Library

Bosnia and Herzegovina: MFRR and SJN condemn adoption of…

MFRR and SJN condemn adoption of foreign agent legislation in Bosnia’s entity Republika Srpska

The Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) partners and SafeJournalists Network (SJN) strongly condemn the adoption of legislation in the Republika Srpska entity in Bosnia and Herzegovina which will establish a “special registry” of NGOs, many of which are independent media. 

05.03.2025

Viewed as retaliation against government critics, this law raises concerns about its potential use in labeling independent media and civil society organisations as foreign agents. Our coalition has long opposed the adoption of such legislation in Republika Srpska and now calls for the approved law to be immediately rescinded and for the international community to forcefully oppose the law.

 

On 27 February, Republika Srpska voted in the so-called “foreign agent law”, with the parliamentary majority. Previously announced by the entity’s president, Milorad Dodik, the law was introduced under an urgent procedure. The adopted law is the same as the one proposed in 2023, with only legal deadlines changed.

 

Following Dodik’s recent conviction by the State Court for separatist actions defying the international envoy overseeing peace in the country, Republika Srpska has initiated urgent adoption of the set of decisions and laws that aim to undermine state institutions, as well as to put pressure on independent media and civil society. 

 

The law regulates the permissible function and activities of NGOs who receive foreign funding, and subjects them to special registration and periodic reporting requirements. The text of the law that was previously made available as a draft to the MFRR delegation shows that the regulation establishes no minimum threshold of ‘foreign funding’. As such, NGOs would be required to regularly report on the sum and donor of the smallest contributions that they receive, which in itself imposes an onerous requirement that interferes with the daily work of civil society organisations. The law further bans NGOs, investigative media included, ‘political work’, and stipulates obligations to mark all NGO publications as ‘foreign agents.

 

The same day, the online media Capital.ba was raided by the local police, in an action resembling raids in neighbouring Serbia. The move has come in the midst of suspended US funding and increased tensions and pressures against media and civil society organisations across the region.

 

Foreign agent legislation adopted in Europe in recent years has had a detrimental impact on media freedoms, imposing a disproportionate administrative burden on independent media by attempting to control and reduce their funding, limiting their watchdog role by stigmatising their work, and in some cases pushing them into exile. This law in Republika Srpska has been opposed by the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), the Council of Europe’s Commissioner for Human Rights, OSCE/ODIHR and Venice Commission Joint Opinion, and three UN independent experts.

 

MFRR partners and SJN partners emphasise that the adoption of foreign agent laws, and the unjustified use of urgent procedures undermine democratic principles at their core, and are largely disproportionate. Such laws risk creating opportunities for greater arbitrary actions and politically motivated harassment against independent media. 

 

The undersigned organisations strongly urge Republika Srpska to halt the enactment of the foreign agent law and ultimately to repeal this law.

Signed by:

  • European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
  • Free Press Unlimited (FPU)
  • European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
  • Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT)
  • Article 19 Europe
  • International Press Institute (IPI)
  • Association of BH journalists
  • Association of Journalists of Kosovo
  • Association of Macedonian Journalists
  • Croatian Journalists’ Association
  • Independent Association of Journalists of Serbia
  • Media Union of Montenegro

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, Candidate Countries.

Serbian penal code Library

Serbia: MFRR and SJN urgently call to stop targeting…

Serbia: MFRR and SJN urgently call to stop targeting and intimidating journalists

MFRR partners share a statement condemning the threats and attacks against journalists and media workers when covering demonstrations and protests in Germany, France, Slovenia, Greece, Spain, Poland and Italy. The MFRR calls for increased protection for media freedom across Europe from protestors, unknown 3rd parties and police officers to ensure they are free to continue their work informing the public.

In the aftermath of the deadly collapse of the roof of the Novi Sad railway station on 1 November 2024, journalists have come under unacceptable pressure while covering the tragic story and the subsequent protests. The majority of incidents logged on the Mapping Media Freedom platform are instances of verbal abuse and physical assault against journalists and media workers. Of the 22 incidents documented between November 2024 and February 2025, five attacks were initiated by state officials, including Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić and his ruling SNS party.

 

Some of the most serious attacks include a death threat sent to Ana Lalić Hegediš, the Executive Director of the Independent Journalists Association of Vojvodina (NDNV), on her Facebook page in November 2024. On 17 January 2025,  NDNV, whose premises had recently been broken into, reported that police had forcibly removed five journalists from the Novi Sad City Hall to prevent them from documenting an opposition-led protest from inside the building. 

 

On 15 February 2025, Ksenija Pavkov, N1 journalist, received death threats and abuse while reporting about an SNS rally in Sremska Mitrovica. On 24 February 2025, private security at the Novi Sad City Assembly – acting on the orders of Assembly President Dina Vučinić – searched journalists, restricted their movement, and locked them in a press room until the end of the conference.

 

Our organisations further note with alarm raids by Serbian police against non-governmental organisations (NGOs) critical of the government conducted on 25 February 2025. The government has portrayed what is happening in the country as a “coloured revolution”, with NGOs allegedly being paid by foreign states to destabilise the country. 

 

The Centre for Research, Transparency and Accountability (CRTA), which runs the fact-checking website Istinomer, an important source of verified information for Serbian citizens, was among the organisations raided without a warrant. These raids, based on unverified claims by individuals within the U.S government about alleged misuse of USAID funds, mark a new level of intimidation on those reporting the truth, with media outlets and media NGOs potentially next.

 

Such acts are a clear violation of press freedom and freedom of expression. They reflect an institutionalised landscape in which violence against journalists and activists is tolerated and encouraged by official rhetoric constantly portraying the press and NGOs as enemies of the state.

 

The MFRR and SJN call on the authorities to refrain from targeting the media and NGOs and to stop inciting hostility to prevent the safety of journalists from further deteriorating. The undersigned organisations also call for thorough and independent investigations into any violence against members of the press, including those allegedly perpetrated by police and private security agencies.

 

At a crucial time, when truth and accurate reporting are more vital than ever, the MFRR and the Safe Journalists Network will continue to closely monitor the developments in Serbia and stand in full solidarity with Serbian civil society and journalists targeted for reporting the truth.

Signed by:

Media Freedom Rapid Response

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

 

SafeJournalists Network

  • Association of Journalists of Kosovo
  • Association of Macedonian Journalists
  • Association of BH journalists
  • Croatian Journalists’ Association
  • Independent Association of Journalists of Serbia
  • Media Union of Montenegro

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: Media freedom groups warn LRT audit risks threatening…

Lithuania: Media freedom groups warn LRT audit risks threatening editorial independence

The undersigned international media freedom and journalist groups today raise concerns over a planned “political neutrality” audit recently approved by the supervisory body of the Lithuanian National Radio and Television (LRT) and warn that the measure could negatively affect editorial independence at the public broadcaster.

Our organisations jointly question the need for such an action by the LRT Council and warn that rather than improve political neutrality it could instead lead to self-censorship by journalists and management at the broadcaster. As press freedom organisations working at the EU level, we note that this specific type of internal audit procedure into political neutrality would have little precedence, posing serious questions over its purpose and motive.

 

The LRT Council voted in favour of conducting the audit in December 2024 and tasked the LRT’s internal auditor to assess the adherence of journalists working at the broadcaster to principles of political neutrality in news reporting, content creation and management. Plans for the audit moved forward in February, though few details have so far been made public.

 

After assessing the proposal, on a practical level our organisations are concerned about both the scope and feasibility of such an audit, as well as under what specific methodology and criteria it would be carried out, in what form potential issues would be reported, what potential outcomes or repercussions there could be for staff, and what options there would be for appeals against accusations of political bias. Overall, the audit risks increasing pressures on journalists, potentially leading to self-censorship and potentially eroding editorial independence.

 

Furthermore, it is our view that the existing self-regulatory mechanisms and oversight bodies in place at LRT are more than sufficient for upholding professional standards. The LRT Act already regulates the political neutrality of the broadcaster; the Code of Ethics for Public Information likewise provides guidelines for journalistic neutrality; and the LRT self-regulatory journalists’ ethics commission offers an adequate mechanism for addressing such issues internally.

 

These same concerns have already been expressed across the journalistic community in Lithuania, including from the Association of Professional Journalists, the Chair of the Lithuanian Journalists’ Union, the Director General of LRT, and a group of 60 journalists working at the broadcaster, as well as members of the LRT Council themselves, including its own Chair. Concerns have even been raised about such an audit from LRT’s Head of the Internal Audit Service, who has recommended that the Council should not move forward with the procedure.

 

We further note with concern that the recent meeting of the LRT Council with LRT journalists on February 20 was not attended by those individual Council members who initiated and supported the audit, demonstrating a lack of transparency and a bad-faith approach to discussions.

 

While our organisations do recognise the need for interaction between the LRT Council and the broadcaster it oversees regarding the respect of its legal and ethical obligations, we believe that in its current form the proposed audit represents a misguided and unnecessary approach which could end up doing more harm than good.

 

We therefore call on the LRT Council to reconsider its proposed audit. The Council should also clearly communicate its motives and all next steps with LRT management and staff and remain open to engagement with national and international journalistic bodies.

 

Moving forward, our organisations will be sending our statement to the Office of the President of Lithuania, the Ministry of Culture and to the LRT Council to raise these concerns directly. We continue to support strong and independent public broadcasting in Lithuania and will continue to monitor the situation closely in the coming months and respond to further developments.

Signed by:

  • International Press Institute (IPI)
  • European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
  • European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
  • OBC Transeuropa (OBCT)
  • Reporters Without Borders (RSF)

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, Candidate Countries and Ukraine.

Allgemein

Ukraine: MFRR partners stand with journalists, 3 years since…

Ukraine: MFRR partners stand with journalists, 3 years since start of full-scale invasion

On 24 February 2025, Ukraine marks three years since the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion. While the current scale of Russian attacks against journalists cannot be compared to that at the start of the war, they remain worryingly high and persistent.

Over the past two years, Ukraine has seen fewer cases of journalists killed coming under fire while reporting in Ukraine, however the number of media workers wounded while covering the war remains high.

 

In 2024, the media community reported two more losses: Victoria Roshchyna, a freelance journalist who died in Russian captivity, in which she had been held since 2023, and Ryan Evans, a Reuters security officer who was with his media crew in the eastern city of Kramatorsk when a Russian missile hit their hotel.

 

According to MFRR monitoring data, 16 other journalists were wounded as a result of Russian attacks in 2024, in comparison to 14 in 2023 and 24 in 2022.

 

MFRR partners also highlight their concern for at least 20 Ukrainian journalists who continue to be held in unclear conditions by Russian occupying authorities, in Crimea, Zaporizhia and Kherson regions.

 

This worry is only strengthened by the unexplained death of Victoria Roshchyna in Russian custody. The lack of information about the whereabouts and conditions of these journalists increases fears about their health and wellbeing.

 

Other issues facing Ukrainian journalists include attacks on media infrastructure, cyber attacks, as well as surveillance and threats by Ukrainian authorities. More details on these challenges can be found in the IPI report “Under Attack: Press freedom three years since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine”.

 

Ukrainian media also face a new wave of uncertainty following the suspension of U.S. government foreign assistance in January. A number of Ukrainian media, especially at the regional and local level, have relied on foreign assistance to continue their work following the full-scale invasion, which severely impacted local sources of revenue such as advertising.

 

As a result of the funding freeze, dozens of outlets are facing possible closure, and have had to resort to staff suspensions or dismissals to survive. Given the continued challenges for the sector, MFRR partners continue to urge international donors, including the EU, to provide vital and urgently needed support for those Ukrainian media that are currently in crisis.

 

Despite persistent and intense attacks on media and press freedom, Ukrainian independent media continue to do their work while facing serious safety risks and threats, psychological cost, and continued economic pressures.

 

In this context, MFRR partners continue to stand with Ukrainian journalists, who serve as a source of inspiration to journalists across Europe by continuing to do their job in such conditions.

Signed by:

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

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, Candidate Countries and Ukraine.

Candles are placed during a march in memory of murdered Slovak journalist Jan Kuciak and his fiancee Martina Kusnirova. Library

Slovakia: Media freedom under threat on seventh anniversary of…

Slovakia: Media freedom under threat on seventh anniversary of Ján Kuciak murder

On the seventh anniversary of the murder of Slovak investigative journalist Ján Kuciak and his fiancée Martina Kušnírová, the partner organisations of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) today mark the date with the publication of a new report examining ongoing threats to media freedom and the safety of journalists.

MFRR partners take this opportunity to remember Ján and Martina, renew our call for full justice over their brutal killing, and call on Slovak authorities to ensure that the mastermind behind the assassination is ultimately prosecuted and convicted. Until all those involved in the February 2018 murder are held accountable and the cycle of impunity is finally broken, a dark cloud will continue to hang over the wider climate for press freedom in Slovakia.

 

On February 21, 2018, Kuciak and Kušnírová were fatally shot at their home outside the capital Bratislava. Kuciak was well known for his reporting on corruption for investigative platform Aktuality.sk. He uncovered alleged corruption and tax fraud schemes involving businessman Marián Kočner and prominent figures with suspected ties to the ruling Smer-SSD and organised crime groups.

 

Despite the hitmen and intermediaries receiving lengthy prison sentences, Kočner, who was accused of masterminding the crime after threatening the journalist, has been twice found not guilty due to a lack of conclusive evidence. Following Kocner’s second acquittal in May 2023, a second appeal remains underway at the Supreme Court, which our organisations continue to follow closely.

 

As the report published today underscores, this continued failure to fully resolve the murders remains a stark reminder of the dangers faced by journalists in Slovakia, where media workers continue to be subjected to intimidation, smear campaigns, verbal abuse and legal harassment. More widely, the media landscape in Slovakia is facing a crisis, serving as a critical test case for the European Union’s commitment to safeguarding media freedom and democratic values. 

 

Representatives of the MFRR partner the International Press Institute (IPI) will be in Bratislava on February 21 to take part in commemoration events for the anniversary. The MFRR continues to stand with the families of Ján Kuciak and Martina Kušnírová, and all those fighting to ensure full justice in this case, now and as long as it takes to secure accountability.

Signed by:

  • International Press Institute (IPI)
  • European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
  • European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
  • ARTICLE 19 Europe
  • Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT)

This statement was coordinated by the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR), a Europe-wide mechanism which tracks, monitors and responds to violations of press and media freedom in EU Member States, Candidate Countries and Ukraine.

Library

Georgia: Free Mzia Today

Free Mzia Today

The undersigned journalists, newsrooms, press freedom advocates, human rights defenders, and journalists’ organisations, call upon the Georgian authorities to immediately release veteran journalist Mzia Amaglobeli, who has been on hunger strike for five weeks since her arrest in early January.

As of February 18, Mzia announced an end to the hunger strike after doctors warned that she faced an imminent threat to her life.

 

On January 11, amid a government crackdown on pro-democracy protests, Mzia was arrested on  disproportionate charges of assaulting a police officer – a charge carrying up to seven years in prison – following an altercation with a police chief in Batumi. She has since been unjustly held in pre-trial detention where she decided to refuse food in protest against her mistreatment and against the wider crackdown in Georgia.

 

On February 4, Mzia was transferred to a hospital where doctors warned she would soon go into organ failure. The court hearing to review Mzia’s detention is  scheduled for March 4. 

 

Mzia faces a long rehabilitation to regain her health and must not be returned to prison. 

 

Mzia is the founder and director of Batumelebi and Netgazeti, two of Georgia’s most popular and respected online news portals covering corruption and abuse of power. Throughout her career, Mzia has shown exemplary courage and a steadfast commitment to defending democratic values, press freedom, and journalists’ rights.

 

Mzia’s arrest comes during a brutal suppression of the democracy protests and escalating attacks against independent journalists.

 

Mzia sent the following message from her prison cell:

“These processes have been unfolding over the past year and are embedding themselves into our daily lives as a dictatorship. Freedom is far more valuable than life, and it is at stake. Fight before it is too late […] I will not bow to this regime. I will not play by its rules.”

 

The Georgian authorities must release Mzia immediately, drop the disproportionate charges against her, and conduct an independent investigation into the allegations of mistreatment against her.

 

We stand by Mzia Amaglobeli, her colleagues at Batumelebi and Netgazeti, and all independent journalists of Georgia.

Add you signature

Signed by:

Organizations:

  1. International Press Institute (IPI) 
  2. Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT)
  3. European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
  4. European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
  5. Free Press Unlimited (FPU)
  6. Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ)
  7. International Federation for Human Rights 
  8. Media Diversity Institute Global
  9. Society of Journalists (TD), Poland
  10. Justice for Journalists Foundation
  11. National Union of Journalists of Ukraine (NUJU), Ukraine
  12. Journalists Union of Serbia / SINOS, Serbia
  13. Association of Journalists of Kosovo (AGK), Kosovo
  14. Independent Trade Union of Journalists and Media Workers (SSNM), North Macedonia
  15. The Belarusian Association of Journalists (BAJ), Belarus
  16. Association of Journalists (GCD), Türkiye
  17. The  Georgian Charter of Journalistic Ethics
  18. Trade Union of Croatian Journalists (TUCJ), Croatia
  19. Center for Media, Information and Social Research (CMIS), Georgia
  20. Independent Journalists’ Association of Serbia (IJAS), Serbia
  21. Hungarian Press Union (HPU), Hungary
  22. Studio Monitor (Georgia)
  23. Association luxembourgeoise des journalistes professionnels (ALJP), Luxembourg
  24. Association of Polish Journalists (SDP), Poland
  25. Independent Association of Georgian Journalists (IAGJ), Georgia
  26. South East Europe Media Organisation (SEEMO) 
  27. Transparency International Georgia (TIG)
  28. Granski sindikat kulture, umetnosti i medija ,,Nezavisnost“ (GS KUM  “Nezavisnost”), Serbia
  29. Maisi News (Georgia)  
  30. TV PIRVELI – (GEORGIA)
  31. Agrupación de Periodistas FSC-CCOO, Spain
  32. Media Diversity Institute  (MDI)
  33. Reporters without Borders (Reporters sans frontières)
  34. Muwatin Media Network 
  35. Media Ombudsman (Georgia)
  36. Institute for Reporters Freedom and Safety (IRFS)
  37. Media April (Georgia)
  38. Public Record (Romania) 
  39. Media and Journalism Research Center (MJRC)
  40. Caucasus Open Space (Georgia)
  41. Asociacja Human Constanta International
  42. IFEX
  43. PumaPodcast, Philippines
  44. Somali Journalists Syndicate (SJS)
  45. The Fix Media
  46. Human Rights Center (HRC), Georgia
  47. Syndicat National des Journalistes (SNJ), France
  48. Journalists’ and Media Workers’ Union (JMWU), Russia (in exile)
  49. Formula TV, Georgia 
  50. Media Voice 
  51. Rights Georgia
  52. Journalist’s Network for Gender Equality
  53. Global Bar Magazine, Sweden
  54. Civil.ge, Georgia
  55. Voxeurop.eu
  56. Association of European Journalists (AEJ), France
  57. Georgian Alliance of Regional Broadcasters
  58. Journalism Resource Center
  59. TOK TV
  60. Progressive Journalists Association (PJA), Türkiye 
  61. Journalists’ Union of Athens Daily Newspapers (JUADN), Greece 
  62. Association des Journalistes professionnels (AJP), Belgium
  63.  Georgiannews / Mtis Ambebi
  64. Swedish Union of Journalists (SJF), Sweden
  65. Icelandic Union of Journalists (BI), Iceland
  66. Norwegian Union of Journalists (NJ), Norway
  67. Media Diversity Institute Western Balkans
  68. Journalists About Journalism, (jaj.gr)
  69. Danish Union of Journalists (DJ), Denmark
  70. Media and Law Studies Association (MLSA), Türkiye
  71. Balkan Investigative Reporting Network (BIRN), Bosnia and Herzegovina
  72. Estonian Association of Journalists (EAL), Estonia
  73. Women in Media NGO, Ukraine 
  74. European Journalism Training Association (EJTA), Belgium
  75. Index on Censorship
  76. Association of European Journalists (AEJ)
  77. Association of European Journalists (AEJ), Bulgaria
  78. MEDIA-CENTER UA, Ukraine
  79. I-VIN.INFO, Ukraine
  80. IMS (International Media Support), Denmark 

 

Individuals:

    1. Scott Griffen, Executive Director, International Press Institute (IPI) 
    2. Oliver Money-Kyrle, Head of European Advocacy, International Press Institute (IPI)
    3. Teona Sekhniashvili, Europe Network & Advocacy Officer, International Press Institute (IPI) 
    4. Zeyneb Gültekin, Türkiye Programme Coordinator, International Press Institute (IPI) 
    5. Damla Tarhan Durmuş, Türkiye FOI Project Coordinator, International Press Institute (IPI) 
    6. Ronja Koskinen, Press Freedom Officer, International Press Institute  (IPI)
    7. Eero Lassila, Helsingin Sanomat Foundation Fellow, International Press Institute (IPI) 
    8. Dumitrita Holdis, Europe Programme Manager, International Press Institute (IPI)
    9. Karol Łuczka, Eastern Europe Advocacy Lead, International Press Institute (IPI)
    10. Dinara Satbayeva, Communications Officer, International Press Institute (IPI)
    11. Alina Cristea, Innovation Projects Officer, International Press Institute (IPI)
    12. Javier Luque, Head of Digital Media and Online Safety, International Press Institute (IPI)
    13. Grace Linczer, Membership and Engagement Manager, International Press Institute (IPI)
    14. Ryan Powell, Head of Innovation, International Press Institute (IPI)
    15. Gabriela Manuli, Director of Special Projects, International Press Institute (IPI)
    16. Timothy Large, Director of Independent Media Programmes, International Press Institute (IPI)
    17. Moreta Bobokhidze, Eurasia Program Officer, Civil Rights Defenders
    18. Irakli Vachiberadze, “info imereti”
    19. Anne Leppäjärvi, Degree Director, Haaga-Helia University of Applied Sciences 
    20. Alina Toropova, Journalists-in-Residence Programme Manager, ECPMF
    21. Ena Bavčić, EU Advocacy Officer, ECPMF
    22. Elena Rodina, Coordinator, Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR), ECPMF
    23. Patrick Peltz, Monitoring and Research Officer, ECPMF
    24. Andreas Lamm, Managing Director, ECPMF 
    25. Gürkan Özturan, Monitoring Officer, ECPMF
    26. Luc Steinberg, Head of Operations, Media Diversity Institute Global
    27. Dejan Gligorijević, Journalists Union of Serbia / SINOS member of EFJ / IFJ
    28. Yusuf Kanlı, Vice-Chair, Association of Journalists, Türkiye 
    29. Cristi Godinac, president Romanian Union of Journalists MediaSind
    30. Sari Taussi, Member of BREG/EFJ, Union of Journalists in Finland
    31. Renate Schroeder, Director, EFJ
    32. Ricardo Gutiérrez, EFJ General Secretary
    33. Maja Sever, EFJ president
    34. Renate Gensch, Member of FREG/EFJ, dju in ver.di, Germany
    35. Krzysztof Bobinski, board member, Society of Journalists (Warsaw)
    36. Lia Chakhunashvili, The Georgian Charter of Journalistic Ethics, Executive Director (Georgia)
    37. Maya Metskhvarishvili, Editor at the Studio Monitor, Georgia
    38. Ekaterine Basilaia, Director, Center for Media, Information and Social Research (CMIS)
    39. Khatia Lomidze, The  Georgian Charter of Journalistic Ethics, Editor at the Mediachecker, (Georgia)
    40. Boris Sajaia, Journalist at the Mediachecker, The  Georgian Charter of Journalistic Ethics, (Georgia)
    41. Ninia Kakabadze,  Mediachecker, The  Georgian Charter of Journalistic Ethics, (Georgia)
    42. Natalia Vakhtangashvili, Journalist, Media Project Coordinator at Transparency International Georgia
    43. Tinatin Zazadze, Editor et the “samkhretis karibche” sknews.ge (Georgia)
    44. Gulo Kokhodze, Samkhretis Karibche” sknews.ge ( Georgia)
    45. Vladimer Chkhitunidze, Journalist at Radio “Marneuli”, (Georgia)
    46. Tiko Davadze, Journalist at Radio “Marneuli”, (Georgia)
    47. Kamila Mamedova, Director, Radio “Marneuli” (Georgia)
    48. Nino Zuriashvili, Editor at the Studio Monitor, Georgia
    49. Roger Infalt, Secretary general of the luxembourgish Press Council, board member of the luxembourgish association of professional  journalists (Luxembourg)
    50. Mariusz Pilis, vice president of the Association of Polish Journalists (SDP)
    51. Jolanta Hajdasz, president of the Association of Polish Journalists (SDP)
    52. Irma Dimitradze, Journalist, Gazeti Batumelebi
    53. Die Morina van Uijtregt, Journalist, Netherlands/Kosovo
    54. Zviad Pochkhua, IAGJ President
    55. Janusz Wiertel, Society of Journalists (Warsaw)
    56. Dorota Nygren, Society of Journalists(Warsaw)
    57. Darko Šper,  Granski sindikat kulture, umetnosti i medija ,,Nezavisnost“ (The (Branch) Trade Union for Culture, Art and Media “Nezavisnost”), Serbia
    58. Kathy Kiely, Lee Hills Chair in Free Press Studies, Missouri School of Journalism
    59. Erol Önderoğlu, Press freedom advocate, Türkiye 
    60. Edik Baghdasaryan, Editor in Chief, Hetq, Armenia
    61. Nana Biganishvili, Editor at the Studio Monitor, Georgia
    62. Maria Laura Franciosi, Ossigeno.info
    63. István Kulcsár
    64. Tomasz Milkowski, SDRP, Poland
    65. Rinat Tuhvatshin, Kloop, Kyrgyzstan
    66. Anna Kapushenko, Kloop, Kyrgyzstan
    67. Lika Zakashvili, Editor in chief at the Publika, Georgia
    68. Krzysztof Dowgird Society of Journalists (Warsaw)
    69. Małgorzata Bonikowska Society of Journalists (Warsaw) Canada
    70. Andrzej Zimowski Society of Journalists (Warsaw)
    71. Katarzyna Wyszomierska (Warsaw)
    72. Siromani Dhungana, Chairperson,  Democracy Media Network, Nepal 
    73. Galina Sidorova, journalist, co-founder, Community of Investigative Journalists – Foundation 19/29, Russia-Czech Republik 
    74. Natia Kapanadze – Media Lawyer, Human Rights Defender
    75. Alex Raufoglu, State Department Correspondent, Turan News Agency
    76. Wahid Bhat,  Environment editor, and Co-founder, Ground Report, India 
    77. Jan Keulen, journalist
    78. Mamuka Andguladze, Chair of Media Advocacy Coalition (Georgia)
    79. Emilia Șercan, investigative journalist, Romania
    80. Olena Cherniavska, EU Advocacy, IRFS
    81. Annia Ciezadlo, Investigations Editor, The Public Source (Beirut, Lebanon)
    82. José Luis Benítez, journalist (El Salvador)
    83. Stavroula Poulimeni, journalist, Alterthess.gr, (Greece)
    84. Khatia Ghoghoberidze (Media April)
    85. Nina Shengelia, Policy Leader Fellow, European University Institute
    86. Lukas Diko, Editor-in-chief, Investigative center of Jan Kuciak, Slovakia
    87. Marius Dragomir, Director, Media and Journalism Research Center (MJRC)
    88. Markus Drechsler, Editor, Menschen & Rechte, Austria
    89. Ehsan Ahmed Sehar, President Rural Media Network Pakistan
    90. Ijaz Ahmed Khan, Editor Daily Nawa-I-AhmedpurSharqia, Pakistan
    91. Nouneh Sarkissian, Managing Director, Media Initiatives Center, Armenia
    92. Carlos Dada, Editor in Chief, El Faro (Central America)
    93. Annette Rose, Journalist, dju in ver.di, Germany
    94. Mohamed Ibrahim, President Somali Journalists Syndicate (SJS)
    95. Arzu Geybulla, journalist, freelance
    96. Petr Oralek, Czech News Agency (Czech Republic)
    97. Lika Antadze (Chai Khana Media)
    98. Ginko Kobayashi （Freelance for Japanese media）
    99. Ucha Nanuashvili (former Public Defender of Georgia)
    100. Salome Ugulava, journalist, Formula TV 
    101. Lukas Burnar, Executive Director, Medienhaus andererseits, Austria
    102. Joanna Grotkowska (Society of Journalists) , Warsaw, Polish Radio
    103. Vladimer Mkervalishvili, Media and Communication Expert, Professor
    104. Teresa Di Mauro, journalist, freelance
    105. Mariam Gersamia, Chair of Media Voice
    106. Nata Koridze, Managing Editor, Civil.ge 
    107. Gian-Paolo Accardo, executive editor, Voxeurop.eu
    108. Nino Baindurashvili, News Writer, Civil.ge
    109. Andreï Jvirblis, freelance journalist
    110. Sergey Burtsev, KubanNovosti
    111. Olga Proskurnina, Deputy Editor-in-Chief, Republic.ru
    112. Ekaterina Biyak, Activatika
    113. Natia Kuprashvili – Head of PhD Mass Communication Program, TSU. Journalism Resource Center
    114. Nina Kheladze – TOK TV Director
    115. Konstantinos  Alexopoulos 
    116. Laura Gogoladze, Editor in chief at the Chemi Kharagauli, Georgia
    117. Josh LaPorte, Media Diversity Institute Global
    118. Gela Mtivlishvili, ediGeorgiannews / Mtis Ambebi
    119. Noémi Martini, journalist at HVG (Hungary)
    120. Ekaterina Kotrikadze, TV Rain, News director and Anchor
    121. Tikhon Dzyadko, TV Rain, Editor-in-Chief
    122. Milica Pesic, Media Diversity Institute (MDI)
    123. Georgia Thanou
    124. Aristeidis Georgiou
    125. Argyro Giannoudaki (Greece)
    126. Thimios Kakos , Freelance Journalist 
    127. Tatiana Capodistria, Greek retired journalist
    128. Alexander Chritina Kopsini, secretary general of Panhellenic Federation of Journalists Unions
    129. Marina Drakatou, journalist, Private Insurance Monthly, privateinsurance.gr
    130. Kostas Nikolakopoulos
    131. Şebnem Arsu, journalist, Türkiye 
    132. Eleni Voultsidou, journalist, Greece
    133. Michalis Sifakis, journalist, Greece
    134. Fotis Raisis (Greece)
    135. Xanthidis Pantelis, Journalist, Athens, Greece
    136. Maria Nikolaidou, Journalist, Athens. Greece
    137. Christos Michalopoulos, Athens.Greece 
    138. Chrysa Liangou, Journalist, Athens. Greece
    139. Hatzis Dimitris journalist athens Greece
    140.  Eleftheria Alavanou, journalist, Athens, Greece 
    141.  Nicholas Tsimpidas – Journalist, Greece 
    142. Helen Belli, Journalist, Athens, Greece
    143. Alexis Vakis, journalist, Athens, Greece
    144. Alexia Svolou Journalist athens Greece
    145. Andreas Ch. Panagopoulos, journalist, Athens, Greece
    146. Vasileios Tzimtsos, journalist, Greece
    147. Konstantin Vorovich, Journalist, Discours.io
    148. Espen Brynsrud, Head of Department, Oslo Norway
    149. Katerina Oikonomakou, journalist, Athens, Greece
    150. Nikos Sakellariou
    151. Teona Tskhomelidze, journalist, Executive Director of Media Voice 
    152. Alexander Kapsylis journalist, Athens, Greece
    153. Angeliki Boubouka, journalist, Athens, Greece
    154. Espen Leirset, Editor-in-Chief, Norway
    155. Lazaros Kokosis, journalist, Athens, Greece
    156. Igoumenidi Teti journalist Athens Greece
    157. Katja Alexander, journalist
    158. Jenny Panteli,  journalist GREEK VOICE FLORIDA – ODYSSEY TV KANADA
    159. Andrei Kaganskikh, independent journalist
    160. Katerina Fikari, journalist, Greece
    161. Ilia Papaspyrou, journalist, Greece
    162. Ivana Jelača, Media Diversity Institute Western Balkans
    163. Nikos Kiaos, journalist Athens Greece
    164. Thanasis G. Kappos journalist & teacher at media studies, Athens, Greece
    165. Milka Tadic Mijovic, President, Centre for Investigative Journalism of Montenegro
    166. Christos Michaelides Journalist, Athens, Greece.
    167. Karali Athina Journalist, Athens, Greece.
    168. Nikos Theodorakis, Nick Theodorakis, Journalist, Athens, Greece
    169. Nikos A. Konstantopoulos, newspaper KATHIMERINI
    170. Georgia Mylonaki, journalist, Athens, Greece 
    171. Theodwros Manikas, Athens, Greece
    172. Pannagiotis Votsis, journalist, Greece
    173. Sissy Alonistiotou, journalist, Greece
    174. Mirsini Grigori, Athens, Greece
    175. Tigkiris Michael, journalist, Greece
    176. Zoltán Sipos, editor-in-chief and manager of Átlátszó Erdély
    177. AndreRoth, German Journalist Federation DJV
    178. Milorad Ivanovic, editor in chief, BIRN Serbia#
    179. Nora Ralli, journalist, The Journalist Journal/2020mag.gr/ect
    180. Lina Stefanou, editor-in-chief of NOMAS magazine   
    181. Erato Giannakoudi editor Athens
    182. Nikos Langadinos, journalist, Greece
    183. David Omarov, Invisible rainbow of Turkmenistan
    184. Yannis Alexiou, journalist, Greece
    185. Maria Syrrou, journalist / actress, Greece
    186. Argiro Morou, Journalist, Greece
    187. Kyriaki Fyntanidou, Greece
    188. Annita Triantafyllopoulou Journalist
    189. Natalie Sablowski, Journalist, Süddeutsche Zeitung, Germany
    190. Antonis Papavomvolakis, journalist, Greece
    191. Giolada Koubli journalist, Athens Greece 
    192. Dimitris Papadimitriou, journalist, Greece   
    193. Satik Seyranyan, president of the Union of Journalists of Armenia, editor-in-chief o” (168.am)
    194. Katerina Koutselaki, tovima.gr
    195. 195. Nontas Chaldoupis, businessdaily.gr
    196. 196- Bülent Mumay, journalist, Turkey
    197. Victor Korb, DO-info, news agency 
    198. Bilio Tsoukala Journalist Greece
    199. Frederik Obermaier, Director of paper trail media, Germany
    200. Nina Komninou, Greece
    201. Dimitris Tsipouras, Journalist Greece
    202. Tatyana Khlestunova, independent journalist, Khabarovsk
    203. Ia Kldiashvili (IMS)
    204. Irina Nedeva, journalist,, Bulgaria
Allgemein

Italy: Call for full transparency after Fanpage editor-in-chief surveilled…

Italy: Call for full transparency after Fanpage editor-in-chief surveilled with spyware

The Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) is urging Italian authorities to shed full light on the recent surveillance of an editor-in-chief in Italy and others using Graphite spyware technology developed by Israeli firm Paragon Solutions.

Our organisations are alarmed by the latest case of a journalist within the European Union having their secure communications and sources compromised using advanced spyware technologies, representing yet another serious attack on press freedom.

 

In the wake of recent revelations, we also urge other governments in Europe to launch investigations into targeted surveillance against any other journalists who it emerges have been affected by the same spyware technology.

 

On 1 February 2025, it was revealed that investigative journalist Francesco Cancellato, the editor-in-chief of Italian news outlet Fanpage, was among more than 90 individuals worldwide to have had their WhatsApp hacked using Graphite, a military-grade zero-click spyware sold by Paragon.

 

According to WhatsApp, which said it disrupted the spyware attacks in December 2024, this list included journalists and civil society members around the world. In the EU, it is understood that individuals were targeted in 13 Member States: Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Germany, Greece, Latvia, Lithuania, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, and Sweden.

 

The full scope of the spyware hacking, as well as the number of journalists who were among the 90 individuals worldwide who were targeted, is currently unknown. Cancellato is the only journalist to have come forward publicly so far. It is also unclear how long he was targeted for and to what extent his communications were compromised.

 

Fanpage has published recent high-profile investigations into the youth wing of the Prime Minister Georgia Meloni’s party, the ‘Brothers of Italy’. However Cancellato has not speculated on the reason he was targeted, or by whom, and said that he had never been told by any authorities that he was under investigation.

 

In the wake of the revelations, the Italian government confirmed that seven mobile phone users within the country had been targeted and has said that its law enforcement agencies do use spyware. However, Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni’s office has denied any involvement in the targeting of journalists and the government has not formally acknowledged the existence of a contract with Paragon.

 

However, according to multiple media reports Paragon has suspended or terminated at least one of its two contracts with the country due to the violation of its terms of use. Like other spyware firms, Paragon markets its products exclusively to state intelligence and law enforcement agencies from approved governments.

 

While investigations have been opened within Italy and the case has received parliamentary scrutiny, the actor ultimately responsible for deploying the spyware has yet to be disclosed. However, multiple factors point to the involvement of at least one state agency from within Italy.

 

The MFRR stresses the need for urgent and thorough investigations to identify the source of the surveillance and how many media professionals were affected, in which countries, for how long, and under what legal justification. Those responsible for the potentially illegal surveillance of journalists must be held to account and steps must be taken to assess why legal safeguards to protect journalists from undue surveillance were potentially ineffective in EU Member States.

 

Amidst a global proliferation in spyware capabilities and a record number of abuses against journalists and other civil society actors, our organisations further call for the EU to refocus its attention on assuring strict implementation of the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA), which sets out new protections for journalists inside the bloc from undue surveillance.

 

Under Article 4 of the EMFA, the use of spyware is banned except in very specific cases including investigations of serious crimes, and requiring judicial approval. Establishing how such surveillance against media actors in Italy and beyond was permitted under current legal regulations, and whether due diligence was followed, will be vital in the coming months.

 

Under Article 4.7 of the EMFA, journalists surveilled using spyware in the EU also have a right to know about the accessing and processing of their personal data in the context of the deployment of the surveillance measures or the deployment of intrusive surveillance software as part of a criminal investigation. MFRR therefore urges Italian authorities to ensure the relevant provisions are upheld in the case of Cancellato, and any other journalists in Italy who it emerges were also surveilled.

 

Given the seriousness of this case for media freedom and its EU-wide considerations, we further support the recent initiative of Italian MEPs to request that the European Parliament establish a Commission of Inquiry into the Graphite spyware case. We also support the recent initiative by the National Federation of the Italian Press (FNSI) and the National Order of Journalists to file a criminal complaint over the spyware hacks with the Rome Public Prosecutor’s Office.

 

Our organizations remain committed to advocating for the strongest possible regulations against spyware use against journalists and other civil society actors within the EU, and beyond, and will continue to assist journalists who believe they may have been targeted by spyware in connecting with experts for diagnostic tests on their mobile devices.

 

*If you are among the journalists within the EU to have received messages from Meta/WhatsApp about hacking in December 2024, please reach out to MFRR representatives at the following secure communication to discuss for device testing: contactMFRR@proton.me

Signed by:

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

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, Candidate Countries and Ukraine.

Allgemein

Denmark: Condemnation of legal threats against Danwatch by Ingosstrakh…

Denmark: Condemnation of legal threats against Danwatch by Ingosstrakh and ELWI

We, the undersigned media freedom and journalists’ organizations, express our condemnation of the legal threats issued by the Moscow-based law firm ELWI on behalf of the Russian insurance company Ingosstrakh against the Danish investigative media outlet Danwatch. These actions represent an attempt to intimidate and silence independent journalism, and we stand in full solidarity with Danwatch and its journalists in the face of these threats.

Between December 2024 and January 2025, Danwatch received four strongly worded legal letters from ELWI, representing their client Ingosstrakh, a major Russian insurance company, which has previously been sanctioned by the United States and the United Kingdom. These letters follow the publication of a joint investigation by Danwatch and the Financial Times into Ingosstrakh’s role in insuring oil vessels that are suspected of being part of Russia’s efforts to circumvent Western sanctions. The investigation highlighted the grave risks posed by these vessels to European coastal states, particularly Denmark, as they operate without coverage for sanction violations, leaving these nations vulnerable to potential environmental disasters.

 

The legal threats issued by ELWI primarily dispute the factual basis of the investigation, demanding that Danwatch provide “detailed documentation” and information on its sources. Danwatch, however, has refused to comply, as this would compromise the confidentiality of its sources—an essential principle of responsible journalism.  Furthermore, where appropriate it has willingly clarified certain points. Overall, Danwatch stands by the accuracy of its reporting. 

 

We believe that these legal actions are nothing short of an attempt to harass and suppress investigative journalism and free expression. The remedies requested, demanding the release of source material, are unacceptable. The nature of these legal demands is both aggressive and without merit, particularly given that the investigation was conducted in collaboration with a bigger media outlet such as Financial Times, which has not received any similar legal threats from Ingosstrakh or ELWI. These legal actions bear the hallmarks of abuse and, if pursued further in court, they will qualify as a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP), a form of legal harassment designed to stifle public debate and shield powerful entities from scrutiny.

 

We call on Ingosstrakh and the law firm ELWI to immediately cease these legal threats and intimidation tactics against Danwatch.

 

We also commend Denmark’s Foreign Minister, Lars Løkke Rasmussen, for his swift condemnation of Ingosstrakh’s threats, describing them as a “politically motivated lawsuit.” Such statements are vital in reinforcing the importance of protecting journalists and media outlets from undue legal harassment, particularly when it is used as a tool for political intimidation.

 

The Council of Europe and the European Union have introduced new instruments to counter SLAPPs, including the EU Anti-SLAPP Directive, which member states should implement and transpose. We call on Danish authorities to ensure the implementation of the best European standards in national law and practice.

 

We will continue to closely monitor developments surrounding this case and document it on Mapping Media Freedom and the Council of Europe Platform for the Safety of Journalists.

Signed by:

  • AEJ-Bulgaria
  • European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
  • European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
  • Foundation Atelier for Community Transformation – ACT, Bosnia and Herzegovina
  • Index on Censorship
  • Pro Publico – Legal & Public Affairs for Civil Society
  • Civil Liberties Union for Europe (Liberties)
  • Institute for Mass Media, Cyprus.
  • Reporters Without Borders (RSF)
  • RECLAIM
  • Sherpa
  • The Daphne Caruana Galizia Foundation
  • Civic Initiatives (Serbia)
  • Blueprint for Free Speech
  • International Media Support
  • Solomon (Greece)
  • Greenpeace Nordic
  • Croatian Journalists’ Association (HND)
  • Fundación Internacional Baltasar Garzón –FIBGAR–
  • Free Press Unlimited (FPU)
  • Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT)
  • Presseclub Concordia (Vienna)
  • Coalition For Women In Journalism

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, Candidate Countries.

IPI - Turkey Statement call for action as press freedom violations surge in Turkey in 2025 Library

Turkey: Media Freedom organisations call for action as press…

Media Freedom organisations call for action as press freedom violations surge in Turkey in 2025

Türkçe açıklama aşağıdadır

The International Press Institute (IPI), together with undersigned press freedom, freedom of expression, human rights, and journalists’ organisations, and media outlets, expresses serious concern over the recent escalation of press freedom violations in Turkey, marking a troubling start to the new year. The frequent use of arbitrary arrests, detentions, judicial control measures, and convictions poses an existential threat to independent media, democratic discourse, and fundamental human rights in the country.

5.2.2025

Turkey must ensure that its practices align with international standards for the protection of freedom of expression and press freedom, as well as with the protections enshrined in its own constitution, in order to safeguard the foundations of democracy and human rights.

In January 2025 alone, at least nine journalists were arrested, six were sentenced to prison, five were detained, 23 faced investigations and one encountered police obstruction. Here is a timeline of a concerning acceleration of press freedom violations over the last month (the following is not an exhaustive list):

  • On January 2, authorities launched an investigation against journalist Aslıhan Gençay for her reporting on corruption in Hatay. They blocked access to her article and charged her with multiple offences, including violations of the disinformation law—an apparent attempt to suppress investigative journalism.
  • On January 7, the Ankara Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office launched an investigation against 21 journalists who covered the Kobani trial’s final hearing. The journalists face potential fines for alleged unauthorised photography—a move that effectively criminalises routine court reporting.
  • On January 17, a coordinated crackdown led to the detention of six journalists – Reyhan Hacıoğlu, Necla Demir, Rahime Karvar, Vedat Örüç, Velat Ekin and Ahmet Güneş – across multiple cities. They were denied basic legal rights, including access to legal representation, and were subsequently arrested on January 20 without their statements being recorded. The authorities’ only justification appears to be their legitimate journalistic activities. (Note: Ahmet Güneş was released on February 4.)
  • On January 21, Rudaw TV correspondent Rawin Sterk Yıldız faced police interference while documenting a detention in Istanbul’s Beyoğlu district. Despite clearly identifying himself as a journalist, he was prevented from documenting the public incident.
  • On January 23, a troubling verdict resulted in five journalists – Yakup Çetin, Ahmet Memiş, Cemal Azmi Kalyoncu, Ünal Tanık, Yetkin Yıldız, Gökçe Fırat Çulhaoğlu – receiving harsh sentences—ranging from 25 months to over six years in prison—in a terrorism-related case, despite the absence of credible evidence.
  • On January 24, the arrest of journalist Eylem Babayiğit once again demonstrated the arbitrary use of “membership of an organisation” charges.
  • On January 28, the detention of journalists Barış Pehlivan, Seda Selek, and Serhan Asker following their broadcast of a recorded phone conversation with an expert witness raises concerns about limitations on the coverage of matters of public interest. The court released Seda Selek and Serhan Asker under judicial control measures.
  • On January 28, the launch of an investigation into T24 columnist Şirin Payzın for alleged “terror propaganda” over social media posts indicates a concerning expansion of surveillance and criminalisation of online expression.
  • On January 28, the conviction of journalist Safiye Alagaş, former news editor for the pro-Kurdish JINNEWS, resulted in a six years and three months prison sentence. Alagaş has already spent a year in pretrial detention and is currently free while awaiting appeal.
  • On January 29, Halk TV editor-in-chief Suat Toktaş, program coordinator Kürşad Oğuz, and journalist Barış Pehlivan were detained for broadcasting a recorded phone conversation with an expert witness. While Pehlivan and Oğuz were released under judicial control measures, Toktaş was arrested—authorities cited flight risk and potential evidence tampering, demonstrating a concerning use of arbitrary detention criteria. Halk TV, one of Turkey’s largest private TV channels, is recognised for its critical programming.

Broadcast regulator’s decisions threaten press freedom

Turkey’s broadcast regulator RTÜK has demonstrated a concerning pattern of targeting critical media outlets. Just before the journalists’ detention over broadcasting a recorded phone conversation, the RTÜK Chair warned of potential consequences for media outlets and journalists regarding the same broadcast—effectively signalling the impending crackdown. In his statement, he criticised Halk TV for recording and broadcasting a phone conversation with an expert witness without permission and allegedly attempting to influence ongoing legal proceedings.

This incident reflects a broader pattern of regulatory pressure on critical media. In 2024, RTÜK imposed 24 broadcast bans resulting in fines totalling 81.5 million Turkish lira (approximately €2.2 million or $2.3 million), with the majority targeting media critical of the government. 

The systematic use of regulatory powers to penalise critical media outlets raises serious concerns about the independence of broadcast regulation and its impact on media pluralism in Turkey.

In a recent example, following the devastating hotel fire in Bolu that erupted in the early morning hours of January 20, 2025, claiming 78 lives, the RTÜK Chair directed media outlets to report solely on information from official sources. Shortly after this directive, the Bolu 2nd Criminal Court of Peace imposed a broadcasting ban on coverage of the disaster at the request of the Bolu Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office.

Judicial control measures: a new tool for censorship

While there appears to be a decrease in the number of journalists in prison, this masks a troubling shift toward using judicial control measures—such as travel bans, regular check-ins at police stations, and house arrest—as alternative means of restricting press freedom. This trend represents an equally antidemocratic practice aimed at controlling journalists’ freedom of movement and expression. The systematic implementation of these measures, combined with increasing online censorship, appears to be replacing traditional detention as a method of silencing independent journalism.

Recent cases exemplify this pattern. While journalists are released under judicial control measures shortly after being detained, the arbitrary imposition of travel bans, house arrests and other restrictions continues to impede their ability to perform their professional duties effectively. These measures, originally intended as exceptional remedies to ensure judicial proceedings, are increasingly being weaponized to create a chilling effect on press freedom.

In light of these egregious violations of press freedom in Turkey, we urge the Turkish authorities to uphold the principles of justice, release the journalists subjected to arbitrary arrests and detentions, and safeguard the vital role of journalism in fostering debate on matters of public interest and democracy.

Medya Özgürlüğü Kuruluşları, Türkiye’de basın özgürlüğüne yönelik artan baskılara karşı harekete geçilmesi çağrısında bulunuyor

Uluslararası Basın Enstitüsü (IPI) ve aşağıda imzası bulunan basın özgürlüğü, ifade hürriyeti, insan hakları, basın meslek ve haber kuruluşları, Türkiye’de gazetecilere yönelik hak ihlallerinin son dönemde ciddi ölçüde artmasından endişe duyuyor. Keyfi tutuklamalar, gözaltılar, adli kontrol tedbirleri ve hapis cezaları, ülkedeki bağımsız medya, demokratik söylem ve temel insan hakları için varoluşsal bir tehdit oluşturuyor.

Türkiye, demokrasi ve insan haklarının yanı sıra, ifade ve basın özgürlüğünün korunmasına ilişkin uluslararası standartlara ve kendi anayasasında yer alan koruyucu hükümlere uygun hareket etmelidir.

2025 yılının Ocak ayında en az dokuz gazeteci tutuklandı, altı gazeteciye hapis cezası verildi, beş gazeteci gözaltına alındı, 23 gazeteci hakkında soruşturma başlatıldı ve bir gazeteci polis müdahalesiyle karşılaştı. İşte son bir ayda kaydedilen basın özgürlüğü ihlallerindeki endişe verici artışın kronolojisi (aşağıdaki liste temsili bir liste olup geçtiğimiz ayın tüm basın özgürlüğü ihlallerini yansıtmamaktadır):

  • 2 Ocak’ta yetkililer, gazeteci Aslıhan Gençay hakkında Hatay’daki yolsuzluklarla ilgili haberlerinden dolayı soruşturma başlattı. Haberine erişim engeli getirilerek, dezenformasyon yasası da dahil olmak üzere birçok suçlama yöneltildi—bu durum araştırmacı gazeteciliği bastırma girişimi olarak görülüyor.
  • 7 Ocak’ta Ankara Cumhuriyet Başsavcılığı, Kobani davasının son duruşmasını takip eden 21 gazeteci hakkında soruşturma başlattı. Gazeteciler, izinsiz fotoğraf çektiği iddiasıyla para cezasıyla karşı karşıya—bu durum rutin dava haberlerinin suç unsuru haline getirilmesi anlamına geliyor.
  • 17 Ocak’ta evlerine yapılan polis baskınıyla gözaltına alınan altı gazeteci – Reyhan Hacıoğlu, Necla Demir, Rahime Karvar, Vedat Örüç, Velat Ekin ve Ahmet Güneş – avukatlarına erişim de dahil olmak üzere temel yasal haklarından mahrum bırakıldılar ve 20 Ocak’ta ifadeleri alınmadan tutuklandılar. Yetkililerin tutuklama gerekçesi ise gazetecilerin meşru gazetecilik faaliyetleri oldu. (Ahmet Güneş 4 Şubat’ta tahliye edildi.)
  • 21 Ocak’ta Rudaw TV muhabiri Rawin Sterk Yıldız, İstanbul Beyoğlu’nda bir gözaltı işlemini belgelerken gazeteci olduğunu açıkça belirtmesine rağmen polis müdahalesiyle karşılaştı.
  • 23 Ocak’ta beş gazeteci – Yakup Çetin, Ahmet Memiş, Cemal Azmi Kalyoncu, Ünal Tanık, Yetkin Yıldız, Gökçe Fırat Çulhaoğlu – terörle ilgili yeniden yargılandıkları davada, somut deliller olmamasına rağmen, 2 yıldan 6 yıla kadar ağır hapis cezalarına çarptırıldı.
  • 24 Ocak’ta gazeteci Eylem Babayiğit‘in mesleki faaliyetlerinden dolayı tutuklanması, “örgüt üyeliği” suçlamasının keyfi kullanımını bir kez daha gözler önüne serdi.
  • 28 Ocak’ta bir bilirkişi ile yapılan telefon görüşmesinin kaydını yayınladıkları gerekçesiyle gazeteciler Barış Pehlivan, Seda Selek ve Serhan Asker‘in gözaltına alınması, kamuyu ilgilendiren haberlere getirilen kısıtlamalar konusunda endişe yarattı. Mahkeme, Seda Selek ve Serhan Asker’i adli kontrol şartıyla serbest bıraktı.
  • 28 Ocak’ta T24 yazarı Şirin Payzın hakkında sosyal medya paylaşımları nedeniyle “terör propagandası” iddiasıyla soruşturma başlatılması, çevrimiçi paylaşımların suç unsuru sayılmasının endişe verici bir şekilde arttığını gösteriyor.
  • 28 Ocak’ta JINNEWS’in eski haber müdürü gazeteci Safiye Alagaş terör suçlamalarıyla yargılandığı davada 6 yıl 3 ay hapis cezasına çarptırıldı. Alagaş daha önce bir yıl tutuklu yargılanmıştı, şu anda temyiz sürecini tutuksuz bekliyor.
  • 29 Ocak’ta Halk TV Genel Yayın Yönetmeni Suat Toktaş, Program Koordinatörü Kürşad Oğuz ve gazeteci Barış Pehlivan, bir bilirkişi ile yapılan telefon görüşmesinin kaydını yayınladıkları gerekçesiyle gözaltına alındı. Pehlivan ve Oğuz adli kontrol şartıyla serbest bırakılırken Toktaş kaçma şüphesi ve delilleri karartma ihtimali gerekçe gösterilerek 30 Ocak’ta tutuklandı. Bu durum, keyfi tutuklama kriterlerinin endişe verici kullanımını gözler önüne serdi.

RTÜK’ün kararları basın özgürlüğünü tehdit ediyor

Türkiye’nin yayın düzenleyicisi RTÜK, eleştirel medya kuruluşlarını hedef alan endişe verici bir tutum sergilemeye devam ediyor. Gazetecilerin kayıtlı bir telefon görüşmesini yayınlamaları nedeniyle gözaltına alınmalarından hemen önce, RTÜK Başkanı konuyla ilgili medya kuruluşları ve gazeteciler için olası sonuçlar konusunda uyarıda bulundu – bu da yaklaşan gözaltı ve tutuklamaların sinyalini verdi. Açıklamasında, Halk TV’yi bir bilirkişi ile yapılan telefon görüşmesini izinsiz kaydetmek, yayınlamak ve devam eden yasal süreçleri etkilemeye çalışmakla eleştirdi.

Bu olay, eleştirel medya üzerindeki baskının devamını yansıtıyor. 2024’te RTÜK, çoğunluğu hükümeti eleştiren medyayı hedef alan, toplam 81,5 milyon Türk lirası para cezasıyla sonuçlanan 24 yayın yasağı uyguladı.

RTÜK’ün düzenleyici yetkilerini eleştirel medya kuruluşlarını cezalandırmak için sistematik şekilde kullanması, bağımsız yayıncılık ve Türkiye’deki medya çoğulculuğu noktasında ciddi endişeler uyandırıyor.

Yakın zamanda bir örnek olarak, 20 Ocak 2025’te Bolu’da meydana gelen ve 78 kişinin hayatını kaybettiği otel yangını sonrasında, RTÜK Başkanı medya kuruluşlarına yalnızca resmi kaynaklardan gelen bilgileri aktarmaları talimatını verdi. Bu talimatın hemen ardından, Bolu 2. Sulh Ceza Hakimliği, Bolu Cumhuriyet Başsavcılığı’nın talebi üzerine felaketle ilgili haberler hakkında yayın yasağı getirdi.

Adli kontrol tedbirleri: Yeni bir sansür aracı

Cezaevindeki gazeteci sayısında bir düşüş görülse de, bu durum endişe verici bir gerçeği maskeliyor: Yurt dışı yasakları, düzenli imza verme zorunluluğu ve ev hapsi gibi adli kontrol tedbirleri basın özgürlüğünü kısıtlamanın alternatif araçları olarak kullanılıyor. Bu eğilim, gazetecilerin hareket ve ifade özgürlüğünü kontrol etmeyi amaçlayan eşit derecede antidemokratik bir uygulamayı temsil ediyor. Bu tedbirlerin sistematik olarak uygulanması ve artan çevrimiçi sansür, bağımsız gazeteciliği susturma yöntemi olarak geleneksel tutuklamanın yerini alıyor gibi görünüyor.

Son vakalar da bu durumu örnekliyor. Gazeteciler gözaltına alındıktan kısa süre sonra adli kontrol şartıyla serbest bırakılırken, keyfi olarak uygulanan yurt dışı yasakları, ev hapsi ve diğer kısıtlamalar, mesleki görevlerini etkili bir şekilde yerine getirmelerini engellemeye devam ediyor. Aslen yargı süreçlerini güvence altına almak için istisnai tedbirler olarak tasarlanan bu önlemler, basın özgürlüğü üzerinde caydırıcı bir etki yaratmak için kullanılıyor.

Basın özgürlüğüne yönelik bu ağır ihlaller karşısında, Türkiye’deki yetkilileri adalet ilkelerine bağlı kalmaya, keyfi gözaltı ve tutuklamaya maruz kalan gazetecileri serbest bırakmaya ve haberciliğin kamuyu ilgilendiren tartışmalar ve demokrasideki hayati rolünü korumaya çağırıyoruz.

Signed by:

  • International Press Institute (IPI)
  • Association of European Journalists (International)
  • Association of European Journalists in Belgium (AEJ Belgium)
  • Association of European Journalists in Bulgaria (AEJ Bulgaria)
  • Association of Journalists (GC)
  • Bulgarian Helsinki Committee
  • Catalan PEN
  • Center for Media, Information and Social Research of Georgia (CMIS)
  • Coalition For Women In Journalism (CFWIJ)
  • Danish PEN
  • European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
  • European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
  • Freedom House
  • Foreign Media Association (FMA Turkey)
  • Georgian Charter of Journalistic Ethics
  • IFEX
  • Index on Censorship
  • International Federation of Journalists (IFJ)
  • Irish PEN/PEN na hEireann
  • Kurdish PEN
  • Media and Law Studies Association (MLSA)
  • Media and Migration Association (MMA)
  • Media Development Foundation (MDF)
  • Netgazeti / Batumelebi
  • Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT)
  • OC Media
  • P24 Platform for Independent Journalism
  • Armãn PEN
  • PEN America
  • PEN Centre of Bosnia & Herzegovina
  • PEN Esperanto
  • PEN International
  • PEN Melbourne
  • PEN Norway
  • PEN Québec
  • PEN Sweden
  • PEN Türkiye
  • Progressive Journalists Association (PJA)
  • San Miguel PEN
  • South East Europe Media Organisation (SEEMO)
  • Vietnamese Abroad PEN Centre
  • Yapay Gündem

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 States, Candidate Countries.

Library

Georgia: Press freedom partners call for release of Mzia…

Press freedom partners call for release of Mzia Amaglobeli, end to crackdown on free press 

The undersigned press freedom, journalists and human rights organisations call for the immediate release of veteran Georgian journalist and founder and director of the online newspapers Batumelebi and Netgazeti. 

The undersigned press freedom, journalists and human rights organisations call for the immediate release of veteran Georgian journalist and founder and director of the online newspapers Batumelebi and Netgazeti. 

 

Amaglobeli, who announced on January 20 to have been on hunger strike since January 12 after being abused while held in detention said “The charges against me today are the product of repressive, treacherous, and violent processes targeting humanity, freedom of speech, and expression.”

 

She faces charges of assaulting a police officer—carrying a sentence of up to seven years in prison—following an altercation with Batumi Police Chief Irakli Dgebuadze.

 

Amaglobeli was first arrested on January 11 for an administrative offense after placing a sticker  about an upcoming general strike on the wall at the entrance of a police station. She was released the following day and, while speaking with her supporters outside the police station, police began arresting several of them. This led to an altercation between Amaglobeli and Dgebuadze, during which Amaglobeli is accused of slapping Dgebuadze. She was then charged under Article 353(1) of the Georgian Criminal Code (“Assault on a police officer, a special penitentiary service employee, or another public official or institution”), a serious offense that can carry a punishment of 4 to 7 years in prison.  On January 14, Amaglobeli was ordered to remain in pre-trial detention. 

 

On January 15 Nona Kurdovanidze, Chairperson of the Georgian Young Lawyers’ Association—a respected Tbilisi-based human rights watchdog, stated that Dgebuadze spat in Amaglobeli’s face and denied her access to water and toilet facilities for an extended period. Two days later, Gyla revealed that the Special Investigation Service (SIS), a body responsible for investigating crimes committed by officials, had been aware of the ill-treatment allegations while Amaglobeli was held in custody. Kurdovanidze noted that the SIS received detailed information directly from the alleged victim. 

 

On January 20, Amaglobeli announced a hunger strike. In a letter published by Netgazeti, she wrote: “ These processes have been unfolding over the past year and are embedding themselves into our daily lives as a dictatorship. I refuse to accept the regime’s agenda […]. Freedom is far more valuable than life, and it is at stake. Fight before it is too late.”

 

According to Transparency International Georgia, video footage of the incident shows that the slap lacked sufficient force to cause harm,” and therefore does not meet the threshold of seriousness required for charges under the criminal code.

 

Prior to Amaglobeli’s arrest, the editor-in-chief of Batumelebi, Eter Turadze, was harassed by Dgebuadze. Batumelebi has repeatedly reported on and exposed alleged human rights violations under Dgebuadze. 

 

In a separate case, the Batumi City Court sentenced Guram Murvanidze, a camera operator and photographer with  Batumelebi, to eight days of administrative detention. Murvanidze was detained by police on January 12 while covering a protest. The prosecution accused him of disobeying a lawful order from law enforcement officers.

 

We urge the Georgian authorities to immediately and unconditionally release Amaglobeli and put an end to this unprecedented crackdown on the media. We furthermore demand a thorough investigation into the mistreatment she endured.

Signed by:

  • International Press Institute (IPI) 
  • European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
  • European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
  • Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT)
  • Free Press Unlimited (FPU)
  • Justice for Journalists Foundation (JFJ)
  • IMS (International Media Support)
  • Media Diversity Institute (MDI)
  • PEN International
  • Civil Rights Defenders (CRD)
  • Kathy Kiely, Lee Hills Chair in Free Press Studies, Missouri School of Journalism
  • Society of Journalists (Warsaw)
  • IRMI – Institute for Regional Media and Information (Ukraine)
  • South East Europe Media Organisation (SEEMO)
  • Rosental C Alves, Founder and Director of the Knight Center for Journalism in the Americas
  • Randy Smith, President, Alfred Friendly Press Partners

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, Candidate Countries.