Allgemein

Ukraine: Four years into full-scale invasion, journalism remains a…

Ukraine: Four years into full-scale invasion, journalism remains a deadly profession

On the fourth anniversary of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the undersigned partners of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) hail the continued courage of journalists in the country who continue to report on the war despite serious risks – and waning international attention.

24.02.2026

As we mark the anniversary, our organisations honour and remember the journalists who have been killed while reporting on the war and in the line of duty. We pay our respects to these reporters, who made the ultimate sacrifice in bringing news on the war to Ukrainian and international audiences.

 

As documented in our recently published annual media freedom monitoring report, 2025 stood out as the deadliest period for journalists in Ukraine since the first months of the full-scale invasion in February-May 2022.

 

In October 2025, three media workers were killed in Russian attacks in Donetsk region. French photojournalist Antoni Lallican was murdered on October 3 in a strike conducted by an FPV (first-person view) drone. Ukrainian journalist Aliona Hubanova and cameraman Yevhen Karmazin were killed on October 23 in another Russian drone attack. According to MFRR monitoring, 12 more journalists were injured over the past year as a result of Russian attacks.

 

In the past year, rapid advances in drone technology have made reporting work in Ukraine more dangerous than ever. Multiple incidents recounted by reporters over the past months seem to show that journalists are no longer protected by PRESS markings. Instead, these have become a target used by Russian forces to identify and attack media teams with drones.

 

In the past four years, 16 journalists have been killed while reporting from Ukraine, while 62 more have been wounded. The perpetrators of these war crimes continue to act with impunity and none of those responsible have been held accountable to date.

 

Twenty-six Ukrainian journalists are meanwhile still being held in Russian custody, mostly on trumped-up charges of ‘terrorism’ or ‘espionage’. Testimonies by journalists released from Russian captivity paint a picture of systematic mistreatment and torture.

 

In this context, the tragic and still unexplained death of Ukrainian journalist Victoria Roshchyna in Russian custody in September 2024 continues to underscore fears for the safety of other imprisoned journalists.

 

Across Ukraine media and journalists also face increasingly challenging working conditions, as Russian attacks continue to target the country’s critical infrastructure. These have left media offices without heating, power or running water, with Russia continuing to strike Ukraine’s energy systems throughout a harsh winter season and sub-zero temperatures.

 

On the anniversary of the full-scale invasion, MFRR partners continue to stand in full solidarity with journalists and media workers facing these situations. In the past four years, Ukrainian journalists have offered a remarkable example to their European colleagues by continuing their work in extremely challenging wartime conditions, with many losing their lives or injured while documenting the horrors of war. MFRR partners will continue to monitor, advocate and provide support to the Ukrainian media community now and in the future, as we continue to support the fight for free and independent journalism in Ukraine.

 

In this context, we call on all stakeholders with diplomatic and advocacy leverage to pursue immediate and sustained efforts towards the release of the Ukrainian journalists still held behind bars.

 

As peace negotiations continue, we also urge the international community to embed accountability for violations against journalists within broader justice and accountability mechanisms addressing the Russian war against Ukraine With regards to the situation of media on the frontline, we call for the respect by all parties of international humanitarian law, which guarantees journalists access to zones of armed combat and offers them protection as members of the press.

 

Finally, we call for an urgent refocusing of international support for Ukrainian media, including through funding mechanisms to rebuild critical media infrastructure destroyed across Ukraine.

Signed by:

  • International Press Institute (IPI)
  • European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
  • European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
  • ARTICLE 19 Europe
  • 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 and Candidate Countries.

Library

Italy: MFRR to conduct follow-up media freedom mission to…

Italy: MFRR to conduct follow-up media freedom mission to Rome

The Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) partners will conduct an advocacy mission to Rome, Italy, on 9–10 March 2026 to assess key developments affecting press and media freedom in the country and push for implementation of crucial reforms. 

18.02.2026

The mission will focus on four main themes: the reform of the public broadcaster RAI and its compliance with the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA); the transposition of the EU Anti-SLAPP Directive and broader defamation reform; digital threats and the use of surveillance against journalists; and media market concentration and its compatibility with the EMFA. 

 

The decision to return to Italy two years after the MFRR’s urgent mission to Rome in May 2024 reflects great concerns with the implementation of EMFA and findings from the MFRR’s latest monitoring report, which documented 118 press freedom violations in Italy in 2025. These cases included physical attacks, legal harassment, major spyware cases, and an attempted assassination of prominent journalist Sigfrido Ranucci. These developments point to ongoing structural threats to journalists’ safety, editorial independence, and media pluralism in Italy.

 

The delegation will engage with institutional and political actors, as well as with representatives of the leadership of RAI, media experts, journalists’ organisations, and media professionals. As in all MFRR country missions, the consortium has requested meetings with a wide range of stakeholders to ensure a balanced and comprehensive assessment of the situation on the ground.

 

The 2024 mission report, Silencing the Fourth Estate: Italy’s democratic drift, outlined a series of recommendations to address concerns regarding political interference in RAI, legal harassment of journalists and other threats to media pluralism. The March 2026 mission will assess developments since then and continue dialogue with national stakeholders.

 

The mission led by the European Federation of Journalists (EFJ) and will be carried out with partners of the MFRR consortium: ARTICLE 19 Europe, the European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF), Free Press Unlimited (FPU), the International Press Institute (IPI), and Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT).

 

The delegation will work in coordination with local partners Amnesty International Italia, the Federazione Nazionale Stampa Italiana (FNSI), and the Unione Sindacale Giornalisti Rai (Usigrai).

 

A press conference will be held on the morning of 10 March at the premises of the Consiglio Nazionale Ordine dei Giornalisti, Via Sommacampagna 19, Rome, to present the preliminary findings of the mission.

 

The MFRR is a consortium of organisations committed to protecting media freedom across Europe. Through monitoring, support, advocacy, and country missions, the MFRR works to ensure a safer and more independent environment for journalists and media professionals. Further information about the mission and its outcomes will be published in the coming weeks.

Italia: il consorzio MFRR condurrà una missione dedicata alla libertà dei media a Roma

I partner del Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) organizzeranno una missione di advocacy a Roma, in Italia, il 9-10 marzo 2026 per valutare i principali sviluppi che influenzano la libertà di stampa e dei media nel paese e sollecitare l’attuazione di riforme cruciali. 

 

La missione si concentrerà su quattro temi principali: la riforma dell’emittente pubblica Rai e la sua conformità alla legge europea sulla libertà dei media (EMFA); il recepimento della direttiva UE Anti-SLAPP e la riforma in materia di diffamazione; le minacce digitali e l’uso della sorveglianza contro i giornalisti; la concentrazione del mercato dei media e la sua compatibilità con l’EMFA. 

 

La decisione di tornare in Italia due anni dopo la missione del consorzio MFRR a Roma nel maggio 2024 riflette le grandi preoccupazioni relative all’attuazione dell’EMFA e alle conclusioni dell’ultimo rapporto di monitoraggio MFRR, che ha documentato 118 violazioni della libertà di stampa in Italia nel 2025. I casi registrati dal report MFRR includono aggressioni fisiche, molestie legali, gravi casi di spionaggio informatico e l’attentato al giornalista Rai Sigfrido Ranucci. Questa tendenza segnala l’esistenza di minacce strutturali alla sicurezza dei giornalisti, all’indipendenza editoriale e al pluralismo dei media in Italia.

 

La delegazione si confronterà con attori istituzionali e politici, nonché con rappresentanti della dirigenza Rai, esperti dei media, organizzazioni di giornaliste e giornalisti. Come in tutte le missioni MFRR di advocacy, il consorzio ha richiesto incontri con un’ampia gamma di parti interessate per garantire una valutazione equilibrata e completa della situazione sul campo.

 

Nel rapporto della missione del 2024, intitolato Silenziare il Quarto Potere: La deriva democratica dell’Italia, il consorzio aveva delineato una serie di raccomandazioni per affrontare le preoccupazioni relative alle interferenze politiche nella Rai, alle azioni vessatorie nei confronti dei giornalisti e ad altre minacce al pluralismo dei media. La missione del marzo 2026 valuterà gli sviluppi intervenuti da allora e proseguirà il dialogo con le parti interessate a livello nazionale.

 

La missione è guidata dalla Federazione europea dei giornalisti (EFJ), e prenderanno parte alla missione gli altri partner del consorzio MFRR: ARTICLE 19 Europe, the European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF), Free Press Unlimited (FPU), the International Press Institute (IPI), e Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT).

 

La delegazione sarà affiancata dai partner locali: Amnesty International Italia, la Federazione Nazionale Stampa Italiana (FNSI), e l’Unione Sindacale Giornalisti Rai (Usigrai).

 

La mattina del 10 marzo si terrà una conferenza stampa presso la sede del Consiglio Nazionale Ordine dei Giornalisti, in Via Sommacampagna 19, Roma, per presentare i risultati preliminari della missione.

 

Il consorzio MFRR riunisce organizzazioni impegnate nella tutela della libertà dei media in tutta Europa. Attraverso attività di monitoraggio, sostegno, advocacy e missioni nei vari paesi, MFRR lavora per garantire un ambiente più sicuro e indipendente ai giornalisti e ai professionisti dei media. Ulteriori informazioni sulla missione e sui suoi risultati saranno pubblicate nelle prossime settimane.

Library

Media Freedom Monitoring Report 2025

Media Freedom Monitoring Report 2025

Europe’s media freedom landscape faced sustained pressure in 2025, with attacks on journalists, legal harassment, and political interference continuing across the continent. The new MFRR Monitoring Report 2025 documents the scale and patterns of these threats, drawing on verified cases recorded in the Mapping Media Freedom database.

18.02.2026

Europe’s media freedom landscape faced sustained pressure in 2025, with attacks on journalists, legal harassment, and political interference continuing across the continent. The new MFRR Monitoring Report 2025 documents the scale and patterns of these threats, drawing on verified cases recorded in the Mapping Media Freedom database.

Between January and December 2025, the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) documented 1,481 press freedom violations affecting 2,377 media-related persons or entities across 36 countries. The report covers all 27 EU Member States as well as nine countries with EU candidate status, offering one of the most comprehensive snapshots of media freedom conditions in Europe.

The findings reveal persistent problems that cut across borders and political systems. Verbal attacks, smear campaigns, and intimidation remained the most frequently recorded violations. Digital threats continued to rise, while political actors were increasingly identified as sources of pressure against journalists. In several countries, the data points to deep-rooted structural issues rather than isolated incidents.

The report is structured in four main parts. It opens with a general overview of trends and key statistics, followed by three thematic chapters examining the impunity of crimes against journalists, the spread of foreign agent laws and narratives, and the ongoing use of Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs). The final sections provide detailed country analyses, including case studies from EU Member States and candidate countries where risks to press freedom are particularly acute.

By combining quantitative data with qualitative analysis, the Monitoring Report offers policymakers, journalists, and civil society a clearer picture of how threats to media freedom evolve across Europe. It also highlights areas where stronger safeguards, accountability, and legal protections are urgently needed.

The report has been compiled by the European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF), the European Federation of Journalists (EFJ), and the International Press Institute (IPI) as part of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) project, co-financed by the European Commission.

Allgemein

MFRR welcomes European Democracy Shield draft report and proposes…

MFRR welcomes European Democracy Shield draft report and proposes further protections for journalists

The Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) partners welcome the European Commission’s EU Democracy Shield initiative and the European Parliament’s Special Committee’s Rapporteur’s draft report published on 21 January. While the Shield lays out critical political priorities and policy measures to defend democracy, these require further operationalisation. The MFRR reiterates its calls for a comprehensive action plan that elaborates on the concrete implementation and timeline for these commitments.

23 January 2026

The MFRR partners, therefore, share this more detailed response that aims to translate the political commitments of the Democracy Shield into concrete actions that can feed into the Parliamentary Debate on 29 January, and consequent amending procedure.

 

We are happy to see that Draft Report recognises our monitoring data, citing it to portray the increased intensity of attacks against journalists, and its interplay with disinformation campaigns and foreign interference. In light of this, the amendments MFRR seeks to promote focus on specific topics of media freedom, media pluralism and the protection of journalists. 

 

Our organisations seek to emphasise topics that are inseparable from European values of democracy and human rights, as well as European security and the safeguarding of the information ecosystem. We commend the Draft Report for emphasising the importance of media in the next Multi-annual Financial Framework (MFF), and we reiterate our calls for allocating adequate mechanisms for independent media viability and long-term financing.

 

MFRR truly believes that media and independent journalism should become a part of critical infrastructure and be treated as such. We welcome the strong focus on Anti-SLAPP initiatives and invite the European Parliament to provide concrete steps on the topics of protecting journalists, supporting journalists in exile, and the enforcement of  European Media Freedom Act (EMFA), Digital Services Act (DSA) and other EU acts.

 

More specifically, MFRR welcomes that the Democracy Shield prioritises the safety and protection of journalists, a critical prerequisite for an independent and plural media environment. We also welcome the announcement to scale up rapid response work with trusted partners, to update the Recommendation on the Safety of Journalists and review the Anti-SLAPP Recommendation and to adopt guidelines to support the implementation of EU rules. We call for these protections to be extended both in terms of increased physical security, including non-lethal violence, and legal protection, such as decriminalisation of defamation, and a stronger opposition to foreign agent-style laws.

 

The MFRR also welcomes the Democracy Shield’s commitment to provide core support to exiled independent journalists and media outlets and to sustain high quality independent media outlets in key partner countries. The EU remains a critical safe haven for journalists at risk worldwide, especially against the backdrop of rising authoritarianism and increased crises. While some EU Member States have stepped forward in offering short-term relocation and protection to journalists in distress, the EU falls short in offering durable and structural protection. In addition, authoritarian regimes continue to target journalists abroad through digital harassment, surveillance and physical attacks. Transnational repression (TNR) requires a coordinated EU response, which the Shield is currently lacking. 

 

Finally, safeguarding the integrity of the information space across the EU block and candidate countries is one of the core objectives of the Democracy Shield. The report recognises and prioritises the threats that foreign information manipulation and interference (FIMI) poses to democracies and citizen’s rights, including its impact on media freedom and independent journalism. The MFRR calls for a concrete action plan for the functioning of the Centre for Democratic Resilience, and a stronger involvement of journalists and media. As well as stronger support to independent journalists.

 

MFRR partners sincerely hope to see these recommendations integrated into future drafts and a final report. Our organisations remain open to dialogue and meetings with EU institutions in the drafting process. We intend to remain fully engaged on the initiatives stemming from the European Democracy Shield, both as MFRR, and within wider civil society efforts.

Library

Malta: Convicted bomb suppliers lose appeal over Daphne Caruana…

Malta: Convicted bomb suppliers lose appeal over Daphne Caruana Galizia murder

The undersigned international media freedom and journalist organisations welcome the confirmation of guilty verdicts handed to Robert Agius and Jamie Vella, the two men who supplied the bomb used to assassinate journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia in 2017.

23 January 2026

On 21 January, the two gang members lost their attempt at the court of appeal to overturn their convictions. Both men are serving life imprisonment after being found guilty in June 2025 of procuring the military grade explosives and providing them to the hitmen who executed the murder of the journalist.

 

The pair unsuccessfully argued their convictions and sentences should be quashed due to claims of alleged juror misconduct, allegedly prejudicial pre-trial publicity, and the credibility of the key state witness. The Court of Appeal dismissed all these arguments.

 

The confirmed sentences of life imprisonment solidifies an important step forward for justice and represents another important victory in the fight against impunity, which our organisations jointly hope will further strengthen the case against the alleged mastermind. Five individuals have been found guilty of participating in the killing.

 

The alleged mastermind, Yorgen Fenech, a powerful Maltese businessman, is awaiting trial. Fenech was released on bail in February 2025 and successfully argued for a court order restricting reporting on his legal proceedings.

 

Our organisations continue to closely monitor the legal process and reaffirm our continued support for Daphne’s family and their legal team in the ongoing fight for full and uncompromising justice.

 

We hope that all those involved in the killing will soon be behind bars and some of our organisations intend to be in Valletta to hear the announcement of the verdict. Nothing but full justice for Daphne’s brutal murder will suffice.

Signed by:

  • International Press Institute (IPI)
  • European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
  • European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
  • Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ)
  • 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 and Candidate Countries.

Allgemein

EU’s dangerous ‘Return Hubs’ policy: A threat to journalists…

EU’s dangerous ‘Return Hubs’ policy: A threat to journalists in exile

The EU’s new return policy risks jeopardising the lives of vulnerable journalists and human rights defenders living in exile. As such, it undermines the very principles of press freedom and human rights it aims to uphold and the safe haven the EU seeks to provide for journalists from all over the world threatened for reporting on the truth. ECPMF and undersigning organisations urge the EU to immediately reconsider these adverse effects and prioritise the protection of those who have already fled persecution.

12 December 2025

On 8 December 2025, the Council of the European Union approved a negotiating position on a new EU-wide law for the return of so-called irregular migrants. This includes a common “return order”, mutual recognition of returns, and the possibility of sending rejected asylum seekers to “return hubs” or “safe” third countries. It is a dangerous decision with serious implications for journalists and human rights defenders under threat, especially those already living in exile.

 

According to the EU’s own criteria for qualifying a third country as “safe”, the country concerned should respect fundamental rights, the rule of law and protection from persecution of journalists and other at-risk groups. But these indicators resonate in the exact opposite direction in many of the newly listed states. Many of the countries listed as “safe” third countries are the very same places where journalists face imprisonment, harassment, and violence. Reporters Without Borders’ Press Freedom Index consistently ranks these states as high-risk environments for the press. This year’s ranking of the newly added “safe” third countries: Out of 180 countries – Bangladesh 149, Colombia 115, Egypt 170, India 151, Kosovo 99, Morocco 120, Tunisia 129. They show patterns of arbitrary detention, crackdowns on independent media, widespread impunity for violence, and state-enabled persecution of critical voices. These cannot be treated as safe, not as countries of origin, and certainly not as third countries for forced returns.

 

Independent investigations show conditions in which EU policies may have a devastating effect to the people on the move, including journalists. The 2024 Lighthouse Reports investigation, Desert Dumps, winner of this year’s IJ4EU Impact Award, documented how Black people on the move are abandoned in life-threatening border zones in North Africa as a direct consequence of EU-funded cooperation agreements. Such findings demonstrate that these environments fail the EU’s safety standards in practice, while also revealing how EU policies can contribute to the very dangers now being ignored in return decisions. 

 

ECPMF’s recent study on Transnational Repression (TNR) of journalistists in exile in Germany displays how authoritarian regimes continue to target journalists abroad through digital harassment, surveillance and physical attacks. ECPMF wants to highlight that some of the affected journalists come from exactly the same countries the EU now designates as “safe”. Requests for protection, relocation, asylum and emergency assistance often come from journalists escaping harsh conditions in countries like Afghanistan, Russia and Turkey, and others, but also countries such as Egypt and Bangladesh.

 

It is important to note that the journalists documented in exile in Germany or the EU represent only a fraction of those at risk, amongst others because EU protection mechanisms for journalists under threat are not accessible – hampering them from relocating to EU Member States.This means that the scope of transnational repression is far bigger than EU-based cases suggest. Countless journalists reach out to the undersigned organisations, from countries such as Sudan or Palestine, facing severe threats without any realistic opportunity to seek safety.

 

ECPMF already warned about the EU’s position on “safe” third countries on 2 May, World Press Freedom Day, when we raised awareness about transnational repression targeting Egyptian journalist Basma Mostafa. Journalists who already fled due to threats now face additional stress and fear that a return could place their lives in danger. Such policies could be used to silence critical voices and expose threatened journalists to danger and psychological stress.

 

What needs to change

The EU must guarantee that no journalist, human rights defender, or individual at risk of persecution is returned to countries where they face threats, harassment, or violence. This includes ensuring that asylum claims from these groups are given priority and that their protection needs are fully assessed.

 

This policy undermines press freedom and puts vulnerable people at immediate risk. For these reasons, we insist that the EU revises and overturns the classification of countries such as Bangladesh, Colombia, Egypt, India, Kosovo, Morocco, and Tunisia as “safe” for returns, given their documented records of press freedom violations, arbitrary detention, and persecution of journalists and human rights defenders. Alternatively, the EU should consider adding an amendment that exempts journalists fleeing repression in these countries.

 

All future decisions must uphold the clear, evidence-based and transparent criteria for designating “safe” third countries, taking into consideration the track record of press freedom and other human rights violations. The EU needs to ensure these criteria is applied rigorously in line with international human rights standards and the EU’s own commitments to fundamental rights and the rule of law.

 

Lastly, we ask the European Commission, Council and Parliament to recognise and address the risks of transnational repression, including digital harassment, surveillance, and physical attacks on journalists in exile. This includes providing safe relocation, legal protection, and emergency assistance to those at risk. The EU can only designate third countries credibly as “safe” when it also invests in upholding the criteria it applies for such qualification by addressing repression in those states and ensuring that fundamental rights are upheld.

Signed by:

  • European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
  • Law and Democracy Support Foundation (LDSF)
  • European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
  • Free Press Unlimited (FPU)
  • Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT)
  • Index on Censorship

This statement was coordinated by the European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF) as part of 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.

Allgemein

MFRR Summit 2025 report on media freedom in Europe

MFRR Summit 2025 Report on Media Freedom in Europe

This report offers a recap of the discussions and key takeaways from the MFRR Summit 2025. This year’s Summit fed into EU Democracy Shield policy discussions, highlighting journalism as vital democratic infrastructure. Drawing on MFRR’s monitoring, missions, and policy work, the event explored five key pillars of media resilience: economic viability, safety, legal protection, AI governance, and implementation of safeguards.

10.12.2025

The summit took place on October 13, in Brussels, and this report documents how journalists and media outlets across EU member states and candidate countries are confronting mounting economic pressure, legal harassment, physical and digital attacks, and threats emerging as a result of changing digital space. Drawing on five thematic panels and a special focus on Ukraine, it connects on-the-ground monitoring with concrete policy debates on issues such as the European Media Freedom Act, anti-SLAPP measures, spyware, and foreign agent laws, offering both an overview of violations and a roadmap for strengthening journalism as a vital part democratic processes.​

This report was coordinated by the ECPMF and 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 and Candidate Countries.

Event

Jailed for dissent: Georgian journalists and writers under crackdown

Jailed for dissent

Georgian journalists and writers under crackdown

Friday, 12 December 2025 at 11:00 am CEST.

On August 6, 2025, after more than 200 days of unjust pretrial detention and a highly politicized trial, Georgian journalist and Sakharov Prize laureate Mzia Amaglobeli was sentenced to two years in prison, as the world watched and protesters gathered outside a courtroom in Batumi, Georgia. She is the first female journalist to be imprisoned in Georgia’s 34 years of independence.

 

Mzia is being targeted and punished for her decades-long work and dedication to independent reporting that exposes corruption, political repression, and human rights violations.

 

She is the first female journalist imprisoned in Georgia since the fall of the Soviet Union. Georgia now has over 60 political prisoners, most of them jailed during the wave of protests that erupted after the October 28, 2024, elections and the ruling party’s subsequent announcement about halting EU integration. 

 

Since October 28, Mapping Media Freedom recorded 117 attacks on media freedom involving 312 journalists. Among them 31 journalists have been subjected to arbitrary and unjust arrests.

 

Among those jailed for dissent is Zviad Ratiani, renowned Georgian poet sentenced to two years in prison under grossly disproportionate charges of assaulting a police officer. 

 

The ruling Georgian Dream party is entrenching authoritarian rule not only through elections, but also through the systematic capture of the judiciary, turning it into a tool for stifling dissent and protecting those in power.

 

To mark the International Human Rights Day on December 10 and the awarding of Mzia Amaglobeli with the Sakharov Prize on December 16, MFRR is shining a spotlight on Georgia – a country once regarded as a beacon of democracy in the South Caucasus, now moving closer each day toward fully consolidated authoritarianism.

 

We will examine the attacks on media freedom, independent journalism and freedom of expression in Georgia, explore how those jailed for speaking out can be supported by the international community, and the ways to reverse the country’s authoritarian drift.

 

This webinar is organised in partnership with PEN International, joining efforts to defend free expression and support Georgian journalists targeted for dissent.

Speakers

Irma Dimitradze

Communications Manager and Journalist at Batumelebi and Netgazeti

Khatuna Tskhadadze

PEN Georgia President

Kety Abashidze

Senior Human Rights Officer at Human Rights House Foundation

Moderator

Teona Sekhniashvili

Europe Advocacy Officer at the International Press Institute (IPI) 

Allgemein

Lithuania: Media freedom groups raise alarm as political pressure…

Lithuania: Media freedom groups raise alarm as political pressure campaign on LRT widens

Proposed legal amendments to the law governing Lithuania’s public broadcaster LRT risk weakening its editorial independence and disrupting its sustainable financing, the undersigned partner organisations of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) warn today.

4.12.2025

Earlier this week, LRT journalists announced a protest scheduled for 9 December in front of the Parliament to oppose proposed changes to the Law on the Lithuanian National Radio and Television, which they say would “dismantle the safeguards that protect LRT’s independence.”

 

The protest is organised in reaction to two amendments initiated by the governing Nemunas Dawn party, which is part of the ruling parliamentary majority, which targeted both LRT’s budget and the rules governing the dismissal of its Director General.

 

On 25 November, lawmakers voted to freeze LRT’s annual budget at €79.6 million for 2026, 2027, and 2028, overriding the existing mechanism that would have increased the broadcaster’s funding by roughly 11% next year, according to LRT. The budget change was made without proper consultation with LRT management.

 

Meanwhile, a proposed legal amendment that would lower the threshold for dismissing the Director General, allowing the LRT Council to remove the head of the broadcaster with a simple majority rather than the current two-thirds requirement, was passed the first reading in Parliament on 27 November. We are concerned that this would open the door to greater political pressure on the LRT’s management and potentially violate Article 5 of the European Media Freedom Act, which obliges Member States to ensure that procedures for the appointment and dismissal of PSM leadership “aim to guarantee the independence of the public service media.”

 

Our organisations further warn that these legislative reforms follow the results of an internal audit conducted in 2025 to assess LRT’s performance, particularly its “political neutrality” for the period 2021-2024. The audit report, published in November, identified areas for improvement but overall found that the public broadcaster operates efficiently and transparently, and did not identify any editorial bias.

 

As feared, in the recent weeks politicians from Nemunas Dawn and other coalition parties have instrumentalised the audit findings to attack the public broadcaster, question its funding and governance, and justify attempts to increase political control over LRT. Our organisations repeatedly raised concerns about the scope, nature and justification for such an audit and its potential impact.

 

Ahead of the planned strike, MFRR partners urge political parties to reject the proposed legislative amendment to the LRT law. Moving forward, any such proposed changes should be put to public consultation, with input from expert national and international journalists and media freedom groups, as well as input from LRT management itself. MFRR partners will continue to closely monitor the situation and alert European institutions about emerging threats to media freedom in Lithuania.

Signed by:

  • European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
  • European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
  • Free Press Unlimited (FPU)
  • International Press Institute (IPI)
  • 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 and Candidate Countries.

Allgemein

Hungary: New EU Media Board should assess Blikk acquisition…

Hungary: New EU Media Board should assess Blikk acquisition by pro-government media group

The undersigned Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) partners and Médiafórum today raise alarm about the recent acquisition of Hungary’s most-read tabloid newspaper by a pro-government media group and calls on the newly established European Board for Media Services to launch an assessment of the merger and its potentially negative impact on media pluralism in Hungary.

21 November 2025

Our organisations call on the European Board for Media Services (Media Board) – the independent EU advisory body established by the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA) – to initiate an advisory opinion on the takeover, which we hope will be an important test case for ensuring free and pluralistic media inside the bloc.

 

In early November 2025, it was announced that Indamedia, a pro-government media group, had reached a deal with Ringier, a Swiss media company, to purchase its portfolio of media titles in Hungary for an undisclosed sum. The purchase includes Blikk, the country’s most popular tabloid, which has three million monthly online readers as well as several regional newspapers.

 

The acquisition represents yet another example of the consolidation of media under government-aligned ownership. Indamedia is linked to the Prime Minister’s business circle through the influence and partial ownership of Miklós Vaszily. Vaszily owns 50% of Indamedia and is also president of TV2, a major pro-government television channel. His career includes leading roles at other Orbán-aligned outlets, including Origo, which was transformed into staunchly government-friendly media under his stewardship.

 

Indamedia already owns Index, a formerly independent online news website which was captured in 2020. If the same policies enforced at Index and Origo are now implemented at Blikk, a market leader, it would further shrink the space for citizens to access pluralistic media content. With the recent appointment of a new editor-in-chief aligned with the new owners, the threat of editorial adjustments appears high.

 

Crucially, this merger comes less than six months before the April 2026 election in which the ruling Fidesz party is facing its biggest challenge in a decade and tails in the polls. The acquisition therefore looks timed to tighten media control ahead of the vote and increase the ability of the government to reach voters.

 

The takeover, and its timing, must also be viewed against the backdrop of the Hungarian government’s long term media capture strategy, in which media titles owned by foreign owners retreating from the market have been bought up at opportune moments in strategic acquisitions led by business interests linked directly or indirectly with the government or the Prime Minister, after which new editors are brought in, the editorial line is recalibrated, and overt criticism and watchdog journalism is silenced, and to differing levels replaced with political propaganda. Examples include the sale in 2016 – also by Ringier – of the newspaper Népszabadság to Mediaworks, a company with close ties to the government who promptly closed the paper.

 

Over the past 15 years, the government has successfully orchestrated this strategy to the point where it is estimated the government holds sway or indirect control over 80% of the media market. This has been combined with capture of the public broadcaster, the installation of former Fidesz MPs to control the key media regulator, and the deliberate bloating of state advertising budgets to prop up media towing the government line. As a new report published this week outlines, the result is the most sophisticated system of media capture and control ever developed within the European Union.

 

The EU Commission’s flagship European Media Freedom Act (EMFA), which entered into full force in August 2025, was developed in part to address the systemic challenges to democratic systems posed by such state-led media capture. With this new regulatory framework in place, all key obligations under the EMFA are now mandatory for Member States. The Media Board, established specifically to advise the European Commission, now has a mandate, and a duty, to act.

 

Under EMFA, any media merger that could have a significant impact on media pluralism and editorial independence qualifies for assessment. Under the new rules, the Media Board can issue an opinion after being consulted by the relevant national regulator. In Hungary, the Media Council and the Hungarian Competition Authority (GVH) are tasked with assessing such mergers. However, there has been no indication so far that either body will do so. As the Hungarian government has challenged EMFA before the European Court of Justice seeking to have it nullified, any interaction with Hungarian regulators appears unlikely.

 

Even if it were to launch its own assessment, the Media Council is dominated by former Fidesz MPs and is the target of infringement proceedings by the Commission over its discriminatory decision to reject the license renewal of one of the country’s last critical radio broadcasters. It is therefore unlikely that any assessment conducted by the Media Council on this merger would be transparent, objective, proportionate and non-discriminatory – the criteria set out under EMFA for such assessments.

 

Instead, in the absence of an independent consultation by the national regulators, rules state that the Media Board may issue an opinion on its own initiative, or when requested by the European Commission. Given the clear impact the merger in Hungary will have, our organisations believe this represents an important first potential case for the Media Board. Rather than wait for the Commission’s appeal, the Board should swiftly launch its own assessment. This advisory opinion should address the wider landscape for media pluralism in Hungary, and examine the editorial practices imposed by Indamedia after previous acquisitions, as well as its connections to government.

 

When completed, the Media Board can then present its assessment to the Hungarian Media Council, which is, under EMFA rules, obliged to take its opinion “to the fullest extent possible”. If this opinion is disregarded, the regulator is obliged to submit its reasoning to the Board and the Commission explaining its position and why the opinion was not followed.

 

While any conclusions made by the Board assessment are non-binding, we believe this impact assessment can still play an important role in highlighting the undemocratic nature of the takeover at the European level. In addition, any actor seeking to challenge the merger under domestic law will be able to cite in the Board’s advisory opinion in court. Moving forward, assessments of the Media Board on Hungary must be combined with close monitoring of implementation of the EMFA in Hungary by the Commission, which should use all tools at its disposal to enforce the rules.

 

While our organisations recognise that the EMFA alone cannot and will not be a silver bullet for addressing systemic challenges in Hungary, its provisions must be utilised to the fullest extent to roll back entrenched media capture, to the benefit of a free and pluralistic media market, and more widely the country’s democracy. The EMFA’s new rules are now in place. No time should be wasted in using them.

Signed by:

  • International Press Institute (IPI)
  • European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
  • European Federation of Journalists (EFJ) 
  • Médiafórum Egyesület (Hungary)
  • 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 and Candidate Countries.