Albania: Fresh concerns over journalist’s safety following suspected arson…

Albania: Fresh concerns over journalist’s safety following suspected arson attack

The International Press Institute (IPI) condemns the suspected arson attack which destroyed the car of journalist Sami Curri and calls on Albanian authorities to carry out a thorough investigation to establish the motive and bring those responsible to justice.

07.05.2026

The blaze, which is currently being treated by police as a suspected arson attack, has raised fresh concerns about the climate for the safety of journalists carrying out investigative journalism in Albania.

On the night of April 26, the journalist’s car was set on fire and destroyed while parked 30 meters away from his residence in Bulqizë, northeastern Albania. Curri is the owner of Bulqizaime.al, a local investigative media outlet in the Dibër region that reports on public interest topics including abuse of public funds, protests and environmental affairs.

The fire was discovered by nearby residents shortly before 3am and the police and fire brigade arrived soon after. Preliminary investigations found no injuries or damage to nearby property and only Curri’s car was destroyed, indicating a targeted attack.

While the full circumstances of the incident remain unclear, Curri told IPI that he considered the attack “a clear message intended to influence and intimidate” his work. He added: “This was not a random attack, but something that appears to have been ordered and executed deliberately”.

The journalist said this was the first time he experienced such an attack. While he did not receive any direct threats in the lead up to the attack, Curri told IPI he had faced indirect pressures and warnings tied to his recent investigative work that suggested he should refrain from pursuing certain topics.

Albanian law enforcement authorities are currently investigating the incident under the direction of the prosecution and the fire is being treated as an act of intentional arson. As of now, Curri said he had not received any updates regarding concrete results or identified suspects. The journalist is not currently under any formal police protection and has not requested it.

IPI urges Albanian law enforcement to ensure a thorough investigation is conducted that leads to the identification and prosecution of those responsible for what appears to be a targeted act of intimidation against a journalist over their media outlet’s reporting.

IPI also calls on political authorities in Albania, both at the local and national level, to strongly condemn the apparent threat and make clear that any attack on independent journalism will not go unpunished.

Curri told IPI that this attack will not impact his work moving forward. “I consider journalism, especially at the local level and under such conditions, not just a profession but a mission. Despite the many known difficulties, particularly in local environments, it remains a commitment to serve the public interest.”

The case has been recorded on the Mapping Media Freedom platform, which is run by the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR). IPI will continue to monitor the case.

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 and Candidate Countries.

Allgemein

As deadline passes, MFRR renews call for urgent transposition…

As deadline passes, MFRR renews call for urgent transposition of EU Anti SLAPP Directive

Today, 7 May 2026, marks the deadline for EU Member States to transpose the EU Anti-SLAPP Directive, also known as Daphne’s law. As we mark this landmark, however, the European Anti-SLAPP Monitor shows a fragmented and uneven picture for transposition across Europe, as the deadline is being missed by nearly all Member States.

07.05.2026

While the Anti-SLAPP Directive marked a significant step forward in protecting journalists and media from abusive litigation, its implementation at the national level remains alarmingly incomplete. Although there are some positive examples, the majority of states are seriously lagging behind and others have made no progress at all.

Today, Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) partners issue an urgent call to Member States to demonstrate their commitment to media freedom by accelerating their legislative processes and ensuring that national measures fully reflect both the letter and the spirit of the Directive as well as substantive and procedural safeguards set out in in EU and Council of Europe Recommendations. Partial, delayed, or weak implementation will fail to provide effective protection and may allow abusive practices against the press to persist.

Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs) are abusive legal actions used by powerful individuals or entities to silence journalists and media organisations by burdening them with costly and time-consuming litigation. By creating a chilling effect and imposing significant financial pressure, such lawsuits directly threaten the media’s ability to cover public interest matters such as corruption, environmental harm, and human rights abuses.

The case of Maltese investigative journalist Daphne Caruana Galicia is one of the clearest cases demonstrating how harmful these actions can be. The investigative journalist faced 48 libel suits at the time of her assassination in 2017, many from powerful figures she investigated. She was killed in reprisal for her work, while her case became a catalyst for anti-SLAPP efforts in Europe and the establishment of the Coalition Against SLAPPs in Europe (CASE).

The EU Anti-SLAPP Directive was adopted in April 2024 to protect journalists, the media, and civil society from such lawsuits, ensuring they can continue their watchdog role without fear of legal intimidation. The willingness of the countries, however, to meaningfully transpose this Directive has proven to be limited. In many Member States, authorities refuse to acknowledge the problem of SLAPPs at the national level. Only a handful of countries have begun to implement it, as the European Anti-SLAPP Monitor shows.

France and Malta stand out as few countries classified as “Partially Implemented.” However, these processes have not been ideal, as Malta’s government’s ‘summary transposition’ through a Legal Notice rather than parliamentary process, was widely criticised by Maltese stakeholders as a ‘missed opportunity’ for a meaningful transposition that does justice to the situation of SLAPP targets in Malta.

A majority of Member States including Belgium, Germany, and Netherlands, have formally “Started” the transposition process. Legislative proposals have been drafted, and in some cases advanced through parliamentary stages. However, in most of these countries, concerns exist about the minimum level of transposition envisioned in the draft laws. Only a few countries have expanded the protection of SLAPP-targets in cases without a cross-border element. This is problematic, as only 8.5% of the European SLAPP cases currently are cross-border. As a result, most individuals targeted by SLAPPs continue to face legal uncertainty and insufficient safeguards.

Among these, the Belgian draft law stands out as one of the more progressive transpositions of the Directive. Its legislative approach goes beyond minimum EU requirements by extending protections to domestic cases and introducing key procedural safeguards, such as early dismissal mechanisms and sanctions against abusive claimants. Yet, important gaps remain, particularly regarding SLAPPs in criminal proceedings, which may still allow certain forms of legal harassment to continue. The expansion of SLAPPs into criminal law is a concern in several other Member States where defamation has not been decriminalised, fearing that the anti-SLAPP safeguards in civil cases will lead litigants to pursue criminal cases instead.

At the same time, several countries, including Italy and Hungary have not yet begun transposition. This raises concerns about significant delays and uneven protection for individuals targeted by abusive litigation across Europe.

In some cases, such as Portugal, limited publicly available information makes it difficult to assess the state of implementation, raising additional concerns about transparency and accountability.

Overall, the findings highlight a clear gap between political commitment and practical implementation. While progress is underway in many Member States, the level of protection against SLAPPs remains inconsistent across Europe as the deadline passes, with potential sweeping effects on journalists and their work of public interest.

As we mark the deadline today, the MFRR calls for effective and urgent transposition of the Directive into the national law, with robust safeguards for media freedom. We encourage member states to implement a broad set of measures that go beyond the limits set in the transposition and include domestic cases within the definition of SLAPPs.

We also want to reiterate the importance of transposing the Directive alongside the requirements of the EU Anti-SLAPP Recommendation that has concurrently been adopted, as well as Council of Europe’s Recommendation countering use of SLAPPs which offers broader protections for journalists, media and civil society. Finally, we call on candidate countries to meaningfully engage in this process and start the application of the Directive as a part of their EU path.

MFRR urges Member States and candidate countries to establish, in consultation with civil society organisations, mechanisms to track SLAPP cases and evaluate the Directive’s effectiveness, as well as support mechanisms to ensure targets of SLAPPs can obtain the legal and financial support they require. Media organisations, civil society, and policymakers must work together to resist SLAPPs and defend public interest journalism.

Moving forward, the European Commission should closely monitor progress and be prepared to take swift infringement action where Member States fall short. The Directive must provide broad protections across the bloc, rather than result in a fragmented landscape where safeguards depend on national borders. This should be done promoting a meaningful engagement with the media and civil society.

The transposition of the Anti-SLAPP Directive is a critical step in safeguarding media freedom and the right to public participation, and the states must ensure timely, effective transposition that will serve media and civil society both nationally and across the EU.

Signed by:

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

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

Georgia: An escalating media freedom crisis

Since the contested parliamentary elections in October 2024, Georgia has experienced one of the most rapid and serious deteriorations of press freedom ever seen in an EU member state or candidate country, Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) partners warn today.

As we mark World Press Freedom Day 2026, our organisations once again draw attention to the plight of independent media and journalists in Georgia, where the Russia-friendly ruling party has continued its intensifying clampdown over the past year. Our thoughts today are particularly with jailed journalist Mzia Amaglobeli, who has now been behind bars for one year and three months on politically motivated charges.

6 May 2026

The Georgian Dream’s erosion of media freedom has been a driving factor in the unprecedented period of democratic backsliding in the country, which on paper remains a candidate for EU accession. Today, our organisations again call for urgent action from the European Union and the international community to support independent media and hold those responsible for this autocratic assault to be held accountable.

Legal and economic harassment of journalists

Since Georgia received EU candidate status in early December 2023, the Mapping Media Freedom Platform, the largest database for media freedom attacks in Europe, has documented 319 media freedom violations, affecting 555 journalists and media organisations, making Georgia one of the countries with the most rapid decline in media freedom in Europe.

In recent months, pressure on independent journalists intensified further, especially for the journalists reporting from rallies. In April, the bank accounts of two journalists including Maka Chikhladze (TV Pirveli) and Liza Tsitsishvili (Formula TV), both from government-critical outlets, were frozen. The freezes were tied to fines the journalists say they were never notified about, issued while they were reporting from rallies in the course of their work.

In 2025 alone, the MFRR documented 36 cases of journalists facing arbitrary fines, including 25 linked to covering demonstrations. In all 25 cases, journalists reported being fined despite clearly identifying themselves as members of the press while carrying out their work.

Since the ruling Georgian Dream party adopted restrictive amendments undermining freedom of expression in October 2025, police have detained dozens of protesters in Tbilisi, including journalists. Under the new legislation, vaguely defined offences such as “artificially blocking a road” or “wearing a mask at a rally” are punishable by up to 15 days of administrative detention, with repeat offences carrying sentences of up to one year in prison.

Following these changes, several journalists from independent media have faced imprisonment of up to 15 days for their reporting on rallies, including Mariam Dzidzaria from Netgazeti, Mariam Kuprava of Tabula, and Ninia Kakabadze from Mediachecker.ge.

Although the complaints against Kuprava and Kakabadze were eventually dropped, proceedings against Dzidzaria remain ongoing, while Kakabadze was required to attend four hearings before the charges were dropped.

Repressive legislation

Since April 2024, the ruling Georgian Dream party has introduced and adopted laws aimed at restricting independent media. Among EU member states and candidate countries, Georgia represents the most far-reaching example of a government abusing repressive legislation, including foreign agent laws, to muzzle free media.

Despite international outcry, the ruling party has not withdrawn any of the repressive measures adopted in 2024 and 2025, including the initial draft of the foreign agent law, the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), amendments to the laws on Grants and Broadcasting and amendments to the Law on Freedom of Speech and Expression.

Instead, in 2026 Parliament has adopted a sweeping new legislative package introducing criminal sanctions for cooperation with international entities or donors. Furthermore, it included an “extremism” provision, punishing acts that “systematically” question the government’s legitimacy with up to three years’ imprisonment for individuals. These legal changes further constrain independent media, as any public activity or campaign of social and political relevance can be assessed as conduct aimed at influencing the government’s domestic or foreign policy and may be treated as a criminal offence.

Safety of journalists and ongoing impunity

Since 2024, the country’s media landscape has grown increasingly hostile and perilous, with journalists exposed to attacks on their physical safety and legal or institutional harassment. With political institutions including the judiciary effectively captured and run by a so-called ‘clan’ connected with the ruling party, impunity for crimes against journalists remains widespread.

Journalists have been subjected to arbitrary detentions and physical assaults. Since 2024, Mapping Media Freedom has documented 63 cases of physical attacks involving 148 journalists. In 60% of these cases, police and state security forces were the perpetrators as the vast majority of cases remain uninvestigated.

In the recent months, journalists including independent media organisation Mtis Ambebi’s journalists and independent journalist David Tchabashvili have received death threats by private individuals.

Georgia must end the cycle of impunity by conducting thorough investigations into all cases of attacks against journalists by police, state security forces as well as private individuals.

Continued imprisonment of Mzia Amaglobeli

The continued imprisonment of Mzia Amaglobeli, co-founder of Batumelebi and Netgazeti, and the Sakharov Prize Laureate remains deeply alarming. Arrested in January 2025 after an altercation with a police officer during a protest, she was sentenced in August to two years in prison.

Amaglobeli’s parole request was denied on 2 April on the grounds that she “does not repent,” after on 3 March the Supreme Court refused to hear her appeal, exhausting all domestic remedies. Since her arrest, she and her outlets have faced sustained smear campaigns, defamation, degrading treatment, and economic pressure.

Amaglobeli has now spent over a year and three months in prison on politically motivated charges. Her case became a symbol of the fight of independent media against the backdrop of the broader assault on media freedom in Georgia.

Call for urgent action

Deliberate efforts by the ruling Georgian Dream party to erode the freedom of the media and weaken independent and watchdog journalism are central to wider efforts to limit checks and balances on power, stifle dissent and solidify the government’s position. Our organisations and partners have repeatedly called on the international community to respond, support independent media and civil society, and stem the country’s rapid descent into authoritarianism.

Despite repeated calls for sanctions from the European Parliament, the EU has not succeeded in taking steps to reverse Georgia’s growing authoritarianism, including imposing robust sanctions. With the change of government in Hungary, which repeatedly blocked EU sanctions against Georgia under the Fidesz rule, the EU now has an opportunity to move forward with targeted sanctions.

As we mark World Press Freedom Day, our organisations call on Europe not to lose sight of the crackdown on media freedom in Georgia. We also renew our call on the EU to take urgent, coordinated and effective action including sanctioning the leaders of institutions who are responsible for this open crackdown on the country’s free press.

Signed by:

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

Library

World Press Freedom Day: Six years of monitoring reveals…

World Press Freedom Day: Six years of monitoring reveals emerging threats against media freedom in Europe

To mark World Press Freedom Day, the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) is today publishing an analysis of six years of monitoring data which reveals in granular detail the most serious challenges and trends threatening freedom of the press in Europe.

5 May 2026

The MFRR consortium first began comprehensive monitoring in 2020 and has become the largest public database of media freedom violations in Europe. Our Mapping Media Freedom (MapMF) platform has now recorded 6092 media freedom violations in Europe affecting more than 10,200 different journalists and media-related entities in EU Member States and nine EU candidate countries.

This monitoring offers a detailed picture of the different threats to journalists and media, where these attacks are occurring, and what new trends have emerged over the past few years that the EU and national governments need to respond to.

Download the fact sheet

Monitoring by MFRR partners includes cases of physical and verbal attacks, attacks against journalistic property and equipment, legal threats and lawsuits, and different forms of interference with journalistic work. This data has informed and shaped the MFRR’s advocacy, reports and missions, and led to MFRR legal and practical support.

During this six year period, media freedom in Europe has faced serious and sustained challenges from the Covid-19 pandemic, Russia’s full scale war in Ukraine, the continued rise of the far-right, the erosion of democratic norms worldwide and technological disruption from the emerging AI revolution.

In the past six years, 27 journalists, media workers, media owners or staff guarding media offices have been killed in line of duty or because of their work in European countries monitored by the MFRR. The majority of these deaths (59%) have occurred in Ukraine, with the Russian military as the major perpetrator. Impunity for crimes against journalists remains a central concern for press freedom in Europe.

Almost a fifth of all incidents (1180 cases) recorded by the MFRR were physical attacks (19%). This included 430 serious physical attacks on journalists which resulted in injuries or required medical attention. Most physical attacks were perpetrated by private individuals (59%), while police accounted for 23%. MapMF also documented more than 2000 verbal attacks, including death threats, intimidation, sexual harassment and smear campaigns.

One alarming trend revealed by the data is that the share of media freedom violations per year in which political actors were responsible has increased from 14% in 2020 to 20% in 2025. More than half of these cases (54%) were verbal in nature, indicating a growing use of hostile rhetoric against the press.

An increasing share of media freedom threats in the past six years have come in the digital sphere. One key trend documented during this period has been the emergence of spyware surveillance of journalists, where MapMF has documented 22 alerts affecting 48 journalists and other media actors.

Analysis also shows that women journalists are increasingly affected by digital attacks, with artificial intelligence posing an emerging threat to journalists online. The frequency of such alerts has increased significantly in the past two years. Spoofing including fake websites and AI generated deep fakes was an emerging and increasing trend journalists and media faced, with a total of 109 cases.

Moreover, 1062 violations, affecting 1820 journalists and other media professionals during protests and demonstrations across EU member states and candidate countries show that demonstrations and protests have been the second most dangerous context for journalists and other media professionals in the past period. This underscores the importance of protection mechanisms for journalists and media workers covering these events.

Six years of data also points to sustained challenges in the legal climate for media freedom, where the platform recorded 414 cases of journalists or media workers being arrested, detained or imprisoned. MapMF also recorded 145 criminal charges against the media and nearly 200 civil lawsuits. The project also documented 142 problematic legislative initiatives, including drafts proposals and laws, targeting press freedom in 30 different European countries.

During this period, the MFRR has also tracked the emergence of foreign agent laws in Europe, as well the spread of toxic narratives around foreign funding, especially since 2024. In total, MapMF documented 181 alerts related to foreign agent laws or narratives, affecting 313 journalists or media entities.

As we mark World Press Freedom Day 2026, the MFRR encourages journalists, media researches, policymakers and international organisations to utilise the data. MFRR partners hope this data offers strong, data-based insights into the levels of pressures journalists and media professionals are facing across Europe today to inform policy and decision-making.

MapMF is part of the MFRR and is coordinated by the European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF), the European Federation of Journalists (EFJ) and the International Press Institute (IPI). Click here to explore the data in full.

The Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) is a Europe-wide mechanism which tracks, monitors and responds to violations of press and media freedom in EU Member States and Candidate Countries. It is co-funded by the European Commission.

Event

World Press Freedom Day 2026: Serbia’s spiral of violence

4 May, 13:00 CET

To mark the World Press Freedom Day 2026, our webinar will examine the role the European Union can play in responding to Serbia’s deepening media freedom crisis, which has evolved into a self-reinforcing cycle of violence, intimidation, and impunity. Drawing on findings from the March 2026 mission, it will underscore that the situation is no longer episodic but structural, driven by sustained political rhetoric, institutional shortcomings, and the rise of coordinated digital threats.

By situating these developments within a broader European context, the discussion will look at how existing mechanisms have fallen short and where more decisive action may be required. The session is intended to move beyond documentation toward pressure, pinpointing systemic failures and identifying concrete leverage points through which international actors, particularly the EU, can contribute to meaningful change.

Moderator

Roberta Taveri

Senior Media Freedom Programme Officer for Europe, ARTICLE 19 Europe

Speakers

Tamara Filipović

Secretary General, Independent Journalists’ Association of Serbia (IJAS)

Božidar Milovac

Investigative reporter, KRIK

Stefan Goranović

TV Journalist

Library

Turkey: International organisations condemn escalating use of “disinformation law”…

Turkey: International organisations condemn escalating use of “disinformation law” against journalists and call for its repeal

The undersigned press freedom, freedom of expression, journalists’ and human rights organisations strongly condemn the intensifying use of Article 217/A of the Turkish Penal Code — widely known as the “disinformation law” — to arrest, detain, and prosecute journalists, and call on the government to repeal the provision immediately and release all journalists imprisoned under it.

28.04.2026

Since the law entered into force in October 2022, at least 83 journalists have been charged 114 times over disinformation according to news reports. The scale of Article 217/A’s use against journalists has been starkly illustrated in a recent article. The two journalists most frequently charged under the law are BirGün’s İsmail Arı, who faced the charge six times, and DW Turkish’s Alican Uludağ, who faced it four times. Both journalists are currently imprisoned.

In recent months, authorities have escalated and accelerated use of the law to arrest and sentence journalists under the disinformation law’s vague prohibitions, as part of a wider pattern of the weaponisation of legislation to criminalise legitimate journalism and silence reporting in Turkey.

On February 19, judicial reporter and DW Turkish correspondent Alican Uludağ was taken into custody in Ankara and transferred to Istanbul on charges of “insulting the president” under Article 299 and disinformation under Article 217/A. Uludağ was ultimately arrested on the former charge and remains in prison pending trial, and still faces the disinformation charge.

On March 15, journalist Bilal Özcan was taken into custody after reporting that the death of an influencer may have been a homicide rather than a suicide. Özcan was arrested in Istanbul on disinformation charges and has since remained in pretrial detention.

On March 22, BirGün reporter İsmail Arı was detained in Tokat while visiting his family and transported to Ankara on disinformation charges stemming from a report about the financial mismanagement of public foundations. Arı denied any wrongdoing, stating that the information in his reporting had long been in the public domain. He was nevertheless imprisoned pending trial on disinformation charges and has since been held at Sincan Prison in Ankara.

On April 14, an Istanbul court sentenced journalists Murat Ağırel and Barış Pehlivan to one year and three months in prison each under Article 217/A for their commentary on a Halk TV broadcast about trade between Turkey and Israel. While the sentences have been handed down, Ağırel and Pehlivan have not yet been imprisoned, as the verdicts are subject to appeal.

Also on April 14, a separate Istanbul court convicted journalist Zafer Arapkirli under the disinformation law and sentenced him to two years and six months in prison. Arapkirli had been charged in connection with a social media post from December 2024, in which he condemned attacks by jihadist groups on Alawite settlements in Syria.

On April 17, Turgay Kılıç, a journalist at NEO TV in İzmir, was detained at his workplace and referred to court on disinformation charges over a social media post. Kılıç had shared screenshots of threats and calls to violence circulating on Telegram targeting schools in İzmir, following two separate attacks on schools in Turkey. In his statement to police, Kılıç said he had acted in his capacity as a journalist and that the images were drawn from publicly accessible Telegram groups. Kılıç was formally arrested following the detention. He was subsequently released under judicial supervision, but still faces prosecution.

On April 18, Mehmet Yetim, editorial director of Kulis TV, was detained in Urfa. Yetim was charged under the disinformation law, with authorities citing a social media post as the basis for the investigation. His family disputed the arrest, noting that the journalist had no criminal intent. The court nonetheless ordered his pretrial detention, ruling that supervisory measures short of imprisonment would be insufficient.

This documented pattern of abuse of the “disinformation law” against journalists and media positions Turkey as a regional and even global outlier in the misuse of regressive fake news and disinformation legislation to stifle media freedom and freedom of expression, and further weakens an already hostile climate for free and independent journalism in the country.

Turkey’s disinformation law is structurally incompatible with international press freedom standards. Its language fails to define clearly what constitutes “untrue information” or to specify what content poses a threat to national security or public order. As one journalist prosecuted under the law underlines: any information not sourced from the government is liable to be deemed false. Such deficiencies leave courts with unchecked power to determine criminality, enabling them to influence prosecutions of critical journalism.

The undersigned organisations reiterate that a free and independent press is itself the most durable safeguard against the spread of false information. Criminalising journalism is neither a lawful nor an effective response to it.

We call on Turkish authorities to immediately and unconditionally:

Release all journalists arrested under Article 217/A,
Drop all pending charges against journalists arising from their reporting or commentary,
Repeal Article 217/A in its entirety, and
Bring all legislation regulating freedom of expression into conformity with Turkey’s international obligations.

Signed by:

Articolo 21
Association of European Journalists (AEJ)
Coalition For Women In Journalism (CFWIJ)
Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ)
Civil Rights Defenders (CRD)
European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
Foreign Media Association (FMA) Turkey
International Federation of Journalists (IFJ)
International Press Institute (IPI)
IFEX
IPS Communication Foundation (bianet)
Media and Law Studies Association (MLSA)
Norwegian Helsinki Committee
Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT)
South East Europe Media Organisation (SEEMO)
PEN America
PEN Denmark
PEN International
PEN Norway
PEN Sweden
Progressive Journalists Association (PJA)
P24 Platform for Independent Journalism
Reporters Without Borders (RSF)
The Journalists’ Union of Turkey (TGS)

Library

Czech Republic: Public media funding bill raises concerns over…

Czech Republic: Public media funding bill raises concerns over compatibility with EMFA

A new government bill which would overhaul the funding model for the Czech public media risks financially weakening the broadcasters, eroding safeguards for their financial independence and violating European Media Freedom Act (EMFA), the undersigned Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) partners, and other media freedom, journalist and freedom of expression organisations warn today.

Our organisations call on the European Commission to closely assess this bill regarding its compatibility with Article 5 of EMFA and to ensure that no reforms are undertaken which threaten the financial, editorial or institutional independence of the Czech public media.

22.04.2026

On April 14, Czech Minister of Culture Oto Klempíř presented the new bill, which fundamentally changes the funding model of Czech Television (ČT) and Czech Radio (ČRo). The proposed law would abolish the current system of licence fees, replace it with direct funding from the state budget, and significantly reduce the amount of funding for both broadcasters.

Under the proposal, funding would be set at a fixed amount and annually adjusted in line with inflation, up to a cap of five percent, while both institutions would fall under the oversight of the Supreme Audit Office. According to the bill, the two institutions would not be merged, contrary to earlier announcements, and their supervisory boards would remain unchanged.

ČT would receive CZK 5.7 billion (€233 million) annually from the state, down from roughly CZK 6.7 billion (€274 million) in licence-fee income, while ČRo’s funding would fall from CZK 2.5 billion (€102 million) to just over CZK 2 billion (€82 million), effectively reversing the fee increase introduced by the previous government.

While the government points to similar funding models for other public media across the EU, ČT and ČRo have strongly opposed the plan, warning that the bill would open doors for “legal uncertainty, external pressure, and the weakening of editorial autonomy”.

A separate parliamentary proposal announced on 21 April is expected to exempt the above-75 age group and companies with less than 50 employees from paying license fees as of late 2026, as a transitional step ahead of the abolition of licence fees. But details on this secondary bill remain unclear due to lack of agreement within the ruling coalition.

Our organisations are concerned that the parliamentary bill has been developed without proper consultation with ČT and ČRo, as well as media experts, civil society policy stakeholders, or international media freedom groups. Prime Minister Andrej Babiš and his coalition partners vowed before being reelected to merge ČT and ČRo and replace the licence fee with direct financing from the state budget. These proposals follow previous hostility towards public media by Babiš, and efforts under previous ANO-led administrations to weaken the safeguards protecting Czech public media’s independence.

ČT and ČRo are recognized within Central Europe as models of quality public-service broadcasting. For over three decades, both institutions have served as trusted broadcasters, reaching some of the largest audiences in the Czech Republic. The licence fee model, widely perceived as an effective and well-functioning system in the Czech Republic, has been a crucial guarantee of their financial sustainability and editorial independence.

Our organisations fear therefore that a motivation behind the announced changes is to weaken the broadcasters’ financial and editorial independence and compromise their ability to fulfill their public service remit.

Article 5 of the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA) requires all EU Member States, including the Czech Republic, to ensure the funding procedures of public broadcasters “are based on transparent and objective criteria laid down in advance” and broadcasters are provided with “adequate, sustainable and predictable financial resources corresponding to the fulfilment of and the capacity to develop within their public service remit”.

Our organisations call on the European Commission to closely monitor developments, examine the bill in light of the Article 5 of the EMFA, and urge the Czech authorities to refrain from making any changes to the funding system of the public media which weaken or erode financial, editorial or institutional independence.

These proposed changes represent a crucial test of the EMFA’s safeguards for the independence of public service media. The EU should use all tools at its disposal to prevent authorities in the Czech Republic from destabilising public media and increasing government leverage.

Signed by:

International Press Institute (IPI)
European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT)
European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
Free Press Unlimited (FPU)
ARTICLE 19
Index on Censorship
South East Europe Media Organisation (SEEMO)
Association of European Journalists (AEJ)
PEN International
Public Media Alliance (PMA)
European Broadcasting Union (EBU)
Reporters Without Borders (RSF)
IPI National Committee in the Czech Republic (CZ IPI)

Library

Italy: Landmark ruling in press freedom case

The Media Freedom Rapid Response consortium welcomes yesterday’s acquittal of writer and journalist Roberto Saviano in a case brought by current Italy’s Minister of Infrastructure and Transport Matteo Salvini, setting a landmark ruling for press freedom and freedom of expression in Italy.

17 April 2026

Versione italiana di seguito

On April 16, 2026, the Criminal Court of Rome acquitted Saviano of criminal defamation, rejecting both the public prosecutor’s request for a €10,000 fine and the additional €100,000 damages sought by Salvini’s legal team.

The case was initiated by Minister Matteo Salvini in response to a number of social media posts authored by Saviano in June 2018,in which he had criticized Salvini’s anti-migrant and xenophobic rhetoric and policies. In those social media contents, Saviano also spoke out against Salvini’s repeated threats to revoke the police protection granted to him since 2006. Saviano further called him “minister of the underworld”, echoing an essay by journalist and historian Gaetano Salvemini who had criticized the stance of the pre-fascist Giolitti government towards the Southern regions of Italy in the early 20th century. Salvini’s lawsuit further targeted an interview Saviano gave to the German news outlet Süddeutsche Zeitung in 2018, alleging that the writer had referred to a non-aggression pact between Italian criminal organizations and the Ministry of the Interior – an accusation that the court ultimately proved to be unfounded over the course of the trial. Notably, Salvini filed the lawsuit when he was Minister of the Interior on official Ministry of the Interior letterhead, adding a further element of institutional pressure and intimidation to the case.

The case represents a textbook example of a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP). It highlights a clear imbalance of power, with a politically influential claimant pursuing disproportionate legal action and excessive remedies in response to Saviano’s criticism. His reporting addressed matters of public interest, including on migration, minority rights, and the relationship between national political leadership and Southern Italy. Finally, Salvini’s lawsuit appears to be part of a broader pattern of sustained attacks and delegitimization targeting the writer. This case also reflects broader patterns in which legal action is used to deter scrutiny and silence critical voices.

In a context marked by an alarming trend of high-ranking public officials resorting to legal harassment to silence criticism, this ruling stands as a watershed moment affirming the right to hold those in power to account, an important test for the health of Italian democracy.

The court’s reasoning in this acquittal, which will be made available in three months, will be crucial in shaping future case law in Italy. The ruling does align with the interpretation of Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, as reiterated by the European Court of Human Rights, according to which public figures should tolerate a higher degree of criticism and scrutiny due to their prominent position in society.

While welcoming this important outcome, the MFRR consortium reiterates the urgent need for the Italian Parliament to fully decriminalize defamation and align national legislation with international freedom of expression standards. Criminal defamation laws are inherently open to abuse and have a chilling effect on legitimate public interest reporting and commentary. This reform should go hand in hand with a comprehensive reform of civil law, including robust safeguards against SLAPPs in both domestic and cross-border cases, and across all types of proceedings.

With the deadline for transposing the EU Anti-SLAPP Directive – also known as Daphne’s Law – approaching next month, Italy must act promptly, including by incorporating both the EU Recommendation (2022/758) and the Council of Europe Recommendation CM/Rec(2024)2.

Only comprehensive and effectively implemented legal safeguards can protect journalists and other public watchdogs from abusive litigation and enable them to report on matters of public interest without fear of legal harassment or retaliation.

Italia: sentenza storica per la libertà di stampa

Il consorzio Media Freedom Rapid Response esprime soddisfazione per l’assoluzione, pronunciata ieri, dello scrittore e giornalista Roberto Saviano in un procedimento intentato dall’attuale ministro italiano delle Infrastrutture e dei Trasporti Matteo Salvini: una sentenza storica per la libertà di stampa e la libertà di espressione in Italia.

Il 16 aprile 2026, il Tribunale penale di Roma ha assolto Saviano dall’accusa di diffamazione aggravata a mezzo stampa, rigettando sia la richiesta del pubblico ministero di una multa di 10.000 euro sia la richiesta di risarcimento danni di ulteriori 100.000 euro avanzata dalla difesa di Salvini.

Il procedimento è stato avviato da Matteo Salvini, all’epoca ministro dell’Interno, in risposta a una serie di post pubblicati sui social media da Saviano nel giugno 2018, nei quali quest’ultimo aveva criticato la retorica e le politiche anti-migranti e xenofobe di Salvini. Contenuti social in cui Saviano si era anche espresso contro le ripetute minacce di Salvini di revoca della scorta che gli era stata concessa dal 2006. Saviano lo aveva inoltre definito “ministro della malavita”, riprendendo un saggio del giornalista e storico Gaetano Salvemini che aveva criticato la posizione del governo prefascista di Giolitti nei confronti delle regioni meridionali d’Italia all’inizio del XX secolo. Tra i fatti oggetto della querela presentata da Salvini rientrava anche un’intervista rilasciata da Saviano al quotidiano tedesco Süddeutsche Zeitung nel 2018, in cui, secondo l’ex ministro dell’interno, lo scrittore avrebbefatto riferimento a un patto di non aggressione tra le organizzazioni criminali italiane e il Ministero dell’Interno – un’accusa che il tribunale ha dimostrato essere infondata nel corso del processo. Al momento di proposizione della querela, Salvini ha formalizzato l’atto su carta intestata ufficiale del Ministero, introducendo così un ulteriore elemento di pressione di natura istituzionale.

Il caso costituisce un esempio da manuale di SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation), alias azione legale vessatoria. Esso mette in luce un evidente squilibrio di potere, con un ricorrente politicamente influente che intraprende un’azione legale sproporzionata e chiede un risarcimento eccessivo in risposta alle critiche di Saviano. I contenuti formulati dallo scrittore trattavano questioni di interesse pubblico, tra cui la migrazione, i diritti delle minoranze e il rapporto tra la leadership politica nazionale ed il Sud Italia. Infine, la causa intentata da Salvini sembra inserirsi in un quadro più ampio di attacchi continui e di delegittimazione nei confronti dello scrittore. Questo caso riflette un fenomeno di ampia portata attraverso cui le azioni legali vengono utilizzate per scoraggiare lo scrutinio e mettere a tacere le voci dissenzienti.

In un contesto caratterizzato da una tendenza allarmante che vede funzionari pubblici di altissimo livello ricorrere a forme di molestie legali per mettere a tacere le critiche, questa decisione rappresenta un momento spartiacque nell’affermazione del diritto di criticare il potere e chiedere conto dell’operato di chi quel potere lo esercita, un test importante per la salute della democrazia italiana.

La motivazione della sentenza di assoluzione, che sarà resa pubblica tra tre mesi, sarà determinante per l’evoluzione della giurisprudenza in Italia. La sentenza è in linea con l’interpretazione dell’articolo 10 della Convenzione europea dei diritti dell’uomo, come ribadito dalla Corte europea dei diritti dell’uomo, secondo cui i personaggi pubblici devono tollerare un livello più elevato di critica e di scrutinio proprio in virtù della loro posizione di rilievo nella società.

Pur accogliendo con favore questo importante risultato, il consorzio MFRR ribadisce con urgenza l’appello al Parlamento italiano affinché proceda con la completa depenalizzazione della diffamazione, ed allinei la legislazione nazionale agli standard internazionali in materia di libertà di espressione. Le leggi penali sulla diffamazione sono intrinsecamente soggette ad abusi e hanno un effetto dissuasivo sulla legittima attività giornalistica e di interesse pubblico. Questa riforma dovrebbe andare di pari passo con una riforma del codice civile, che includa solide tutele contro le SLAPP sia nei casi nazionali che transfrontalieri, e in tutti i tipi di procedimenti.

Con l’avvicinarsi, il prossimo mese, della scadenza per il recepimento della direttiva UE anti-SLAPP – nota anche come «Legge di Daphne» – l’Italia deve agire tempestivamente, recependo sia la raccomandazione dell’UE (2022/758) sia la raccomandazione del Consiglio d’Europa CM/Rec(2024)2.

Solo garanzie giuridiche piene ed effettivamente applicate possono proteggere giornalisti, attivisti, whistleblower e gli altri guardiani della democrazia da azioni legali vessatorie, consentendo loro di occuparsi di questioni di interesse pubblico senza il timore di ritorsioni o strumentalizzazioni del diritto.

Signed by:

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

Library

Hungary: Media freedom reform must be priority for incoming…

Hungary: Media freedom reform must be priority for incoming Tisza government

Media reform in Hungary must be a priority issue for the new Tisza government as it seeks to rebuild the country’s severely eroded checks and balances and rejoin the European Union’s democratic community, the undersigned partners of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) said today following the election result.

15.04.2026

The end of the 16-year rule of Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s Fidesz party, under which Hungary plummeted to become the European Union’s worst country for media freedom, offers a historic opportunity for a democratic reset and a new era for media after a decade-and-a-half of sustained deterioration.

Just as the Orbán government’s crackdown on the press paved the way for increasing autocratisation and corruption, reforms to improve media freedom and revitalise media pluralism will be central to the success for the Tisza government’s wider re-democratisation and transparent governance efforts moving forward. As the country charts a course towards a more European future, MFRR partners call on the new government of Prime Minister Peter Magyar to ensure that fundamental media reforms are at the core of this democratic transformation.

To support this process, MFRR partners today call for the establishment by parliament of an independent and high-level multistakeholder task force on media reform, which should develop a comprehensive strategy for constitutional, legislative, and regulatory change, in line with EU commitments, regulations and laws. This strategy should be developed with meaningful and inclusive input from media experts, journalists’ organisations and civil society.

Key priorities for this reform of the country’s media landscape must include efforts to support the regeneration of media pluralism; laws to limit media concentration; systemic reform of public media to guarantee independence; overhaul of the country’s media regulatory system and management; readjustment of the media market through the end of abuse of state advertising to media; and the repealing of restrictive laws such as Sovereignty Protection Act and the dismantling of the Sovereignty Protection Office.

These policies should be combined with accountability for spyware and other types of surveillance of journalists; cessation of smear campaigns and abusive language against press by government politicians; improvement of the climate for access to information for journalists; the end of discriminatory accreditation and interview practices, and the strengthening the legal climate and creation of protections against abusive lawsuits.

Tisza’s election manifesto made several pledges on addressing state propaganda and reforming the country’s media institutions. Most prominently, these include changes to media regulator management, a temporary suspension to the public media news broadcasting until reforms ensuring independence are implemented, and a temporary moratorium on state advertising in the media. While these proposals offer some positive signs, such reforms will require a robust and detailed strategy, which should be developed in close consultation with media, journalists’ organisations, civil society and policy communities.

After more than 15 years of the steady erosion of media freedom and pluralism in Hungary, MFRR partners stress that the process for unwinding media capture in the coming months and years will be complex and challenging. Despite the two-thirds constitutional majority secured in parliament, the Tisza government will likely face hurdles and obstruction in changing a media system built by Fidesz to withstand reform. While a major overhaul is required, it is important that reforms are carried out through lawful, proportionate and democratic means, with the aim of regenerating media pluralism, restoring local, regional and national media markets, and ensuring an enabling environment for independent journalism. We also urge the new leadership to ensure that its communication practices regarding the press foster an environment that enables free and independent journalism.

The ability of Tisza to unwind media capture, safeguard independent journalism and re-democratise the country’s media will be a crucial test for the new government’s rule of law agenda, but could also offer an example for positive media freedom reform for the European Union and beyond. The new government has the crucial constitutional majority required to do so. The focus must now be on how to make immediate media freedom progress, but also how to introduce the safeguards required to ensure Hungary can never experience similar media crackdowns in the future.

At the beginning of this historic democratic re-opening, MFRR partners stand ready to support the development of media reforms and to provide recommendations for improving media freedom in line with international standards and EU frameworks, most prominently the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA). In the coming months, our organisations are also committed to visiting Budapest to meet with the new leadership and government ministries to provide expert input on the path ahead.

Signed by:

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

Since April 2020, the MFRR’s Mapping Media Freedom (MapMF) platform has registered 213 different press freedom violations in Hungary, targeting 886 journalists and media actors. These include smear campaigns, blocked access to reporting locations, surveillance and spyware, SLAPPs and other legal pressures, editorial interference and many others. Most of these incidents were conducted by the government officials and/or other public authorities (98 in total).
Click here to access more of the MFRR’s advocacy and reports on media freedom in Hungary
MFRR statement: Espionage charges against investigative journalist Szabolcs Panyi ahead of elections mark another dangerous step toward Orbán’s authoritarian rule
Ahead of the election, the International Press Institute (IPI) and the MFRR organised a webinar which gathered leading Hungarian media experts to discuss the diverging paths ahead for media freedom after the vote and to discuss the priorities for media reform. You can watch the online discussion here.

Library

Serbia: Total impunity entrenched 27 years after killing of…

Serbia: Total impunity entrenched 27 years after killing of editor Slavko Ćuruvija

Twenty-seven years after the assassination of Serbian newspaper publisher and editor Slavko Ćuruvija in Belgrade, the undersigned media freedom organisations mark the upcoming anniversary of the killing by lamenting the complete impunity for those responsible for one of the most serious attacks on journalism in the country’s history.

13.04.2026

Our organisations, which were part of a recent international media freedom mission to Serbia organised by the Council of Europe’s Platform for the Safety of Journalists and the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR), have monitored the media freedom crisis in Serbia intensively in the past years.

Following our visit to Belgrade, we warn that the current climate for the safety of journalists is so dire that we fear another journalist could be seriously injured or even killed unless urgent measures are taken to stop the downward spiral of violence. We echo the concerns of United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Völker Türk who warned on 9 April against “the continued targeting of journalists and the growing pressure on independent media outlets” pointing “to a broader deterioration of the media environment”.

As we prepare to mark yet another grim anniversary on 11 April, our thoughts are with the family of Ćuruvija and their colleagues at the Slavko Ćuruvija Foundation, who continue the nearly three-decade fight for justice and accountability for the journalist’s murder.

Ćuruvija, a well-known critic of the Milošević regime, was gunned down outside his apartment building in central Belgrade on 11 April 1999, amidst the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia. In the days leading up to his killing, he was placed under surveillance by members of state security. The broad-daylight killing became one of the most emblematic cases of impunity for the killing of a journalist in the Balkans.

Twenty years later, in 2019 four former Serbian intelligence and security officers were finally found guilty of planning and carrying out the murder, securing a historic conviction. The combined 100-year prison sentences were upheld in 2021. However, following a retrial, in February 2024 the Belgrade Court of Appeal overturned the guilty verdicts and acquitted the four men.

In October 2025, the Supreme Court ruled that significant violations of the provisions of criminal procedure were made during the retrial, including the unfounded dismissal of key witness testimony. The Supreme Court decision was only revealed in January 2026. Although the ruling identified important violations of the law in the acquittal decision, no further appeals are possible under Serbian law.

The impunity for the killing of Ćuruvija, as well as for the murders of Dada Vujasinovic and Milan Pantic, stands out as a shocking example of the consistent failure of the criminal justice system to secure accountability for historic killings of journalists in Serbia, but also as a symbol of the wider breakdown of the rule of law in the country and the inability of authorities to protect journalists.

Despite a massive surge in the number of physical attacks, death threats and intimidation against journalists in the last year, ranking Serbia among the highest in Europe for such cases, in 2025 only three convictions were secured. This shocking statistic points to a wider breakdown in the systems for protecting journalists. It is also fuelled by hostile and irresponsible rhetoric against independent journalists from high-ranking government officials.

Following the mission on March 26-27, which was organised as part of the Council of Europe’s Platform for the Safety of Journalists and the Media freedom Rapid Response (MFRR), we warned that the current climate for the safety of journalists remains so toxic that the chances of further escalation in the severity of attacks against journalists are dangerously high. Since the mission, local elections saw yet another serious spike in violent attacks on journalists reporting from the streets.

On the anniversary of Ćuruvija’s murder, we again urge the Serbian state to uphold its responsibility to end the impunity for Curuvija’s murder. At the same time, the government must take concerted action to stop the cycle of violence against journalists in the country, lead by example in reducing tensions and hostility, and ensure journalist protection mechanisms are functioning properly. If authorities do not act, they will bear significant responsibility for any future attacks or killing of journalists.

In the coming weeks, our organisations will publish a post-mission report outlining recommendations for stopping this dramatic media freedom decline in Serbia, which will be provided to government officials as well as international bodies, such as the European Union, Council of Europe and the OSCE.

As the Slavko Ćuruvija Foundation continues its legal campaign for justice, in the face of defamation lawsuits from the now acquitted defendants, our organisations again underline our support for their decades-long fight for justice and all efforts to secure accountability for this crime. As we remember Ćuruvija, we remind that no journalist deserves to be threatened, silenced, attacked or killed for doing their job of questioning and holding power to account.