submit alert
All Posts By

Mapping Media Freedom

Oct 23
0

Letter: Serbian media facing “very difficult” situation

By | Mapping Media Freedom, Serbia

Dear Index on Censorship,

We wish to inform you about the key issues, problems and processes related to media and media freedom in Serbia today and to explain our views and attitudes, as well as arguments we based them on.

The information provided here will help you fully understand the complexity and stratification of the problems faced by Serbian journalists and media, as well as the citizens, whose constitutional right to be informed truthfully, comprehensively and timely informed about matter of public interest is seriously violated. We would also like to explain in more detail the role of media and journalists’ associations in media processes, especially those related to the dialogue with representatives of the authorities.

Despite a very difficult, we could say dramatic, situation in the media, the associations are always ready to have a dialogue and cooperate with representatives of the authorities if that leads to solving problems. We started cooperation with the Serbian government in June this year on creating the Media strategy, having been given firm guarantees by the Prime Minister Ana Brnabic that there was an unwavering political will among the authorities to improve the situation in the media and to cooperate with relevant journalists’ and media associations in order to achieve that goal. We would like to remind you that in the period preceding our cooperation, the authorities tried to create the media strategy, but all relevant journalists’ and media associations withdrew from the process dissatisfied with the methodology and possible outcomes. A few months later, as a result of pressures, the Serbian government stopped this process and elevated it from the level of the Ministry of Culture and Information to the level of the Serbian government. OSCE was invited to facilitate the process, while journalists’ and media associations were asked to contribute by delegating members of the task force for designing the media strategy. That is good news is that this document is being drafted at the moment and, despite certain problems, it is a widely inclusive process, which is satisfactory.

However, bear in mind that the Serbian government is supposed to adopt this document and that it can undergo major, even substantial, changes in comparison to the draft, which will be submitted to the government by the working group. What is more important is that this document itself does not mean much, even if its quality is exceptional – it merely represents a promise of the Serbian government to adhere to it during a future period. Large number of strategic documents in Serbia has remained nothing but a list of nice, yet unfulfilled wishes.

It is only after the media strategy is adopted that the process of amending the existing or creating new laws will begin. It is important to note that three years passed from the moment the media strategy was  produced to the moment the laws were adopted by the parliament (2011-2014). To be honest, we are afraid that a large number of professional media in Serbia will not last long enough to see the new laws; especially media exposed to great and varied political and economic pressures.

An issue greater than passage of time is the fact that the problems in the field of media in Serbia are only in small part a result of imperfect legal solutions – they are mostly a result of violations and mocking the law, i.e. lack of the rule of law. In practical terms, it means that even if we get excellent laws, it will not mean anything, nor can it be guaranteed that the situation in the field of media will improve. Namely, even the existing laws regulating media have been evaluated as positive by international stakeholders and experts. Yet, four years later, we have, and all relevant analyses, research and reports testify to that fact, the same dramatic problems in the world of media market, media freedom and media pluralism.

We would also like to remind you that Serbia received high appraisals from relevant institutions in the process of European integrations for the media laws of 2014. We believe that you understand our concern that the goal of the authorities now, just like in 2014, is not to improve the situation in the media, but to present the state of affairs in Serbian media to the international community in a light that does not reflect reality. We would like warn if the possibility that the authorities in Serbia present the process of drafting the Media strategy as a giant leap forward and that they might use it to divert attention away from all other problems in the media.

It is because of this concern that we requested from the authorities to initiate a process parallel to the process of drafting the media strategy, in which we would jointly work on fast-tracking solutions to a number of media-related problems in the existing legal framework. Having reached an agreement, journalists’ and media associations formed a team for the dialogue, while the Serbian government established the coordination body, thus creating a platform for negotiations. The associations entered the process hoping to help overcome current problems in the field of media and that the results would be visible in a relatively short period. Unfortunately, four months after the dialogue began we still do not have a single proof, spoken reassurances aside, that there is a genuine political will on behalf of the authorities to improve the situation in the field of media and media freedom, which seriously questions the usefulness of the initiated dialogue. At the same time, the problems related to media are becoming more complex and numerous on a daily basis, thus creating extremely negative effects on the media, journalists, media freedom and media pluralism.

On August 16 2018, journalists’ and media associations submitted to the government’s coordination body 13 requests for solving the key issues in the field of media, wishing to see if there was really political readiness to solve them. We did not set a deadline for the realisation of requests, because we were fully aware that some of them required more time, but we expected to receive adequate answers, which would indicate the readiness on behalf of the coordination body to fulfil them, naturally with our help and support. Unfortunately, we have so far received nothing but partial, incomplete answers that we are absolutely not satisfied with. We have decided, as agreed on the previous meeting between the  team for the dialogue and the coordination body, to further specify our requests, prioritise them and set deadlines. Should the deadlines not be met – and they are realistic and not too demanding – we retain the right to withdraw from the dialogue, as well as to reconsider our participation in the Working group in charge of drafting the Media strategy.

As we have already stated, parallel to these processes, the situation in the field of media is becoming increasingly difficult. Representatives of the authorities publicly call names, insult and humiliate journalists and media workers, labelling them as enemies of the society or “foreign agents”, thus seriously jeopardising their safety. There are many examples of such behaviour, the most recent one was the attack of the Head of the Parliamentary Group of the ruling Serbian Progressive Party Aleksandar Martinović on the President of the IJAV Nedim Sejdinović, whom he called an “enemy of Serbia” from the podium in the National Assembly for making critical comments about the authorities in Serbia. This was not the first time Martinović had called out a journalist by name. He had already called out Sejdinović’s name before, who received a large number of death threats as a result, all of which were reported to the police, but no court proceeding has been initiated. A few days ago an official from the Security Information Agency (BIA) Marko Parezanović stated that the “greatest threat to Serbia are the foreign agents working in media, non-governmental agencies and opposition parties”, while the Serbian president Aleksandar Vučić supported the claim. As we have stated, there are many cases of representatives of the authorities attacking the “disobeying” media and journalists. In its online database, the Independent Journalists Association of Serbia recorded 72 cases of calling out, insults, degradation and discrimination of journalists, media, journalists’ and media associations by the politicians and public officials.

The latest incident took place on 19.10.2018 when the President of RS Aleksandar Vudić first called a public service broadcaster by her name and insulted and humiliated her, and then turned to TV N1 journalist who had asked him not to put pressure on colleagues from the PSB (see transcript in English here).

Serbian authorities abuse various inspection services to put pressure on the media. “Vranjske” daily were closed in September 2017, was subjected to political, economic and administrative pressures, while the owner and Editor-in-chief Vukašin Obradović went on a hunger strike. Journalists, media and civil society organisations protested for months because of this, but to no avail. The latest case from Niš, the “Južne vesti” case, is also very disturbing. Namely, the tax administration spent six months in this small media company and, even though it had conducted its business in compliance with the law, fined it. Representatives of the tax administration abused their position in various ways in order to cause damage to the company.

Representatives of Serbian authorities often sue media companies and journalists, while court decisions are not in line with the laws in Serbia and practice of the European Court of Human Rights, which envisage that public officials are obliged to be subject to critical opinion. The fines make the already difficult situation even less bearable for the media that are not close to the authorities. On the other  hand, despite being at the receiving end of threats and other forms of pressures, journalists do not have the adequate legal protection. The police, public prosecutor’s offices and courts are utterly inefficient when it comes to such cases, so the attacks on journalists remain unsolved and unsanctioned. We would also like to remind you that Serbia has still not seen court epilogue of murders of journalists that happened 15 and more years ago. On the other hand, state bodies in charge show a high level of efficiency when the targets of threats are representatives of the authorities. In such cases, the offenders are quickly found and sanctioned.

The tabloid print media are increasingly breaking the Serbian Journalists’ Code of Ethics, as confirmed by the reports of the Press Council. It is important to note that the media that break the Code the most are those closest to the authorities and they are in large part financed from public revenues. Those media spread hate speech, call names and insult those critical of the authorities, as well as citizens of other nationalities and confessions. The authorities have completely blocked and stultified the work of the Regulatory Authority of Electronic Media (REM), which is why chaos and lawlessness rule the field of electronic media. The media with national coverage have been turned into propaganda tools, with programmes of extremely low quality dominating the field. The Regulatory Authority is not reacting, even though the realised programmes are completely different from the submitted proposals, i.e. suggested work plans that the stations submitted when applying for frequencies. REM is not reacting even when it comes to a striking example of a breach of the Law on Electronic Media, i.e. when certain TV stations with national coverage broadcast live the sessions of the main board of the ruling party.

The case of the national news agency Tanjug is one of the most famous cases of breaching the law and endangering the legal system in the country. This agency is still actively working, even though a decision to close it down was made, pursuant to the law, on October 31, 2015. This agency is now a propaganda tool owned by the state, although the state decided to pull out from owning any media, pursuant to the laws of 2014. Furthermore, the state is, unlawfully, a co-owner of daily newspapers “Večernje novosti” and “Politika”, while the local self-government in Kragujevac is, also unlawfully, a co-owner of the previously privatised radio-television Kragujevac.

Truth be told, Serbia is allocating extremely large amounts from the budget to the media, but completely non-transparently, selectively and discriminatorily. The laws allow the state to intervene financially in some rare cases and by co-financing projects of public interest. However, it is allocating enormous amounts through other means (public procurements, promotions, advertising, sponsorships, contracts on business and technical cooperation) in a way that is completely deregulated, as highlighted by the Anti-Corruption Council. In its report, the council pointed out that the decisions made by political and economic elites on where to advertise and how much money to spend directly influenced the future of media companies. In order to attract advertisements, the council claims, the employees in such media companies try to create content which are in line with the interests of advertisers, thus neglecting the Journalists’ Code of Ethics, i.e. the ethical principles of their profession. It is with this intervention that the funds are allocated to the media close to the authorities, thus creating a serious imbalance on the media market and discriminating against “inadequate” media. No-one knows exactly how big these  amounts are (one of our requests is to have the coordination body submit a report on it, but the state is allegedly unable to obtain this information), but we are definitely talking about dozens of millions of euro annually. This is one of the most efficient recipes for controlling the media, where you subject them to both corruption and blackmail at the same time.

When it comes to competitions for co-financing projects of public interest in the media, we have been experiencing serious problems for years now. Although the law stipulates that the allocation of funds should be entrusted to media experts delegated from journalists’ and media associations and that the funds should be used in the interest of the public, this authority have turned this process into financing the media close to them and self-promotion. The funds are allocated to the media that have repeatedly broken the Journalists’ Code of Ethics, even though it is one of the basic criteria for fund allocation.

We would like to remind you that the European Commission’s 2018 Report on Serbia contains a very negative assessment of the situation in the media, where the highlighted problems are the lack of transparency in ownership structure, the state’s co-financing of media and the consequent influence on not only the media, but the freedom of expression in general. The focus is on co-financing the issues of public interest in the field of information, the model of state’s financial intervention in the field of media envisaged by the Law on Public Information and Media of 2014, as well as “the distribution of advertising funds“. The report states that Serbian authorities should ensure that informal pressure on editorial policy is not exerted through the distribution of advertising funds, including from public companies, as well as through project co-funding from local budgets.

The public broadcasters in Serbia do not obey their legal obligations, which state that they should work in public interest and report truthfully, unbiasedly and comprehensively and that they should have independent editorial policies. Researches have shown that the public broadcasters are places from which public dialogue and critical thinking have been ousted and that their news programmes are dramatically dominated by the executive authorities. We would like to remind you that two years ago many editors were removed from their positions at the Public Broadcasting Service of Vojvodina for political reasons, that the situation in this company has remained unchanged, despite the protest of journalists’ and media associations and international organisations, and that this public broadcasting service is also weakened by other numerous affairs.

A huge problem for journalists’ and media organisations is the fact that there is political pressure on the institution of the Commissioner for Information of Public Importance. Since 2015, the authorities have ignored 601 decisions of the commissioner related to the complaints submitted to the commissioner because of the infringement of the right to have free access to information. This is a staggering fact. We are certain that you are fully aware how important the instrument of free access to information is to journalists and media.

Unfortunately, this is just a brief overview of the most significant problems that the media in Serbia, as well as we, journalists’ and media associations, and citizens of Serbia are facing. We hope that this overview clarifies why we evaluate the situation as dramatically bad.

We also hope that, having read this, you will better understand our doubt that there is a political will among the authorities to solve the problems in the field of media within the scope of the process of the accession of Serbia to the European Union.

Independent Journalists’ Association of Serbia

Independent Journalists’ Association of Vojvodina

Association of Local Independent Media – Local Press

Association of Independent Electronic Media

Association of Online Media

Mapping Media Freedom: Serbia

Incidents reported to and verified by Mapping Media Freedom since May 2014

Oct 15
0

Maltese journalist Caroline Muscat continues in the spirit of her murdered colleague Daphne Caruana Galizia

By | Malta, Mapping Media Freedom

By Fréderike Geerdink

On 16 October 2017 Malta’s most important investigative journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia was murdered in Malta. Three men will stand trial for carrying out the crime but the masterminds remain untouched, rendering Malta an unsafe place for independent journalists. Journalist Caroline Muscat refuses to get distracted by that.

“The murder,” says journalist Caroline Muscat, “was a message to the country that whoever investigates those in power and makes corruption visible, has to fear for his life. So we had to send a message back.”

Muscat seems to be in an adrenaline rush while talking in her apartment in a small town in the north of Malta. The interview was postponed twice for an hour because she had to convene with her colleagues about new stories for The Shift, the journalistic website that she and a colleague launched early November 2017. It was just weeks after the shock of the assassination of Daphne Caruana Galizia. The Shift is the message Caroline Muscat sent back to the perpetrators.

Malta doesn’t have a lot of independent journalism. Even media outlets that are not tied to a political party, have opaque ties with the political and entrepreneurial establishment. It is because of such ties that Caroline Muscat quit her job at the widely read Times of Malta in 2016: in publications about the leaked documents known as the Panama Papers, Caruana Galizia revealed that the managing director of the Times’ publisher was implicated too.

“I could not continue to work for the Times,” she says. She freelanced and made plans to start an investigative online paper, to be launched in the spring of 2018. Caruana Galizia’s murder accelerated the launch.

“Our goal is to hold those in power to account,” Muscat says.

That’s not a spectacular goal for a journalistic project. It does lead to remarkable choices though. Muscat tells about the arrest, in December 2017, of three men suspected of placing the bomb in Caruana Galizia’s car and detonating it. “We didn’t publish that news,” Muscat says. “We were immediately criticised about that. A government official even attacked me on Twitter, asking why The Shift didn’t publish about this breakthrough in the investigation.”

She explains – and still gets furious: “The men were detained with a grand show of force. In Malta, there are only a few people who know how to make bombs. Why weren’t they taken earlier? The arrested men have no motive for the murder. We want to know who is behind Daphne’s death. The arrests were a way to conceal that no serious investigation is carried out into the murder. As a journalist, I refuse to contribute to such a scheme.”

By performing journalism that way, The Shift works in the spirit of Running Commentary, the blog of Caruana Galizia. Also, Caruana Galizia didn’t care a bit about good contacts with powerful key figures in politics and business but investigated and scrutinised them, to attack if necessary. Muscat, however, resists the idea that she is following in Caruana Galizia’s footsteps: “Nobody can replace Daphne. She has been the target of hate campaigns and threats for years. Her dogs were murdered, her house was set ablaze. We often ran into each other because we worked on the same kind of stories, but she worked alone, I worked for an established paper. I was protected. She wasn’t.”

After resigning from the Times of Malta, Muscat also lost her protection, which became all the clearer when she started The Shift. An intense disinformation and hate campaign was launched against her, especially on social media, just as had happened to Caruana Galizia.  Muscat and her family are, without any grounds, being connected to alcoholism, arms trade and prostitution. In secret Facebook groups linked to the governing Labour Party – where contributors to The Shift went undercover for half a year – pictures of Caruana Galizia and Muscat surfaced, accompanied by hateful comments (“She got what she deserved,” and “She deserves some bombs too”), generously supplied with likes by sometimes highly placed government figures.

Muscat immediately notices when a picture of hers has been doing the rounds again in such online networks. “This week the owner of a grocery shop asked me if I was the woman who publishes articles online. I am starting to get an idea now of the pressure under which Daphne has lived for years. Every aspect of my life has become difficult,” Muscat says.

The Shift welcomes some hundred thousand visitors per month and lives from donations. Muscat does other freelance journalistic work if necessary to earn enough income. Maybe, when the visitor stats rise, they will try to get revenues from advertisements. They usually publish several stories per day, both backgrounds and investigative work and analyses and columns. Muscat: “The Shift is journalism, but it is a movement too. Yes, I have an agenda. My agenda is press freedom, democracy, rule of law. We don’t have the luxury anymore to demand anything else. No, I don’t think The Shift will find the final piece of the puzzle that will solve Daphne’s murder. Such an expectation is unrealistic. All we can do is continue to investigate and contribute to adding pieces of the puzzle.”

Does she fear for her life? She circles around the question. She seems unable to ponder the issue. She does, however, point to an important difference between The Shift and Caruana Galizia’s blog: “The Shift doesn’t depend on me. We have a team. If one of us falls away, The Shift will continue.”

Oct 08
0

Mapping Media Freedom Q1 Q2 2018 report

By | European Union, Mapping Media Freedom, media freedom featured

Mapping Media Freedom has been recording threats to press freedom since 2014, highlighting the need for protection for journalists. The project monitors the media environment in 43 countries. In the first two quarters of 2018, 541 reports of limitations to press freedom were verified by a network of correspondents, partners and other sources based in Europe, with a majority of violations coming from official or governmental bodies (Q1: 247; Q2: 294).

First Quarter 2018

One journalist was killed during the first quarter of 2018; 52 reports of assault or injury were made; 53 reports of journalists being detained or arrested, with many reports involving the arrests of multiple journalists at one time; 54 reports included criminal charges and civil lawsuits; there were 59 reports of intimidation; 3 instances of sexual harassment were recorded; in 28 incidents media professionals had their property vandalised or confiscated; and there were 57 instances of journalists or sources being blocked.

DEATH

One media worker was killed as a result of their reporting in the first quarter of 2018. On 26 February Slovak investigative journalist Jan Kuciak was shot dead at his home in the village of Veľká Mača, 5km east of the capital Bratislava. Kuciak, who worked for Slovak news website Aktuality.sk, was shot in the chest and his fiancée was shot in the head. In September 2017 the journalist filed a complaint against businessman Marian Kočner for threatening him. Kočner was allegedly connected with the bankruptcy of Real Štúdio KFA. Kuciak had also revealed that Ladislav Bašternák was required to repay the Slovak treasury €2 million after a real estate transaction. Both businessmen are said to be associated with the ruling Smer party.

Kuciak was also investigating, among other things, the Slovak oil company Petroltrans, which the journalist alleged was controlled by Ukrainian businessman Mykhailo Olevskyy through an offshore company. Petroltrans has won a major public contract, and has employed the daughter of Slovak financial services’ deputy head.

PHYSICAL ASSAULTS AND INJURY

Mapping Media Freedom documented 52 verified incidents of assault and injury in the first quarter of 2018, 30% of which occured in Ukraine (10) and Russia (6).

On 23 January a TV crew for Revizzoro, a Pyatnitsa show that reviews cafes and restaurants, was assaulted while filming in cafe Neptun in Nizhny Novgorod. An employee of the cafe made death threats and punched one member of the crew in the face.

On 23 March Olga Gunzhel, a journalist for the local newspaper Chronicles of Communities, was assaulted by employees of the Butenkivsky village council in the Poltava region. Council employees prevented Gunzhel from filming proceedings, which involved her husband Pavel Gunzhel, deputy head of the council. Speaking to the Institute of Mass Information, Pavel Gunzhel said: “An employee of the village council grabbed journalist’s hair, then another employee of the village council punched her in the face with his fists. He knocked the camera out of her hands, the battery fell out of the camera.” Olga Gunzhel suffered a fracture on her nose and a craniocerebral trauma.

ARRESTS/ DETAINMENTS

Of the 53 instances of arrest and detainment that occured in the first quarter of 2018, 37 took place in Turkey, involving at least 72 media workers.

On 10 January Veli Büyükşahin, president of the executive board of the shuttered TV 10, along with broadcasting board member Veli Haydar Güleç were detained in early morning raids on their homes. TV10, a network representing Turkey’s Alevi minority community, was shut down under Turkey’s emergency decree. Büyükşahin and Güleç remain in pre-trial detention, along with 13 other people, on charges of “membership to a terrorist organisation”.

In the early hours of 28 March the Istanbul office of the pro-Kurdish daily Özgürlükçü Demokrasi, and the printing house where the newspaper is printed, were raided, and the company’s assets frozen. Initially, the newspaper’s publisher İlhan Yaşar and eight print house workers, including owner Kasım Gün, were detained. In the weeks that followed, a total of six Özgürlükçü Demokrasi editors and 20 printing house workers would be arrested and placed in pre-trial detention.

CRIMINAL CHARGES/CIVIL LAWSUITS

Out of the 54 instances of criminal charges or civil lawsuits that occured in the first quarter of 2018, 35 took place between Belarus (19) and Turkey (16). All but two of the Belarus reports involved a media worker being fined in the course of their duties. Fifteen journalists – 12 of which working for Belsat TV, a Poland-headquartered outlet aimed at Belarus, a total of 23 times. On 14 March Balrusian freelance journalists Kastus Zhukouski and Andrei Tolchyn were fined €255 each for the illegal production and distribution of media content for Belsat. It was the third time the pair had been fined in 2018.

On 12 March Belarusian bloggers Alyaksandr Kabanau and Syarhei Pyatrukhin were fined 980 Belarusian rubles (€406) for the “illegal production and/or distribution of media content,” after hosting live broadcasts on Facebook and YouTube from the entrance checkpoint of Exide battery plant in Pinsk. The pair were tried under Article 22.9 of the Code of Administrative Offences, a law concerning media outlets. It was the first time social networks were deemed as such in Belarus.

LEGAL MEASURES

There were 33 legal measures taken against journalists in the first quarter of 2018. On 3 January French president Emmanuel Macron vowed to introduce a law to ban online fake news during French election campaigns, which was later rejected by the Senate. On 17 January Lithuanian MP Robertas Sarknickas proposed an amendment to the Law on Informing Public that would sanction media outlets and journalists for what he calls “widespread” “romanticising” of suicide.

On 25 January members of Russia’s Stavropol Krai Duma (regional parliament) passed a law banning journalists from outlets recognised as “foreign agents” to enter Duma events. The bill imposes fines of up to 5 million rubles (€718,000) for outlets listed as “foreign agents” not observing the rules. On 6 February Polish President Andrzej Duda signed into law an amendment to the country’s Act on the Institute of National Remembrance that makes it a crime to “ascribe Nazi crimes to the Polish Nation or to the Polish State”.

INTIMIDATION

In all, 59 instances of intimidation were recorded across Europe by Mapping Media Freedom in the first quarter of 2018. On 28 March Hungarian politician János Lázár, then Secretary of State of Prime Minister’s Office, made comments about the future of Hír TV after one of its journalists, Zsolt Tárkányi, asked questions about the country’s defence budget. Lázár initially said the government would commit 2% of its GDP to military spending by 2022, but then changed the date to 2024. “We will ask you again in 2022,” Tárkányi said. Lázár then raised doubt as to whether Hír TV would “still be around then”.

On 1 August Hír TV, which had been critical towards Orbán’s government since 2015, was taken over by figures close to the Hungarian government. Programmes which have been consistently critical of the government have been cancelled, and critical journalists such as Olga Kálmán, Balázs Bodacz and András Zimon were dismissed.

ATTACKS ON PROPERTY

Twenty-eight attacks to property were recorded across Europe by Mapping Media Freedom in the first quarter of 2018, including a spate of fires. On 1 February a car belonging to the girlfriend of Italian journalist Francesco Morbilio, a reporter at news outlet Il Quotidiano del Sud, was set on fire in the city of Vibo Valentia. On 8 February the car belonging to Zoran Milosheski, a correspondent for several national North Macedonian media outlets and owner of the news website Publikum.mk, was set on fire. A year earlier, Milosheski’s garage was set on fire.

On 22 February an known assailant set two plastic bottles containing gasoline alight inside the editorial office of the Ukrainian investigative news website Chetverta Vlada in the city of Rivne. Four people were inside the office at the time, including a child. Although no one was injured, one of the rooms was completely destroyed. Chetverta Vlada had been investigating illegal construction, land seizures and corruption.

BLOCKED ACCESS

There were 57 confirmed cases of blocked access throughout Europe in the first quarter of 2018, in which journalists were expelled from a location or prevented from speaking to a source by way of obstruction. Many of these reports were connected to other violations, such as assault, damage to property and intimidation. Thirty of these violations took place in just four countries: Russia (10), Ukraine (9), Hungary (6) and Poland (5).

On 3 February only journalists working for state-funded media outlets were allowed to attend a conference by the Constitutional Tribunal, Poland’s constitutional court, on the scientific achievements of Lech Morawski, an appointee to the tribunal who died in July 2017. Journalists working for private outlets were barred from attending. Dominika Długosz, a journalist for Polsat News, said independent journalists were not granted access because politicians in attendance were afraid of answering questions.

Case Study: Turkey

In all, 49 media freedom violations were reported to Mapping Media Freedom in the first quarter of 2018, the largest of any country. This included 12 media workers who were sentenced to a total of 29 years in prison, while three were given combined suspended sentences of a total of 10 years, three months and two days. On 9 March two newspaper employees — Murat Karakaş and Leyla Yıldız — were sentenced to three years, one month and 15 days each for “aiding and abetting a terrorist organisation” by distributing the magazine Özgür Toplum.

On 26 February Muhammet Doğru, a reporter for the shuttered Dicle news agency, was given a suspended prison sentence of eight years at the final hearing of a case in which he was tried alongside 12 other co-defendants at the Second High Criminal Court of Sakarya. Doğru was sentenced to six years and three months in prison for “membership in a terrorist organisation”. He was also sentenced to an additional two years and three months for “spreading propaganda for a terrorist organisation”.

Second Quarter 2018

One journalist was killed during the second quarter of 2018; 64 reports of assault or injury were made; 45 reports of journalists being detained or arrested, with many reports involving the arrests of multiple journalists at one time; 59 reports included criminal charges and civil lawsuits; there were 92 reports of intimidation; 6 instances of sexual harassment were recorded; in 33 incidents media professionals had their property vandalised or confiscated; and there were 52 instances of journalists or sources being blocked.

DEATH

One journalist was killed as a result of their reporting in the second quarter of 2018. On 12 April investigative journalist Maksim Borodin, who worked for news service Novy Den, died after falling from the window of his fifth-floor apartment in Yekaterinburg, Russia. Polina Rumyantseva, editor-in-chief of Novy Den, said she did not believe Borodin committed suicide. A friend of Borodin’s, Vyacheslav Bashkov, wrote on Facebook on 15 April that Borodin contacted him at 5am on 11 April and claimed that several camouflaged, masked men were outside his apartment and a man with a gun was on his balcony. He said that Borodin was alarmed, but not hysterical or drunk.

Borodin reportedly said that he believed his apartment was about to be searched and that the security officers were waiting for a court order. He asked Bashkov to find him a lawyer. An hour later, however, Borodin called back and said he had been mistaken and that the security officers were conducting some sort of drill. Borodin regularly wrote on crime and corruption. In the weeks before his death he wrote extensively about the deaths of Russian mercenaries fighting in Syria, identifying several fighters from the Urals city of Asbest who had been killed. On 12 October 2017 Borodin was assaulted by unidentified men with a metal pipe after giving an interview to independent TV station Dozhd about Alexey Uchitel’s movie Matilda.

PHYSICAL ASSAULTS AND INJURY

Mapping Media Freedom documented 64 verified incidents of assault and injury, across 17 countries, in the second quarter of 2018, a 23% increase on the first quarter. The countries with the most incidents were Russia (10), France (7) and Italy (6). All French incidents took place at protests or demonstrations. A photojournalist was knocked out and left bleeding from the head when riot police attacked him with batons at protest against railway reforms in Paris on 3 April, and on 19 April police fired a stun grenade at journalist Karine Pierre while she was covering an anti-government protest in the city. She suffered a broken collarbone.

Four violations involved tear gas being fired at journalists. Freelance journalist Stéphanie Roy suffered second-degree burns and a broken thumb when police fired a tear gas canister at her on 14 April. Roy was covering a protest against french president Emmanuel Macron and in support of the Notre-Dame-des-Landes commune in Nantes.

ARRESTS/ DETAINMENTS

Mapping Media Freedom documented 45 verified incidents of assault and injury in the second quarter of 2018, a 15% decrease on the first quarter. The largest proportion of these incidents took place in Turkey (21), followed by Russia (4) and Ukraine (4). On 3 April Nevriye Kurt, a writer for the leftist magazine Red, was taken into custody during an early morning police raid on her home in Ankara over posts she made on social media. Kurt was released on 4 April but police confiscated her phone.

At 2:30am on 8 June Ece Sevim Öztürk, editor-in-chief of the Çağdaş Ses news website, was taken into custody by police in Istanbul. The reason for her arrest was social media posts which allegedly showed support for FETÖ, the name used by the Turkish authorities to refer to the outlawed Gülen movement, which the government accuses of being behind the

July 2016 failed attempt at a coup. Her arrest came shortly after she shot a documentary on the coup attempt. On 20 June she was referred to the Criminal Judgeship of Peace on Duty of the Istanbul Courthouse and placed in pre-trial detention. The prosecutor said she “knowingly and willingly aided the terrorist organisation without being a part of its hierarchical structure”.

CRIMINAL CHARGES/CIVIL LAWSUITS

Of the 59 instances of criminal charges and civil lawsuits reported to Mapping Media Freedom in the second quarter of 2018, 42 took place in Turkey (24) and Belarus (18). On 28 May the Kalinkavichy district court in the Homel region of Belarus fined freelance journalist Larysa Shchyrakova 980 rubles (around €490) for a live broadcast from an apartment in the town of Kalinkavichy where several representatives of the Mothers-328 Movement were holding a hunger strike. The fine was for the illegal production and distribution of media products under Article 22.9 of the country’s Code of Administrative Offences.

On 6 June the Turkish Health Ministry filed a criminal suit for libel against Fatih Portakal, a popular anchor of Fox TV’s main evening news programme, for insulting and “denigrating state organs”. The ministry filed its complaint in response to a series of reports aired by Fox TV about a hospital in the southern Turkish city of Mersin.

LEGAL MEASURES

There were 27 legal measures taken against journalists in the second quarter of 2018, a 19% drop on the first quarter. On 13 May Liviu Dragnea, the president of the Romania’s ruling Social Democrat Party, called for an investigation into journalist Dan Tapalaga for an article on G4media.ro disclosing secret information about the Romanian government’s decision to adopt a resolution moving the country’s embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. The article, which appeared on 18 April, was actually the work of journalist Cristian Pantazi.

In Spain pro-Independence parties in the Catalan regional parliament, on 25 May, rejected a proposal to create a commission on alleged espionage of journalists and politicians. The proposal was launched by centrist party Ciudadanos, right-wing People’s Party and leftist regional party Catalunya en Comú, and it was rejected by the pro-independence majority in parliament, made up by Junts per Catalunya, Esquerra Republicana de Catalunya and Candidatura de Unidad Popular.

INTIMIDATION

Cases of intimidation rose by 56% between quarter one and quarter two. In all, 92 instances of intimidation across 28 countries were recorded across Europe by Mapping Media Freedom in the second quarter of 2018. The counties with the most amount of reports were Italy (14), Russia (8), Romania (7) and Ukraine (7).

In Hungary, 6 instances of intimidation were recorded, including on 8 April when two journalists, Dávid Katz and Attila Kálmán, working for the news website hir24.hu, were threatened by Ádám Fásy, a well-known singer after the two tried to interview him after one of his shows during the Hungarian election campaign. Fásy was performing at the campaign event of a candidate for the ruling Fidesz party. The singer grabbed the camera, hit one of the journalists in the stomach and threatened the other with violence. Fásy then gave the camera to his daughter, who unsuccessfully tried to delete the footage.

In Serbia, 6 instances of intimidation were recorded, including on 9 May when Tatjana Vojtehovsk, a journalist and TV host, received death threats on Twitter following an episode of Popular TV on Serbian women who survived time in a camp in Bosnia during the Bosnian War. The Twitter user wrote: “I’ll kill you, you treacherous whore.” They also threatened to “cut that two-faced treacherous pig head of yours”.

ATTACKS ON PROPERTY

Thirty-three attacks to property were recorded across Europe by Mapping Media Freedom in the second quarter of 2018. At around 11am on 1 April an explosive device was thrown at the home of journalist Sead Sadiković in Bijelo Polje, Montenegro. Only the journalist’s wife was home at the time. Damage was caused to the house and nearby vehicles. Two suspects were identified and detained for 30 days. Sadiković had interviewed a relative of one of the suspects, which was considered insulting.  

On 15 May Slovakia’s National Crime Agency seized a mobile phone belonging to investigative reporter Pavla Holcova who works for the Czech Center for Investigative Reporting. Holcova was invited for what she believed to be a routine interview to aid the investigation into the murder of journalist Jan Kuciak in January 2018. Instead, she was interrogated for eight hours with irrelevant questions, threatened with a fine of €1,650 and criticised for her journalistic work “against the system”. A digital forensics unit attempted to download all of the information from the journalist’s phone and when this did not work, they pressured Holcova into handing over the device.

BLOCKED ACCESS

There were 52 confirmed cases of blocked access throughout Europe in the second quarter of 2018, a slight decrease on the first quarter. Blocked access is when journalists are expelled from a location or prevented from speaking to a source by way of obstruction. On 26 April the chancellery of the Poland’s Sejm stopped issuing temporary passes to parliament allegedly for security and organisational reasons. While this was temporary, journalists without permanent passes were left without access to parliament. A privately-owned news channel like TVN24 was left with only two teams in the parliament building, while the state-owned TVP INFO had over a dozen.

In Malta on 16 June a police officer tried to obstruct Darrin Zammit Lupi, a photographer working for Reuters, from covering a protest denouncing alleged government corruption outside the office of Maltese prime minister Joseph Muscat. Zammit Lupi had informed a police officer, Joseph Mangion, that he was a journalist. Mangion attempted to cover his camera lens with his hand and began taking pictures of Zammit Lupi on his phone. Four other police officers arrived in a car and asked to see the photographer’s ID, which he declined to show, saying his press card was enough.

Case Study: Russia

For the second quarter running, Turkey (37) was the country with most media freedom violations reported to Mapping Media Freedom, tied with Russia (37). While Turkey seen a decrease in media freedom violations between the first and second quarter (-11), Russia saw an increase (+4). Out of the Russian reports there were ten incidents of journalists being physically attacked or assaulted, one of which resulted in injury. On 13 April Dmitry Polyanin, editor-in-chief of the regional newspaper Oblastnaya Gazeta, was attacked by a group of unknown assailants near the entrance to his home Yekaterinburg. He was beaten with a metal bar and hospitalised suffering with a concussion and a broken rib. A criminal case was opened on the assault with suspicions the attack was related to his work.

On 16 June Gonzalo Bonadeo, a reporter for Argentinian Canal 13, was assaulted by an Argentinian fan while covering the World Cup in Moscow. According to Bonadeo, when a group of young Argentinians fans passed him outside the Spartak stadium after the national team drew 1-1 in its opening match with Iceland, one of the fans shouted abuse at him and threw a bottle at him, which struck him on the back.