Serbia: New draft media laws represent another step backward…

Serbia: New draft media laws represent another step backward for media freedom

The partner organisations of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) today raise the alarm about two draft media laws brought forward by the Serbian government for their lack of compliance with international freedom of expression standards. If passed they would represent a regressive step with wide-ranging implications for media freedom and pluralism. As the public debate on the legislation continues, the MFRR calls on the Serbian government to withdraw the problematic changes added into the latest drafts and ensure compliance with the country’s previously agreed Media Strategy.

The latest draft versions of the Law on Public Information and Media and the Law on Electronic Media, developed by the Ministry of Information and Telecommunications, propose a framework that would block the reform of the Regulatory Body for Electronic Media (REM) and pave the way for a return to full state ownership of private media, including Telekom Srbjia. The MFRR is concerned that the proposed changes do not comply with international and European standards on media freedom and freedom of expression and diverge radically from the objectives of the Media Strategy adopted by the Government of Serbia in 2020.

First, the draft of the Law on Electronic Media does not foresee the election of new REM Council members after the adoption of the new law, despite the fact that the draft law prescribes completely new criteria for their election, as well as authorized proposers, as is foreseen in the Media Strategy adopted by the Government of the Republic of Serbia. The REM has faced both domestic and international criticism, including from the MFRR, for its lack of independence and politically-motivated decision-making processes. There has also been widespread criticism about how members of the REM are appointed. Proposed changes which would oblige the Council of REM to adopt the Code of Labour – a shift which would better regulate the ethics of its members – have also been disregarded. If passed, this proposal would solidify political control over REM and block much needed reforms to strengthen the regulator’s independence.

Secondly, the new proposal of the Law on Public Information and Media fails to establish legal provisions that would ensure that all media must meet ethical standards to receive public co-financing funding. Under the previous draft, sanctions issued by the Press Council could see media fail to receive public money from co-financing funding for public interest content. However, new rules provide a loophole for print and online media outlets which have not accepted the competence of the Press Council. For those media, such criteria would not apply, meaning they can continue to violate professional standards with impunity and still receive public funding. We fear this will disadvantage media which abide by professional standards and further encourage the dissemination of disinformation and violent rhetoric in the Serbian media landscape. This change was controversially included at the last-minute by the government and was not discussed in a wider Working Group established to discuss the draft laws, which comprises members of civil society and of the journalistic community.

Thirdly, the government also included in both draft laws an identical provision which would essentially facilitate the return to state co-ownership of private media in Serbia. Under the current Media Strategy, direct and indirect ownership of private media by the state is banned. However, the new law would formally allow the state to return to being the co-owner and founder of media outlets. This would formally legalise the ongoing ownership situation at telecommunications provider Telekom Srbija, which is majority state-owned, in violation of the current law. If passed, the MFRR fears the new law would further cement government control over Telekom Srbija and represent a damaging new form of media capture in an EU Candidate Country which is already experiencing its biggest crisis for independent journalism in years.

Finally, the MFRR highlights that the new proposals radically deviate from the Media Strategy, a landmark blueprint developed after widespread consultation with the journalistic community, which the government of Serbia has held up as proof of its commitment to positive reform of the media landscape. This new approach also undermines years of work by journalist associations and working groups to shape the laws and bring them closer in line with EU acquis and other European standards.

Our organisations warn that if passed, the new laws would undermine national and international confidence in the Media Strategy and pose serious questions for the government’s commitment to improve media freedom and pluralism as part of its potential accession to the European Union. Rather than ushering in positive steps in this direction, the last year has been marked by steps backward, as noted by many of our organisations following a visit to Belgrade, and in the most recent report of the European Parliament.

The MFRR therefore shares the concerns recently outlined by the Coalition for Media Freedom in Serbia, and calls for the government to reverse the problematic changes introduced in the two draft media laws and ensure that their provisions comply with international standards on freedom of expression. As the public debate on the legislation continues, we urge the government to return to discussions with the Coalition and other groups which remain committed to reform of the media landscape in Serbia in line with European values. Key provisions must be reintegrated into the draft laws, especially those which provide for more democratic management of the REM. Our organisations will continue to closely monitor the situation in Serbia and call for systemic media reform.

Signed by:

ARTICLE 19 Europe
European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
Free Press Unlimited (FPU)
International Press Institute (IPI)
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.

Media-Democracy Nexus in the European Space

On 17 October 2023, the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) will host a high-level conference in Rome, Italy and online to explore the intersection between media and rule of law across Europe from different thematic angles, geographic and/or professional backgrounds.

By unpacking the nexus between rule of law, media and democracy the high-level international conference aims at bringing together journalists, academics, legal experts and representatives of CSOs to discuss recent media-related developments and examine the ways in which a sound rule of law system contributes to the advancement of media freedom in the European space.

Media freedom is under serious pressure in Europe, in a context of political interferences, verbal, physical and legal attacks as well generalised conditions characterised by lack of protection, that – albeit to different degrees – affect journalists and media professionals across all member states and candidate countries.

Strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs) are on the rise, employed by powerful individuals and companies to avoid public scrutiny and silence critical voices. At the same time, online harassment and intimidation, as well as surveillance incidents, are a growing phenomenon, directed against those dealing with corruption, human rights and other issues relevant to the rule of law.

Alongside with ensuring fair elections, and countering disinformation, strengthening media freedom figures as one of the key priorities on the EU current agenda, as articulated in the 2020 European Democracy Action Plan. Throughout the past few years, EU institutions have been issuing and discussing a number of measures directed towards ensuring a better protection of journalists, countering abusive and exaggerated lawsuits, and protecting media pluralism and independence. Such endeavours testify to the role played by civil society in drawing the attention and establishing a dialogue with EU policymakers on the ways to support and promote media freedom and freedom of expression, and on the pivotal role played by such rights in strengthening the resilience of EU democracies.

Three thematic sessions will explore the intersection between media and rule of law across Europe from different thematic angles, geographic and/or professional backgrounds.

The event will take place in English with simultaneous translation in Italian.

Attendance is free, but registration is required. Register here.

It will also be broadcast live on OBC Transeuropa Facebook page.

You can find the full programme on the OBC Transeuropa website.

This event is coordinated 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.

Serbia: Convicted killers of journalist Slavko Ćuruvija must not…

Serbia: Convicted killers of journalist Slavko Ćuruvija must not be acquitted

IPI renews call for justice to be secured as speculation mounts about potential acquittals.

The International Press Institute (IPI) today renews its two-decade long demand for the killers of Serbian journalist and newspaper publisher Slavko Ćuruvija to face justice for their crimes and for the Court of Appeal to reach its verdict on the landmark retrial in a fully impartial and independent manner.

IPI’s latest call comes as rumours swirl in Belgrade about the pending decision by the judges at the Court of Appeals to acquit the four former state security officers who have twice been convicted of orchestrating and carrying out the killing of Ćuruvija outside his apartment in the capital in 1999.

Multiple sources, including IPI World Press Freedom Hero Veran Matić, a member of the Permanent Working Group for the Safety of Journalists and head of the Commission for Investigating Murders of Journalists, have warned that they have received credible information in recent months that the court has already passed and written its verdict: to overturn the two previous convictions and find all the defendants not guilty.

Alarm bells were first sounded in May 2023 about the apparent verdict of the three-member judicial panel, which deliberated in private after the retrial hearings concluded in March 2023. Seven months later, it is unclear why no verdict has yet been announced and state authorities have not commented. In recent weeks reports emerged that the court was poised to publicly announce its decision.

IPI Executive Director Frane Maroević said: “If the acquittal is confirmed, the state’s inability to secure the convictions of the four former members of the State Security Service (SBD) would represent an abysmal failure of the rule of law and deal a devastating blow to media freedom and the fight against impunity for the murder of journalists in Serbia. The relaunch of the investigation, subsequent trial and conviction for the murder of Slavko Ćuruvija were pioneering developments in combating impunity for killings attacks on journalists in Serbia. An acquittal in this case would be a terrible retrograde step.”

The four individuals have twice been convicted of carrying out the broad daylight assassination on April 11, 1999, which took place amidst the NATO intervention against Serbia. Among them is Radomir Marković, former head of the SDB. At the time Ćuruvija was the editor and founder of the Daily Telegraph and Evropljanin. The first trial began 16 years after the murder, in June 2015. In 2019, all four men were sentenced to a combined prison sentence of 100 years for their roles in the killing. A retrial confirmed the guilty verdicts in December 2021.

However, after the appeal was launched in 2022 leading journalist associations in Serbia, as well as media experts, journalist groups and the family of Slavko Ćuruvija, as well as the foundation set up in his name, have consistently warned that hard-won the guilty verdicts were in jeopardy amidst fears of political interference in the work of the court.

IPI joined several international media freedom organizations in Belgrade in April 2023 to jointly call for justice for Ćuruvija, warning that the verdict would be the most significant for the freedom of media and journalism in the modern history of Serbia and would serve as a litmus test for the rule of law and democracy in the Balkan country.

“As the Court of Appeal verdict approaches, IPI today renews these warnings and our calls for justice for those convicted of carrying out the murder of Slavko Ćuruvija to be confirmed”, Maroević said. “Media freedom and Ćuruvija journalism in Serbia are already in a deep and sustained crisis. An acquittal for Curuvija’s murder – for which the family and colleagues have fought for 24 years to secure – would further damage Serbia’s standing on media freedom within the international community and severely undermine its press commitments as part of its potential EU accession process.”

He added: “Regardless of the verdict, IPI will continue to fight for justice for Slavko Ćuruvija and his family until the very end and until convictions are secured. Our global network of journalists, editors and media executives also continue to stand with all those who have fought for accountability for this murder, and all journalists in Serbia who continue to uphold the values Curuvija exemplified: fiercely independent journalism which strives to hold power to account, even under significant pressures.

“IPI will continue to closely monitor the situation and expects the Court of Appeal to reach its verdict in an impartial and independent manner, based on the evidence presented, rather than on external pressures. The rule of law must be upheld and the cycle of impunity for the killing of Slavko Ćuruvija must end.”

This article was originally published by the International Press Institute (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.

Report Launch: Relocation of journalists in distress in the…

Report Launch: Relocation of journalists in distress in the European Union

Uncovering the truth is dangerous and can put journalists and media workers at serious risk. When a journalist finds him- or herself in danger because someone wants to keep the public in the dark, a situation can occur where the only way to safety is to seek refuge in another country. However, restrictive asylum and visa policies all too often hamper the pathways to international protection.

On October 9th 10:30-11:30 CEST, the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) will present the findings of a thematic fact-finding mission organised earlier this year, which aims to contribute to a better understanding of six pioneering relocation mechanisms for journalists in distress within the European Union. For this purpose, the MFRR partners examined existing schemes in the Czech Republic, France, Germany, Lithuania, the Netherlands and Poland, revealing salient differences and similarities in the scope and features of the responses.

Join us at the Czech Permanent Representation in Brussels or online for the report launch. The Czech mission to Brussels will host the conference. The Deputy Head of the Czech Permanent Representation to the EU Permanent Representative to the Political and Security Committee Ambassador Jitka Látal Znamenáčková will open the presentation. Professor Can Yeğinsu will then discuss the idea of emergency visa for journalists, which he developed as part of the High Level Panel of Legal Experts of the Media Freedom Coalition. Further, in a panel discussion, a journalist in exile will discuss their situation and path to obtain the emergency visa in an EU Member State. Lastly, the report’s authors will present key findings, conclusions and recommendations, and there will be time for a Q&A session.

This mission 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.

For a transnational anti-SLAPP network: Countering gags on public…

For a transnational anti-SLAPP network: Countering gags on public participation

On October 16, 2023, the first public event of CASE Italia dedicated to countering SLAPPs will take place in Rome. Speakers include journalists, activists, experts in the field, and representatives of a range of organisations advocating for freedom of expression.

SLAPPs (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation) are a form of legal harassment affecting not only press freedom, but the right to freedom of expression of our societies as a whole. The goal of those who resort to SLAPPs is to inhibit public participation by silencing critical voices on matters of public interest. Organised on the sixth anniversary of the murder of the Maltese investigative journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia, the first public event of the CASE Italia working group aims at examining the impact of the SLAPP phenomenon in Italy, contextualise it in the European landscape, and offer recommendations so that journalists, activists, lawyers, and citizens can counter it.

The meeting is organised in two sessions. The first panel offers the chance to hear from journalists and activists targeted by SLAPP about their personal and professional experiences. The second panel is centred around a debate among a number of experts, such as media professionals, lawyers and activists, who will discuss specificities of the Italian context and the continuity with the broader European panorama, as well as possible proposals aimed at contrasting SLAPPs and at strengthening the European anti-SLAPP transnational network.

The event will take place in Italian.

Programme

14:30 – 14: 45 Registration

14:45 – 15:00 Introduction: Sielke Beata Kelner – Researcher and advocacy officer OBCT

15:00 – 16: 30 Panel: SLAPPs: voices and experiences from the field

Speakers:

Francesco Zambon – Whistleblower

Nello Trocchia – Domani journalist

Sara Manisera – Freelance journalist

Antonio Tricarico – Public and corporate finance campaigner ReCommon

Cecilia Anesi – Editor and co-founder IrpiMedia

Antonella Napoli – Freelance journalist

Moderator: Martina Turola – Head of Communication The Good Lobby Italia

16:30 – 17:00 Coffee break

17:00 – 18: 30 Roundtable: Countering SLAPPs: What can Italian civil society do to strengthen the transnational network?

Speakers:

Vittorio di Trapani – FNSI president

Linda Ravo – Liberties – Liberties lawyer and activist

Virginia Ripa di Meana – lawyer

Giulio Vasaturo – Articolo 21 lawyer

Marino Bisso – Rete No Bavaglio journalist

Moderator: Graziella Di Mambro – Articolo 21 journalist

18:30 – 18:45 Closing remarks: Roberta Taveri – Media Freedom Senior Programme Officer ARTICLE 19 Europe

Address: Industrie Fluviali – Via del Porto Fluviale, 35, Rome, Italy
Date: October 16, 2023 from 14:30 to 19:00

Participation to the event is free, but registration is required by October 14, 2023 via this link . The event will be live streamed via OBCT YouTube channel .

Through the initiative of Articolo 21 , the meeting is approved as part of the professional training courses directed to Italian journalists. For the recognition of credits, members of the Ordine dei Giornalisti must register on the dedicated platform .

This first CASE Italia event is co-organised by Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa and ARTICLE 19 Europe in the framework of the Media Freedom Rapid Response – MFRR project with the support of the Coalition Against SLAPPs in Europe – CASE.

CASE Italia

CASE Italia is an informal working group established in 2020, whose work is coordinated by Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa. The working group supports CASE in countering SLAPPs in Europe. In support of journalists, activists, whistleblowers, human rights defenders and others targeted by SLAPPs, our efforts are directed at exposing legal harassment and intimidation, and protecting the rights of those who speak out on matters of public interest. CASE Italia members are: Amnesty International Italia, ARTICLE 19 Europe, Articolo 21, Certi Diritti, Environmental Paper Network, Greenpeace Italia, Meglio Legale, OBC Transeuropa, The Good Lobby Italia, Transparency International Italia.

Contacts:

resourcecentre@balcanicaucaso.org

kelner@balcanicaucaso.org

Greece: Decisive action needed to protect journalists and salvage…

Murdered, surveilled and sued: decisive action needed to protect journalists and salvage press freedom in Greece

Greek journalism is under sustained threat from the impact of the surveillance scandal “Predatorgate”, the unresolved killing of a reporter, abusive legal action and economic and political pressures. Following a mission to Athens, eight international organisations today call on the Government and Prime Minister to show political courage and urgently take specific measures aimed at improving the climate for independent journalism and salvaging press freedom.

Although Europe has been shaken by the revelations about the targeting of Greek media professionals with spyware and the 2021 killing of veteran crime reporter Giorgos Karaivaz, the domestic authorities – though verbally supportive of the European Union’s action in favour of press freedom – have done little to remedy the problems. Following the recent parliamentary elections and nomination of the new Government, our organisations conducted a joint mission to Athens to analyse the underlying reasons for the recent erosion of media freedom and examine the possible opportunities for improvement. Between 25 and 27 September 2023, they met a variety of media with the broadest possible range of editorial lines, officials of several state bodies, and civil society stakeholders.

The delegation was composed of the six members of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR): ARTICLE 19 Europe, the European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF), the European Federation of Journalists (EFJ), Free Press Unlimited (FPU), the International Press Institute (IPI) and the Osservatorio Balcani e Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT) – joined by the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) and Reporters Without Borders (RSF).

The mission identifies four significant systemic challenges for press freedom in Greece, which when combined contribute to distrust between the journalists and the Government and a toxic and dangerous environment for critical and independent reporting: arbitrary surveillance, threats to the safety of journalists, abusive lawsuits as well as economic and political pressures. Taking specific measures proposed by the delegation and complying with European standards will allow the Government of Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis to make a clear demonstration of political commitment to improve press freedom in Greece and renew the trust of the media community.

Provide guarantees against and punish arbitrary surveillance

Between 2020 and 2022, a number of journalists and media owners were subjected to wiretapping by the National Intelligence Service (EYP), which is controlled by the Office of the Prime Minister, under the pretext of protecting national security. Some also faced illegal surveillance with the powerful Predator spyware. Although numerous complaints were filed, justice has not yet been served for these serious cases of violation of individual privacy and of confidentiality of journalistic sources, a cornerstone of press freedom. Despite our alerts and specific proposals, the legislation regulating surveillance has undergone only cosmetic changes or changes designed to let the government off the hook. In line with the European Parliament’s recommendations and the extensive case law of the European Court of Human Rights, we ask:

The Government and Parliament to urgently adopt amendments to the legislation, which will oblige competent prosecutors to provide a justification for any surveillance undertaken in the interest of national security that allows for proper scrutiny of its legality and proportionality, set up independent and effective judicial oversight o, allow for effective access to information by persons targeted with surveillance by removing the arbitrary three-year time limit and reinstating the sole responsibility of the Hellenic Authority for Communication Security and Privacy (ADAE), and establish specific safeguards for journalists;
The Government to quickly propose and the Greek President to adopt the decree – as stipulated in the law – regulating the use of spyware by the state, while applying the above-mentioned safeguards;
The Greek justice system to bring justice for the illegitimate and illegal spying on media professionals in a swift, independent and transparent manner, using the evidence provided by the journalists’ investigations and treating the specific cases as a felony (rather than as a misdemeanor which expires after five years).
The Government and Parliament to refrain from taking any steps that weaken the functional independence of the ADAE and ensure the body is free to carry out its mandate to investigate wiretapping without political pressures

Take enforceable action against impunity for crimes against journalists

With the unsolved murder of crime reporter Giorgios Karaivaz as the gravest example, this mission finds that attacking a journalist in Greece continues to go unpunished in virtually all cases. We welcome the arrest in April 2023 of two suspected assassins in connection with the murder of Karaivaz, however, the case remains in a state of impunity as middlemen and masterminds have not been apprehended and no convictions have been secured. This delay in securing justice sends a worrying signal that impunity for the murder of journalists is tolerated. Other investigations of serious physical attacks on journalists have followed a similar course, such as the 2010 murder of Sokratis Giolias and the eleven physical attacks on media houses and journalists’ homes since 2019. Two further recent acts of violence and hostility against journalists Giorgos Papachristos (Ta Nea) and Kostas Vaxevanis (Documento), underline the need for urgent action.

After meetings with various Government officials, we conclude that no concrete measures have been taken to expedite justice. Complete data on attacks against journalists is not publicly available and no specific protocol for investigations of crimes against journalists appears to be in place. The establishment of the Task Force for the protection of journalists is a step in the right direction, but it requires sufficient resources, a timeline and the political backing required to be effective. Information on why investigations of these cases are not leading to convictions remains with individual prosecutors, and oversight authorities have not prioritised this issue.

In line with the case law of the European Court of Human Rights and the European Commission’s Recommendation on the Safety of Journalists, we ask:

The Public Prosecutor to dedicate additional resources to and actively collaborate with international bodies such as Europol in the case of the murder of Giorgios Karaivaz;
The Parliament and Government, especially the Ministry of Civil Protection and Justice, to prioritise and commit to prompt, effective and independent investigations of crimes against journalists by dedicating additional resources and staff to these cases, recognising their special nature and impact on the public sphere;
The Prosecutor of the Supreme Court to commission an independent evaluation of all unresolved cases of attacks against journalists, including cases involving police violence, the conclusions of which should be publicised;
The newly established spokesperson of the Prosecutor of the Supreme Court to take a leading role in the regular dissemination of information about investigations to restore faith in the commitment to justice and ensure greater transparency about ongoing investigations, in particular towards the victims and their families;
The Task Force to prioritise the establishment of a monitoring platform in which all attacks, including digital attacks and threats, are recorded and followed.

Abusive litigation, including Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs)

When journalists in Greece report critically on powerful business and political interests, the possibility of facing abusive or frivolous legal action looms over them. During the mission, we heard from several journalists who face Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs) and other abusive litigation from politicians and business owners who accuse reporters of defamation or the infraction of other laws including GDPR for their reporting on political affairs, environmental crimes, corruption and other matters in the public interest.

This weaponised abuse of the civil and criminal legal system serves not to seek proportionate legal redress but rather to silence critical voices, tying up financial and human resources as reporters and newsrooms must spend an inordinate amount of time in court to defend against baseless accusations. Especially for smaller outlets and freelance journalists, SLAPPs pose an existential threat as often the compensation demanded greatly exceeds their resources, which further exacerbates their intended chilling effect beyond the targeted journalist.

We ask:

The Government, Parliament and judicial bodies to take effective, appropriate and proportionate measures to address manifestly unfounded or abusive court proceedings against public participation, in line with the European Commission’s April 2022 Recommendation on protecting journalists and human rights defenders who engage in public participation from manifestly unfounded or abusive court proceedings;
The Government to provide transparency on the steps taken by publishing its forthcoming report to the European Commission on the implementation of the April 2022 Recommendation;
The Government and Parliament to ensure that amendments to the rules applicable to criminal defamation do not have an inadvertent negative impact on press freedom and ensure adequate time for public debate and consultation of Greek and international stakeholders to provide their input on pertinent legislative changes.

Media independence and pluralism

Undercutting these issues, the Greek media ecosystem continues to suffer from multiple long-term and systemic challenges that negatively affect the landscape for independent journalism and press freedom. Many of these issues can be traced to the country’s prolonged financial and economic crisis, which severely weakened the media market and deepened the toxic entanglement of media with vested political and business interests. While the media market remains densely populated, political polarisation is deeply ingrained and media pluralism is weak. Ownership of major print and television channels by familial dynasties and shipping magnates, many of whom have political connections and cross-ownership interests in industries dependent on state contracts, exposes these media to potential conflicts of interest and weakens their editorial independence. As a result, although direct acts of censorship are rare, self-censorship is rife within the journalistic profession and certain topics are widely understood to be off-limits. The economic precariousness of journalists in Greece caused by low wages and weak industry protections leaves media professionals more vulnerable to editorial pressures. Economic weaknesses in the media market likewise expose Greek media to capture by vested interests.

While several regulatory and legal reforms have been implemented by the Government in the last few years to try and address these issues, so far their impact remains unclear. Positive changes include the new Registry for Print Media (MET) and Registry for Electronic Press (MHT), which aim to improve the transparency of media ownership, including beneficial ownership. Under a new system, media not registered in these bodies are not eligible to benefit from state advertising. The Ethics Committee and the Directorate for Media Oversight likewise represent a new approach, which will hopefully have a positive impact on improving media ethics. Greater transparency over the allocation of state funding to media is also essential. However, the direct oversight of the Hellenic Broadcasting Corporation (ERT) and the Athens-Macedonian News Agency by the office of the Prime Minister continue to pose questions over the independence of both public media bodies, despite ostensible safeguards. The independence and competence of the National Council for Radio and Television (NCRTV) regulator remains in doubt.

While the country benefits from a small but highly professional group of independent and investigative media publishing vital public interest journalism, these titles remain isolated on the fringes of the media landscape and lack systemic support. The combination of these many challenges means Greek journalism faces a crisis of credibility, being one of the EU countries with the lowest level of trust in media by citizens. The challenges of pluralism and media independence are among the most complex to address and any positive developments in Greece will require action and responsibility from journalists and media, backed by unions, supported by strong political will from the Government.

To begin this process the Government should:

Take concrete steps to better regulate the fair and non-discriminatory allocation of state advertising to media in a transparent manner and based on strict and publicly available criteria;
Enforce the full implementation of the transparency of media ownership in Greece in an accessible and regularly updated ownership registry for all forms of media, including beneficial ownership;
In consultation with media stakeholders, develop reforms aimed at safeguarding independent journalism in line with provisions outlined in the proposed European Media Freedom Act (EMFA).

The media community should:

Support the pending establishment of an independent self-regulatory Media Council to enhance adherence to journalistic ethics, ensuring that the composition of this body is pluralistic and representative;
In media owned by wealthy and politically connected commercial interests, particularly in legacy broadcast and print media, journalists and editors should establish strict internal safeguards to prevent all forms of interference of owners and other politics and business interests, while also protecting editorial independence and journalistic freedoms and discouraging self-censorship.

Journalist unions and associations should:

Enhance cooperation to fight for the rights and freedoms of journalists, as well as collective agreements to improve working conditions and labour rights of all media workers;
Continue to support and contribute to the work of the government Task Force, while also pushing the body to be more ambitious in its approach to strengthening the safety of journalists and improving the broader situation for media freedom.

—————–

A detailed report with expanded recommendations will be published in the upcoming weeks, in both Greek and English, and will be shared with domestic stakeholders and European institutions.

Turkey: Annual international press freedom mission to Ankara, Diyarbakır…

Turkey: Annual international press freedom mission to Ankara, Diyarbakır and Istanbul

Between 2 and 5 October 2023, five international media freedom organisations will conduct an annual joint press freedom mission to Ankara, Diyarbakır and Istanbul. The mission will focus on the state of media freedom, the challenges experienced by journalists, media workers and the media landscape in general in the aftermath of devastating earthquakes, and the parliamentary and presidential elections this year.

The mission will start with a series of meetings with representatives of different political parties, the media regulator RTÜK, the Constitutional Court, journalism and media associations, and international mission representatives. As part of the mission, the delegation will also monitor the first hearing of Tele1 TV director Merdan Yanardağ in Istanbul who has been in prison since 27 June. On the last day of the mission, simultaneous press conferences will be held in Istanbul and Diyarbakır.

The mission will be led by the International Press Institute (IPI) as part of its #FreeTurkeyJournalists campaign and the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR), and will be joined by the European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF), Osservatorio Balcani e Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT), as well as the Reporters Without Borders (RSF) and the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ).

During the visit, the delegation will meet with leading media professionals, political officials, state representatives, international diplomatic missions, and other relevant stakeholders in the country. As part of the annual press freedom mission, the delegation confirms the long-standing commitment of the participating organisations to improving press freedom in the country. The delegation will examine the problems experienced by journalists and media workers in the aftermath of the devastating earthquakes in February 2023, as well as during the election period in the spring, threats to the safety of journalists and media pluralism, and legal safeguards.

On 5 October, the delegation will hold simultaneous press conferences in Diyarbakır and Istanbul to present initial observations and recommendations. A detailed mission report will be published by the end of the year.

This mission was coordinated as part of IPI’s #FreeTurkeyJournalists campaign and in cooperation with Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) partners. The 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.

France: IPI condemns arrest of investigative journalist Ariane Lavrilleux

Journalist for Disclose detained for alleged violation of national security secrets.

The International Press Institute (IPI) today condemns the arrest and interrogation of French journalist Ariane Lavrilleux and demands her immediate release from custody. IPI further calls on French law enforcement authorities to ensure full respect for international media freedom standards on source protection.

Lavrilleux, a journalist with French non-profit investigative platform Disclose was taken into custody on Tuesday 19 September after a dawn raid on her home by officers from the domestic intelligence agency, the DGSI. Her apartment was searched and her computer was confiscated, in the presence of a judge, according to media reports.

The journalist was taken to the DGSI headquarters in Marseille and questioned for several hours in the presence of her lawyer as part of an investigation into the publication of highly confidential documents in the investigative series, the “Egypt Papers”. She remained in custody overnight and into Wednesday 20 September.

In November 2021, Lavrilleux had co-authored and published the Egypt Papers, an investigative series based on hundreds of leaked documents which revealed how information gathered by French counter-intelligence bodies was abused by the Egyptian military to carry out a campaign of bombings and arbitrary killings of alleged smugglers and innocent civilians.

At the time, Disclose had issued a statement justifying its decision to publish the confidential information, citing the evidence of the French state’s potential complicity in serious human rights abuses committed by a foreign regime, and the public’s right to know about such matters of public interest.

In July 2022, prosecutors in Paris opened an investigation that was later handed over to the DGSI. They alleged the publication had compromised national defence secrets and revealed information that could lead to the identification of a protected agent. It is unclear whether any intelligence official was compromised.

“IPI is highly alarmed by the continued detention and interrogation of Ariane Lavrilleux and urges the General Directorate for Internal Security to proceed with extreme caution and full respect for French law and international legal standards regarding journalistic source protection”, IPI Executive Director Frane Maroevic said. “Any charges against Lavrilleux must be dropped immediately and all pressure on Disclose and its journalists related to their investigative work must cease.

“The arrest of an investigative journalist is extremely serious, as it has major ramifications for press freedom”, he added. “Journalists’ right to protect their sources is enshrined in national and international law as it essential for journalists to expose wrongdoing and hold power to account. The public interest defense of revealing the information published in Disclose’s investigative reporting on the Egyptian military is clear. IPI and our global network stand behind Lavrilleux and her colleagues at Disclose and will continue to monitor the situation closely.”

The arrest of Lavrilleux is believed to be the first time since 2007 that the home of a French journalist had been searched by police.

In a statement released immediately after the arrest, Disclose said: “The aim of this latest episode of unacceptable intimidation of Disclose journalists is clear: to identify our sources that revealed the Sirli military operation in Egypt. In November 2021, Disclose revealed an alleged campaign of arbitrary executions orchestrated by the Egyptian dictatorship of President Abdel Fatah al-Sisi, with the complicity of the French state, based on several hundred documents marked ‘defence – confidential”.

Maroevic added that IPI had been in contact with staff at Disclose after the arrest and has offered to help provide legal support through the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR), a European consortium which offers legal aid. He noted that the arrest was the latest in a number of worrying incidents involving the interrogation of journalists from Disclose in relation to their reporting on the Egyptian government, and its sources for those stories.

This statement was coordinated 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.

Surveillance: after Pegasus and Predator, the EU is (slowly)…

While the European Parliament’s Commission enquires on the various states where surveillance technologies have been commercialised despite the bans, the emphasis remains on civil society and digital security.

Interview with Lorenzo Bagnoli of IrpiMedia by Paola Rosà

The new technological scenarios entail unprecedented challenges, like the Pegasus case with dozens of journalists, activists, and human rights defenders subjected to surveillance and wiretaps. The EU has responded with the Commission of Inquiry of the European Parliament on the amendments and the regulation on the export of civil and military dual-use technologies. The European Data Protection Authority (EDPS) itself was unequivocal in its analysis published on 15 February 2022: it is not just about the right to privacy and the violation of privacy – fundamental freedoms as well as democracy and the rule of law are also at stake. For this reason, the Authority had recalled, “the entire system of safeguarding our fundamental rights and freedoms must be rethought, because they are endangered by these instruments”. The measures suggested by the EDPS include some changes to the export regulation, so as to “condition the export of technologies suitable for digital surveillance on respect for fundamental rights and privacy”.

Now that several months have passed since those concerned declarations, now that the regulations and reports have been published, many doubts remain about the actual guarantees and protections, while the intra-European surveillance market appears to thrive, which an investigation by IrpiMedia defines “a black hole”.

We talk about it with Lorenzo Bagnoli, senior reporter and editor at IrpiMedia.
What is the focus of your research?

The global surveillance industry. One of our objectives is to understand how the relationship between countries producing and importing surveillance technologies works and to analyse money flows, to look for those who finances this world.

IrpiMedia is an independent, non-profit transnational investigative journalism outlet that covers organised crime, corruption, environment, migration, and justice. How did surveillance enter into the picture?

It has always been a topic of interest, for me even as a freelancer before the foundation of IrpiMedia. It is a pivotal theme on which in the past the collaborative approach that distinguishes our work has been lacking. Our #Sorveglianze series was born from the collaboration with Privacy International, a British organisation that deals with advocacy on the topic, with which we try to identify the most interesting threads.

When looking for a definition of “surveillance system”, what should we think about?

The mass surveillance system is a political and technological infrastructure that a state sets up with the ideal aim of building a safer society through the use of technological tools. In fact, the technological tools used are so invasive that in some cases they damage digital rights, especially among the poorest segments of the population. Those who produce technologies that power surveillance systems have the power to influence the decisions of a nation state.

The alarm was also raised at the European Union level, especially for some countries such as Hungary, Poland, and Cyprus.

We must thank the European Parliament and the Commission of Inquiry established in March 2022. Compared to the past, there are parliamentary groups that are more aware of how mass surveillance can arbitrarily target minorities and oppositions. However, I don’t think there is consensus in European fora to consider the spread of these technologies “alarming”. The presence of Cyprus among the problem countries according to the monitoring of the PEGA Committee is not too surprising, for historical and geographical reasons.

For this reason, at a certain point IrpiMedia also dealt with Cyprus.

Our interest in Cyprus was only due to the sale of Predator and the role the country played as a broker for Israeli technology in Greece. In general, in terms of public attention, since 2019 the spotlight has certainly been on Cyprus after the founder of Intellexa himself – the company involved in the scandal in Greece – had shown in an interview one of his own vans sold by a company of the group full of surveillance technologies.

Business deals passing through Cyprus bypassing the bans have since emerged.

Since at least 2015, around the time of the HackingTeam leak, it has been clear that there is a problem in the functioning of the licensing system for surveillance technologies such as spyware. In the case of Cyprus and the Predator case, the problem is the use of specific technology and the manufacturer NSO. NSO must comply with the export authorisation granted by the Defense Exports Control Agency (DECA) of the Israeli Ministry of Defense, but if the technology is exported by a company owned by NSO but registered in a country like Cyprus then it can create a hole in the control network. Cyprus can apply looser control to exports and, since exports between EU countries are less strictly regulated, at that point the intra-European resale system is the problem. Furthermore, Cyprus is a border country, which manages to use its position to act as a bridge between the EU and the Eastern Mediterranean.

Last January, the Commission of Inquiry produced a recommendation in which it condemns any export of these technologies to countries where human rights are violated and, noting that some abuses have been committed by Cyprus, calls on the government to provide a precise list of all export permits, revoking inappropriate ones, and to collaborate with Europol on alleged cases of spyware use against journalists, lawyers, and members of civil society. But Cyprus is not an isolated case, and the Commission reiterates that in other member states too there is “the presence of a thriving spyware industry which takes advantage of the good reputation, the single market and freedom of movement in the EU, allowing states such as Cyprus and Bulgaria to become clearinghouses for spyware to non-democratic regimes around the world”. The reality is therefore known. Are the solutions only legal or can there be other tools?

It is necessary to put in place a strategy to strengthen the cybersecurity of digital devices, providing both economic support to device manufacturing companies and including new obligations, such as extending security updates to older devices that would otherwise remain vulnerable.

Furthermore, a simplification of access to device analysis could be envisaged, in order to collect telemetry information useful for verifying infections. Until now this activity has been carried out almost exclusively by civil society organisations, let’s think about tools like the one developed by Amnesty Tech , which are very useful because they also allow those without high IT knowledge to carry out a preliminary analysis of a device and understand if there is any trace of infection.

Regulation, however, remains an important point: even just thinking about creating a public list of companies that sell surveillance technologies could be a step forward. At this moment journalists and associations are trying to put together a puzzle whose dimensions and number of pieces are unknown: we are walking in the dark, waiting to discover the name of yet another new company.

Is there something that public opinion could do at European level?

If we think about the behaviour of some member countries during the PEGA Commission’s investigation into the use of spyware such as Pegasus, we realise how some did not want to cooperate and respond to the Commission’s requests. In some cases they even almost sabotaged the works, like Spain with the case linked to Catalonia or Greece. Public opinion could put pressure to ensure that, in the next European elections in 2024, MEPs are much more aware of the risks of these technologies and have a much more incisive approach, also starting from the results of the report and recommendations of the PEGA Commission. Furthermore, public opinion could also ask for greater transparency from their governments regarding data on exports of these technologies: the European Commission collects data on exports but only publishes aggregate data without detailing the activities of each individual member state. States, in turn, barricade themselves behind this fiction of transparency to deny access to any data.

Greece: Refugee reporting in times of surveillance

It could be the plot of a psychological thriller movie. It’s the true story of a young investigative journalist, Stavros Malichudis, who unintentionally became one of the protagonists of the Greek Watergate. His reports, awarded with many international prizes, told the stories of refugees in Greece.

By Mary Dosopoulos

Originally published by OBCT . Available also in ITA.

There is a new generation of Greek journalists, whose voice stands for a healthy form of active citizenship and human rights-oriented political participation. For them, reporting on topics that have been considered controversial or too ‘sensitive’ for the Greek state, such as refugees or corruption, has been quite challenging. Stavros Malichudis, a reporter covering migration, is one of the journalists who had reportedly been targeted with spyware for investigating the living conditions of a young Syrian boy detained on a Greek island. One year after a hearing organized by the European Parliament’s investigative committee and despite international pressure to proceed with investigations, little has been done at a national level.

Refugee reporting: a brief chronicle of a scandal

It could have been the scenario of a psychological thriller movie. It is an ordinary Saturday, in November 2021. A young journalist, Stavros Malichudis, is scrolling through his Facebook feed, when an interesting title catches his eye: ‘Citizens under surveillance by the National Intelligence Services’. The article, published by a leftist cooperative media outlet called EFSYN (Efimerida ton Syntakton, lit. ‘Newspaper of the Editors’) describes a dystopic landscape for freedom of expression in Greece, claiming that EYP (the Hellenic Intelligence Service) has been monitoring the activity of people engaged into two controversial topics: Refugees and Pandemic denial. Alluding to the ‘Stone Years’, when the government would hold files on citizens based on their ‘ideological status’, the writer reveals, among others, how the secret services had been following every single step of a reporter researching the story of a young refugee boy on a Greek island. It doesn’t take long for Stavros to understand that the article is about him.

This is how journalist Stavros Malichudis unintentionally became one of the protagonists of the Greek Watergate, a wiretapping scandal referring to the prolonged monitoring of the mobile phones of politicians and investigative reporters. While the spying scandal was unfolding, Malichudis was nominated together with Iliana Papangeli for a major European journalism award for their project documenting the stories of unaccompanied minors in Moria’s refugee camp. In 2022, they won the IJ4EU Impact Award . In the same year, the annual World Press Freedom Index classified Greece as the lowest-ranked EU member for press freedom.

The Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) stood since the beginning in solidarity with Malichudis and the journalistic team at Solomon and issued a statement urging the European Commission and European Parliament to seek immediate responses from the Greek government. In light of these serious developments, in September, 8, 2022, the PEGA committee of the European Parliament organized a hearing on the ‘Use of spyware in Greece’, where Malichudis attended as one of the victims of wire-tapping, together with Thanasis Koukakis, journalist targeted with Predator and Eliza Triantafillou, investigative journalist with the Inside story. One month later, the MFRR partner organisations would publicly support ‘the calls for the testing of mobile devices belonging to journalists in Greece who suspect they may have been targets of intrusive spyware or other advanced surveillance’.

Despite the outcry by foreign media outlets, as well as local left-leaning platforms, the dominant media in Greece kept a distance from the scandal, focusing mainly on the cases of politicians under surveillance and often illustrating the story as a complex game of political rivalry. There were also cases of popular media outlets documenting the story, yet highlighting fragmented aspects of it, creating thus, a different impression. The title of an article published in capital.gr in November, 4, 2022, is indicative of this tendency: ‘PEGA Commission: no proof of spyware use was found, but the complaints should be investigated in detail’.

The dominant tv channels of the country were certainly not interested in hearing what the affected reporters had to say, not to mention what their research findings were, despite them gaining international appraisal and recognition. ‘Even until today, I have never been invited to the news to talk about my work’, said Malichudis, interviewed for the OBCT in March 2023. ‘I have talked to the national radio stations of other countries, but not in my own. In Greece, the political reportage has gone extinct’.

One year later: Slow progress, low hope

After more than a year of vigorous investigations, in May, 8, 2023, PEGA adopted its final report and recommendation, introducing an EU-wide regulatory framework and a condition-based moratorium for the use of spyware. One month later, in June, 14, 2023, the Committee published a press release, calling for the conduction of full and credible investigations on the topic and also, for the adoption of institutional and legal safeguards to prevent abuse. The communique mentioned that ‘spyware should only be allowed in exceptional cases and for limited time’, while it also involved targeted recommendations to Greece and Cyprus. MEPs stressed that the illicit surveillance has put ‘democracy itself at stake’ and that ‘when used wrongly by governments, spyware is a huge risk to the rule of law and fundamental rights’. To help uncover and address such phenomena, Parliament proposed the creation of an EU Tech Lab, an independent research institute that would be mandated to investigate surveillance and provide technological support.

The news of these EU-related initiatives barely reached the Greek audience, as they were overshadowed by the deadly shipwreck of a boat carrying refugees that took place in the early hours of the first day, near Pylos; one of the worst accidents in its kind ever recorded in the Mediterranean sea. This dramatic incident triggered a wave of critical questions coming from independent local media regarding the government’s management of the tragedy and its stance towards refugees, overall. The shipwreck would mark the beginning of a turbulent summer for Greece. In the past two months, the country has been tormented by wildfires and deadly floodings; in this context, the focus of national media has been on extreme weather phenomena and alleviation measures for the struggling population. Once again, the government’s response has been heavily criticized by a small part of the media, who have not attributed this catastrophe primarily on climate change, but rather on lack of preparedness, disorganization and mismanagement. These opinions have been circulated mainly on the social media.

Personal implications for reporters and trauma

Looking at the wider picture, PEGA-led developments are certainly positive; at the same time, however, recommendations are vague and leave an open door for ‘exceptional cases’, meaning that governments will still be able to rely on loopholes to justify surveillance of citizens. It could be argued that the Committee has missed the opportunity to voice a strong message against practices that undermine media freedom in its member states, downsizing at the same time, the impact that such practices can have on reporters’ well-being, social circle and career.

Refugee reporting is a controversial issue in Greece. While investigative reporters’ mission is to document and shed light on the turbulences experienced by migrants, legal or not, research findings are limited when it comes to understanding and assessing the implications that this procedure as a whole has on reporters’ wellbeing, starting with the process per se of on-the-ground critical covering on refugee trauma to the implications of getting spied upon. Malichudis shares the impact that the surveillance scandal had on him both as a person and as a professional: “In the beginning, I would be scared to even touch my phone. My main fear was unwillingly putting friends or colleagues on the spotlight. I didn’t know why I had become a target, what these people wanted from me and what their intentions were; this made me feel unsafe and often suspicious. With time, I managed to distance myself from this situation. I understood that it wasn’t personal”. Becoming conscious of how vulnerable one can be to surveillance – or even physical attacks (as in the recent case of Kostas Vaxevanis) – might also have practical implications for one’s daily working routine: Adjusting one’s working space/offices to become less visible and less approachable or learning to work in smaller and more flexible teams are some of the ‘remedies’ that Malichudis and his team have resorted to.

Reporters in Greece, especially the young ones, continue being underpaid and relying on short-term contracts; furthermore, they are frequently reminded that there are some topics that simply should not be researched and some sectors that are meant to be untouched, such as the banking or the shipping sector in Greece. The fact that the biggest media outlets in the country are donor-dependent implies that one should not investigate anything exposing the donor and jeopardizing their interests. In this framework, there is a significant part of independent investigative journalists from Greece, in their majority young, who have chosen to report for foreign media only, driven both by financial reasons, but also by the fact that they enjoy more freedom. In an article written for the New York Times, Lauren Markham and Lydia Emmanouilidou share that ‘any journalist who covers refugee arrivals to the Aegean Islands or the Evros land border with Turkey risks arrest’.

Nevertheless, there is light at the end of the tunnel. Recent survey findings conducted in Greece speak of a gradual shift in public opinion regarding the credibility of information served en masse by the popular local media: For instance, according to the 2023 Digital News Report of the Reuters Institute, recently published in Kathimerini, there is growing mistrust among Greeks towards the ‘social media of well-established news platforms’ and the so-called ‘popular’ or ‘dominant’ news. Malichudis believes that the spyware scandal has helped restore the negative public image of journalists, by debunking the narrative of journalists as pawns of each ruling party. ‘The Greek audience is becoming aware’, says Malichudis. ‘Due to the scandal and all the discussions that it triggered, they are starting to understand that some journalists are, in fact, OK. This is why they are looking for alternative forms of media to access more reliable information. I believe that eventually, people will save Greek journalism’.

This article 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.