment to Lithuanian law on national radio and television threatens public broadcaster’s funding model

Today OBCT joins the International and European Federation of journalists (IFJ-EFJ) and other mediafreedom organisations in writing to the authorities in Lithuania, urging them to open consultation and discussion with LRT and ensure that any changes to the funding model will maintain guarantees that LRT is fully funded and able to fulfil its mandate.

25 June 2024

To:

Office of the President of the Republic of Lithuania, kanceliarija@prezidentas.lt

Ms Vikorija Čmilytė-Nielsen, Speaker of the Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania, pirmininko.sekretoriatas@lrs.lt

Members of the Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania, via Ms Vaida Servetkienė, Director of Document Department, Acting Secretary General of the Seimas

Members of the Committee on Culture of the Seimas, via Ms Agnė Jonaitienė, Head of the Committee Burau

Members of the Committee on Budget and Finance of the Seimas, via Committee Bureau

Mr Mindaugas Lingė, Chair of the Committee on Budget and Finance

Ms Ieva Ulčickaitė, Chief Advisor to the President

Mr Frederikas Jansonas, Chief Advisor to the to the President on Communications

Subject: Draft amendment to Lithuanian law on national radio and television threatens public broadcaster’s funding model

The International and European Federation of journalists (IFJ-EFJ), together with the International Press Institute (IPI) are concerned about the draft amendment to the Lithuanian Law on National Radio and Television (LRT) submitted by Mindaugas Lingė, Member of Parliament, on 14 June 2002. The draft seriously threatens the public broadcaster’s funding model.

The current LRT law guarantees that its budget should never fall below its 2019 level. The proposed amendment seeks to abandon this crucial provision and replace it with a mechanism that would limit the growth of LRT’s budget.

The draft was submitted without prior consultation with the public broadcaster. As stated in Article 5(3) of the newly adopted European Media Freedom Act (EMFA), funding procedures should be based on “transparent and objective criteria laid down in advance”. The submission of such changes without informing and consulting the public broadcaster reinforces our concerns about the future of the broadcaster.

The proposed abolition of the minimum funding threshold undermines the long term sustainability of LRT, compromising its independence and reducing its ability to fulfil its mandate.

The amendment is being justified as necessary in order to redirect funds to increase Lithuania’s defence spending. Raising a defence budget must not come at the cost of undermining institutions essential for the preservation of Lithuania’s democracy, including public broadcasting.

As a public media service, LRT must be adequately funded to fulfil its mission, to evolve in line with rapid technological and social change and to ensure adequate preparedness for uninterrupted broadcasting in times of emergency. Moreover, the public service media’s role in combatting disinformation is also vital for the protection against information warfare.

We urge the authorities to engage in open consultation and discussion with LRT to ensure that any changes to the funding model will maintain guarantees that LRT is fully funded and able to fulfil its public service remit.

Thank you for your attention to this important issue. We remain at your disposal for any further information or assistance.

Signed by:

Ricardo Gutiérrez, General Secretary of the European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)

Anthony Bellanger, General Secretary of the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ)

Chiara Sighele, Programme Manager, Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT)

Scott Griffen, Interim Executive Director, International Press Institute (IPI)

Andreas Lamm, Interim Managing Director, European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)

Library

Media freedom groups call on Slovakia’s Parliament to reject…

Media freedom groups call on Slovakia’s Parliament to reject public broadcasting bill

Critics warn: proposed law could seriously undermine the independence of public media

Journalists and media freedom groups are urging Slovakia’s MPs to reject the proposed public service broadcasting bill scheduled for parliamentary review next week. Despite recent amendments to the bill, the new structure would lead to the politicisation of the broadcaster in breach of the European Media Freedom Act.

The public broadcasting bill aiming to replace Radio and Television of Slovakia (RTVS) with a new entity, Slovak Television and Radio (STVR), will be discussed by the Parliament next week after its finalisation by the government in May.

If passed into law, the governing coalition will also remove the current Director-General and supervisory board before the end of their legal mandates.

The new Director-General will be appointed by the new Board of STVR, which will consist of nine members, five appointed by the Parliament and four by the Ministry of Culture. All their mandates would start at the same time. This would hand the ruling majority effective control over the Board and, therefore, the Director General, leading to the likely rapid politicisation of the new public television and radio channels.

The ruling coalition has persistently accused the public media and its journalists of bias and political activism and has made no secret of its desire to assert control over it through this ‘reform’.

The initial bill, published in March, provoked a string of protests led by RTVS’s journalists who published a petition expressing fear that the new law will create “a tool for political control of RTVS for any government in power”, adding that “free and independent public media should serve all citizens of Slovakia, not the power ambitions of any parties.”

Slovakia’s President, Zuzana Čaputová, European Commission Vice-President Věra Jourová, as well as many international organisations also expressed concerns including that the law may breach provisions for independence laid out in the European Media Freedom Act.

As a result, the government has since withdrawn some of the more vexatious elements of the law, including a provision for a new politically appointed Programme Council to coordinate the programming.

Despite these modifications the bill still provides for the politicisation of the public broadcaster by the government that would fatally compromise its independence. It is therefore still contrary to the European Media Freedom Act’s provisions on the independence of the public media.

Moreover, the law has done nothing to secure sufficient, stable and independent funding which is essential to ensure STVR’s independence and fulfilment of its public service mission. In 2023 Slovakia replaced the licence fee model with direct state funding increasing its dependence on the government.

Our organisations have seen how easy it is for governments to undermine the independence of public broadcasters and how serious the effects of such a politicisation can be for society as a whole.

The tragic shooting of Prime Minister Robert Fico against the background of a polarised society shows that the need for pluralistic and independent public media, that can facilitate debate across the political spectrum in a time of crisis, has never been greater.

Signed by:

International Press Institute (IPI)
Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ)
European Broadcasting Union (EBU)
European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
Free Press Unlimited (FPU)
OBC Transeuropa (OBCT)
Reporters Without Borders (RSF)

Library

Germany: Journalist Ignacio Rosaslanda physically assaulted by police while…

Germany: Journalist Ignacio Rosaslanda physically assaulted by police while covering police operation

The undersigned international media freedom, free expression, and journalist organisations call on the German authorities to conduct a thorough investigation into the physical attack by Berlin police on Mexican video journalist Ignacio Rosaslanda while he was covering a police operation. The journalist who is working for the daily Berliner Zeitung, was not only prevented from reporting and physically abused but was also arbitrarily detained for hours without medical care. We urge authorities to take appropriate measures to ensure that the attack does not go unpunished and strengthen the protection of journalists who are vulnerable targets during demonstrations.

On 23 May 2024, Mexican journalist Ignacio Rosaslanda was at the Humboldt University’s Institute of Social Sciences to cover protests by pro-Palestinian activists who had occupied the building. The police intervened to evacuate the activists. Rosaslanda, who was filming the evacuation and had identified himself to the police as a member of the press, was physically attacked by a Berlin policeman. The incident was recorded by the journalist.

“The policeman suddenly attacked me from behind. He punched me twice in the face before pushing me to the ground with his knee behind my back. I kept shouting that I was a journalist. I even had my journalist card around my neck and my camera in one hand. They could see that I was documenting,” Rosaslanda told the MFRR partners. According to Rosaslanda, when he was on the ground, the policeman even said to him: “Freedom of the press is not without restrictions, your colleagues are outside and have done their work and are not handcuffed”. Although Rosaslanda tried to clarify the reason for his aggression by the police, he was told that he was the one who had attacked and resisted arrest. “I was then handcuffed for at least an hour and held in the building university for at least three hours for questioning”. Rosaslanda, who was injured, was refused immediate medical attention. The journalist had to be taken to hospital by one of his colleagues after the interrogation.

On 24 May 2024, the editors of the Berliner Zeitung strongly condemned the violence against Rosaslanda and the obstruction of his work by the Berlin police. “An attack on a journalist is an attack on the freedom of the press. This is all the more serious when the attack comes from the state,” wrote the Berliner Zeitung. Rosaslanda filed a lawsuit for assault and abuse of authority.

“We condemned and made the attack visible via our X account. We will also talk with the Berlin police and call for clarification on this attack. The Berlin police had only declared to various media that they “check” investigations,” emphasises Renate Gensch, regional chairwoman of the German Union of journalists (dju) in ver.di Berlin-Brandenburg and member of the national board of dju.

“As a Press representative, Ignacio Rosaslanda had only wanted to do his job. We condemn the violence against a press colleague by the Berlin police in the strongest possible terms. We also call for even stronger cooperation between the police and journalists’ associations and press representatives to prevent such incidents,” said Andrea Roth, deputy chairwoman of the Bavarian Journalists’ Association and EFJ Steering Committee member.

The MFRR partners are concerned about police violence because this unacceptable behaviour encourages and normalises hatred against journalists, who are already being targeted by protestors in pro-Palestine demonstrations, ranging from covering up or damaging cameras, harassment of the press, threats of physical violence, and assaults. Of the seven physical attacks on journalists during demonstrations, recorded by the Media Freedom Rapid Response platform, four journalists were injured at protests related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Most recently, a freelance photographer was physically assaulted with a poster at a pro-Palestinian demonstration in Berlin and suffered a bleeding wound. Reporters from Sachsen Fernsehen were brutally beaten in Leipzig in January.

The MFRR partners stand in full solidarity with the journalist Ignacio Rosaslanda and all journalists subjected to pressure and threats to silence them. We urge the relevant authorities to take immediate steps to protect the journalists, including a swift and thorough investigation into the police attack on Rosaslanda.

Signed by:

The European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
OBC Transeuropa (OBCT)
Free Press Unlimited (FPU)
European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
The International Federation of Journalists (IFJ)
The International Press Institute (IPI)

Library

Death threats to editorial of weekly magazine Nacional in…

Death threats to editorial of weekly magazine Nacional in Croatia

The editorial office of the weekly magazine Nacional received death threats in an SMS message on Monday, 20 May 2024. The SafeJournalists Network and The Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) partners are calling on the relevant institutions in Croatia to immediately respond, find, and prosecute the perpetrator.

The message sent to Nacional’s official phone contained the following text: “You and those like you carried out the attempted assassination of Prime Minister Fico by writing half-truths, lies, and inciting against people who are doing their jobs just to make money. Your triple informant paid for it with his life, and soon all the editors of the ‘axis of evil’ will too. We are waiting for the moment to catch as many of you together as possible so that we don’t waste explosives on just one scavenger. The surviving vultures will start writing the truth and only the truth, not lying, inventing, and writing in order just to collect money. We are watching you, and getting more than two will be a success, so write your wills….”

The Nacional editorial staff immediately reported the threat to the police and informed the Minister of the Interior, Davor Božinović. This threat is particularly alarming as it echoes the tragic story of Nacional’s owner and editor, Ivo Pukanić, and marketing director, Niko Franjić, who were killed in a bomb attack in Zagreb on 23 October 2008. “This threat is serious. You mentioned explosives. It is impossible not to think of our colleagues who were killed in a bomb assassination described by the state attorney as the most violent attack in modern Croatian history. But we will not let the threats affect our work,” editor-in-chief Berislav Jelinić told the EFJ. Jelinić has been under police protection for five years, from 2008 to 2013 due to threats linked with the tobacco mafia linked with the killing of his colleagues in 2008. He has even been the target of two assassination attempts. The threat of death, already worrying, takes on an even more frightening dimension in this highly charged context.

Hrvoje Zovko, president of the Croatian Journalists’ Association (CJA), stated: “For the Croatian Journalists’ Association, this is a direct threat not only to the safety of our colleagues from Nacional, whom we support but also a direct attack on media freedom. I will just remind you that Prime Minister Andrej Plenković, a little over a month ago, dangerously labeled several media outlets, including Nacional, as the ‘axis of evil.’ I also remind you of the open threats from the leaders of the “Domovinski pokret” directed at the editorial office of the weekly Novosti and the entire journalistic community, practically marking the media as enemies of the state,” Zovko emphasized.

The SafeJournalists network and MFRR partners are calling on the relevant institutions in Croatia to conduct a thorough investigation and bring the perpetrator of the death threat to justice. Such incidents represent a serious attack on media freedom and further endanger the safety of journalists working in increasingly difficult conditions daily. It is necessary to ensure that all journalists can do their jobs without fear of violence and threats, and it is therefore crucial that the relevant institutions demonstrate determination in protecting media freedoms. Organisations also call on authorities to stop targeting the media, as their inflammatory rhetoric encourages individuals and groups to threaten journalists.

We call on the authorities to provide meaningful support to journalists’ safety.

Signed by:

SafeJournalists Network

Association of Journalists of Kosovo

Association of Journalists of Macedonia

BH Journalists Association

Croatian Journalists’ Association

Independent Journalists’ Association of Serbia

Trade Union of Media of Montenegro

Media Freedom Rapid Response

European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)

The European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)

International Press Institute (IPI)

Free Press Unlimited (FPU)

Library

BiH: Authorities must urgently break the deadlock facing public…

BiH: Authorities must urgently break the deadlock facing public broadcasters and solve the financial problems

Following the temporary interruption of the TV and radio programs of the RTV Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina on 8 May 2024, the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) partners denounce the irresponsible political management that created the crisis and led to direct violation of citizens’ right to freedom of information.

The long-standing financial dispute between the national public broadcaster (BHRT) and the federal public channel of Bosnia and Herzegovina (FTV), two of the three public service media in the country, led to an unprecedented media blackout ordered by the BHRT management board. As a result, most of the programmes were replaced by a test signal at 6 am on 8 May. The signal to FTV was reactivated a day later following the order of the Municipal Court in Sarajevo, which threatened BHRT with a fine.

On 15 May, the Prosecutor’s Office of Bosnia and Herzegovina issued an order to investigate the responsibility of the Steering Committee members of the Public Radio and Television System of BiH (BHRT, RTV FBIH, RTRS) whose twelve members are appointed by the entity parliaments and the Parliament of Bosnia-Herzegovina.

“Most of the problems faced today by BHRT and RTV FBiH arise precisely from the fact that the Law on Public Broadcasting System, adopted in 2005 and amended several times in the past period, has never been fully implemented in practice, nor is it respected,” said the BH Journalists Association, which denounced a huge lack of political will to solve the situation.

That system was additionally violated in 2017 by the unilateral decision of the RTRS, the radio television of the Republika Srpska, one of the two entities, not to respect the current law on the distribution of RTV fees, and the continuation of the dispute between two broadcasters in the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

“We hope that the investigation by the BiH Prosecutor’s Office will be an additional signal to the Steering Committee members of the three public broadcasters to urgently return to the key legal provisions on the method of collecting and distributing the RTV fee”, added the journalists’ association.

A MFRR mission to Bosnia and Herzegovina conducted in October 2023 warned that the very existence of Bosnia and Herzegovina’s public service media was at stake if the perennial crisis was not urgently resolved. The situation deteriorated further in December 2023, when the only source of income of BHRT had not been collected after a contract dispute with BHRT management. Bosnia and Herzegovina was on the verge of becoming the only European country without a public broadcaster, potentially leaving 800 employees with no job.

While in March 2024 the European Council agreed to open accession negotiations, Bosnia and Herzegovina has yet to improve its environment for the media to continue on its path towards the European Union, as the European Commission pointed out a “backsliding” in media freedom in its report published in November 2023. In particular, the BH Journalists Association has long denounced the dire working conditions for the journalists working in the two public services, their poor labour rights, low salaries and dilapidated state of their equipment.

The MFRR partners urge the competent authorities to find a sustainable solution in order to provide the public broadcasters with sufficient funding to operate normally, as well as the implementation of a legal framework that protects their independence and guarantees their public service mission. A sustainable financing of public services is a prerequisite for the country’s accession to the European Union, in line with the newly adopted European Media Freedom Act. The undersigned organisations also expect the investigation by the Prosecutor’s Office to shed light on the financial management of recent years and to find those responsible for the systematic obstruction of the Law on public radio and television system for almost two decades.

Signed by:

European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
ARTICLE 19 Europe
European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
International Press Institute (IPI)
Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT)
Free Press Unlimited (FPU)
South East Europe Media Organisation (SEEMO)

Library

Ukraine: MFRR partners highlight ongoing press freedom issues

MFRR partners today highlight ongoing press freedom concerns in Ukraine, over two years following the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion. While Ukraine was at first quick to unite in the face of armed aggression, setting aside internal conflicts and arguments, the climate of trust between officials and independent media seems to have seriously deteriorated, two years on

Repeated surveillance of journalists

In comparison to neighboring Russia and Belarus, Ukraine has long been a haven for independent media, offering local journalists the opportunity to criticize power without fear of retribution. However, a shadow was cast on this image, when in recent months a worrying phenomenon of government surveillance of journalists re-emerged.

According to media reports, this surveillance has recently been carried out mostly by the Security Service of Ukraine, known locally as SBU. In January, journalists at investigative outlet Bihus.Info were intimidated by the publication of video and audio recordings showing some of the outlet’s camera operators consuming cannabis, amphetamine and other illegal drugs.

Later revelations by the outlet seemed to point to the incident being part of a wider surveillance operation targeting Bihus.Info, in the course of which SBU operatives would have hacked access to video cameras, as well as sent officials to follow journalists at the outlet.

In a separate incident, a group of unknown individuals attempted to intimidate investigative journalist Yuri Nikolov by banging on the door of his apartment and demanding his drafting into the army. It was unclear who had sent the individuals to Nikolov’s apartment and how they had obtained the reporter’s address.

In April, the SBU again appeared to be responsible for the surveillance of a journalist. This time, Yevheny Shulhat from Slidstvo.Info was targeted. Just a few days before the reporter published an investigation into alleged corruption by a high-level SBU official, military officers tracked him down at a supermarket near his home and attempted to draft him.

The incidents were not left unanswered by the authorities. In both the case of Shulhat and of Bihus.Info, the SBU officials allegedly responsible for organizing the journalists’ surveillance were swiftly removed from their positions, while competent authorities opened investigations.

However, efforts cannot stop here: systemic safeguards must be established to prevent SBU and other officials from targeting journalists or other critics in retaliation for their work, all while protecting journalists who report on possible misconduct or crimes by SBU and other officials. If this is not done, Ukraine risks following a pattern of state-sponsored intimidation and harassment of investigative journalists.

United news policy

In Ukraine, six of the country’s main television channels continue to conduct common, 24/7 news broadcasts, as part of an initiative called the “united news telethon”. Each channel is responsible for producing content for a given time slot, with all remaining channels broadcasting the content of the station occupying the slot.

While this initiative was initially hailed as an effort by Ukrainian media to produce common news broadcasts in the wake of Russia’s full-scale invasion, the format of these broadcasts has remained largely unchanged over the past two years, contributing to making them increasingly irrelevant, uninformative and unpopular, according to opinion polls conducted in Ukraine.

The fact that several of Ukraine’s main television channels continue to conduct common news broadcasts, 24 hours a day, seriously lowers the quantity and quality of information received by Ukrainian viewers. As a result, data has shown that the telethon’s viewership has notably fallen over the past year, and that Ukrainians have turned to anonymous Telegram channels to read what is perceived as “real” news.

The sources used by anonymous Telegram channels are often impossible to determine, as are their sponsors. This move away from the media creates a serious danger to Ukraine’s informational security, as the political agenda of anonymous channels normally remains unknown. In addition, Telegram has comparatively loose policies on hate speech and other problematic and manipulative content.

For this reason, we call upon Ukrainian authorities to seriously reconsider the format of the “united news telethon” and consider closing this project altogether, as an inefficient target of resources detrimental to Ukraine’s informational security and media diversity in the country

Frontline accreditation

As in any war, it is essential to both ensure that Ukrainian journalists can deliver accurate and timely information to the public and to create conditions that minimize risks to their safety. In this context, MFRR is concerned with the current system of frontline accreditation for journalists, and in particular the “traffic light” system under which regional army commands have the power to decide on which areas form part of which zones, establishing “red”, “yellow” and “green” zones with varying degrees of permitted access.

While a recent reform did away with the most stringent restrictions, we believe that this positive change can only be a first step in making regulations more adapted to the reality of the work of war correspondents.

The current “traffic light” system is inappropriate for several reasons. Firstly, it is not possible to update access zones swiftly enough in response to changing conditions on the ground. As a result, journalists risk being let into areas not safe enough or are prevented from entering areas where the safety situation has improved but are still under a “red” designation.

Additionally, anonymous reports by Ukrainian journalists show that military commanders on the ground regularly disregard official red zones, or impose additional restrictions on the work of journalists not required by national regulations. This is mainly related to restrictions on filming, as well as on interviewing soldiers, with many of these cases being overly restrictive.

While we again acknowledge and are grateful for the Ukrainian authorities’ commitment to protecting journalist safety, we believe in a need for a discussion about a return to more flexible arrangements for journalists’ access to the frontline, for instance by instead formulating general recommendations to local-level commanders on the conditions under which journalists should be allowed access to combat zones.

While great care must be applied when formulating these new regulations, we believe this more flexible system would in the end create safer and equal conditions for journalists, while also ensuring that journalists can continue to provide accurate and timely news to the Ukrainian public.

MFRR partners continue to stand with Ukraine, and Ukrainian journalists in particular, in their resistance to Russia’s war of aggression. Recommendations made to Ukrainian authorities are made based on the premise that they will help Ukraine in building a democratic society respectful of media freedom, which ultimately will contribute to Ukrainian victory.

Signed by:

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

Library

Georgian PM urged to withdraw Foreign Agent Law and…

Georgian PM urged to withdraw Foreign Agent Law and to guarantee journalist safety

Today the partners of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) urge Georgian Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze to immediately withdraw the bill on Transparency of Foreign Influence and to address the concerning rise in attacks against journalists and media workers in recent weeks.

Irakli Kobakhidze

Prime Minister of Georgia

7 Ingorokva Street

State Chancellery

Tbilisi, Georgia

Dear Prime Minister Kobakhidze,

We, the undersigned international press freedom, journalists and human rights organisations, are writing to express our deep alarm about the reintroduction of the bill on Transparency of Foreign Influence and the sudden rise in violence and other restrictions against Georgia’s journalists reporting on the public protests against the Bill.

We reiterate our call for the immediate withdrawal of the Bill which threatens the viability of many independent media and we call on the authorities to guarantee the safety of all journalists after at least 20 media workers were physically assaulted, verbally harassed, or detained while covering demonstrations.

The Transparency of Foreign Influence bill, which was recently passed in its second reading at the Parliament, provides the authorities with a powerful tool to discredit, pressure, and eventually silence independent voices, thereby threatening press freedom and freedom of expression.

The law would not only force independent media and NGOs to be labelled as “organisations pursuing the interests of foreign powers,” it would also empower the Ministry of Justice to conduct “thorough investigations” of these organizations solely on the basis of a written application alleging ties to a “foreign power.”

The Ministry of Justice would have the power to request personal information enabling it to interfere in the activities of independent media outlets and NGOs, disrupt their operations, and undermine their watchdog role.

Georgia’s current legal framework provides safeguards that uphold freedom of the press, including Article 17 of the Constitution of Georgia, which guarantees the inadmissibility of censorship, freedom of the media, and pluralism of the media. Additionally, Article 3 of the Law on Freedom of Speech and Expression guarantees journalists’ right to protect the confidentiality of sources of information, and to make editorial decisions in accordance with their own conscience.

These important legal protections will be undermined by the new Bill by enabling direct government interference and pressure to be applied to newsrooms.

Lastly, journalists should be able to carry out their work freely. The decision to bar journalists from online outlets from the Parliament, which was made at the very start of parliamentary debates on the Bill, is a clear restriction of the freedom of the media and should be immediately overturned. Furthermore, journalists are unable to carry out their work safely due to police violence and intimidation on the streets of Tbilisi which should immediately end. According to Article 154 of the Criminal Code of Georgia, unlawful interference with a journalist’s professional activities is strictly punishable especially when committed using threats of violence or abusing an official position.

Based on our data, at least 20 media workers have been physically assaulted, verbally harassed, or detained while covering demonstrations, and we call on you to ensure the incidents are fully investigated and the perpetrators are held accountable.

Signed:

International Press Institute (IPI)

Index on Censorship

International Media Support (IMS)

European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)

European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)

Free Press Unlimited (FPU)

OBC Transeuropa (OBCT)

South East Europe Media Organisation (SEEMO)

Association of European Journalists (AEJ Belgium)

Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project

Association of European Journalists (AJE France)

IFEX

Committee to Protect Journalists

Public Media Alliance (PMA)

Society of Journalists (Warsaw)

Human Rights House Foundation (HRHF)

Community Media Forum Europe (CMFE)

Global Forum for Media Development (GFMD)

Library

Serbia: MFRR partners demand Belgrade court set Belarusian journalist…

Serbia: MFRR partners demand Belgrade court set Belarusian journalist free

Andrey Gniot at risk of deportation under politically motivated charges

The undersigned partner organizations of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) demand the immediate release of Andrey Gniot, a Belarusian journalist and pro-democracy activist who is being held in custody by Serbian authorities on politically motivated charges formulated by the regime of Alexander Lukashenko. Since October, Serbian courts have been deliberating upon a request to deport Gniot to Belarus.

According to the Belarusian Association of Journalists (BAJ), an independent trade union in exile, Gniot was arrested immediately upon his arrival to Serbia on October 30. He was detained based on an international arrest warrant issued by Interpol upon request by authorities in Belarus on alleged tax evasion charges. After a first appeal, the High Court of Belgrade is currently deliberating on whether the conditions for Gniot’s extradition to Belarus have been met.

The journalist first left his home country in 2021 after receiving “signals” that authorities were aware of his activism, which he had not made public out of fear of reprisal, according to reports by independent Belarusian media. After first moving to Thailand, the journalist flew for work to Serbia, a country which remains a major hub for exiled Belarusians and Russians, as it is one of the few in Europe which they can enter without a visa. He was unaware that an international arrest warrant had been issued against him.

Activism and journalistic activity in Belarus

Gniot is mainly known for his activities as a director of music and TV commercials, as well as a journalist and political activist. He is one of the founders of SOS BY, an independent union of Belarusian sportspeople, which reportedly contributed to the canceling of the 2021 Hockey World Cup in Belarus. The decision was made months before the event and was motivated in part by ongoing human rights abuses perpetrated by authorities in the wake of the 2020-21 mass protest movement against Lukashenko. SOS BY was later designated as an “extremist formation” by the Belarusian KGB, which made it possible to sentence its members to lengthy prison terms. In addition, Gniot’s decision to leave Belarus was due in part to his contributions for Prague-based broadcaster RFE/RL, as he was concerned about the risk of arbitrary detention in retaliation for his journalistic work.

While Gniot is formally accused of tax evasion, he claims that he was never notified of these charges throughout the years during which he would have violated Belarusian tax laws. Tax evasion, as well as other charges, were also earlier used to incriminate Maryna Zolatava and Lyudmila Chekina, respectively the editor-in-chief and director general of Tut.by. The website used to be Belarus’ most popular independent online outlet before its forced closure by authorities in 2021.

In addition, Gniot’s lawyers reported that authorities in Minsk accused him based on a law adopted in 2019, while the charges are related to Gniot’s activities between 2012 and 2018.

Risk of political persecution in Belarus

Belarus remains Europe’s biggest jailer of journalists, with 36 media workers currently behind bars according to BAJ. The country of nine million also has the highest rate of imprisoned journalists per capita in the world.

Independent media are in practice fully banned at the national level, and independent journalists have been forced to go into exile, as staying in Belarus exposed them to inevitable repression due to current and past activities.

Since 2020, authorities have labelled thousands of media outlets, website pages, social media accounts and other online content as various forms of “extremism”: as a result, journalists and readers alike face fines and prison terms for any interactions, current or past, with independent outlets designated as such. Security forces are known for regular detentions of Belarusian journalists and independent media consumers for past activities, with the first group receiving prison or other sentences restricting their liberty, while the second are typically forced to record videos “confessing” their “extremism” before serving short-term prison terms (typically up to 15 days).

Given the likelihood of politically motivated repression in Belarus, we urge the High Court of Belgrade, which is currently handling Gniot’s case, to pronounce a decision in favour of his immediate release, as well as for competent authorities in Serbia to not appeal such a decision.

Serbian authorities should take into account the unimaginable scale of repression of independent media in Belarus, and the fact that Belarusian authorities have weaponized tax evasion charges to take revenge on a journalist for his past successful activism against human rights abuses. Gniot’s deportation to Belarus would expose him to arbitrary detention and imprisonment, as well as inhumane treatment and torture while in custody.

Andrey must be set free and allowed to continue his professional activities in the country of his choice.

Signed by:

International Press Institute (IPI)
Article 19 Europe
European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
Free Press Unlimited (FPU)
OBC Transeuropa (OBCT)

Library

Hungary: Media freedom groups welcome EU court referral over…

Hungary: Media freedom groups welcome EU court referral over Klubrádió frequency

Together with media freedom and freedom of expression organisations, today MFRR partners welcome the European Commission’s decision to refer Hungary to the Court of Justice of the European Union over the February 2021 decision of the country’s Media Council to force independent broadcaster Klubrádió from the airwaves.

This decision by the EU’s executive body to take Hungary to court over the alleged breach in EU telecoms rules regarding Klubrádió’s frequency licence is a belated but important signal that the Commission is increasingly willing to use the tools available to it to defend independent media, freedom of expression and media pluralism where they are most threatened.

We believe this legal challenge goes to the core of democratic standards and EU values: the freedom of the press to criticise the government and provide independent reporting without undue interference from government or state regulatory bodies.

The Commission announced the continuation of infringement proceedings on July 15, stating that the Media Council’s decision to reject Klubrádió’s application for the use of the Budapest 92.9 MHz frequency was made on “highly questionable grounds” and had applied rules in a “disproportionate and discriminatory manner”. It added that the muzzling of the station “violated the freedom of speech as enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU”.

As our organisations have previously reported, Klubrádió was forced off air in February 2021 after the media regulator, which is filled with figures appointed solely by the ruling Fidesz party, rejected the extension over its alleged failure to comply with administrative requirements. The regulator then blocked the station’s attempt to re-secure the frequency it had broadcasted on for 20 years, gagging one the country’s last major critical broadcasters. While Klubrádió continues to broadcast online, it is currently operating as a radio station without a frequency, severely limiting its reach and influence.

Moving forward, we hope the Court of Justice of the European Union will carefully assess this case and find Hungary in violation of EU telecommunications law over the fair and non-discriminatory allocation of radio frequencies. This would then allow Klubrádió to seek a retrial at the Supreme Court over the Media Council’s original decision. However, this process is likely to be lengthy and there are concerns that in the end it may have little direct impact on Klubradio’s ability to restart broadcasting.

Ultimately, this case is bigger than one radio station. Over the last decade, as a result of a lack of appropriate legal safeguards for upholding the Media Council’s functional independence, the regulator has played a central role in the well documented and systematic erosion of media pluralism in Hungary. Concerns over this lack of independence were recently highlighted in the EU’s Rule of Law Report 2022. Klubrádió is one of several cases in which the frequency renewal process has been applied selectively at the expense of critical broadcasters.

This underscores the urgent need for the upcoming European Media Freedom Act to address developments contributing to media capture, including by helping enforce the functional independence of national media regulatory across the bloc.

Our organisations will continue to closely monitor the infringement proceedings in the coming months and will continue to sound the alarm over all future attacks on media pluralism and freedom in Hungary. We also continue to stand in solidarity with all independent journalists and media outlets in Hungary who continue to carry out their watchdog role in highly challenging conditions.

Signed by:

ARTICLE 19 Europe
AMARC Europe
European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
Civil Liberties Union for Europe (Liberties)
Free Press Unlimited (FPU)
IFEX
International Press Institute (IPI)
Media Diversity Institute
OBC Transeuropa (OBCT)
Ossigeno.info
Reporters Without Borders (RSF)
Society of Journalists, Warsaw

Media Freedom Mission to Romania questions fairness of electoral coverage

Lithuania: Joint letter from mediafreedom organisations

Media freedom groups call on Slovakia’s Parliament to reject public broadcasting bill

Germany: Journalist Ignacio Rosaslanda physically assaulted by police while covering police operation

Death threats to editorial of weekly magazine Nacional in Croatia

BiH: Authorities must urgently break the deadlock facing public broadcasters and solve the financial problems

Ukraine: MFRR partners highlight ongoing press freedom issues

Georgian PM urged to withdraw Foreign Agent Law and to guarantee journalist safety

Serbia: MFRR partners demand Belgrade court set Belarusian journalist free

Hungary: Media freedom groups welcome EU court referral over Klubrádió frequency

Get in touch