Allgemein

EU Enlargement Package: Assessments must now translate into meaningful…

EU Enlargement Package: Assessments must now translate into meaningful media freedom action

The Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) today welcomes the publication of the 2025 EU Enlargement Package and highlights key media freedom developments and concerns that should shape negotiations with candidate countries moving forward.

13.11.2025

Our organisations welcome the sharpening of criticism of certain countries engaging in egregious media freedom violations by the Commission in this year’s report, particularly Serbia and Georgia, and stress that assessments for all countries must now translate into effective progress on media freedom, media pluralism and freedom of expression.

 

The Enlargement Package recognises freedom of expression, media freedom, and pluralism as key pillars of a democratic society in the accession process. Although some improvements have been noted, the media sector in most candidate countries remains marked by persistent and systemic challenges, including political interference, lack of regulatory independence, and limited pluralism, as well as threats to the safety of journalists.

 

The report emphasises that the European Commission insists on the highest quality of reforms, especially regarding the rule of law, democratic institutions, and fundamental freedoms. However, some crucial media freedom issues deserve more attention in this report, which we highlight here.

 

The MFRR, which monitors national media landscapes and advocates for free media in all EU Candidate Countries as part of its mandate, seeks to spotlight the main concerns we want to be tackled in the enlargement process, as well welcome positive steps forward. 

 

Backsliding on media freedom

Georgia: The report accurately highlights severe backsliding, leading Georgia to decline to an early stage of preparation in the area of freedom of expression. This is the second consecutive year of backsliding, illustrating an escalating press freedom crisis driven by the ruling Georgian Dream party.  Since the protests were sparked by the government’s decision in November 2024 that Georgia would halt its EU membership negotiations until the end of 2028, the government’s crackdown on media and civil society intensified. Since the start of the protests in November, the MFRR’s Mapping Media Freedom (MapMF) platform documented 175 attacks affecting 288 media workers with the police and security forces as well as government officials being the major source of the attacks. Since MFRR started active monitoring of Georgia, in December 2023, MapMF has documented a total of 262 media freedom violations in the country affecting 433 media workers, which is the highest number of alerts recorded during the same period among EU candidate countries. 

 

Each day, Georgia moves closer to becoming a fully consolidated authoritarian regime, as the ruling Georgian Dream party intensifies its efforts to erode democracy and stifle dissent. Journalists have been viciously beaten, verbally assaulted, threatened, and detained. Their equipment has been confiscated and destroyed, and their work repeatedly obstructed. At the same time, government smear campaigns to discredit independent journalism have continued unabated. The Georgian Dream is adopting repressive legislation at an alarming rate, making it nearly impossible for independent media and civil society organisations to operate. As the report outlines, new legislation, including amendments to the Law on broadcasting, the Foreign Agents Registration Act and the legislative package on family values and protection of minors, all negatively affect the right to freedom of expression and the ability of the media to operate freely. Additionally, the Georgian Dream Parliament adopted amendments to the Law on Freedom of Speech and Expression, and the Organic Law on Common Courts. 

 

The country report on Georgia adequately assesses the capture of the Georgian Public Broadcaster (GPB), noting that it “lacks independence, has biased editorial policy and contributed to the promotion of anti-EU rhetoric.” MFRR repeatedly  raised concerns about the GBP, which has long been an instrument of the Georgian Dream government, and suppressed efforts by journalists who try to report free of political control, including firing several journalists. It further acknowledges the deterioration of journalists’ safety, including the use of arbitrary arrests, fines, and SLAPPs against journalists, and mentions the unjust imprisonment of Mzia Amaglobeli, founder and director of the online media outlet Batumelebi. The report brings into focus the severe crackdown on journalistic freedoms by the government, which make Georgia one of the key flashpoints for media freedom in Europe in need of urgent international attention. At this stage, the EU considers Georgia a “candidate country in name only” and urges authorities to reverse course. In the face of rising authoritarianism, Georgian media demonstrate exemplary resilience and refuse to be silenced. MFRR reiterates our call on the Georgian Dream to stop the crackdown on independent media and repeal repressive legislation. We also renew our call on the European Union and its member states to step up pressure on Georgia and stem the rapid descent into authoritarianism.

 

Serbia: The report is explicit in its assessment of backsliding on freedom of expression in Serbia, emphasising the current crisis and polarisation of society following the student-led anti-corruption protests initiated in November 2024. Attacks against free media continue to take place effectively unaddressed by authorities. Since November 2024, MapMF has documented 190 attacks affecting 341 media professionals, media outlets and journalists’ representatives. Of these, 82 journalists were targeted during demonstrations, with 51 media actors assaulted. The report also notes the smear campaigns and verbal attacks from government officials targeting journalists and media, denigrating critical journalists as enemies of the state. The latest example of these attacks is the orchestrated smear campaign against the Independent Journalists’ Association of Serbia (NUNS) from the newly established journalists’ association ANS and pro-government tabloids, who falsely accused NUNS of plotting violence during demonstrations by distributing protective equipment to journalists ahead of demonstrations.   

 

Amidst a perilous environment for independent reporting, the future of independent media outlets remains uncertain. A recent investigation by the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP) suggested efforts by President Vučić to “weaken” the editorial autonomy of the two remaining critical privateTV stations, N1 and Nova TV. These same broadcasters were labelled by Vučić as “doing pure terrorism”, and were removed from the SBB network as of 16 April 2025, retaining only their online platforms. Political interference is also contaminating newsrooms. The MapMF platform has documented several cases of journalists being dismissed or forced to resign in direct retaliation for defending ethical journalism and/or resisting censorship. Journalists at the public broadcaster, RTS, which was criticised for its unbalanced coverage of the protests, have not been spared pressure. 

 

While media freedom has been in a state of crisis for decades in Serbia, the current escalation of events over the past year represents one of the deepest downturns in press freedom  in the country’s recent history. The lack of independence of regulatory bodies is particularly concerning and it is demonstrated inter alia by the repeatedly obscure process of appointment of the members of the Commission for Electronic Media (REM). SLAPPs and other forms of intimidation continue to represent a threat for journalists in Serbia. MFRR organisations, which conducted a solidarity mission to Belgrade and Novi Sad earlier this year, have repeatedly called for a tougher stance by the EU in response to clear Serbian backsliding on media freedom and freedom of expression. While we welcome the long overdue hardening of language in the current report, we now call for the EU to exert maximum effort into ensuring sustained and concrete democratic reforms as part of Serbia’s accession process.

 

Türkiye: Türkiye remains at an early stage of preparation in freedom of expression, with further backsliding observed in the overall state of democracy and media freedom, according to the 2025 report. Judicial actions against journalists and media intensified through politically motivated prosecutions and arrests, often relying on vague legal definitions and selective application of the law. The implementation of criminal laws related to national security, counterterrorism and defamation continued to hinder freedom of expression. The reporting period saw a further increase in arrests and detentions of journalists, underscoring the disproportionate use of legal measures to intimidate and silence media. For instance, Furkan Karabay, a journalist whose social media posts were deemed “insulting the president” was arrested. The 2022 Disinformation Law and the new Cybersecurity Law have also introduced vague provisions enabling censorship and surveillance.

 

Media ownership in Türkiye already remains highly concentrated among pro-government business groups. Türkiye’s broadcast regulator RTÜK maintained issuing discriminatory administrative and monetary fines against independent and opposition media outlets, further undermining media pluralism. Nearly 100 million liras in fines were imposed, along with 25 days of broadcast bans — including two full blackouts — and a government-appointed trustee took control of a TV channel. The selective allocation of public advertising and control over print distribution also damaged financial sustainability of independent and minority media outlets. Independent media outlets receiving foreign funding were frequently subjected to hostile rhetoric and smear campaigns by pro-government media. Online freedom is likewise restricted, as authorities frequently block access to critical websites, news articles, and social media accounts, and impose temporary shutdowns or throttling of platforms during protests or crises.

 

As the overall trend remains deeply concerning, marked by political interference and instrumentalisation of the judiciary, the MFRR reiterates the urgent need for Türkiye to overhaul its restrictive legislation and broadcasting frameworks. Reflecting the report’s assessment, we further echo the call for the release of detained journalists and human rights defenders, and urge the authorities to safeguard independent reporting as a cornerstone of media freedom and pluralism in Türkiye.

 

No progress on media freedom

Bosnia and Herzegovina: While the report  indicates that Bosnia and Herzegovina shows ‘some level of preparation’ in the area of freedom of expression, an ongoing political crisis at the entity level and a series of restrictive legislative changes have severely stalled paths for any meaningful improvement. The EU correctly reports ‘no progress’ achieved during the reporting period in guaranteeing freedom of expression, media freedom, and the protection of journalists. According to MFRR monitoring, the first half of 2025 instead saw a rise in attacks compared to the same period the previous year of threats including verbal attacks often perpetrated by politicians, physical assault, and interference with journalists’ work.The sudden closure of Sarajevo-based AlJazeera Balkans in July 2025, due to the cited financial issues, after 14 years of broadcasting further undermines media pluralism in Bosnia and Herzegovina and across the region. The closure has left over 200 media professionals in Sarajevo, and other cities in the region without a job. 

 

The situation remains particularly challenging in Republika Srpska. In March 2025, the region’s National Assembly adopted a foreign-agent style law which targets independent media and civil society organisations that receive foreign funding, subjecting them to onerous reporting requirements under the risk of sanctions if they fail to comply with the new rules. In addition, criminal defamation, reintroduced into the Penal Code in 2023, forms part of a disturbing trend of expanding liability for dissenting opinions and creates a chilling effect, undermining previous progress as it was decriminalised more than 20 years ago. Our organisations consistently oppose criminal defamation laws, as they constitute a disproportionate interference with the right to freedom of expression and are incompatible with international human rights standards. While the continuing political standoff in Republika Srpska continues, progress on media freedom looks set to face sustained hurdles without considerable democratic reform.

 

Kosovo: The country has some level of preparation but made no progress in the past year. The MFRR believes that this evaluation is well justified, considering that the government passed a heavily criticised media law, titled Law on the Independent Media Commission (IMC). The Law was then annulled by the Constitutional Court demanding the prompt drafting of a new proposal. The boards of the public broadcaster and the media regulatory body remain dysfunctional due to a lack of quorum, as the parliament failed to elect new members. The public broadcaster faced turbulent times due to political interference, which culminated in the removal of six editors from its TV programs. This led the Ombudsperson to open an investigation into censorship. The situation further deteriorated in August when the staff of the public broadcaster received their salaries almost a month late – a situation that has been repeated in November.

 

Journalists continue to face difficulties in accessing information, as institutions remain largely closed to journalists and activists. The number of complaints filed with the Agency for Information and Data Protection over refusals of Freedom of Information (FOI) requests continues to rise on a yearly basis. Verbal and other forms of attacks and incidents also marked the year 2025, with government officials, including Prime Minister Albin Kurti, publicly attacking journalists and media outlets. Verbal and other forms of attacks and incidents also marked the year 2025, with government officials, including Prime Minister Albin Kurti, publicly attacking journalists and media outlets.

 

To improve the media situation, the MFRR urges the government and members of the ruling party Vetëvendosje to immediately stop their anti-journalist rhetoric. We further urge the incoming government to commit to preparing a comprehensive package of laws related to media freedom, ensuring that this package aligns with EU and Council of Europe standards and enjoys broad political support. We further call on the government to immediately release the funds owed to RTK so that salaries can be paid and the broadcaster can continue to operate, and for the Assembly of Kosovo to restore RTK’s legal governance structures and appoint the remaining board members to ensure the election of a permanent Director General without delay. Unless steps are taken to address converging crises, long term democratic media freedom reform in Kosovo risks heading into reverse.

 

Limited progress on media freedom

Albania: Although considered a frontrunner among candidate countries, when it comes to freedom of the media and freedom of expression, our organisations stress that Albania continues to suffer from numerous structural weaknesses and challenges to its still fragile media ecosystem. While the 2025 enlargement report assesses Albania as having some and a moderate level of preparation, the MFRR warns that recent legislative initiatives risk severely undermining recent tangible progress. In particular, draft amendments to the Penal Code on provisions related to defamation, insult and influencing judicial independence pose direct threats to media freedom and the fundamental right to freedom of expression. Our organisations have criticised these proposed changes and called for them to be amended. 

 

Further proposals by the parliamentary majority to significantly restrict journalists’ access to the Parliament of Albania, though not yet implemented, pose a threat to the public’s right to information. The non-execution of court decisions and the obstruction of journalistic activity at the Tirana premises of Focus Media Group also emerged as a key flashpoint for media freedom in 2025. Elsewhere, the country still faces serious challenges due to concentrated media ownership, strong ties of media owners to vested political and business interests, which undermines independence and public trust, as well as some instances involving the intimidation of journalists – all of which require sustained attention and action.

 

North Macedonia: The European Commission correctly observes a moderate level of preparation on freedom of expression in North Macedonia. The report accurately reflects the main challenges facing the media sector in the country, including the partial alignment of media legislation with European requirements, the need to strengthen the independence and capacity of the regulator (AAAMS), the ongoing reform of the public broadcaster (MRT), and the persistent risks to the safety of journalists (including physical attacks and online harassment). While the media environment in North Macedonia is generally stable, the difficult working and economic conditions faced by many journalists – especially in local and small media outlets struggling to remain viable – needs to be given more emphasis and considered as prerequisites for moving forward in the EU enlargement process. 

 

Of particular concern are also the lack of specific safeguards against abusive litigation (anti-SLAPP legislation) and the growing use of abusive lawsuits. Furthermore, the MFRR emphasises the need to undertake a comprehensive reform of the Media Law to address the evolving media landscape, particularly in the digital sphere. North Macedonia’s small and highly fragmented media market remains economically fragile, leaving media outlets exposed to political and financial pressures. State funding and advertising continue to reflect strong political influence over the media. Particularly concerning is the lack of transparency in the allocation of state budget funds for political advertising during election campaigns, a practice that distorts the market, increases media dependence on major political parties, and weakens editorial independence and media pluralism.

 

Some progress on media freedom

Ukraine: Overall, the media freedom situation in Ukraine remains positive, despite numerous and serious war-time pressures. Restrictions imposed within the scope of martial law regulations are “overall proportionate”, according to the Commission. While the most serious issues putting in danger the physical safety of journalists are caused by Russia’s war of aggression, the media also face a number of concerns created by domestic actors. Authorities typically react promptly to physical attacks, direct intimidation and harassment of journalists, by opening criminal cases to investigate the events. However, these criminal cases often fail to produce concrete results, and those responsible for the attacks are seldom identified and prosecuted.

 

Authorities must  ensure that restrictions imposed temporarily by martial law comply with key public rights and interests, such as access to information and media freedom. This is especially the case of Ukraine’s “United News” telethon: a government-funded project, the telethon pools Ukraine’s main TV channels into a common television broadcast, the content of which has been criticised domestically and abroad as unreliable and failing to meet objectivity standards. In its report, the Commission called upon Ukrainian authorities to reassess the format of the telethon “at latest by the time of the eventual suspension of martial law”. The independence of Ukraine’s national media regulator should be strengthened, and the transparency of media ownership increased, in line with the provisions of the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA). Efforts already made to implement the European anti-SLAPP directive are commendable, however these are only at a first stage of development. Overall, despite significant war-time pressures and challenges, the domestic situation for media freedom in Ukraine remains broadly positive, yet fragile.

 

Montenegro: Montenegro demonstrates moderate preparedness in freedom of expression, yet significant concerns persist regarding media independence and pluralism. The MFRR welcomes the overall positive trend noted by the Commission regarding Montenegro but notes a troubling increase in attacks against journalists and media outlets, with 17 recorded incidents affecting 25 individuals and organizations since January 2025, a sharp rise from six incidents in 2024. While physical assaults are rare, verbal abuse, often perpetrated by private individuals, including serious death threats, both online and offline, is particularly alarming. Furthermore, public officials and politicians have been primarily responsible for discrediting journalists’ work, underscoring a lack of understanding of the media’s democratic role. Additionally, the absence of a signed sectoral collective agreement contributes to poor working conditions and a lack of social dialogue. 

 

Public broadcasters, the Radio and Television of Montenegro and the Agency for Audiovisual Media Services (AMU) are particularly exposed to political pressure. The fact that AMU’s Council has been operating without its full composition since December 2024 due to the non-election of two members remains another serious issue. In parallel, ongoing court proceedings challenging the legality of the RTCG Director General’s appointment, and the recent conviction in first-instance proceedings against RTCG Council members for abuse of official position during the election, further raise concerns about transparency and adherence to legal procedures. However, at a time when national legislation requires further alignment with European media laws, the Ministry of Culture and Media’s newly formed working group to implement the European Media Freedom Act and the Digital Services Act into Montenegrin legislation is a positive step forward. Further action is needed to consolidate existing gains and push for further progress on media freedom and freedom of expression.

 

Good progress on media freedom

Moldova. Moldova is assessed as having between having some and a moderate level of preparation in freedom of expression and has made tangible progress, notably in adopting new legislation on access to information, implementing the law on the Media Subsidy Fund, amending the audiovisual media services code (AVMSC) and on advertising, as well as on the protection of journalists. Rules for selecting members of the public service broadcaster and the Audiovisual Council have been reviewed. While the overall climate for free and independent journalism remains relatively healthy compared to other EU candidate countries in the region, local divergences remain acute and all media face intense challenges to their financial viability.

 

In a landscape characterised by the division between pro-Western and pro-Russian politics, journalists face challenges in navigating polarised news environments and disinformation. The fragility of the media and public interest journalism due to the small advertising market is particularly concerning. While the media environment is overall healthy in most of the country, in Transnistria, a region occupied by pro-Russian military forces, no media are allowed to freely function. Issues also persist in the largely Russian-speaking regions of Gagauzia and Taraclia, where independent journalists report being regularly intimidated by local authorities and the population. The MFRR welcomes recent progress on freedom of expression and media freedom in Moldova and urges national authorities to continue on the trajectory as part of its EU aspirations.

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

Library

Media freedom, a prerequisite for EU enlargement

Media freedom, a prerequisite for EU enlargement

To advance in their European integration path, Western Balkan candidate countries must ensure media freedom and pluralism. For Montenegro and North Macedonia, this means moving beyond formal commitments and proving through concrete actions that democratic reforms are more than words on paper

28.10.2025 – Serena Epis

A couple of weeks ago, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen visited Western Balkan candidate countries ahead of the publication of the 2025 Enlargement Package and country reports, in which the Commission evaluates each state’s progress in aligning with EU norms and standards.

 

Among the different topics covered during her visit, von der Leyen emphasized that media freedom and pluralism  are key prerequisites for moving forward in the EU integration process.

 

On 20 October, partners from the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) and the Transnational Advocacy for Freedom of Information in the Balkans (ATLIB) project hosted a webinar to discuss recent developments in the region’s media sector, focusing on Montenegro and North Macedonia. Opening the event, Embassy Counselor Thomas Botzios from the Adriatic and Balkans Unit of the Italian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation underlined the importance of building transnational ties with Balkan partners to promote free and independent media and ensure that democratic standards are upheld by all candidate countries.

 

The situation of media freedom in the region remains complex and contradictory, noted Maja Sever, President of the European Federation of Journalists. While progress has been made — such as Montenegro’s new protocol to enhance journalist safety — serious concerns persist. Disinformation, foreign information manipulation, political pressure, economic fragility, the weakness of local media markets, and the under-regulation of online media all continue to pose major challenges.

 

Although these problems are common across the region, each country faces specific issues that require tailored responses adapted to local political contexts.

 

In Montenegro, structural weaknesses continue to undermine the independence and freedom of many media outlets, especially at the local level. Poor socio-economic conditions make journalism a fragile profession, increasingly exposed to smear campaigns — often online — and to abusive lawsuits designed to silence critical voices. This phenomenon, known as SLAPPs, is finally beginning to receive more attention in Montenegro’s media landscape.

 

Another pressing concern is the lack of independence of the public broadcaster, which remains entangled in clientelist relationships that severely limit its capacity to operate in the public interest, as highlighted by Olivera Nikolic from the Montenegro Media Institute.

 

In North Macedonia, the pace of reform remains slow. “We have made some progress, but the ultimate goals are still distant,” said Zoran Richliev from the Metamorphosis Foundation. The country’s media market is small and highly fragmented, making media outlets susceptible to external political and economic pressures. State financing and advertising continue to reflect strong political control over the media, fostering clientelism and corruption.

 

While there have been some positive steps — such as improving journalist safety and amending the criminal code to recognize attacks on journalists as attacks on public officials — alignment with European standards remains incomplete. One of the most troubling practices is state budget-paid political advertising during election campaigns, which distorts the media market and undermines editorial independence.

 

From a broader regional perspective, and in light of the EU accession process, there is still significant room for improvement. While candidate countries can look to EU member states for guidance in implementing European norms, the exchange should not be one-way. Member states, too, face threats to media freedom and challenges in applying newly adopted regulations. In this context, transnational advocacy represents a valuable tool.

 

Referring to the implementation of the European Media Freedom Act in Croatia, Maja Sever stressed the importance of joint efforts — sharing knowledge, strategies, and actions — to ensure proper enforcement of standards and full accountability from decision-makers.

 

Ultimately, as OBCT collaborator Massimo Moratti reminded participants, media freedom can only be guaranteed when the broader rule of law functions effectively, e.g. when an independent judiciary is able to enforce the law and hold political power accountable. Adopting new laws is not per se sufficient to enhance media freedom. Those laws need to be implemented as well.

 

Building transnational partnerships between the EU and the Western Balkans is essential to keep attention focused on media freedom at a time when democracy across Europe faces mounting threats and backsliding. While legislative progress should be welcomed, it is time for change to become visible on the ground. Achieving this will require a coordinated, multi-level effort involving all relevant stakeholders, both in candidate countries and within the EU itself.

This publication is the result of activities carried out within the Media Freedom Rapid Response co-funded by the EU and within ATLIB – Transnational Advocacy for Freedom of Information in the Western Balkans, a project co-funded by the Italian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation. All opinions expressed represent the views of their author and not those of the co-funding institutions.

Event

Media freedom through transnational lenses: insights from Montenegro and…

Media Freedom Through Transnational Lenses:

Insights from Montenegro and North Macedonia

Monday, 20 October 2025 at 11:00 am CEST.

This webinar presents the findings of two shadow reports assessing the state of media freedom in Montenegro and North Macedonia, highlighting progress, ongoing challenges, and recommendations for EU and national stakeholders.

 

Montenegro has recently advanced its media legislation, strengthening public broadcaster independence, enhancing transparency, and promoting self-regulation. Yet, challenges remain: key institutions remain vulnerable to political influence, law implementation is inconsistent, and foreign interference continues to pose risks. 

 

In North Macedonia, improvements such as reduced violence against journalists and legal reforms coexist with persistent issues, including disinformation, political and economic pressure, weak regulation, particularly for online media, and declining public trust. Foreign interference and negative rhetoric from officials add to the fragility of the media environment. 

 

Montenegro and North Macedonia are both candidates for EU accession; for this reason, this webinar aims to explore the current media landscape in both countries from a transnational perspective, understanding its implications for the wider EU integration process. 

Register here

Opening Remarks

Botzios Thomas

Embassy Counsellor; Adriatic and Western Balkans Unit at the Italian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation

Speakers

Maja Sever

European Federation of Journalists

Olivera Nikolic

Montenegro Media Institute

Zoran Richliev

Metamorphosis Foundation

Massimo Moratti

OBC Transeuropa

Moderator

Serena Epis

OBC Transeuropa

Library

Montenegro: MFRR partners call for the perpetrators of the…

Montenegro: MFRR partners call for the perpetrators of the attack on journalist Ana Raičković to be held accountable amid concerns for the safety of women journalists

The Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) partners strongly condemn the verbal and physical attack on Ana Raičković, editor of the daily “Pobjeda”, as well as the attack on her family members. The MFRR partners welcome the swift reaction of the Basic State Prosecutor’s Office (ODT), which identified and detained four suspects on charges of “violent behaviour”.The consortium calls on the authorities to ensure that the perpetrators are held accountable without delay, following the Criminal Code, which prescribes higher penalties for attacks on journalists. 

On 11 November, journalist Raičković was in a fast food restaurant in Podgorica when the suspects – businessman Zoran Ćoć Bećirović, his son, and two of his security guards, Mladen Mijatović who also works at the Ministry of the Interior (MUP) and Lubjo Dukić – began to harass her because of her journalistic work and Pobjeda’s critical coverage of Bećirović’s suspicious businesses activities but also his hostility towards the press. 

 

The derogatory remarks included calling her a “stinking journalist” working for a “drug cartel”, and also insults for being a regular guest on the Montenegrin broadcaster Television E (TVE).  Raičković reported that the businessman Bećirović then spat at her before suggesting that he would record the number plate of her car and find her. Security guard Mijatović allegedly threatened the journalist with physical violence while calling the police. The verbal abuse continued after Raičković’s fiancé and son arrived, before escalating into physical violence outside the restaurant. 

 

“Mijatović grabbed me by the throat and demanded, ‘Say the boy’s name [referring to the journalist’s son].’ I refused, and he kept insisting, threatening to find him anyway and, if I didn’t cooperate, to kill me,” Raičković recounted to the newspaper Pobjeda. Bećirović then pulled the journalist’s hair and slammed her head against the car door. Her son, who came to her defense, was pinned down and beaten; her fiancé was also assaulted,” added the daily Pobjeda who expressed full support for its editor Raičković. The attack left Raičković and her family members with injuries. The journalist’s car was also vandalized by the attackers.

 

According to the Trade Union of Media of Montenegro (TUMM), Bećirović has repeatedly threatened journalists in the past: “We remind that Bećirović has a history of aggression and obvious hostility towards journalists. He even used his own media outlet to conduct a smear campaign against his fellow citizen, journalist Dragana Šćepanović. Also, in 2019, at the “Delta City” shopping center in Podgorica, a member of his security team confronted and threatened journalist Vladimir Otašević. That case ended without an adequate conclusion, meaning no criminal or misdemeanor responsibility was established for the perpetrator. Bećirović has also filed private lawsuits multiple times for alleged defamation against media outlets and journalists reporting on his business dealings,” reacted the Trade Union of Media of Montenegro (TUMM). 

 

On 13 November, the ETV portal reported Bećirović was brought to the Basic Court shortly before 9 pm for a hearing before the investigating judge. Bećirović as well as his security guards Dukić and Mijatović were ordered to remain in custody, for up to 30 days. The news portal also recounted that a witness stated Dukić was armed at the time of the attack, which the journalist did not notice. Concerning MUP officer Mijatović, the Minister of the Interior announced he would initiate disciplinary proceedings against him. 

 

The violent aggression of Raičković, in a public environment, notwithstanding the presence of witnesses, raises alarming concerns for the safety of journalists. In fact, since January 2024, the MFRR has observed a particularly hostile environment for women journalists in Montenegro. Of the five attacks documented by the MFRR platform since January, all journalists targeted were women. The MFRR will keep monitoring Raičković’s situation and all threats to media workers in Montenegro, targeted for their work of public interest.

Signed by:

  • The European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
  • OBC Transeuropa (OBCT)
  • European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
  • Free Press Unlimited (FPU)
  • 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, Candidate Countries and Ukraine.

Library

Media in Montenegro – Interview with Mihailo Jovović, editor-in-chief…

Media in Montenegro – Interview with Mihailo Jovović, editor-in-chief of Vijesti

After the dissolution of Yugoslavia and a transition period, in Montenegro – now a candidate country for EU membership – the evolution of the media landscape continued in parallel with the attempts to accelerate democratic developments.

 

By Sava Mirković
Originally published by OBCT. Also available in ITA and BHS

According to the latest ranking by Reporters Without Borders on press freedom in the world, Montenegro occupies the 40th place (out of a total of 180 countries taken into consideration), therefore it is positioned quite high compared to the other countries of the post-Yugoslav area. However, the situation is not rosy.

 

External interference, mainly from Serbia, through media ownership structures, and the pervasiveness of propaganda are just some of the problems plaguing the media sector in Montenegro. While on the one hand the European Commission, in its latest report on Montenegro, considers the level of pluralism of the Montenegrin media landscape to be satisfactory, the Media Ownership Monitor operated by the Global Media Registry highlights some critical issues. Specifically, a high degree of cross-media ownership concentration and a significant risk of political interference in editorial decisions.

 

The first problem arises from the fact that eight main media companies control 89.5% of the Montenegrin media market (TV, print media, radio, and web portals). The second problematic aspect is linked to a strong polarization of the media, with a clear tendency to align with certain political positions.

 

The public broadcaster (Radio Television of Montenegro, RTCG) is the main source of information for Montenegrin citizens. The RTCG is currently led by Boris Raonić, appointed for the first time in 2021 with the aim of changing the management framework of the public service, until then allegedly controlled by the Democratic Party of Socialists (DPS). In 2023 Raonić was reconfirmed as head of the RTCG, despite the decision of the High Court which deemed Raonić’s appointment illegitimate due to a conflict of interest.

 

The new law on public service, approved by the Podgorica parliament on 19 June, addresses the issue of the procedures for appointing the director of the RTCG and has become the bone of contention between the political forces precisely because of Raonić’s re-election.

 

Also worth highlighting is the issue of safety of journalists which, in Montenegro, is linked first and foremost to the inability (or lack of will) of the competent authorities to conduct adequate investigations and resolve cases of attacks on journalists. The unsolved murder of Duško Jovanović, owner and editor of the newspaper Dan, is one of the main indicators of the impotence of state institutions which, twenty years later, have still not managed to clarify what happened. Cases like this raise concern among citizens, fuel distrust in the judiciary and police forces, and contribute to the creation of a dangerous environment for journalists.

 

We spoke about this, and much more, with Mihailo Jovović, editor-in-chief of the independent newspaper Vijesti and president of the Commission for monitoring the work of the authorities responsible for investigating attacks on journalists.

This interview was conducted by Osservatorio Balcani e Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT) 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. The MFRR is co-funded by the European Commission. 

Library

Two decades of impunity in case of murder of…

SafeJournalists and MFRR Condemn Two Decades of Impunity in Case of murder of Duško Jovanović

On the 20th anniversary of the murder of Montenegrin journalist Duško Jovanović, the SafeJournalists Network and partners in the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) call for stronger action from the authorities.

Media freedom organisations jointly condemn the two decades of impunity in the case of the murder of journalist Duško Jovanović and urge the Montenegrin authorities, both political representatives and relevant bodies, to take all necessary measures to identify and bring the perpetrators and masterminds to justice.

 

Duško Jovanović was the founder, director, and chief editor of the daily newspaper “Dan,” one of the first private newspapers in Montenegro. He was killed in front of his newspaper’s office on May 27, 2004. For this gravest crime in the history of Montenegrin journalism, only one accomplice has been convicted, who will soon be free as he has nearly served his multi-year prison sentence.

 

According to relevant domestic and international media organizations, the years-long investigation was conducted poorly and ineffectively, with numerous recorded oversights for which no one has been held accountable. Despite announcements from the highest Montenegrin officials in recent years that progress in the investigation could be expected, none has been made, or at least the public has not been informed. For this reason, we justifiably fear that this could remain one of the key unsolved cases, sending a devastating message about the media and socio-political landscape in Montenegro, that crimes against journalists are allowed to go unpunished. Therefore, it is essential that the state of Montenegro takes decisive steps towards justice as the family and colleagues of the late Jovanović, as well as the entire public, have been waiting too long.

 

In addition to Jovanović’s murder, over the past two decades, more than 100 cases of attacks on journalists and media property have been recorded in Montenegro, many of which remain unresolved, with some even having reached the statute of limitations. Hence, more decisive action by Montenegrin state authorities is needed to ensure the safety of journalists and resolve these cases.

 

We strongly urge the Montenegrin authorities to take immediate and concrete steps to address and resolve this most severe case in Montenegrin history. The time for action is now—swift and decisive measures are essential to ensure justice and restore public trust, and to show that crimes against journalists are not permitted.

Signed by:

SafeJournalists Network 

Association of Journalists of Kosovo

Association of Journalists of Macedonia

BH Journalists Association

Croatian Journalists’ Association

Independent Journalists’ Association of Serbia

Trade Union of Media of Montenegro

 

Media Freedom Rapid Response

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 SafeJournalist Network and 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
Library

Montenegro: Jelena Jovanović, journalist targeted by the mafia

Montenegro: Jelena Jovanović, journalist targeted by the mafia

14/02/2024

Dealing with organised crime and risking your life, needing police protection just to be able to do your job and live your everyday life. Jelena Jovanović, journalist from the Montenegrin newspaper Vijesti, explains what it is like to live under police protection

By Vukašin Obradović

Originally published by OBCT  . Also available in ITA  and BHS 

For over two years Jelena Jovanović, a journalist for the newspaper Vijesti in Podgorica, has lived under police protection: she gets up in the morning, goes about her day and goes to sleep in the evening accompanied by the officers in charge of protecting her. Jovanović has been dealing with issues related to organised crime for years and, due to her work, she is exposed almost daily to risks that threaten her safety. Highlighting the dangers faced by those investigating corruption and organised crime go far beyond “the usual”, Jovanović explains that when a journalist comes into possession of compromising information, on politicians or on prominent members of the criminal underworld, they begin to be perceived as a threat to the interests of powerful groups and individuals involved in criminal and corrupt activities.

“From that moment – and I have experienced many throughout my career – there is no longer anything ordinary or spontaneous. As I get closer to the truth, the threats become more and more concrete and the ‘benevolent advice’ to give up leaves room for attempts to intimidate me. In recent years, it has happened several times that they also tried to stop my investigations with hateful messages on social media and attempts to criminalise and discredit my work. These situations, in my opinion, are real turning points in which the journalist, subjected to unbearable pressure, finds themselves at a crossroads: give up or continue to risk their life to uncover the truth”.

 

How much has your private and professional life changed since you received police protection?

My life has changed significantly since I was first assigned an escort towards the end of 2018. Fortunately, that first experience did not last long, unlike the current one that began in August 2021.

I have been forced to change my habits, to give up travel and often concerts, theatre performances, sporting events, mountain walks… In simple words, for almost two and a half years now I have not been able to freely go about my daily life, because for me those places are no longer safe. This says a lot about the changes that have occurred in my private and professional life.

 

Do you believe that the security services have taken all the necessary measures to protect you from those who put your life in danger?

The very fact that I am here talking to you answers your question. However, I am aware that no institution in the world can guarantee absolute protection to anyone. This is even more true for Montenegro, where dozens of police officials had close links with the criminal groups on which my investigations were focused.

For me it was devastating to read the transcripts of messages exchanged through the Sky application, where some senior police officers, whom I had previously consulted, forwarded my questions to the leaders of some criminal groups, reached an agreement with them on the answers to give me and promised that they would ‘explain’ certain things to me. In that context, ‘explain’ could have several meanings, but it certainly could not mean anything good. That experience, however, made me reflect, making me even more convinced that, in a society like the Montenegrin one, keeping quiet and keeping aloof is more dangerous than speaking openly about anomalies that we witness.

 

Does living under protection make it more difficult for you to do journalism?

It is a significant obstacle. Some sources refuse to meet me because they do not trust the police and fear that the officers tasked with protecting my physical safety are actually here to take note of my encounters. However, the work I do every day shows that somehow I manage to move forward.

 

How safe can journalists feel in Montenegro?

It is completely inappropriate to talk about the safety of journalists in a country where, twenty years after the murder of Duško Jovanović, the instigators have still not been identified, where we do not know who brutally attacked Mladen Stojović and Tufik Softić, who shot Olivera Lakić, who placed a bomb under the windows of Mihailo Jovović’s office, then chief editor of the newspaper Vijesti… In a country where clarity has never been reached on a number of attacks on journalists and assets owned by the media – a country deeply divided, so much so that even the media landscape is polarised – those who do journalism respecting the ethical rules of the profession almost daily end up in the crosshairs of various obscure structures and individuals linked to them. Instead, those who, unfortunately, continue to ridicule our beautiful profession in their articles and reports – which are anything but the search for the truth – feel safer than morally upright journalists. However, I believe that their conscience – assuming they have it – is much more tormented, because they too know that the truth is like water – sooner or later it finds its way.

 

Do you feel protected by living under police protection?

The police officers who are tasked with protecting me are well-trained professionals who I fully trust and I am infinitely grateful to always have them by my side. However, no one in the world can feel completely safe, and not even me. But I’m not afraid, and for me this is much more important than the feeling of safety or insecurity. Helping me overcome my fears are my family, friends and colleagues, but also all those good people who support my work.

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
Library

Montenegro: After a new acquittal, the hopes and projects…

Montenegro: After a new acquittal, the hopes and projects of journalist Jovo Martinovic

After over seven years of judicial ordeal and after spending fifteen months in pre-trial detention on drug trafficking charges, investigative journalist Jovo Martinovic was acquitted for the second time by the Supreme Court on 17 January. We interviewed him while waiting for the final verdict.

Interview by Paola Rosà

One last step is still missing, but the trial of Jovo Martinovic, investigative journalist tried, convicted, acquitted, reconvicted, and acquitted again for criminal association and drug trafficking, seems over after almost eight years of authentic ordeal. Under the international spotlight since 2015, for over 15 months in pre-trial detention, the protagonist is now simply tired and eager to go back to doing his job in a country where journalism faces corruption and threats, and where reports of violence are ignored and even cases of murder often go unpunished.

A few days ago the second acquittal arrived in a process that the Supreme Court has asked to be redone twice. In all there were two convictions and two acquittals, with almost 15 months in pre-trial detention. How do you feel about this last decision?

The sentence is not final, it must be confirmed by the Supreme Court. At the same time I recognise that it will be a formality, as it was the Court itself that sent everything back to the sender, establishing that in the new trial other elements had to be taken into consideration and some gaps filled. So, it’s a formality, but to celebrate I have to wait a few more months.

 

In this last trial, your activity as a journalist was considered, acknowledging that those contacts with the criminal group were aimed at journalistic investigations. So, good news. But I guess you’re exhausted by now from telling your case: a journalist is more used to asking questions than receiving them, right?

That’s right!

 

If you had to find an explanation for what happened, would you mention revenge, punishment, injustice, or rather the will to control and silence journalism?

It’s just the legacy of the communist system. Unlike in all other countries, communists continued to rule in Montenegro until 2020. It was the same political party that came to power in 1945, and just changed the name after the fall of the Iron Curtain.

 

So, nothing personal?

The new communist system did all it could to retain control of each aspect of life. And if you work for international outlets, then you are automatically a foreign agent, a suspect. I have been treated as such for years. This is not my first incarceration: in 2004 I was in detention for the denigration of the good name of the country. It’s a charge that had not been used since 1974. But in 2004 they charged me for denigration of the good name of Montenegro because I happened to be a photographer for the British guy who wrote the story on the sale of Roma children in the country. The funniest thing is that when I was arrested I wasn’t questioned about the story at all. I was questioned about who was assisting Italian and German press coverage of the secret smuggling, that was the main topic of my interrogation, not the actual story that was used as a pretext for taking me in.

 

This episode tells us a lot about journalism in the country, isn’t it?

Exactly, if you don’t cooperate, if they can’t force you to submit, or to do whatever you are told by the secret service, be prepared for consequences.

 

Your case received a lot of solidarity and support from international organisations, including MFRR. What did you experience with your colleagues from Montenegro?

It must be said that they are not really my colleagues, in the sense that we don’t deal with the same things and I don’t work for Montenegrin newspapers; I also deal with other countries as well. So, it’s not like they knew me that much. Furthermore, at the beginning it was also difficult to let people know what was happening to me: the news of my preventive detention only came out after three months. In any case, I must say that they then made up for it, several journalists’ associations made themselves heard, as well as some independent newspapers, and even colleagues who work in state broadcasters showed empathy, some publicly, others privately.

 

So, there is hope for journalism in Montenegro. What do you think?

I think so! Since former communists no longer control the government, people are slowly getting rid of that legacy. It’s not just about massive surveillance, but also self-censorship, because even now, journalists are aware of what they can cover, or how far they can go in terms of certain issues.

 

Is the situation in Montenegro influenced by the fact that it is a small country?

What makes it unique is that the same political party ruled for 75 years, without interruption, from 1945 to 2020. It’s a small country, 600,000 people, which is easy to control and which is not strategically important to any big power, and the big powers were not that bothered with internal reforms, they just wanted stability and no big commotion, like in Bosnia or in Kosovo.

 

In the end, what is the outcome of your story? What have you lost, and what have you learned?

The consequences were bad, I’ve been marked. But on the other hand, when you have a clean conscience and you know that you were just doing your job, it just gives you strength to carry on. And I continue to do my work as before and even more. But secondly, I just won’t compromise, I mean, this is not the first time that I have encountered warnings and threats. I rather believe that this came as a result of me ignoring early warnings and threats. Eventually, it’s good for freedom of speech and the press, because giving in is something that backfires.

 

It seems you had no other choice.

I just carry on. I know it’s not pleasant, but it’s real. You find yourself under such charges, and of course in detention it’s like science-fiction meets you in a way, you have the feeling it’s happening to someone else, you’re just a by-stander, it’s surreal but it’s a reality at the same time.

 

What kind of message does your story hold for the rest of the country?

Well, the country is known for many unsolved attacks against journalists, there are many cases of physical assaults, threats, there’s a case when one editor-in-chief, Dusko Jovanovic, was killed in 2004, and it is still unsolved. So, freedom of the press has been constantly mentioned in many EU reports, the country was at the bottom of the Index by RSF, so it is something that has been known for years and remained unaddressed by the former government, except for promises.

 

If things go well in your case, are you expecting compensation?

Yes, once the verdict is final, I can claim compensation, but the main compensation is the clearing of guilt. I don’t believe money can compensate what I have been through. The main thing is just to clear my name. Having a pile of dirt thrown upon, a criminal record against someone who has fought all his life against injustice and crime and corruption, is a lot. Clearing my name is my main satisfaction, the rest comes after.

 

Will it be possible to name the perpetrators?

It depends. Recently, the deputy chief of the special prosecutor’s office was arrested for abuse of his office, and some other things have changed in terms of the abuse of the previous special prosecutor office. So it may come a day when the prosecutor is not only involved in abuse of office or cooperation with the criminal cartels that were operating in the country, but some other evidence may come up that they were complicit in covering up attacks on journalists. Actually, recently a former police official accused the former attorney general of being complicit in covering up of the murder investigation of Dusko Jovanovic killed in 2004. It’s reasonable to conclude that there will be new details on how the former prosecutors worked, or failed to work in accordance with the law and the Constitution. But this is not my task, it’s up to the new prosecutors in power to deal with.

 

It must be quite hard to continue to believe in justice.

Thanks to the EU there are certain changes in the justice system. Unfortunately, all comes with big external pressure, but nevertheless it’s happening. And of course it will take some time. Well, it will take probably a lot of time till we have a judiciary which is on pair with the European Union. But it’s a process, and we’re all aware that it takes time.

 

Your plans for the future?

For the time being, I carry on with my work. After so many years, and after being incarcerated nearly 15 months, you just learn to live with that. You just carry on with your life despite all the difficulties. And I think that’s a good attitude to take, because if we cave into resentment and hard feelings, that’s bad, that backfires. My approach was to remain open, to take it easy and to just move on. And this gives you more strength than being resentful and bitter, blaming people and lashing out. It’s something that I have always wanted to avoid.

This interview was conducted Paola Rosà for OBC Transeuropa 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.

MFRR 3 consortium logos
Library

Montenegro: Impunity must end for shooting of journalist Olivera…

Montenegro: Impunity must end for shooting of journalist Olivera Lakić

The undersigned partners of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) today renew our call for an end to impunity for the shooting of investigative journalist Olivera Lakić in 2018 and hope the recent arrest of suspects will lead to all those involved ultimately facing justice.

Our organisations also welcome the recent cross party approval of amendments to the criminal code which will strengthen protections for journalists but stress the need for further reforms to create a safe and open environment for independent journalism.

Lakić, an investigative journalist covering organised crime and corruption for the daily Vijesti, was shot in the leg outside her apartment in Podgorica on 8 May 2018. She was wounded but survived after being treated in hospital. The attack was first classified as attempted murder but later changed to grievous bodily harm.

Prosecutors said the motive for the attack was Lakić’s investigations into local crime gangs and their links with regional criminal organisations. Although numerous suspects were arrested in the wake of the attack, more than three and a half years later no one has been brought to trial for the broad daylight shooting and Lakić remains under police protection.

On 17 December 2021, Montenegro’s High Court ordered the 30-day detention of Branislav Karadzic and police officer Darko Lalovic, who are suspected by the Special State Prosecutor’s Office of following Lakić before the attack and passing on information about her movements to the “Kavac” drug gang. Concerningly, the officer worked in the same department of the police that is responsible for providing security for Lakić. If proven, involvement of the officer would be devastating for trust in the police force.

While the recent arrests are a welcome development, no formal indictments have been brought against them or any of those suspected of involvement in the shooting. Overall, progress in prosecuting those behind the attack remains painfully slow. Multiple members of the drug gang, including the alleged gunman, have been formally identified as suspects. However, the case remains in the investigation phase. Due to the sensitivity of the case, the High Prosecutors Office (HPO) and the Special Prosecutors Office (SPO) are declining to disclose secret information to the Commission for Monitoring the Competences of Threats and Violence Against Journalists, meaning little information is publicly available.

Our organisations see Olivera Lakić’s case as a litmus test for both the independence of the judicial system and the stated aims of the new government to improve the climate for media freedom by tackling cases of ingrained impunity for attacks on journalists. The 2004 killing of the director and editor-in-chief of the daily newspaper Dan, Dusko Jovanovic, remains mired in impunity, casting a dark shadow over the country’s landscape for media freedom. As Deputy Prime Minister Dritan Abazovic rightly noted recently, no journalist in Montenegro can feel fully safe until that case is solved.

A legal system in which these kinds of serious physical attacks on media workers are punished with appropriate sanctions is crucial. It is uplifting therefore that on December 29 the Parliament of Montenegro unanimously voted to pass amendments to the criminal code which prescribe stronger criminal protection of journalists. We praise the dedicated efforts of Montenegrin journalists’ unions, NGOs and civil society organisations which developed the bill in cooperation with the Ministry of Justice. Under the new law, those convicted of causing grievous bodily harm to those engaged in the dissemination of public information – as in the case of Olivera Lakić – will face penalties of up to eight years in prison instead of the current five years, with stricter punishments for journalists’ killers.

The passing of this legislation marks a welcome step forward on media freedom for the government of Prime Minister Zdravko Krivokapić. To be fully effective, it must be accompanied by funding for capacity building for law enforcement authorities and strong implementation of the legislation by prosecutors. A complementary next step in the fight for justice for journalists would be hiring a foreign expert to investigate Dusko Jovanovic’s murder. Though such an appointment was approved by the former Commission for Investigation of Attacks on Journalists three years ago, no action has since been taken. We urge the current administration to reverse this situation and address other recommendations of the Commission.

While the recent legislative development is welcome, much remains to be done to improve the wider situation for media freedom and independent journalists in Montenegro. As well as the major cases of engrained impunity, the day-to-day safety of journalists and precarious working conditions remain an issue of concern. Verbal and physical attacks and threats against journalists and media workers remain common. The attacks on Vijesti Television journalist Sead Sadiković in March 2021, the death threats sent to Antena M editor-in-chief Darko Sukovic and columnist Dragan Bursać in May, and the intimidation of Milka Tadić Mijović in August all illustrate the type of threats journalists face for doing their jobs. Denunciation by officials of all attacks and intimidation of journalists remains vital.

Separately, but of equal importance, efforts to complete the reform of Radio Television of Montenegro (RTCG) from a state media to a public service media must be handled in a non-political manner and always with the goal of increasing its independence and professionalism. Management changes and the appointment in June 2021 of a new RTCG Council are recognised as having led to more pluralistic coverage. However, future proposals to adapt the public broadcaster’s funding model must be conducted in close consultation with journalists groups and relevant international media organizations. Legislation is required to ensure the independence of the media and the transparency of ownership. Meanwhile, the conviction and sentencing to one year in prison of investigative journalist Jovo Martinović remains a major issue of concern for our organisations.

Much remains to be done to dismantle the entrenched polarisation in Montenegro that poses continued challenges for the independence of public service broadcasters; the state’s response to crimes against journalists; and the fair allocation of state support to media via advertising. The new administration must oversee reforms which roll back the state capture of regulatory bodies and create an even playing field for the media to work free from interference and pressure. There are no quick fixes here and significant political will is required. Yet hope for progress remains amongst the country’s journalistic community. Our organisations stand ready to support the work of the Commission and the government of Montenegro in achieving these goals.

Signed by:

  • ARTICLE 19
  • European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
  • European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
  • Free Press Unlimited (FPU)
  • International Press Institute (IPI)
  • OBC Transeuropa (OBCT)
  • Trade Union Media of Montenegro (TUMM)

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

Library

Montenegro, a justice free country

Montenegro, a justice free country

Interview with Milka Tadic Mijovic, one of Montenegro’s leading journalists and president of the Center for Investigative Journalism, who has always been at the forefront of the fight for a better country and for the defence of freedom of expression.

 

Milka Tadic Mijovic is a brave woman. For more than thirty years she has been at the forefront of the fight for a better Montenegro, for a country that is not only European and pro-Western in words and in which the rule of law and functional democracy are everyday life and not a chimera. Tadic Mijovic was one of the founders of the weekly Monitor and of the Association for the Yugoslav Democratic Initiative (UJDI) – during the bloody sunset of the former Yugoslavia – and among the anti-war activists. For ten years she fought against the regime of Slobodan Milosevic at the end of the 20th century, while for the last 15 years she has opposed the “captured state” of Milo Dukanovic.

In this interview, the president of the Center for Investigative Journalism (CIN) in Montenegro talks about the attacks on journalists, their position, and the problems Montenegro and the new government face in dismantling the dense network of relations tied to the thirty-year regime of the Democratic Party of Socialists (DPS), particularly in the judiciary.

Why are journalists in Montenegro so often the target of verbal and even physical attacks? Among other things, you too were recently verbally assaulted…

Montenegro is among the last countries in Europe in the Reporters Without Borders freedom index. One of the reasons is the large number of attacks on journalists that have remained unsolved, from  Duško Jovanović to Olivera Lakić. My case was not that serious and dangerous. The fact remains that journalists and the media receive a lot of threats and pressures. The biggest problem is not the constant attacks, but none of these serious incidents going to trial. Widespread impunity is the reason there are so many attacks on journalists. No one is afraid to attack journalists because no one has been taken to court, not to mention sentenced. Even when the perpetrators of criminal acts against journalists are accidentally found, the instigators are not. The target of the attacks are always people and the media that investigate the links between organised crime and prominent politicians. The directors of the Montenegrin daily Dan and the Croatian weekly Nacional (Dusko Jovanovic and Ivo Pukanic) were killed. Olivera Lakic also wrote about them and they shot her. Montenegro is one of the most tragic examples of political collusion and cooperation and organised crime. This connection is so strong that it is often not possible to draw a clear boundary between these two realities.

So the problem is the judiciary not doing its job?

One of the key problems is the judiciary. Our country, as Milovan Dilas once said, is “a land without justice”. The judiciary in Montenegro was and still is under the control of politics and sometimes under the control of criminal structures. EU accession negotiations have become the longest in history precisely because the judiciary is a real cancer in our system. Even the principle of the rule of law cannot be established in Montenegro.

Is the appointment of a new National Council of the Investigating Judiciary a precondition for starting the creation of rule of law?

The previous regime lost power in the elections on August 30 last year, but not its strength. They have maintained the main levers of economic power and control of the institutions. The very fact that a year after the elections the new government and the majority did not have the strength to make substantial changes is sufficiently eloquent. This speaks volumes about how difficult it is to dismantle this system that has controlled everything in the country for 30 years. An independent chief prosecutor and prosecutor would be the first important step in creating the rule of law. We never had prosecutors who were not controlled by the political elites. It would be a really big step forward not only to improve the internal situation in Montenegro, but also a strong push towards EU membership. I think that those who have lost power will do everything not to lose control of the judiciary.

So can it be said that Dukanovic’s DPS, and the other parties that were part of government coalitions in previous decades, spoke using European language while ruling in an authoritarian way?

Yes, one might say. The way they ruled was absolutely authoritarian. We do not have a democracy that works. It is also true that all the foreign policy priorities of Montenegro coincide with the priorities of the EU and the USA. And it was this orientation that kept the DPS in power. The West has long supported the DPS government, which has used this support as one of the main levers to strengthen power. The rhetoric of the previous government was European, but the practice was authoritarian. It could be said that Montenegro had a system that coincided with those created in the former Soviet republics, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan. A small group of people holding both political and economic power.

So someone has Aliyev, someone Nazarbaev and Montenegro Dukanovic…

If you look carefully, the biggest investors in Montenegro come from these countries. We have just completed an investment and investor survey in Montenegro. That research showed that they were mostly various Aliyevs, and Russian oligarchs. Anyway, a large majority of people from the East. The explanation is very simple: the way of doing business and managing a business is similar if not identical to the logic applied by the old regime in Montenegro. So, if you want to make a deal, you do not need to have knowledge, skills, a good project, ability to cope with obligations, to be competitive. No, the only important thing is to have a good connection with the highest authorities, i.e. the phone number of the right person to talk to. The door to a privileged position on the market, in business with the state, etc. is immediately opened.

Let’s go back to the position of journalists and the media in Montenegro. It sounds paradoxical, but despite the great pressure, the attacks, and even the killings, we still have professional and independent media in Montenegro and it is a fact that many in the Western Balkans cannot say the same. How do you explain this little paradox?

The fundamental thing is that in Montenegro the media regarded as pacifists in the 1990s managed to survive. Unlike for example B92 in Serbia, the Montenegrin media managed to survive and preserve an independent editorial policy. Thanks to this we have a couple of professional media outlets in Montenegro. However, it is colleagues engaged in investigative journalism who come under the greatest pressure. It also happens that journalists with strong political views are under attack. In other words, anyone who does their job professionally can be targeted.

Can journalists in Montenegro make a living from their work, that is, from the salaries they earn?

Very difficult. There is no free market and fair competition in Montenegro as in states that have a long or well-established democratic history. The advertising market is tightly controlled, and the members of the previous government still have the major advertisers in their hands and influence or try to blackmail the media. This is why independent media are constantly struggling to survive financially, especially in the previous period when only a few selected media could get advertisers and thus cash the money. The pandemic has further aggravated the position of journalists. Wages go down and the cost of living goes up. As a result, many journalists leave the profession and take up other jobs that can give them a better existence. The best journalists leave, but what encourages me is that young people with great motivation come up to investigate and work in this field. Journalism, generally speaking, is in crisis and the profession of journalist is no longer as prestigious or remunerative as it once was.

Finally, how do you see the increasingly heated rhetoric relating to the enthronement of Metropolitan Joanikije in Cetinje? Does it have something to do with a series of events not favourable to the old regime: the new Council of the Prosecutor’s Office, the new management of the Radio-Television of Montenegro, the changes in the board of directors of Prva banka? Is President Dukanovic’s power crumbling?

There is some truth. But there is also great polarisation in society. And that is not good at all. The divisions are deepening. I have friends who have stopped talking to me because they think I have betrayed the nation. This is the atmosphere that brings water to the mill of those who have ruled Montenegro for 30 years. The consolidation of Montenegro and the implementation of the European agenda are not in the interest of the DPS. The only thing they can offer is vulgar nationalism. Serbian President Vucic, on the other hand, is blowing on the crisis trying to compensate for the loss of Kosovo with Montenegro and Republika Srpska. There are several big games going on that are not, at all, in the interest of the citizens of any country in the region, the problem is that we do not know how this is all going to turn out. I just hope the bad part of our recent history does not repeat itself.

First published on OBCT's website