Media Freedom Mission to Romania questions fairness of electoral…

Media Freedom Mission to Romania questions fairness of electoral coverage

Urgent reform of political funding for ‘press and propaganda’ needed to end media dependency on political parties

 

Members of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR), after completing a mission to Bucharest, concluded that much of the media coverage of Romania’s electoral campaigns is seriously compromised by political capture and that media are failing to provide the fair and balanced political reporting necessary for the public to make informed electoral choices.

Romania also boasts some highly professional media outlets providing excellent political coverage. Those that do, either refuse political funds completely, or ensure that when they do accept them, the content is clearly marked and fully transparent.

 

The MFRR’s two-day mission to Romania, 17-18 June, was held just one week after the European and local elections had been held. With presidential elections due in September and parliamentary elections in December this year, the MFRR calls for an urgent reform of the system of party funding to remove political money from the media system.

 

Any political expenditure that does exist must be restricted to clearly marked political advertising, with full disclosure of the budgets spent by each political party for each media. The overall level of state subsidies used for ‘press and propaganda’ must also be reduced.

 

The provision of annual state funding to political parties which are then used to pay media for ‘press and propaganda’ content is, currently, the biggest instrument of political capture of the Romanian media. The huge income it provides for media distorts political reporting creating an unfair electoral playing field. The sums used have risen rapidly in recent years with approximately 24 million euros in 2023 and with this set to rise significantly in 2024.

 

The problem is exacerbated by a lack of transparency over which parties fund which media, how much they fund and for what media content. Political parties are required to report their expenditure to the Permanent Electoral Authority on a monthly basis. While the PEA issued more detailed reports during the 2024 local and European campaign periods, which makes more transparent how much is spent in which media by which party, outside of the official campaign none of this detail is made public.

 

The mission’s key findings

 

Political Influence and Media Coverage:

  • The pervasive influence of political party funds on media results in biassed coverage primarily in favour of the governing coalition.
  • The political funding creates a pliant media that fails to hold government to account and undermines public trust in media.
  • The lack of transparency over the distribution of state advertising funds controlled by elected officials, further exacerbates the capture of media, particularly at the regional and local level.
  • The lack of transparency over other sources of funding, business ties and other conflicts of interests between media and politicians also compromise the capacity of media to serve the public.

 

Vexatious SLAPP Lawsuits:

  • Romanian media are targeted with an alarming number of Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs) aimed at silencing investigative journalism and critical reporting. These lawsuits, often initiated by powerful political figures and business interests, rarely win in court, but instead succeed in intimidating and financially draining media outlets.

 

Safety:

  • Online harassment and threats directed at journalists – particularly women journalists – create a growing climate of hostility designed to silence journalists. The authorities must do more to address this problem and protect journalists, particularly from online trolling and smear campaigns.

For the full mission set of findings and recommendations, see annex below.

 

The mission called for the government to swiftly implement new Europe-wide rules designed to improve media freedom including the European Media Freedom Act, the Anti-SLAPP Directive and the  Regulation on the Transparency of Political Advertising as well as the European Commission’s recommendations on the safety of journalists. The EMFA, in particular, introduces new rules on transparency of ownership, conflicts of interest and the receipt and distribution of state advertising to media.

 

The mission welcomed commitments by the Ministry of Justice and the General Prosecutor to support training programmes for judges, prosecutors and policemen on SLAPPs, protection of sources and the safety of journalists.

 

The mission welcomed the High Court’s decision to instruct the re-opening of the investigation into possible political interference in the investigation into the smear campaign against investigative journalist, Emilia Sercan. The mission also welcomed the General Prosecutor’s assurances that Sercan’s case will be overseen by a highly competent and fully independent prosecutor with the resources to resolve the case before the end of the statute of limitations.

 

The mission also called for closer co-operation between the broadcast regulator (CNA) and the Permanent Electoral Authority (PEA) in verifying the expenditure of political funds in media to ensure its use does not breach either the electoral or broadcast law.

 

Finally the mission called on the parliamentary committees for mass media to conduct a public inquiry into the role of political funds and its impact on media independence and electoral fairness.

 

The mission confirmed findings set out by MFRR partners in their April report, Media freedom in Romania Ahead of Super Election Year.

 

The mission held meetings with Iulian Bulai, Chair of the Parliamentary Committee for Culture, Arts and Mass Information Means of the Chamber of Deputies; Alex Florin Florența, General Prosecutor; Mihai Pașca, Secretary of State for the Ministry of Justice; the Romanian Institute for Human Rights (IRDO);  Dan Santa, Director of International Relations at Radio Romania; Constantin Rada, General Director at the Permanent Electoral Authority; Valentin Alexandru Jucan, Vice President of the National Audiovisual Council (CNA) and Mircea Toma, member of CNA and Council of Europe focal point for the safety of Journalists in Romania; and Renate Weber, Ombudsperson. The mission further met with leading journalists and media freedom groups, in a debate hosted by the Centre  for Independent Journalism.

 

The mission was led by the International Press Institute and included the Osservatorio Balcani e Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT), European Centre for Press and Media Freedom, Free Press Unlimited and the Romanian media freedom organisation, ActiveWatch.

 

The MFRR is particularly thankful for the support of the Centre for Independent Journalism and of ActiveWatch in organizing the mission.

 

Annex

Key Findings

Media Capture and Electoral Coverage 

 

  • Romanian elections are compromised by the political capture of mainstream media, primarily through the use of political party funds expenditure on ‘press and propaganda’. 
  • The main political parties spent in 2023 over 24 million euros on press and propaganda funds and this figure is set to rise significantly in 2024.
  • While the election campaign rules provide for detailed reports of all political party expenditure, which were made more transparent by the Permanent Electoral Authority (PEA) during the June 2024 electoral campaigns, the detail of expenditure between campaigns is withheld.
  • There is considerable evidence, unveiled by investigative journalists, of political funds being illegitimately used to buy media coverage between election periods, in breach of the legislation on financing the activity of political parties and electoral campaigns and broadcast laws.
  • Public funds are being spent by political parties on media content which is not properly marked, making it often impossible for audiences to distinguish between journalistic and paid-for content.

 

    • The lack of transparency over the distribution of state funds controlled by elected officials, means that this is also likely to further exacerbate the capture of media, particularly at the regional and local level.

 

  • There is no obligation on either political candidates, or media, to make public any conflicts of interest such as candidates ownership, or influence over media, further compromising the fairness of electoral campaigns. 
  • This has resulted in a distortion of the electoral coverage as parts of the mainstream national and local media provide pliant coverage of the big political parties and hostile coverage of other political candidates.
  • While the problem is particularly acute during elections, political money has become embedded in the media system creating an unhealthy interdependency between the media and political parties throughout the political cycle.
  • The electoral and media regulators and political parties have a democratic duty to ensure full transparency over their use of public, and private, political funds spent on media.
  • There is an equal obligation on the media companies to declare all sums received from political sources and to clearly label the content that has been paid for.
  • The problem is further exacerbated by a public broadcaster which lacks the independence to be able to hold government to account and is in urgent need of reform.

 

Media Capture Recommendations

Romania must prioritise the fight against media capture including the following actions:

  • The parliamentary committees for mass media, should organise a public inquiry into the impact of political money on media independence and electoral fairness.
  • Closer co-operation between the broadcast regulator (CNA) and the Permanent Electoral Authority (PEA) in verifying the expenditure of political funds in media to ensure its use does not breach either the electoral or broadcast law. If necessary, the regulatory framework should be changed to guarantee the role of CNA in verifying the use of political funds.
  • The obligations of the European Media Freedom Act should be swiftly implemented, particularly those related to media capture including independence of public service media, transparency of ownership and conflicts of interest, regulatory independence, guarantees of media pluralism and fair distribution of state advertising.
  • The Regulation on Political Advertising should also be swiftly implemented to ensure fully transparent labelling of all political advertising in the media and online.

 

Legal Obstacles

Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs)

  • Romanian media are targeted with an alarming number of Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs) aimed at silencing investigative journalism and critical reporting. These lawsuits, often initiated by powerful political figures and business interests, rarely win in court, but instead succeed in intimidating and financially draining media outlets.

Freedom of Information

Protection of Sources

  • Courts and the police have pressured journalists to reveal their sources against the provisions and case law of Article 10 of the European Court of Human Rights.

Legal Obstacles: Recommendations

  • Journalists and media support groups must do more to document and raise awareness about the threats posed by SLAPPs to the media’s ability to hold the powerful to account.
  • The government has an opportunity to reduce the threat of SLAPPs by ensuring that the European Union’s Anti-Slapp Directive is fully transposed into law and that the measures are extended to include domestic SLAPP cases as well as cross-border cases.
  • The Freedom of Information law must be fully implemented with clear consequences for individuals or institutions that are found by courts to have deliberately withheld information in breach of the law.
  • The rules and procedures for authorising surveillance of journalists must be updated to come into line with Article 4 of the European Media Freedom Act and of the ECHR which provide extensive safeguards against abuse of surveillance to target journalists.
  • Training should be provided to prosecutors and judges on SLAPP cases and the protection of sources and the protections offered by the European Convention of Human Rights.

 

Safety and protection of journalists

  • Online harassment and threats directed at journalists – particularly women journalists – create a growing climate of hostility designed to silence journalists. The authorities must do more to address this problem and protect journalists, particularly from online trolling and smear campaigns.
  • The mission welcomed the High Court’s decision to instruct the re-opening of the investigation of possible political interference in the investigation into the smear campaign against investigative journalist, Emilia Sercan.

Recommendations on the safety and protection of journalists

  • The General Prosecutor should organise a regular dialogue with journalists on how to reduce crimes against journalists. This should include trainings with the police and prosecutors on how to protect journalists from growing online and offline threats.
  • The new Prosecutor to be appointed to Emilia Sercan’s case must be highly competent,  fully independent and provided  with the resources to resolve the case before the end of the statute of limitations.

 

Local Journalism

  • Local journalists have seen a steep decline in professional standards, independence and public trust due in most part to the financial dependence – of the majority of local media to state and political advertising funds, enabling local politicians to buy the silence and loyalty of media. Furthermore, local journalists are far more vulnerable to vexatious lawsuits, threats and intimidation where political elites are able to apply influence on the judiciary, police and business communities with comparative ease.

Recommendations Local Journalism

 

  • The local government advertising budgets must be depoliticised to end the political capture of local media and ensure the fair distribution of funds. The rules for distribution and transparency outlined in the EMFA should apply to all local governments regardless of size. 
  • Action should be taken to ensure the professional development of journalists,  the promotion of sustainable business models, and the expansion of community  audiences that help guarantee their independence and integrity.

Signed by:

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

 

Text updated on 27 June 2024

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.

Lithuania: Joint letter from mediafreedom organisations

Lithuania: Joint letter from mediafreedom organisations

Draft amendment to Lithuanian law on national radio and television threatens public broadcaster’s funding model

 

Today OBCT joins the International and European Federation of journalists (IFJ-EFJ) and other mediafreedom organisations in writing to the authorities in Lithuania, urging them to open consultation and discussion with LRT and ensure that any changes to the funding model will maintain guarantees that LRT is fully funded and able to fulfil its mandate.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        25 June 2024

 

To:

Office of the President of the Republic of Lithuania, kanceliarija@prezidentas.lt

Ms Vikorija Čmilytė-Nielsen, Speaker of the Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania, pirmininko.sekretoriatas@lrs.lt

Members of the Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania, via Ms Vaida Servetkienė, Director of Document Department, Acting Secretary General of the Seimas

Members of the Committee on Culture of the Seimas, via Ms Agnė Jonaitienė, Head of the Committee Burau

Members of the Committee on Budget and Finance of the Seimas, via Committee Bureau

Mr Mindaugas Lingė, Chair of the Committee on Budget and Finance

Ms Ieva Ulčickaitė, Chief Advisor to the President

Mr Frederikas Jansonas, Chief Advisor to the to the President on Communications

 

Subject: Draft amendment to Lithuanian law on national radio and television threatens public broadcaster’s funding model

 

The International and European Federation of journalists (IFJ-EFJ), together with the International Press Institute (IPI) are concerned about the draft amendment to the Lithuanian Law on National Radio and Television (LRT) submitted by Mindaugas Lingė, Member of Parliament, on 14 June 2002. The draft seriously threatens the public broadcaster’s funding model.

 

The current LRT law guarantees that its budget should never fall below its 2019 level. The proposed amendment seeks to abandon this crucial provision and replace it with a mechanism  that would limit the growth of LRT’s budget.

 

The draft was submitted without prior consultation with the public broadcaster. As stated in Article 5(3) of the newly adopted European Media Freedom Act (EMFA), funding procedures should be based on “transparent and objective criteria laid down in advance”. The submission of such changes without informing and consulting the public broadcaster reinforces our concerns about the future of the broadcaster.

 

The proposed abolition of the minimum funding threshold undermines the long term sustainability of LRT, compromising its independence and reducing its ability to fulfil its mandate.

 

The amendment is being justified as necessary in order to redirect funds to increase Lithuania’s defence spending. Raising a defence budget must not come at the cost of undermining institutions essential for the preservation of Lithuania’s democracy, including  public broadcasting.

 

As a public media service, LRT must be adequately funded to fulfil its mission, to evolve in line with rapid technological and social change and to ensure adequate preparedness for uninterrupted broadcasting in times of emergency. Moreover, the public service media’s role in combatting disinformation is also vital for the protection against information warfare.

 

We urge the authorities to engage in open consultation and discussion with LRT to ensure that any changes to the funding model will maintain guarantees that LRT is fully funded and able to fulfil its public service remit.

 

Thank you for your attention to this important issue. We remain at your disposal for any further information or assistance.

Signed by:

Ricardo Gutiérrez, General Secretary of the European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)

Anthony Bellanger, General Secretary of the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ)

Chiara Sighele, Programme Manager, Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT)

Scott Griffen, Interim Executive Director, International Press Institute (IPI)

Andreas Lamm, Interim Managing Director, European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)

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.

Slavko Ćuruvija. Photo by Slavko Ćuruvija Foundation / Predrag Mitić

Solidarity with the Slavko Ćuruvija Foundation in their quest…

Solidarity with the Slavko Ćuruvija Foundation in their quest for justice

Lawsuits undermine efforts to fight impunity in journalist’s murder

 

The Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) coalition partners stand firm in solidarity with the Slavko Ćuruvija Foundation, which has unwaveringly campaigned against the continued impunity for the 1999 murder of Serbian journalist Slavko Ćuruvija. New legal action brought by two of the individuals acquitted of Ćuruvija’s murder now threatens to undermine the foundation’s campaign for justice.

For over a decade, the Foundation has sought justice for Ćuruvija, an esteemed editor and publisher who was shot in front of his home in Belgrade in 1999. Twenty years later, four former state security officers were sentenced to a combined 100 years in prison for the murder. A 2021 retrial confirmed the guilty verdicts. However, in February 2024, the Belgrade Court of Appeal reversed course, acquitting the men of the murder charges – much to the shock of human rights defenders in Serbia and internationally.

 

The acquittal means that no one has been convicted for Ćuruvija’s murder, perpetuating a culture of failed accountability for journalists’ murders in Serbia, where other prominent cases, such as those of Milan Pantić and Dada Vujasinović, remain unresolved.

 

In February, the Slavko Ćuruvija Foundation published a press release in which they vigorously expressed disagreement with the verdict. Two of the four acquitted officers, Milan Radonjić and Miroslav Kurak, have since sued the Foundation, requesting damages for “violation of honour and reputation”. This legal action threatens the foundation’s work to fight impunity for the killing of journalists in Serbia and to preserve the legacy of Slavko Ćuruvija.

 

Our coalition unequivocally supports the foundation’s crucial mission, which must continue. We renew our call for further efforts internationally and in Serbia to combat impunity for the killing of journalists, including those of Ćuruvija, Pantić, and Vujasinović.

 

The press freedom situation in Serbia continues to decline, with vexatious lawsuits against the media and persistent threats to journalist safety. We pledge to continue spotlighting the pressing need for justice and accountability in Slavko Ćuruvija’s and similar cases, and ensuring that those who threaten press freedom and journalistic integrity face international scrutiny.

Signed by:

  • International Press Institute (IPI)
  • The European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
  • ARTICLE 19 Europe
  • OBC Transeuropa (OBCT)
  • Free Press Unlimited (FPU)

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

European Commission study on journalist safety lacks solutions while…

European Commission study on journalist safety lacks solutions while security deteriorates

Media freedom groups highlight disconnect between report findings and ground realities

 

The undersigned organisations welcome the recent study on the actions taken by Member States to implement the European Commission’s Recommendation on the protection and safety of journalists. However, our coalition finds that the report lacks a critical assessment of on-the-ground realities that reduce the effectiveness of initiatives that otherwise look good on paper. We stress therefore the need for more effective measures, and a deeper engagement with journalists and media freedom organisations, to build structures that can genuinely safeguard journalist safety in Europe.

The Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) coalition reviewed the recently published Study on putting in practice by Member States of the Recommendation on the protection, safety and empowerment of journalists, commissioned by the European Commission and executed by Intellera Consulting, Open Evidence, and PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC). 

 

We welcome the report and efforts to monitor the record of Member States, in view of the persisting challenges to journalist safety. Nevertheless, given that the study presents an ostensibly positive view on the implementation of the 2021 Commission’s Recommendation 2021/1534, our coalition finds the report insufficiently reflects the real challenges faced by journalists and the overall failure of governments to guarantee a safe environment for media.

 

There is a disconnect between the report’s findings and on-the-ground realities created, in part, by a lack of effective political action for journalist protection. 

 

Persistent hurdles to journalist safety: a reality check

According to the report, most EU Member states “show progress” in implementing the Recommendation, with 19 out of 27 Member States reportedly adopting dedicated action plans or structures. We welcome policy development and political steps taken around the recommendation. 

 

At the same time, we argue that the report fails to critically assess the effectiveness of these measures, focusing purely on quantitative aspects. 

 

To its credit, the study does highlight some critical gaps in journalists’ protection across Europe. It says, for instance, that there is a significant lack of dedicated training for police, judges, and prosecutors on journalist safety. About the pressing issue of impunity, it underscores the “lack of specific measures […] at national level to ensure investigation and prosecution of crimes specifically targeting journalists.” It further states that few Member States offer specific economic and social protections for journalists, and even fewer for freelancers. It admits that existing support mechanisms rarely address the growing threat of online harassment effectively. 

 

In several countries cited as an example of good practice for their governance structures, we have consistently monitored and published evidence that these are often toothless tigers, lacking real political backing. For instance, 

 

  • Greece: The report positively highlights formal mechanisms that, in their current design, are not responsive to ongoing issues for journalists. For example, while the  existence of the Task Force is a positive development, following its mission to Greece this coalition continues to express its concerns that the Task Force has not yet proposed or planned strategies for several crucial components of safety of journalists – including monitoring of violent attacks and impunity (our consortium recorded 24 episodes of physical assault, one resulting in the death of the journalist, in the last four years), as well as improved investigations and prosecution. Moreover, the report states that holding a press card is sufficient for journalists to access events, while reports from journalists and press freedom organizations show that journalists are regularly refused access to press conferences and asylum sites. Similar disparities are observed with regards to the description of Greece’s facilities for economic protection and facilitation of communication between police and journalists. 

 

  • France: The report’s positive description of French government measures, such as the National Law Enforcement Plan, which sets out the operational modalities for the maintenance of public order by all internal security forces, fails to take into account the continuing police violence against journalists, particularly during demonstrations. Revealingly, in all 32 cases of physical assaults against media workers recorded by our monitoring system since 2020, police forces were the source of the attack.

 

  • Italy: While the report commends Italy for establishing monitoring systems and a national coordination center, it overlooks  its lack of independence, as the fact that it is established under the Ministry of Interior may expose it to political interferences and pressures. The Centre also fails to provide a comprehensive reporting of all types of violations, threats, and attacks against journalists and media workers, as it only collects data based on police reports. The report also overlooks that there is a critical need for more comprehensive strategies to address online threats and harassment, and the delay by Italian authorities in fully implementing Articles 19 to 23, which guarantees that journalists and other media professionals are able to operate safely and without restrictions during public protests and demonstrations. In many recent cases, journalists in Italy continue to be fined, arrested or worse – assaulted for doing their job. Troublingly, MFRR recorded 53 cases of physical assault in the last 4 years, 19 of which resulted in an injury. Authorities should provide additional training for law enforcement agencies to improve their capacity to protect journalists and not inhibit their ability to report.

 

  • Croatia: Despite commendation for cooperation agreements between the Croatian Ministry of the Interior, the Croatian Journalists’ Association (HND) and the Croatian Union of Journalists (SNH), recent violations on media and journalists perpetrated by public officials, ranging from legal harassment and editorial interference to verbal abuse, raise questions about the independence and effectiveness of these initiatives. Recent death threats against Nacional’s newsroom for alleged responsibility in the shooting of Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico, for instance, illustrate growing risks for journalists and tension in the country.

 

Advocating for change: a call for inclusive engagement

While we warmly welcome the participation of several civil society and journalistic stakeholders, including the use of statistics and alerts documented by the MFRR’s Mapping Media Freedom platform, we urge the European Commission and Member States to more thoroughly engage with journalists, media freedom groups and media stakeholders nationally and across Europe in future studies and actions to safeguard press freedom and protect journalists.

 

Furthermore, we call for more comprehensive and relevant measures to prioritise journalist safety, address economic and social vulnerabilities, and effectively tackle online threats.

Signed by:

  • International Press Institute (IPI)
  • Free Press Unlimited (FPU)
  • The European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
  • OBC 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.

MFRR partners call for lifting ban on journalists’ access…

MFRR partners call for lifting ban on journalists’ access to Georgian parliament

 

The partner organisations of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) condemn the barring of journalists from reporting within the Parliament of Georgia. We urge the Parliament to reinstate the accreditation of all journalists including online media.

Since the start of the debate on the foreign agent bill titled “Law on Transparency of Foreign Influence in Georgia,” journalists from online outlets have been barred from the Parliament. On May 27, Speaker of the Parliament Shalva Papuashvili signed a decree on “enhancing security levels,” indefinitely barring online media journalists and visitors from attending parliamentary sessions.

 

Since June 3, four journalists of government-critical television channels have also been barred. Nini Balanchivadze of Mtavari Arkhi was banned for one month at the request of ruling Georgian Dream MP Nino Tsilosani after Balanchivadze asked Tsilosani to comment on potential U.S. sanctions against Georgia’s authorities. Tsilosani refused to answer, stating she does not give interviews to Mtavari Arkhi journalists. When Balanchivadze repeated her question, Tsilosani threatened to issue a sanction against her.

 

On June 4, Sopho Gozalishvili of  Formula TV was banned from Parliament for six months also after approaching Tsilosani for an interview. In the video released by Formula TV, Tsilosani accuses Formula TV of being a fascist television.

 

Nata Kajaia and Maka Chikhladze, working for TV Pirveli, had their accreditation suspended at the request of Sozar Subari and Guram Matcharashvili, MPs of People’s Power party, which is closely aligned with the Georgian Dream party.

 

All of the suspensions were based on a breach of the parliamentary code of conduct for journalists established by the Speaker, Papuashvili, in March 2023, which requires journalists to immediately terminate an interview if objected to by an MP, staff member, or guest.

 

Barring journalists from the Parliament represents yet another step by Georgia’s authorities in  its crackdown on independent media. The barring of journalists from Parliament deprives the public of information on the activities of the legislative branch. 

 

We urge the authorities to stop misusing the Speaker’s decree to silence journalists and to immediately lift the arbitrary ban on online media’s presence in Parliament. 

 

Furthermore, we reiterate our call to authorities to guarantee the safety of journalists and to ensure that the country’s media can operate freely, without being subjected to derogatory or insulting comments from the authorities.

 

We also appeal to the Public Defender (Ombudsman) of Georgia Levan Ioseliani to investigate the issue and help end the practice of barring journalists from Parliament. The Public Defender must play a crucial role in safeguarding press freedom in Georgia and protecting its embattled independent media.

Signed by:

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

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

Media freedom groups call on Slovakia’s Parliament to reject…

Media freedom groups call on Slovakia’s Parliament to reject public broadcasting bill

Critics warn: proposed law could seriously undermine the independence of  public media

 

Journalists and media freedom groups are urging Slovakia’s MPs to reject the proposed public service broadcasting bill scheduled for parliamentary review next week. Despite recent amendments to the bill, the new structure would lead to the politicisation of the broadcaster in breach of the European Media Freedom Act.

The public broadcasting bill aiming to replace Radio and Television of Slovakia (RTVS) with a new entity, Slovak Television and Radio (STVR), will be discussed by the Parliament next week after its finalisation by the government in May. 

 

If passed into law, the governing coalition will also remove the current Director-General and supervisory board before the end of their legal mandates. 

 

The new Director-General will be appointed by the new Board of STVR, which will consist of nine members, five appointed by the Parliament and four by the Ministry of Culture. All their mandates would start at the same time. This would hand the ruling majority effective control over the Board and, therefore, the Director General, leading to the likely rapid politicisation of the new public television and radio channels.

 

The ruling coalition has persistently accused the public media and its journalists of bias and political activism and has made no secret of its desire to assert control over it through this ‘reform’. 

 

The initial bill, published in March, provoked a string of protests led by RTVS’s journalists who published a petition expressing fear that the new law will create “a tool for political control of RTVS for any government in power”, adding that “free and independent public media should serve all citizens of Slovakia, not the power ambitions of any parties.” 

 

Slovakia’s President, Zuzana Čaputová, European Commission Vice-President Věra Jourová, as well as many international organisations also expressed concerns including that the law may breach provisions for independence laid out in the European Media Freedom Act. 

 

As a result, the government has since withdrawn some of the more vexatious elements of the law, including a provision for a new politically appointed Programme Council to coordinate the programming. 

 

Despite these modifications the bill still provides for the politicisation of the public broadcaster by the government that would fatally compromise its independence. It is therefore still contrary to the European Media Freedom Act’s provisions on the independence of the public media. 

 

Moreover, the law has done nothing to secure sufficient, stable and independent funding which is essential to ensure STVR’s independence and fulfilment of its public service mission. In 2023 Slovakia replaced the licence fee model with direct state funding increasing its dependence on the government.

 

Our organisations have seen how easy it is for governments to undermine the independence of public broadcasters and how serious the effects of such a politicisation can be for society as a whole. 

 

The tragic shooting of Prime Minister Robert Fico against the background of a polarised society shows that the need for pluralistic and independent public media, that can facilitate debate across the political spectrum in a time of crisis, has never been greater. 

Signed by:

  • International Press Institute (IPI)
  • Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ)
  • European Broadcasting Union (EBU)
  • European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
  • European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
  • Free Press Unlimited (FPU)
  • OBC Transeuropa (OBCT)
  • Reporters Without Borders (RSF)

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

Germany: Journalist Ignacio Rosaslanda physically assaulted by police while…

Germany: Journalist Ignacio Rosaslanda physically assaulted by police while covering police operation

 

The undersigned international media freedom, free expression, and journalist organisations call on the German authorities to conduct a thorough investigation into the physical attack by Berlin police on Mexican video journalist Ignacio Rosaslanda while he was covering a police operation. The journalist who is working for the daily Berliner Zeitung, was not only prevented from reporting and physically abused but was also arbitrarily detained for hours without medical care. We urge authorities to take appropriate measures to ensure that the attack does not go unpunished and strengthen the protection of journalists who are vulnerable targets during demonstrations.

On 23 May 2024, Mexican journalist Ignacio Rosaslanda was at the Humboldt University’s Institute of Social Sciences to cover protests by pro-Palestinian activists who had occupied the building. The police intervened to evacuate the activists. Rosaslanda, who was filming the evacuation and had identified himself to the police as a member of the press, was physically attacked by a Berlin policeman. The incident was recorded by the journalist. 

  

 

“The policeman suddenly attacked me from behind. He punched me twice in the face before pushing me to the ground with his knee behind my back. I kept shouting that I was a journalist. I even had my journalist card around my neck and my camera in one hand. They could see that I was documenting,” Rosaslanda told the MFRR partners. According to Rosaslanda, when he was on the ground, the policeman even said to him: “Freedom of the press is not without restrictions, your colleagues are outside and have done their work and are not handcuffed”. Although Rosaslanda tried to clarify the reason for his aggression by the police, he was told that he was the one who had attacked and resisted arrest. “I was then handcuffed for at least an hour and held in the building university for at least three hours for questioning”. Rosaslanda, who was injured, was refused immediate medical attention. The journalist had to be taken to hospital by one of his colleagues after the interrogation.

 

 

On 24 May 2024, the editors of the Berliner Zeitung strongly condemned the violence against Rosaslanda and the obstruction of his work by the Berlin police. “An attack on a journalist is an attack on the freedom of the press. This is all the more serious when the attack comes from the state,” wrote the Berliner Zeitung. Rosaslanda filed a lawsuit for assault and abuse of authority.

 

 

“We condemned and made the attack visible via our X account. We will also talk with the Berlin police and call for clarification on this attack. The Berlin police had only declared to various media that they “check” investigations,” emphasises Renate Gensch, regional chairwoman of the German Union of journalists (dju) in ver.di Berlin-Brandenburg and member of the national board of dju. 

 

 

“As a Press representative, Ignacio Rosaslanda had only wanted to do his job. We condemn the violence against a press colleague by the Berlin police in the strongest possible terms. We also call for even stronger cooperation between the police and journalists’ associations and press representatives to prevent such incidents,” said Andrea Roth, deputy chairwoman of the Bavarian Journalists’ Association and EFJ Steering Committee member.

 

 

The MFRR partners are concerned about police violence because this unacceptable behaviour encourages and normalises hatred against journalists, who are already being targeted by protestors in pro-Palestine demonstrations, ranging from covering up or damaging cameras, harassment of the press, threats of physical violence, and assaults. Of the seven physical attacks on journalists during demonstrations, recorded by the Media Freedom Rapid Response platform, four journalists were injured at protests related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Most recently, a freelance photographer was physically assaulted with a poster at a pro-Palestinian demonstration in Berlin and suffered a bleeding wound. Reporters from Sachsen Fernsehen were brutally beaten in Leipzig in January. 

 

 

The MFRR partners stand in full solidarity with the journalist Ignacio Rosaslanda and all journalists subjected to pressure and threats to silence them. We urge the relevant authorities to take immediate steps to protect the journalists, including a swift and thorough investigation into the police attack on Rosaslanda. 

Signed by:

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

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.

(Lokal-)Journalismus unter Druck: Monitoring und Schutzmechanismen in Zeiten wachsender…

(Lokal-)Journalismus unter Druck: Monitoring und Schutzmechanismen in Zeiten wachsender Gefährdung

 

24. Juni 2024, 19:00 – 20:30 Uhr

Ort: Nikolaistr. 27-29, Institut für Kommunikations- und Medienwissenschaft, Raum 1.01

Im Rahmen des Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) Projekts des Europäischen Zentrums für Presse- und Medienfreiheit und der Veranstaltungsreihe „Erzählen Sie mehr“ des Masterstudiengangs Journalistik der Universität Leipzig sowie des monatlichen Stammtischformats „LeMoMo“ des DJV-Sachsen laden wir Sie herzlich zur Veranstaltung “(Lokal-)Journalismus unter Druck: Monitoring und Schutzmechanismen in Zeiten wachsender Gefährdung” ein.

Am 24. Juni um 19 Uhr werden Patrick Peltz und Andreas Lamm vom European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF) in Leipzig über ihren jüngsten Report „Feindbild Journalist:in 8“ (Statistik tätlicher Angriffe auf Journalist:innen deutschlandweit) und den neuen „Mapping Media Freedom Monitoring Report“ (für die EU-Ebene) berichten. Gemeinsam mit Journalist:innen wollen wir anschließend über die Bedrohungen für die Pressefreiheit in Deutschland und die Möglichkeiten, Journalist:innen besser zu schützen, diskutieren. Unter anderem mit dem Journalisten Matthias Puppe, der seit 2001 für die Leipziger Volkszeitung arbeitet und seither vielfach von Protesten berichtet hat und der stellvertretenden Chefredakteurin der “Freien Presse”, Anne Lena Mösken.

Für einen Snack und alkoholfreie Getränke ist gesorgt.

Die Registrierung schließt um 12:00 Uhr am 23. Juni.

Register here

Moderator

Dr. Uwe Krüger

Wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter, Universität Leipzig Institut für Kommunikations- und Medienwissenschaft

Speakers

Andreas Lamm

Interim Managing Director, European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)

Patrick Peltz

Monitoring and Research Officer, European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)

Matthias Puppe

Journalist, Leipziger Volkszeitung

Anne Lena Mösken

Stellvertretende Chefredakteurin, Freie Presse

Romania: Super election year calls for press freedom assessment

Romania: Super election year calls for press freedom assessment

29 May 2024

 

A coalition of media freedom organisations will conduct a mission to Bucharest on 17-18 June 2024 to assess key challenges amid Romania’s super election year. The mission will address political influence on media, legal threats to journalists’ work and their safety, culminating in a conversation with the press.

Romanian translation here.

In Romania, European and local elections in early June will be followed by presidential and parliamentary elections in September and December respectively. In the midst of this super election year, the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) consortium will undertake a mission to Bucharest on 17-18 June 2024.

 

The mission will be jointly organised by the International Press Institute (IPI) and the Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT), and will be joined by partners from the European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF), the European Federation of Journalists (EFJ), and Free Press Unlimited (FPU).

 

Following its online fact-finding phase involving meetings with media and civil society stakeholders, during the upcoming in-person mission, the MFRR delegation aims to meet with state authorities. The group will discuss with institutional stakeholders developments regarding a set of critical issues, highlighted in the consortium’s recent report on Romania’s media landscape.

 

First findings: A politically influenced, unsafe media environment

The MFRR consortium has identified the following key issues to tackle:

  • Media capture: The MFRR analysis identified severe political influence over Romanian media. Primarily, an opaque allocation of “media and propaganda” funds from state budgets to political parties foster a compliant and clientelist media environment. Additionally, the consortium noted with concern that the National Audiovisual Council, tasked with regulating media, is under-resourced and lacks political independence.
  • Legal threats: Journalists in Romania face an increasing number of vexatious lawsuits (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation, known as SLAPPs), designed to intimidate and silence voices of dissent. Aside from draining the media’s resources, the MFRR warns about their chilling effect on journalistic freedom.
  • Safety concerns: The consortium has been monitoring a number of prominent cases of physical attacks, online harassment and smear campaigns targeting investigative journalists. Notable cases, such as that of investigative journalist Emilia Șercan, underscore the severity of these threats.

These topics are linked to key pieces of legislation that the European Union has recently adopted. The European Media Freedom Act aims to safeguard media independence and pluralism by tackling media capture, while the Anti-SLAPP Directive provides increased protections for journalists against vexatious lawsuits. Additionally, the European Commission adopted the Recommendation on the protection, safety and empowerment of journalists in September 2021. Two years later, the Council of Europe also launched the five-year Journalists Matter campaign, aiming to promote best practices among government and media stakeholders for improved journalist safety.

 

Our goals: Assess and address

Particularly during elections, journalists face intense political pressure and scrutiny for potential bias. Furthermore, an overall lack of public confidence is perhaps the biggest challenge Romanian media have to face. Yet, their role as public watchdogs is crucial for a fair electoral process. For this reason, the primary objectives of the upcoming MFRR mission are to:

  • Evaluate the impact of political interference and media capture on journalistic independence, including an evaluation of the effectiveness and independence of media regulatory bodies.
  • Investigate the prevalence and impact of SLAPPs and other forms of legal threats on Romanian journalists.
  • Address the safety and protection concerns of journalists facing threats and harassment.
  • Explore solutions, in dialogue and cooperation with relevant authorities, to support and sustain independent and local journalism in Romania.

 

Engagement and advocacy

The MFRR delegation will organise a conversation with the press on June 18, 2024, at 2PM in Bucharest, to present its initial observations and recommendations. An additional press release will be produced shortly after, in order to further detail the mission’s findings.

 

Press registration and contacts

Registration for the press event is open until June 17 at 12.00PM. To join the conversation, please fill out the registration form. To request a meeting with the delegation at a different time, and for more information about the mission, please contact us (stating your full name and media):

Beatrice Chioccioli

Advocacy Officer Europe
International Press Institute (IPI)
bchioccioli@ipi.media

+43 681 103 433 67

 

Sielke Beata Kelner, PhD

Researcher & Advocacy Officer

OBC Transeuropa (OBCT)

kelner@balcanicaucaso.org

This mission is part of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR), a Europe-wide mechanism tracking, monitoring, and responding to violations of press and media freedom in EU Member States and candidate countries. The project is co-funded by the European Commission.

România: Anul super electoral impune o evaluare a libertății presei

Misiunea viitoare a consorțiului european pentru libertatea presei va evalua principalele provocări ale presei din România.

O coaliție de organizații pentru libertatea presei va efectua o misiune la București în perioada 17-18 iunie 2024 pentru a evalua principalele provocări în contextul anului super electoral din România. Misiunea va aborda influența politică asupra mass-mediei, amenințările legale la adresa activității jurnaliștilor și a siguranței acestora. O conversație cu presa va încheia activitățile coaliției.

 

În România, alegerile europene și locale de la începutul lunii iunie vor fi urmate de alegeri prezidențiale și parlamentare în septembrie și, respectiv, decembrie. În mijlocul acestui an super electoral, consorțiul Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) va întreprinde o misiune la București în perioada 17-18 iunie 2024. 

 

Misiunea va fi organizată în comun de către International Press Institute (IPI) și Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT), și va fi însoțită de parteneri de la European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF), European Federation of Journalists (EFJ) și Free Press Unlimited (FPU).

 

Misiunea delegației MFRR – precedată de o documentare online, care a inclus întâlniri cu mass-media și cu parteneri din societatea civilă – urmărește acum să se întâlnească cu autoritățile statului.. Grupul va discuta cu părțile interesate un set de aspecte critice, evidențiate în raportul recent al consorțiului privind peisajul mediatic din România.

 

Primele constatări: Un mediu mediatic incert și influențat politic

Consorțiul MFRR a identificat următoarele aspecte cheie care vor fi abordate pe parcursul misiunii :

  • Mass-media capturată politic: Analiza MFRR a identificat o influență politică severă asupra mass-mediei românești. În primul rând, o alocare opacă a fondurilor pentru „presă și propagandă” de la bugetul de stat către partidele politice favorizează un mediu jurnalistic conformist și clientelar. Mai mult, consorțiul a observat cu îngrijorare că Consiliul Național al Audiovizualului, care are sarcina de a reglementa mass-media, este lipsit de resurse și de independență politică.
  • Amenințări juridice: Jurnaliștii din România se confruntă cu un număr din ce în ce mai mare de procese vexatorii (procese strategice împotriva participării publice, cunoscute sub numele de SLAPP), menite să intimideze și să reducă la tăcere vocile disidente. Pe lângă faptul că astfel de procese epuizează resursele organizațiilor de presă, MFRR avertizează asupra efectului lor descurajator asupra libertății jurnalistice.
  • Preocupări legate de siguranță: Consorțiul a monitorizat o serie de cazuri proeminente de atacuri fizice, hărțuire online și campanii de defăimare care au vizat jurnaliștii de investigație. Cazuri notabile, precum cel al jurnalistei de investigație Emilia Șercan, subliniază gravitatea acestor amenințări.

 

Aceste subiecte sunt legate de acte legislative cheie pe care Uniunea Europeană le-a adoptat recent. Legea europeană privind libertatea mass-mediei are ca scop protejarea independenței și pluralismului presei prin abordarea capturării mass-media, în timp ce Directiva anti SLAPP oferă o protecție sporită pentru jurnaliști împotriva proceselor vexatorii. 

 

În septembrie 2021, Comisia Europeană a adoptat o Recomandare privind protecția, siguranța și capacitarea jurnaliștilor. Doi ani mai târziu, Consiliul Europei a lansat, de asemenea, campania de cinci ani Journalists Matter, care vizează promovarea celor mai bune practici în rândul guvernelor și al părților interesate din domeniul mass-media pentru îmbunătățirea siguranței jurnaliștilor.

 

Obiectivele noastre: Să evaluăm și să răspundem la probleme

În special în timpul alegerilor, jurnaliștii se confruntă cu o presiune politică intensă și cu o examinare amănunțită a imparțialității presei. Mai mult, lipsa generală de încredere a publicului este poate cea mai mare provocare cu care se confruntă mass-media din România. Cu toate acestea, rolul lor de avertizori publici este esențial pentru un proces electoral corect. Din acest motiv, obiectivele principale ale viitoarei misiuni MFRR sunt următoarele:

  • Să evalueze impactul interferențelor politice și al capturii mediatice asupra independenței jurnalistice, inclusiv să evalueze eficiența și independența organismelor de reglementare a mass-media.
  • Să investigheze prevalența și impactul SLAPPs și a altor forme de amenințări legale asupra jurnaliștilor români.
  • Să abordeze preocupările legate de siguranța și protecția jurnaliștilor, care se confruntă cu amenințări și hărțuiri.
  • Să exploreze soluții, în dialog și cooperare cu autoritățile relevante, pentru a sprijini și susține jurnalismul independent din România.

 

Implicare și advocacy

Delegația MFRR va organiza o dezbatere cu presa pe 18 iunie 2024, la ora 14:00, la București, pentru a prezenta observațiile și recomandările sale inițiale. Un comunicat de presă va fi publicat la scurt timp după aceea, pentru a detalia în continuare concluziile misiunii.

 

Informații pentru presă 

Înregistrarea la evenimentul de presă este deschisă până la 17 iunie, ora 24.00. Pentru a participa la dezbatere, vă rugăm să completați formularul de înregistrare.

 

Pentru a solicita o întâlnire cu delegația la o altă oră și pentru mai multe informații despre misiune, vă rugăm să ne contactați (menționând numele și prenumele dvs. și numele instituției mass-media pe care o reprezentați): 

 

Beatrice Chioccioli

Ofițer de advocacy pentru Europa

International Press Institute (IPI)

bchioccioli@ipi.media 

+43 681 103 433 67

 

Sielke Beata Kelner, PhD

Cercetător și ofițer de advocacy

OBC Transeuropa (OBCT)

kelner@balcanicaucaso.org 

Această misiune este parte a MFRR (Media Freedom Rapid Response), un mecanism la nivel european de urmărire, monitorizare și răspuns la încălcările libertății presei și a mass-media în statele membre ale UE și în țările candidate. Proiectul este cofinanțat de Comisia Europeană.

Bosnia and Herzegovina flag

Urgent action needed to address the financial deadlock facing…

Urgent action needed to address the financial deadlock facing Radio-Television of Bosnia and Herzegovina

27 May 2024

 

Today the partners of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) express concern at the critical financial situation facing Radio-Television of Bosnia and Herzegovina (BHRT).

Dear Mr. Denis Zvizdić, First Deputy of Chairman, House of Representatives of the Parliamentary Assembly of  Bosnia and Herzegovina;

Dear Mr. Mladen Bošković, Vice President of the House of Representatives of the Parliament of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina;

Dear Mr. Elmedin Konaković, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Bosnia and Herzegovina;

Dear Mr. Edin Forto, Minister of Communications and Transport of Bosnia and Herzegovina;

Dear Mr. Nermin Nikšić, Prime Minister of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina;

Dear Mr. Radovan Višković, President of the Government of Republika Srpska;

 

We would like to urgently bring to your attention the critical financial situation facing Radio-Television of Bosnia and Herzegovina. This is a direct result of the failure to implement the law on the Public Broadcasting System of Bosnia and Herzegovina, leaving the broadcasters in perpetual conflict and in a dire financial situation. The long-standing financial dispute between the National Public Broadcaster (BHRT) and the Federation Public Broadcaster of Bosnia and Herzegovina (FTV) is leading to an unprecedented media blackout ordered by the BHRT management and creating dramatic working conditions.

 

The financial situation of Radio-Television of Bosnia and Herzegovina is very serious and this broadcaster risks being shut down if there is no agreement on how to distribute the RTV tax. Unfortunately, we still have no information on if and when this issue will be resolved. In Republika Srpska, Radio Television of Republika Srpska (RTRS) is collecting the monthly licence fee through JP Pošta RS and illegally  since 2017 RTRS has not transferred more than 80 million BAM (40 million EUR ) that BHRT should have received. This is also contributing to the dire financial situation of BHRT.

 

As a result of the financial impasse, most FTV programmes were replaced by a test signal at 6 am on 8 May. The signal to FTV was reactivated a day later following the order of the Municipal Court in Sarajevo, which threatened BHRT with a fine. The situation keeps worsening and as of 27 May 2024, BHRT will cancel fifteen programmes, while others will be shortened.

 

On 28 May 2024, it will be 50 days since the last time public service employees in Bosnia and Herzegovina received their last salary. Otherwise, more than 60 per cent of the 750 employees have a salary of less than 400 euros, which is not enough to live on. If salaries and arrears to employees are not paid by 1 June 2024, the continuation of broadcasting will be put in jeopardy, including events of high public interest that only the public service of Bosnia and Herzegovina can cover.

 

As the Independent Union of Workers of BHRT has exhausted all means of negotiation, it will hold a warning protest on 28 May, announcing the next steps prescribed by law: a warning strike and a general strike.

 

We would like to recall that sustainable financing of public services is a prerequisite for the country’s accession to the European Union, in line with the newly adopted European Media Freedom Act. The problematic situation in which the workers find themselves is the result of the inaction of the current and previous political authorities, which have failed to ensure stable funding and functioning of the Public Broadcasting Service of Bosnia and Herzegovina and to implement the existing law.

 

We reiterate our appeal to the authorities to support the BHRT journalists and employees, and to find a sustainable solution to ensure that public broadcasters receive sufficient funding to operate normally and not undermine citizens’ right to freedom of information. It is the responsibility of the state to ensure the implementation of a legal framework that protects the independence of the media and safeguards their public service mission.

 

Thank you for your attention to this important matter. We remain at your disposal for any further information.

Sincerely,

Borka Rudić, General Secretary of the Bosnia-Herzegovina Journalists’ Association

(BHJA)

Ricardo Gutiérrez, General Secretary of the European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)

Ruth Kronenburg, Executive Director, Free Press Unlimited (FPU)

Oliver Vujovic, Secretary General,  South East Europe Media Organisation (SEEMO)

Frane Maroević, Executive Director, International Press Institute (IPI)

Andreas Lamm, Interim Managing Director, European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)

Joanna Szymańska, Acting Head of Europe Office, ARTICLE 19

Luisa Chiodi, Director, Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa

Antoinette Nikolova, Director of Balkan Free Media Initiative (BFMI)

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.

MFRR 3 consortium logos