Serbia, no justice for the Ćuruvija murder

Twenty-five years after the murder of journalist Slavko Ćuruvija and nine after the start of the trial against the four accused of the murder, after a first conviction in 2019 and the repetition of the trial, on Monday 5 February the Court of Appeal of Belgrade acquitted the defendants

07/02/2024 – Massimo Moratti

The news came at the end of a particularly intense day on Friday: a few hours earlier, Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić had announced that, due to the situation in Kosovo, he would request a convocation of the United Nations Security Council. Attention was therefore focused on the events relating to Kosovo and on possible new tensions.

In this context, the news arrived that the Belgrade Court of Appeal acquitted all four defendants accused of the murder of Slavko Ćuruvija.

Ćuruvija, a journalist of great civic spirit, was killed in April 1999 after criticising the regime of Slobodan Milošević and his wife Mira Marković. At that time, Vučić was the Minister of Information.

The four defendants were very prominent figures of the Državna bezbednost (DB), the security agency of the Yugoslav Interior Ministry, heir to the infamous UDBA. Specifically, Radomir Marković was its head at the time, Milan Radonjić was head of the Belgrade department and Ratko Romić and Miroslav Kurak were DB operatives.

The trial of the four began in 2015, thanks to the Commission to investigate the killing of journalists in Serbia . The Commission was created in 2013 by the Serbian government, in which Vučić was then deputy prime minister, as the result of the persistent insistence of Veran Matić, the historic editor-in-chief of B92 at the time of Milošević, who wanted to shed light on the murders of Ćuruvija, Dada Vujasinović and Milan Pantić. At the time of the start of the trial, Vučić himself had said that he would resign if those responsible were not found.

A troubled trial

From the beginning, Ćuruvija’s was defined as a state murder and it was thought that the trial would confirm what everyone knew.

The trial, which began in 2015, saw around a hundred witnesses appear before the judges, although some key figures, such as Milošević’s wife Mira Marković , believed by many to have instigated the murder, were never heard. The investigation only looked at the facilitators and material executors of the murder, without trying to find out who the instigators were, since this would most likely have led to Mira Marković and Slobodan Milošević.

Other key figures, who could have been investigated due to their membership and the role they held at the DB, were instead heard only as witnesses. Numerous witnesses then, during the hearings, had sudden amnesia or changed their initial versions. Over the years, it became known that the inspector who conducted the investigations had been threatened and risked his life .

The first instance sentence was issued in 2019 and the four defendants were sentenced to over one hundred years in prison. In the second instance, however, the sentence was overturned and in September 2019 the Court of Appeal ordered the trial to be repeated. The trial was repeated starting in October 2020 and in December 2021 the Court of First Instance essentially confirmed the previous decision for the four defendants. This sentence, however, was ultimately annulled by last Friday’s acquittal.

The four are therefore considered not guilty and although in principle there is still the possibility of appealing to the Supreme Court, the chances of success are decidedly slim , as the experts have pointed out, and the acquittal of the four defendants cannot be overturned. In any case, on Monday 5 February, the prosecutor’s office made it clear that it intended to appeal to the Supreme Court.

An announced decision

The acquittal is a tombstone on the chances of justice in the Ćuruvija case. But it is a decision that did not come entirely unexpectedly. Although it was only announced last Friday, it seems that it had already been taken for some time.

Veran Matić himself, in the spring of last year, had implied that the Court of Appeal had already ruled on the case of the four defendants. In September, Matić himself and the Ćuruvija Foundation had written that in fact the sentence had already been issued and that the Court had acquitted the four defendants. This despite the fact that the sentence had not yet been published, as they were waiting for the most appropriate moment to make it public . The same invitation to publish the sentence was then reiterated by the Ćuruvija Foundation in November last year.

The authorities gave no explanation as to why the publication of the ruling was delayed for so many months. It is possible that the street protests against the government and the heated electoral climate were the elements that recommended delaying the publication of the sentence, so as not to further exacerbate tensions.

The reactions and protests

Despite the content of the sentence having been widely anticipated and the fact that the news was communicated just before the weekend, the acquittal decision still caused quite a stir in Serbia.

Perica Gunjić of the Ćuruvija Foundation is lapidary: “The decision is scandalous and represents a defeat not only for journalists and freedom of the press, but for the entire independence of the judicial system and for the democratisation process itself”.

Regarding the trial, Gunjić comments that “the court during the entire trial made many strange decisions, which indicated that something was wrong. The two first instance decisions were written in an approximate manner, as if there was the intention to have them annulled in the second instance”. This decision, concludes Gunjić, represents an “immediate return to the 90s, to the darkest period of the new history of Serbia, to the times of wars, to the times of Slobodan Milošević”.

Matić then commented that both the political will and the role of the institutions have failed, especially as regards the judicial sector, which in fact remains anchored to the 1990s.

Matić himself then commented that in the next few days he will discuss the future of the commission investigating the killing of journalists and whether it still makes sense for it to exist. The European Union, OSCE and numerous other members of the diplomatic community expressed their disappointment at the acquittal.

Furthermore, on Monday 5 February, a protest was held in front of the Court of Appeal in Belgrade, organised by journalists’ associations: the demonstrators were silent for 25 minutes in front of the Court, symbolising 25 years of silence since the Ćuruvija murder.

The reactions of the judicial and political world

On Monday 5, the President of the Court of Appeal of Belgrade published a statement in which, while he understands the dissatisfaction of Ćuruvija’s family and friends, he specified that the Court judged on the basis of the evidence contained in the case which was not sufficient to support the prosecution’s thesis.

Prime Minister Ana Brnabić said she could not comment on the Court’s decision as the judiciary is independent. Brnabić stressed how the proceedings had only begun 16 years after the assassination, thanks to Vučić’s coming to power. As a citizen, however, she said she will seek justice.

The Minister of Justice, Maja Popović, however, said she was deeply disappointed by the decision of the Court of Appeal, saying that the judicial system had not carried out its function. Vučić himself said late in the evening of February 5 that he was shocked by the decision, which is a great injustice and a terribly serious matter for the country.

The predominant feeling among those who followed the trial is one of anger and helplessness, but at the same time there is a dark awareness that the forces that dominated Serbia during the 1990s are still at work, as pointed out by Jelena Ćuruvija, the daughter of the murdered journalist .

Symbolically, the day after the acquittal, early in the morning on the pro-government television Pink, Aleksandar Vulin, former director of the BIA – the the agency that replaced the DB – and former leading member of Mira Marković’s party in the 1990s, openly declared that his generation’s task is to bring together all Serbs wherever they live and that this process has already begun and cannot be stopped.

These words closely echo the idea of Greater Serbia and bring the 1990s back to mind.

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

Serbia: Court of Appeals acquits suspects of journalist Slavko…

Serbia: Court of Appeals acquits suspects of journalist Slavko Ćuruvija’s murder

On Friday 2nd February 2024, the Belgrade Court of Appeals reversed the decision of the Special Department for Organized Crime of the High Court in Belgrade, and acquitted the four suspects for the murder of journalist Slavko Ćuruvija. This disappointing development constitutes a grave backslide to the fight against impunity and further undermines journalists’ safety.

This final decision comes 25 years after the murder of Slavko Ćuruvija, who was shot dead outside his apartment in Belgrade on 11th April 1999. First convicted in 2019, the Court of Appeals confirmed the guilty verdicts in 2020 of the four former members of the State Security Service (SBD), Radomir Marković, Milan Radonjić, Miroslav Kurak and Ratko Romić. A retrial started in 2022 following additional information related to the facts of the accusation. The final hearing of the retrial was held in March 2023 and its verdict was only made public last Friday. The Court confirmed the decision of the second instance court and acquitted the defendants due to lack of reliable evidence. This decision is final and cannot be reversed.

The Media Freedom Rapid Response partners strongly denounce the Court’s decision and ultimately the lack of justice rendered for the murder of journalist Slavko Ćuruvija. This verdict reinforces an existing climate of hostility against journalists in Serbia, often singled out for their work and targets of harassment and pressure. Further, this decision fails to send a clear message that attacks and violations of journalists’ safety and rights will not be tolerated and will be strongly addressed by the State. Finally, it casts a shadow over the investigations of the killings of two other journalists in Serbia, Milan Pantić in 2001 and Dada Vujasinović in 1994, whose cases still remain unresolved.

We call on the international community to strongly condemn the lack of accountability in solving Ćuruvija’s case and bring justice to his family. We also urge the Serbian State to ensure justice for the killings of journalists Pantić and Vujasinović, and commit to ensuring a safe climate for all journalists in Serbia.

Signed by:

ARTICLE 19 Europe

European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)

European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)

Free Press Unlimited (FPU)

OBC Transeuropa (OBCT)

SafeJournalists Network

Library

Serbia: media pillory for independent journalists

31/01/2024

Verbal attacks and serious threats against two journalists from independent broadcasters, the Cenzolovka portal and even an NGO and a Belgrade court judge raise concerns about the climate of increasingly heavy repression in Serbia

By Massimo Moratti

Originally published by OBCT . Also available in ITA

It is a decidedly agitated post-election period in Serbia, despite the fact that the month of January is generally considered a calm month given the numerous holidays on the calendar. This year, the heated post-election climate is being reflected in debates on social media and is resulting in actual cases of online violence, which have targeted both the independent press and civil society.

Hatred, threats and insults towards journalists

The first targets were Vanja Đurić and Zeljko Veljković, journalists from N1 and Nova television respectively, often critical of the government. The two journalists , on X, had commented critically on the fact that a fourteen-year-old girl had sung patriotic songs dedicated to Kosovo before a Red Star Belgrade match.

Both were immediately overwhelmed by a wave of comments, insults and threats. Vladimir Đukanović, a leading member of the Serbian Progressive Party (SNS) and very active on X, commented how the journalists had lost their honour, but as a true believer he felt the dutiy to forgive them, light candles for them and hope that “the absurd hatred they carry in their souls” would one day abandon them.

In his tweet, Đukanović says he is convinced that one day the two journalists will repent and confess the bad actions they have committed. He was joined by other politicians from the extra-parliamentary right. The following tweets by trolls and ordinary people, who instigated further insults and threats, were much less mystical. Pro-government tabloids soon joined in accusing Đurić and Veljković of attacking the 14-year-old.

In the end the two journalists were subjected to an actual media pillory, which led Vanja Đurić to delete her account on X after her telephone number had also been made public.

Cenzolovka , the media freedom portal of the Slavko Ćuruvija Foundation , denounced the incident and the treatment of Đurić and Veljković. Cenzolovka‘s intent was to draw attention to the “verbal torture” suffered by journalists, who explain that they did not attack the fourteen-year-old.

From here on, attention shifted to Cenzolovka which in turn was made the target of insults and threats. The article collected more than 500 comments, 90% of which with offensive content towards the portal and journalists, accused of being enemies of the Serbian people, who consequently should be deported, tried or even impaled…

It is as if someone had given the signal from above, writes the Cenzolovka editorial team. Among other things, this is the second case of threats received by Cenzolovka in less than a month. At the end of December, commenting on an article, another X user had threatened the portal’s editorial staff by claiming that journalists and left-wing sympathisers should all be summarily executed. The tweets were then deleted, but the case was still reported to the prosecutor’s office, just as the latest episodes relating to Đurić and Veljković and to Cenzolovka itself were reported to the prosecutor’s office.

The impact on journalists

These attacks on journalists and media freedom are not rare. As Perica Gunjić, editor-in-chief of Cenzolovka, states, “almost every day the country’s leaders refer to independent journalists as foreign agents or traitors to the country. These definitions are dangerous and quickly become threats that journalists regularly face, both on social media and during fieldwork”.

The Cenzolovka portal remains determined to continue its work, but there is clearly concern about the state of independent journalism in Serbia which, after the change in management at NIN, sees independent voices progressively dying out.

“In Serbia, many journalists cannot work in such conditions and throw in the towel because they are subjected to enormous stress every day. As for Cenzolovka, there will be no self-censorship, we will not be scared and we will continue to work professionally. But all this has a negative impact on the entire journalistic profession which increasingly becomes a form of propaganda for political leaders and deals less and less with investigative and critical journalism”.

A multi-pronged attack

In addition to independent journalism, civil society voices critical of the government were also subjected to attacks and threats on social media, including the Crta organisation, which during the electoral round played a key role in observing the elections and harshly questioned their regularity. Crta immediately became a target of criticism by the aforementioned Đukanović, who said that they should be arrested, and Nebojša Bakarec , another member of the presidency of the Serbian Progressive Party.

Diplomatic representations in Serbia have mobilised in support of Crta and even the United Nations Special Rapporteur for Human Rights Defenders, Mary Lawlor, has expressed her concern .

Together with Crta, judge Majić was also threatened via Telegram by a person who speaks on behalf of the self-proclaimed “president’s wolves”, who are threatening to take to the streets and clean up all the trash from Serbia . Miodrag Majić, judge of the Belgrade Court of Appeal, is one of the founders of the civic movement Proglas, which before the elections had led a campaign to encourage citizens to participate in the vote. The attacks on Crta and Judge Majić were virtually simultaneous with the Cenzolovka affair.

Troll farms in Serbia

Numerous trolls, or bots as they are more commonly called in Serbia, also participated in the attacks against journalists. The presence of trolls in Serbia, at the service of the SNS, was already documented almost seven years ago, when an insider reported the existence of a small army of trolls who managed a few thousand profiles and who acted in a coordinated manner following well-defined instructions. Last summer, a list of around 14,500 fake social media profiles , managed by around 3,000 people, became public knowledge.

The operating methods were very similar to those reported, with very specific orders given to the various profiles. SNS itself had proudly confirmed that being a troll for SNS was in fact an act of patriotism . Troll factories are not illegal in themselves, but become very problematic if there are threats, insults and acts aimed at intimidating those who think differently.

The word to the prosecutor…maybe

In light of the above, it seems that the attacks on the two journalists and then on Cenzolovka, as well as the attacks on other representatives of civil society, are the result of coordinated activity initiated by political representatives and then relaunched by tabloids and trolls. The cases have been reported to the relevant authorities, in this case the Cyber Crimes Prosecutor’s Office, but the judicial system in Serbia has great difficulties in systematically investigating and prosecuting such cases, unless the person threatened is president Vučić .

The risk is that the lack of an adequate response by institutions to such attacks could substantially promote impunity and encourage further online violence, which often precedes physical violence. And this must be an additional element of concern in Serbia, where too many cases of violence against journalists remain unsolved.

Library

Threats to Journalists must be addressed by institutions in…

Threats to Journalists must be addressed by institutions in Serbia

The host of the “Good, Bad, Evil” podcast, Nenad Kulacin is again the target of threats. The last threat to the presenter was sent via social networks from an anonymous account. The SafeJournalists Network (SJN) and the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR), as organisations dedicated to protecting media freedom and the rights of journalists, are concerned about the rising threats targeting the presenter, and note that the competent institutions in Serbia have not yet determined the identity of any perpetrator in the cases that have been reported since the beginning of the year.

We emphasize that threats to journalists and media workers in Serbia are an almost daily occurrence that endangers their safety. Accordingly, we call on the authorities in Serbia and the international community to condemn these threats, and the institutions in Serbia to protect journalists and sanction the perpetrators of such threats.

Nenad Kulacin reported eight threats to the prosecutor’s office this year, and to this day only one decision has been made to dismiss the criminal complaint, while the other cases are still before the prosecutor’s office. Some of the threats also referred to his colleague Marko Vidojkovic or his family members. For example, the last threat that Nenad Kulacin received via social networks from an anonymous account also referred to his brother. The account “Sacha Pariss” threatened Kulacin with insults, while mentioning his hometown and his brother.

In October 2021, the mother of Kulacin was also attacked in Bor, when a person verbally attacked her and said: “Your son should be hanged.”

Also, earlier pro-government tabloids ran a campaign against Kulacin, where he was characterized as a “leading ideologue of the opposition”, “Dragan Solak’s favorite editor” and “Dragan Djilas’s poodle”, and unknown persons put up posters with his address in Belgrade on it.

Nenad Kulacin and Marko Vidojkovic, the hosts of the satirical podcast “Good, Bad, Evil”, have been receiving threats for years because of their work. In addition to anonymous threats, the outgoing mayor of Belgrade, Aleksandar Sapic, also threatened the presenters a few years ago. He said that he would “rip out the heart” of Kulacin and Vidojkovic when he met them on the street, but the institutions did not recognize these words as a threat and decided to dismiss the criminal charges.

Kulacin and Vidojkovic have been suffering serious threats for a long time. As a result, Vidojkovic was relocated from his home, through a scheme provided by international organizations, while Kulacin refused to move.

Inaction by state institutions, tabloid smear campaigns and public threats by government officials create a hostile atmosphere in which attacks on those critical of the government are normalised and even encouraged, which has a serious chilling effect on free speech and independent reporting.

Due to all of the above, SafeJournalists Network and Media Freedom Rapid Response call on the authorities in Serbia and the international community to condemn these threats, and institutions in Serbia to process all reports raised by journalists and to act urgently in such cases in accordance with the mandatory instructions of the Supreme Public prosecutor’s offices and in this way send a message that they stand up for the protection of journalists and media workers, but above all, respect democratic values and international commitments, such as the protection of freedom of speech.

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

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

This statement was coordinated by the SafeJournalist Network and 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

Serbia: New draft media laws represent another step backward…

Serbia: New draft media laws represent another step backward for media freedom

The partner organisations of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) today raise the alarm about two draft media laws brought forward by the Serbian government for their lack of compliance with international freedom of expression standards. If passed they would represent a regressive step with wide-ranging implications for media freedom and pluralism. As the public debate on the legislation continues, the MFRR calls on the Serbian government to withdraw the problematic changes added into the latest drafts and ensure compliance with the country’s previously agreed Media Strategy.

The latest draft versions of the Law on Public Information and Media and the Law on Electronic Media, developed by the Ministry of Information and Telecommunications, propose a framework that would block the reform of the Regulatory Body for Electronic Media (REM) and pave the way for a return to full state ownership of private media, including Telekom Srbjia. The MFRR is concerned that the proposed changes do not comply with international and European standards on media freedom and freedom of expression and diverge radically from the objectives of the Media Strategy adopted by the Government of Serbia in 2020.

First, the draft of the Law on Electronic Media does not foresee the election of new REM Council members after the adoption of the new law, despite the fact that the draft law prescribes completely new criteria for their election, as well as authorized proposers, as is foreseen in the Media Strategy adopted by the Government of the Republic of Serbia. The REM has faced both domestic and international criticism, including from the MFRR, for its lack of independence and politically-motivated decision-making processes. There has also been widespread criticism about how members of the REM are appointed. Proposed changes which would oblige the Council of REM to adopt the Code of Labour – a shift which would better regulate the ethics of its members – have also been disregarded. If passed, this proposal would solidify political control over REM and block much needed reforms to strengthen the regulator’s independence.

Secondly, the new proposal of the Law on Public Information and Media fails to establish legal provisions that would ensure that all media must meet ethical standards to receive public co-financing funding. Under the previous draft, sanctions issued by the Press Council could see media fail to receive public money from co-financing funding for public interest content. However, new rules provide a loophole for print and online media outlets which have not accepted the competence of the Press Council. For those media, such criteria would not apply, meaning they can continue to violate professional standards with impunity and still receive public funding. We fear this will disadvantage media which abide by professional standards and further encourage the dissemination of disinformation and violent rhetoric in the Serbian media landscape. This change was controversially included at the last-minute by the government and was not discussed in a wider Working Group established to discuss the draft laws, which comprises members of civil society and of the journalistic community.

Thirdly, the government also included in both draft laws an identical provision which would essentially facilitate the return to state co-ownership of private media in Serbia. Under the current Media Strategy, direct and indirect ownership of private media by the state is banned. However, the new law would formally allow the state to return to being the co-owner and founder of media outlets. This would formally legalise the ongoing ownership situation at telecommunications provider Telekom Srbija, which is majority state-owned, in violation of the current law. If passed, the MFRR fears the new law would further cement government control over Telekom Srbija and represent a damaging new form of media capture in an EU Candidate Country which is already experiencing its biggest crisis for independent journalism in years.

Finally, the MFRR highlights that the new proposals radically deviate from the Media Strategy, a landmark blueprint developed after widespread consultation with the journalistic community, which the government of Serbia has held up as proof of its commitment to positive reform of the media landscape. This new approach also undermines years of work by journalist associations and working groups to shape the laws and bring them closer in line with EU acquis and other European standards.

Our organisations warn that if passed, the new laws would undermine national and international confidence in the Media Strategy and pose serious questions for the government’s commitment to improve media freedom and pluralism as part of its potential accession to the European Union. Rather than ushering in positive steps in this direction, the last year has been marked by steps backward, as noted by many of our organisations following a visit to Belgrade, and in the most recent report of the European Parliament.

The MFRR therefore shares the concerns recently outlined by the Coalition for Media Freedom in Serbia, and calls for the government to reverse the problematic changes introduced in the two draft media laws and ensure that their provisions comply with international standards on freedom of expression. As the public debate on the legislation continues, we urge the government to return to discussions with the Coalition and other groups which remain committed to reform of the media landscape in Serbia in line with European values. Key provisions must be reintegrated into the draft laws, especially those which provide for more democratic management of the REM. Our organisations will continue to closely monitor the situation in Serbia and call for systemic media reform.

Signed by:

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

Library

Serbia: Fresh attacks and smears on media raise threat…

Serbia: Fresh attacks and smears on media raise threat level

Break in at broadcaster N1 and latest high-level political smears underscore deep concerns over journalists’ safety.

The International Press Institute (IPI) today renews their serious concerns about the safety of journalists in Serbia, where independent media houses and their reporters face an intensifying and toxic climate of smear campaigns and political pressure directed by the government and public officials.

On 30 May, the private premises of the broadcaster N1 in the capital Belgrade was breached by around 30 protesters, who obstructed its work and demanded its editorial staff leave the building to face the “wrath of the people”. N1 and its journalists were accused of manipulating coverage of recent anti-government protests and the pandemic, and of working on behalf of foreign intelligence services.

While police were called and plainclothes officers were sent to take up positions outside the N1 building, they were not given orders to react and failed to remove the trespassers from the broadcaster’s private property. None of the protesters had their identification checked, according to media reports, and no arrests were made.

IPI and our global network are shocked by the lack of an adequate response by the police to this incident. While peaceful protest must be respected, trespassing of the premises of a media house clearly warranted appropriate action from law enforcement authorities. This raises serious questions about the ability of the police to protect journalists and must be immediately addressed by the Standing Working Group on the Safety of Journalists.

The security incident came days after the Serbian Prime Minister Ana Brnabić and Serbian Progressive Party MP Nebojša Bakarec spoke in the parliament and separately accused N1 and Nova S of spreading hatred and violence and creating a “sick atmosphere in society” which leads to the tragedies such as two recent mass shootings. The Prime Minister accused so-called “tycoon media” of poisoning the nation and “sowing hatred minute by minute, hour by hour.”

These comments were the latest in an escalating smear campaign against broadcasters and news outlets owned by United Media, a media house staunchly critical of the Serbian government and President Aleksandar Vučić. It is often viewed as the last major bastion of journalism operating independently from the ruling Serbian Progressive Party (SNS) and its network of business allies.

In recent weeks, United Media titles including N1, Nova S and Danas have been accused by multiple public officials of acting against the interest of the state, spreading disinformation, organizing anti-government rallies and being “fascist media”. These verbal attacks have been amplified by tabloid media and broadcasters supportive of the government.

IPI is alarmed by the dangerous escalation in rhetoric against critical media and journalists, which poses real life threats to the safety of journalists. Moving forward, IPI urges all government and public officials in Serbia to refrain from using hostile rhetoric and to lead by example in reducing tensions.

IPI notes that this situation again underscores the findings of both a coalition of international press freedom groups and the European Parliament, that no tangible progress has been made by Serbian authorities as part of their EU accession obligations to improve the landscape for media freedom. Independent journalism in Serbia continues to face a moment of crisis.

IPI renews support for the work of all professional and independent media in Serbia and calls for increased international attention to the plight of media freedom and pluralism in the country.

This statement was coordinated by IPI as part of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR), a Europe-wide mechanism which tracks, monitors and responds to violations of press and media freedom in EU Member State and candidate countries.

Library

Protests in Belgrade and violence in reality shows

After the massacres of recent weeks, street demonstrations continue against the government and above all the media, which according to critics have created a climate of intolerance and violence over the years.

By Massimo Moratti

Originally published by OBCT, also available in ITA

Protests continue in Belgrade. The demonstrations of May 8, 12, and 19 were followed by others on May 26 and 27, organised by the government and the opposition respectively.

The demonstrations managed to bring tens of thousands of people to the streets and block the main arteries of the Serbian capital. If initially composure and pain for the victims of the massacres that have marked the country in recent weeks prevailed, the protests have gradually articulated specific requests to the government, which so far has refused to respond.

Some concern the situation of the media in Serbia and the passivity of the institutions in countering the violence present in the media space. Protesters ask for a ban on media and tabloids that promote violence and hatred, and for an end to programmes – such as some reality shows – that promote aggressive, violent, and immoral behaviour, and finally for the resignation of the entire media regulator institution (REM).

The connection between the massacres and the demands of the protests in Belgrade

While at the moment it seems difficult to find a direct causal link between the mass massacres and the demands of protesters, the accusations leveled against the government are those of having created a media system that not only tolerates, but actually promotes violence.

This connection emerges clearly in the case of the second massacre. The perpetrator of the Mladenovac massacre had as his idol a certain Aleksandar “Kristijan” Golubović, a well-known protagonist of some reality shows, including “Zadruga”, broadcast on Pink television.

Golubović’s “curriculum” speaks volumes: multiple offender for drugs and armed robberies, MMA fighter, he boasted, rightly or wrongly, of friendships with characters such as Arkan, a notorious paramilitary leader during the conflicts of the 90s, and Ulemek “Legija”, the person responsible for the killing of Prime Minister Zoran Đinđić.

In recent years, Golubović has become a star of reality shows that competed for him and the protagonist of numerous episodes of violence, insults, fights, including strangling his partner until she was knocked unconscious. Golubović’s is not an isolated case, similar episodes abound in reality shows and on Serbian television. In addition to common criminals on reality TV, war criminals are also regularly hosted in talk shows as experts on geopolitics or military matters in what is a real glorification of violence.

The role of private TVs

Private television stations RTV Pink and Happy TV are most likely to broadcast reality shows and violence. Nonetheless, last July these two television station were assigned a national frequency for the second consecutive time.

This was criticised by civil society and trade associations: the numerous complaints for incitement to hatred and violence had not been taken into account by the REM which reassigned the frequencies to RTV Pink and Happy TV as well as B92 and Prva TV, two other private TVs, still close to the government but whose contents have not attracted the same criticisms as RTV Happy and Pink.

This decision was also criticised in the progress report on Serbia’s EU accession and by the ODIHR report on the 2022 elections, which had underlined how the REM had tolerated violations of the electoral campaign rules by the four nationwide televisions.

In recent years, Happy and Pink have often been at the centre of controversy and scandals, but have never been subject to significant sanctions. The reason for this, most likely, is that these broadcasters have a very close link with politics and are essentially considered personal instruments of political power in Serbia and in particular of President Vučić, who is a regular guest: one of Vučić’s first TV appearances after the massacres was on Happy TV.

In this perspective, as highlighted by the lecturers of the Faculty of Political Sciences Jelena Đorđević and Rade Veljanovski in an interview for Radio Slobodna Evropa, the violence in media tones and contents is nothing but the reflection of the political discourse and, at the same time, these stations are the pillars on which the Vučić regime relies, in a similar way to what happened in the 1990s with state television.

The comments of the REM and of the TV stations

In front of the demands of the protests, the REM has taken defensive positions. In a statement released on May 11, President Olivera Zekić said that while their resignations should be discussed in Parliament, we should also discuss how a part of society and the media wants to blame the REM for these terrible tragedies in Serbia.

Zekić then reiterated that the repeated attacks against the REM are not only shameful, but could even lead to further violence. The president’s statements were followed by similar statements by REM vice-president Milorad Vukašinović a few days later: “I fear that the instigators of the attacks against the integrity of the REM […] are in the headquarters of some media”. Pressed later on the role of Kristijan Golubović on television, Vukašinović replied that media regulators cannot limit the rights of citizens who have already served sentences, unless this is provided for by these sentences.

However, another member of the REM, Judita Popović, admitted that for years the media have favoured incitement to hatred, violence, and discrimination and that no one has reacted, but in fact certain media have been rewarded with national frequencies. Resignations are not enough, said Popović, REM members should be held responsible for certain situations.

The words of the members of the REM were echoed by the Minister of Information, Mihailo Jovanović, who rejected as unacceptable the demands to close both RTV Pink and Happy TV, as such requests would be contrary to freedom of expression, a fundamental pillar of any democratic society.

A hint of self-criticism comes from Željko Mitrović, the owner of Pink, who entered the house where the “Zadruga” reality show is held and announced that this is the last season of the reality show, which will change from next year. Subsequently, Mitrović himself announced that “Zadruga” will cease to be broadcast within ten days at the latest and that this was a request made by Vučić himself. We will see if the words will be followed by deeds.

Conclusions

The protests are creating a lot of nervousness within the Serbian government and seem to focus on the passivity of the REM and the sensationalist approach of private national televisions, which are often the favorite stage of the SNS, the president’s party.

The REM and the Minister of Information have hidden behind a formal approach of defense of the institutions and freedom of the right of expression, without however emphasising how the same right of expression must be regulated within Serbian society. In this sense, an article by the Centre for Investigative Journalism in Serbia (CINS) is illuminating, which explains that the problems do not arise from the fact that the regulations are not adequate but from the fact that they are not applied.

For example, in January of this year alone, within the famous reality show “Zadruga”, there were more than ten controversial episodes as documented in a complaint filed by the Institute for Media and Diversity (MDI). This complaint has not been acted upon: in the last 5 years the REM has not ordered any measures against RTV Pink for its problematic contents and this happens because the law is not applied adequately and broadcasts with high audience ratings such as reality shows they are considered untouchable. As demonstrated by the CINS, the REM has remained silent in these cases. And it is precisely against this silence that citizens are now protesting.

This article was published as part of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR), a Europe-wide mechanism which tracks, monitors and responds to violations of press and media freedom in EU Member States and candidate countries.

Library

Serbia: Legal harassment of investigative media outlet KRIK must…

Serbia: Legal harassment of investigative media outlet KRIK must stop

The legal harassment against Serbian investigative media outlet KRIK continues as the portal was convicted for reporting on a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP) case it was facing, at the same time as a new abusive lawsuit has been filed against it.

We, international press freedom and journalists’ organisations, stand in solidarity with KRIK’s newsroom, which is currently fighting 12 legal proceedings, and raise the alarm about the use of SLAPPs in Serbia, considered as a growing threat to independent journalism.

In recent months, KRIK has been facing multiple lawsuits as a result of public interest investigations exposing crime, corruption and other abuses of power committed by powerful people in Serbia, often affiliated with the ruling party.

The latest alarming development came from the Belgrade High Court on 3 May. In a first instance decision, the court condemned KRIK for naming in an article the individuals who sued them – police commander Goran Zivkovic and two of his colleagues from the Witness Protection Unit. In the article published in December 2021, the media outlet detailed the avalanche of lawsuits it is currently fighting: namely who brought the cases, on what grounds and their impact on the whole editorial team. As a result, KRIK must pay 374,200 dinars (almost 3,200 €) in compensation for “emotional pain” and for trial expenses. The court also ruled that part of KRIK’s web article must be deleted. KRIK has appealed.

In a reaction to the verdict, KRIK’s editor Stevan Dojčinović said SLAPPs are the outlet’s biggest challenge: “this latest ruling makes it clear that SLAPPs have become the regime’s main tool for shutting down the few remaining independent media outlets. Things have gone so far that we are no longer even allowed to complain in public about the fact that our newsroom is flooded with lawsuits – we are found guilty even for that.”

On 11 May 2023, KRIK reported that the media outlet is facing a new lawsuit in response to an article published on 11 April 2023. The lawsuit was filed by Nikola Petrović against KRIK’s editor and investigative reporters Bojana Jovanović and Dragana Pećo. He demanded the removal of the article and is seeking 200,000 dinars (1,700€) in compensation for “mental suffering”. Nikola Petrović has filed two other lawsuits against KRIK: one ended in favour of KRIK and the other is still pending.

This case is the last in a series of 12 lawsuits initiated in most cases by people from the government or businessmen close to them. The amount of damages claimed is completely disproportionate and exceeds by three times the organisation’s annual budget. While the financial burden is huge, the negative impact on the day-to-day operations is equally significant. The time spent on preparing the defence, presenting the evidence, analysing hundreds of pages of legal documents is effectively taking journalists away from their core work: investigating and informing citizens.

SLAPPs threaten the future of independent journalism – aiming to intimidate, drain resources and isolate reporters so they abandon their hard-hitting investigations. We, the undersigned organisations, renew our support to the KRIK journalists and call on the Serbian judicial authorities to finally acknowledge SLAPPs as a means to silence voices and suppress information of public interest. Serbia continues to provide one of the most fertile grounds in Europe for suing journalists in retaliation for their work. By failing to recognise the threats posed by SLAPPs, the latest court decision sends a worrying signal to all Serbian journalists who investigate sensitive political and economic issues. We hope that the appeal process will consider the serious impact of SLAPPs against journalists, and will finally uphold the public interest and international standards on freedom of expression.

Signed by:

Blueprint for Free Speech
Civic Initiatives
Civil Rights Defenders
Coalition For Women In Journalism (CFWIJ)
European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
Free Press Unlimited (FPU)
Index on Censorship
Institute for Mass Media Cyprus
International Press Institute (IPI)
Justice for Journalists Foundation
OBC Transeuropa (OBCT)
Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP)
PEN International
Reporters Sans Frontières / Reporters Without Borders (RSF)
SafeJournalists Network
South East Europe Media Organisation (SEEMO)
Solomon

Library

Media pluralism in a legal limbo in Serbia

The allocation of national broadcasting frequencies in Serbia highlights the lack of transparency and pluralism in the sector. Frequencies are only awarded to government-friendly media. Concerns have been expressed by both the European Commission and the European Parliament.

By Massimo Moratti

Originally published by OBCT, also available in ITA

The issue of the public allocation of national broadcasting frequencies in Serbia seems to have come to a public halt, after a few important developments in the past months that have shown how contentious this issue is and exposed the weaknesses of the institutional framework of Serbia.

The usual suspects receive (again) the national TV frequencies

The whole dispute started on 29 July 2022 when Serbia’s Electronic Media Regulatory Body (REM) awarded the four national broadcasting frequencies for a period of eight years to the same four televisions (Happy, Pink, B92 and Prva) that had previously received them. The allocation occurred in spite of the numerous shortcomings in the performance of these televisions, including at least 12,000 violations of the advertising act in the previous years and of the fact that several reports for hate speech and violence were filed against them. The award decision started a public outcry and attracted severe criticism by local and international stakeholders since these televisions are all known to be supportive of the SNS, the Serbian Progressive Party, currently in power in Serbia. National and international press freedom organisations considered the process of allocation of the frequencies to be in violation of the principle of pluralism of the public broadcasting organisations and of the principles on the allocation of licences. Few days later, the REM announced that a fifth national frequency would be allocated and that the whole process would be over by the end of the autumn.

The EU progress report

The whole issue was extensively covered by the EU in its 2022 progress report which highlighted how the REM had awarded the four national frequencies to the same broadcasters as in the previous eight years in spite of the fact that all of them had received warnings by the REM due to violations of their legal obligations. The EU reiterated the need to respect the principle of media pluralism and transparency in the process of allocating the frequencies. Moreover, in the progress report the EU quoted the ODIHR final report on the April 2022 elections in Serbia. In its final report the ODIHR noticed that the REM remained passive in overseeing the conduct of Serbian media during the recent electoral campaign. ODIHR also remarked that national public broadcasters provided “extensive uncritical news coverage to public officials who were also candidates” while “private TV channels with a national coverage […] allocated some 90% of coverage in news programmes to the president and government officials portraying them generally positively”. In other words, the REM had failed in its role of ensuring the correct application of the rules regulating the electoral campaign on the public broadcasters.

The saga of the fifth frequency begins

The public tender for the fifth national frequency was launched in August 2022 with a deadline set for the 11 October for the submission of bids. Four televisions eventually applied, amongst them TV Nova S which produces a number of successful programmes and is known for its critical stance towards the government.

According to Nova S, the deadline for the REM to decide on the applications was 30 days and it expired on the 26 November, however on 29 November the chairperson of the REM herself denied that there was any deadline for the awarding of frequencies and that the decision would be brought during one of the next sessions, without making any firm commitments.

Darkness in Serbia

The applicants and those following the process were worried that the whole procedure was just an excuse to buy time and eventually avoid awarding the frequencies. This led to a significant protest of the televisions belonging to the operator United Group, N1 and TV Nova S. On 6 December, the two TVs stopped their broadcasting and for the whole day they broadcasted a black screen displaying the text “Darkness in Serbia without free media”. The protest had a large impact and its timing coincided with the summit EU – Western Balkans. President Vucic himself was forced to comment on it during the summit itself criticising the TVs and stating that they were protesting more in their own interest than in that of the public. The protest of the TVs was later followed by another organised within the National Parliament by the members of the opposition who showed their support for the two televisions and displayed the same message as the two TVs did.

REM goes on strike

While the protest of the TVs did not explicitly refer to the issue of the fifth frequency in Serbia, the message was nevertheless clear and the reaction of the REM was immediate. The REM suspended their work on 9 December via an urgent phone session. Later on that month the chairwoman of the REM informed the Parliamentary Committee on Culture and Information that the REM had gone on strike because of the “violent coordinated pressure” that they were receiving from opposition groups and in particular because of the pressure from the United group. Debates followed whether such a strike was legal or not, but the result was that time was passing and once more the decision on the allocation of the fifth frequency was delayed. The strike eventually ended on 21 December 2022 after the REM received the support of the parliamentary committee as well as that of the Minister of Information and Telecommunications.

The saga continues…

The end of the strike was not the end of the saga. Two days after the end of the strike the president of the REM itself announced publicly that the REM will not allocate the fifth national frequency while there is a pending court dispute with one of the applicants. The reference was to TV Nova S, which on 20 December had started a court case for administrative silence against the REM because the deadline to award the frequency had passed and no decision was brought. While the court case had been initiated to urge the REM to complete the procedure, the REM referred to it as a reason to continue postponing the decision on the allocation of the fifth frequency, even if the case can last years. The chairperson of the REM, Ms. Olivera Zekic, in fact stated that the court procedure “will last as long as it lasts. We can’t interfere in the work of judicial bodies. Was anybody forcing them (Nova S) to take us to court? No, I only regret that because of them, also other interested TVs will have to wait”. The paradox is that the lawsuit against the administrative silence is now being used by the REM to continue their silence and has become the main excuse to delay solving the issue. A similar complaint raised with the Ombudsman’s Office did not produce any results.

To date, there is no end in sight to this issue, even if eight months have passed since the call for the fifth frequency was launched and the deadline expired more than 5 months ago. The fact that the issue was raised both by the European Commission in October and most recently, in April 2023, by the Foreign Affairs Committee of the European Parliament did not unblock the situation. Indeed when commenting on such a report, the chairperson of the REM while rejecting the criticism of the European Parliament clearly stated that the REM has no legal obligation to issue the fifth frequency and that four national frequencies are even too much for the Serbian market. The latest statement seems to confirm what many suspected at the beginning: that the fifth national frequency will never be allocated or that it will be allocated when it is too late and it becomes meaningless.

Library

Serbia: Independent journalism faces biggest crisis in years

Serbia: Independent journalism faces its biggest crisis in years

Following a visit to Belgrade on April 10 and 11 2023 to commemorate the murder anniversary of editor and publisher Slavko Ćuruvija, the undersigned international press freedom and journalists’ organisations today issue a stark warning over the state of media freedom and journalists’ safety in Serbia.

Ahead of World Press Freedom Day on May 3, our shared conclusion is that 24 years after the murder of Ćuruvija in 1999, poor conditions for the safety of journalists, the weak landscape for the rule of law, media capture and a festering climate of hostility towards critical reporting mean that the likelihood of a serious physical attack on a journalist remains a possibility. Independent journalism in Serbia continues to face a period of crisis.

The dedicated work being done by some stakeholders to prosecute attacks on journalists is being undermined by the wider climate of hostility being generated by leading politicians in Serbia. Until this is addressed and the public discourse regarding critical journalism is normalised, tangible progress will remain elusive.

These conclusions come after multiple meetings with independent journalists and editors, media associations and unions, the Standing Working Group for the Safety of Journalists, which included a representative of the Ministry of Interior.

Serbia exhibits a unique situation in which insults and attempts to discredit watchdog journalism stem overwhelmingly from leading politicians, including the President Aleksandar Vučić, Prime Minister Ana Brnabić and ruling party MPs. Our assessment is that Serbia is one of the EU candidate states where journalists face the strongest verbal pressure and attacks from the state leadership. Critical and investigative journalism is still viewed by many public officials as an unpatriotic threat to be fought, rather than a healthy and necessary part of the country’s democratic fabric.

This failure of the political class to accept and respect the role of critical journalism is dangerous. Smears launched by political figures are routinely picked up and reported by a network of tabloid media outlets owned by allies of the government who amplify the messaging, fomenting distrust and hatred against certain journalists. This behaviour by politicians normalises hostility towards independent media and, in many cases, acts as a signpost for physical as well as online threats by non-state actors.

It is no surprise that Serbia remains one of the most dangerous places in Europe, outside of Ukraine, to work as a journalist. In 2022, the Independent Journalists’ Association of Serbia (IJAS) documented 137 violations: 34 verbal threats, nine physical attacks, four attacks on property and 84 different attempts to pressure the media. Until the end of March 2023, 33 serious incidents were recorded: eight verbal attacks, three physical attacks and 22 acts of pressure on media and journalists. Investigative journalists probing high level crime and corruption are particularly at risk and are demonised as foreign mercenaries and national traitors.

While multiple state-backed initiatives have been launched to address the safety of journalists, their effectiveness is undermined by political attacks on journalists which compromise authorities’ efforts. The Standing Working Group on the Safety of Journalists, established in 2016, is an important initiative and a platform for the exchange of information between law enforcement authorities and media, allowing more systematic monitoring. The prosecutor’s office has established a network of dedicated contact points across Serbia which must act quickly in cases of threats. The 24/7 toll-free SOS helpline for journalists whose safety is threatened represents an important instrument for quick responses, along with networking of competent institutions and offering assistance to endangered journalists. In a welcome development, the number of physical attacks recorded in 2022 dropped compared to the previous year.

However, while law enforcement authorities have increasingly identified alleged perpetrators and brought indictments, justice has proven much harder to secure. In 2022, 81 criminal reports were submitted to the public prosecutor’s offices, yet just five convictions were reached. Though certain investigations have faced legitimate barriers in securing evidence, in some cases journalists complain that serious threats are assessed by prosecutors as not meeting the threshold of criminal offences. As of March 2023, 41,96% of cases submitted to the prosecutor’s office were dismissed for this reason. Journalists also raised concerns that politically sensitive cases, including attacks involving members of the ruling party, were not addressed appropriately. While the Standing Working Group functions adequately on paper and stakeholders are committed to its success, its work is undermined by a lack of political will and the wider climate of hostility. The separate Working Group for Security and Protection of Journalists, established in December 2020 with the backing of the Prime Minister, has been a failure.

On the other hand, the Commission for the Investigation of Murders of Journalists is another important initiative and has been fundamental in the fight for justice for Slavko Ćuruvija. Despite progress in the investigation of the Police Working Group within the Commission in identifying possible killers, the Prosecutor’s Office for Organized Crime continues to hesitate on taking over the investigation into the murder of journalist Milan Pantić, while the mysterious death of Dada Vujasnović remains unsolved.

Despite the many challenges, there are some positive developments this year. The March 2023 retrial verdict sentencing perpetrators including a former Belgrade (Grocka municipality) president to five years in prison for the arson attack on the home of journalist Milan Jovanovic is a welcome victory. With an appeal underway, however, justice for this attack has not yet been secured. Swift indictments and prosecutions in early 2023 for the threats made against journalists at OK Radio by a powerful businessman in Vranje were positive. The recent sentencing to one year of house arrest to a man who issued appalling death threats against TV Nova S journalist Jelena Obućina is also a welcome development. However, the willingness and ability to effectively prosecute such attacks appear to extend only to cases where there was political pressure or where the alleged perpetrators lack political connections, indicating a lack of independence of law enforcement bodies.

At the wider level, however, no progress has been made in strengthening the landscape for media freedom and freedom of expression. Media pluralism remains particularly weak, with independent broadcast media systematically disadvantaged in the market. The clearest example was the controversial decision in July 2022 by the Regulatory Body for Electronic Media (REM) to again award all four national frequencies to pro-government television channels, overlooking applications by independent media houses. A fifth licence has yet to be allocated. The REM continues to display a lack of functional independence and has failed to carry out its duty of sanctioning violations of broadcast law by private channels close to the government. Delays continue in the long-overdue reform of the law on public information and media and the law on electronic media.

The public broadcaster continues to suffer from a lack of editorial independence and displays clear bias in its programming and reporting in favour of the government. State advertising – which has for years been the largest advertiser in media – also continues to be distributed in an arbitrary and non-transparent manner, largely in favour of pro-government media outlets. Rather than being disqualified from the co-financing program for regular violations of journalistic ethics, as identified by the Press Council, tabloid media continue to receive large amounts of public money. This use of state resources is one of the prime levers for the government to co-opt and control media coverage. While the direct ownership of private media by the state is banned, the purchase by state-owned and controlled Telekom Srbija of multiple media assets in recent years has established an indirect state ownership model. This is a prime example of media capture in Serbia. Taken together, these developments have cemented a pro-government narrative at the expense of independent journalism.

In addition to physical threats, independent media also face numerous legal challenges. Investigative platforms such as KRIK are being buried under an avalanche of vexatious lawsuits, both civil and criminal, meaning they are forced to dedicate valuable time and money to defending themselves in court. While the courts have recently thrown out clearly vexatious lawsuits, Serbia continues to be one of the worst countries in Europe for Strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs) and the number of documented cases is on the rise. Plaintiffs are most commonly public officials, politicians, businesspeople and companies. A recent case involving two SLAPP cases initiated against BIRN by the mayor of Belgrade is a prime example.

Overall, media freedom in Serbia remains in a poor condition. No one has yet been ultimately found guilty of the murder of a journalist. The climate of threats against journalists is at its worst point in many years. Media pluralism continues to be weak, with the ruling party overseeing a captured media ecosystem. The shared view of our international organisations is that, while important work on effectively prosecuting attacks on journalists has had a positive impact, this progress has been undermined by engrained challenges in ultimately securing justice and the wider climate of hostility towards critical journalism being fostered by political leaders. On balance, these combined factors mean Serbia continues to be held back in its commitments to improve media freedom as part of the EU accession process. We therefore recognise no overall progress since the fact-finding mission of the MFRR in April 2021.

This status quo must not continue. It is vital that the international community recognise the seriousness of the current situation for independent journalism in Serbia. In the coming months, our organisations will be giving as many platforms as possible to independent Serbian journalists to share their experiences first hand. International pressure will be central to enacting positive change. We therefore call on the European Union to ensure that media freedom in Serbia is a priority in the context of the rule of law and democracy. We also urge EU leaders and officials to urgently raise the issue of pressure on journalists by high-ranking politicians during meetings with Serbian officials. Future progress reports on EU accession should fully reflect the seriousness of the situation and outline for meaningful reforms. International bodies such as the OSCE and the Council of Europe must continue to address these issues head on. The upcoming report by the UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of opinion and expression following her mission to the country should be forceful in its assessment of the situation.

Twenty-four years after the murder of Slavko Ćuruvija, the conditions for the safety of journalists in Serbia are alarmingly reminiscent of the period in which he was killed. The upcoming appeal court verdict for the murder will be the most consequential for media freedom and journalism in decades, and will act as a litmus test for the rule of law and democracy more widely. If guilty verdicts are secured, we hope this can act as a catalyst for concrete change moving forward. Our international press freedom and journalists’ organisations will do all we can to support free and independent journalism during this time.