Allgemein

Turkey: 7th International press freedom mission concludes

Turkey: 7th International press freedom mission concludes

Ankara, November 26, 2025 – A mission delegation composed of eight international press freedom, free expression and human rights organisations has concluded a joint press freedom mission to Türkiye. The delegation met with journalists, civil society, political party representatives, MPs, the judicial branch, regulatory bodies, and foreign diplomatic missions to discuss Türkiye’s rapidly deteriorating media freedom environment.

26.11.2025

Türkçe açıklama aşağıdadır…

This seventh international press freedom mission to Türkiye, held in Ankara from 24 to 26 November 2025, was led by the International Press Institute (IPI) and included Amnesty International, ARTICLE 19 Europe, the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), the European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF) and Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT) as part of Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR), Reporters Without Borders (RSF) and the South East Europe Media Organisation (SEEMO).

 

During the visit, the delegation held meetings with the Turkish Constitutional Court, the Radio and Television Supreme Council (RTÜK), the Delegation of the European Union to Türkiye, several foreign diplomatic missions, and representatives of Türkiye’s political landscape, including MPs from the Republican People’s Party (CHP) and the Peoples’ Equality and Democracy Party (DEM). The mission also met with the Association of Journalists in Ankara as well as members of the broader journalism community.

 

Despite multiple requests, government institutions, including the Directorate of Communications, the Ministry of Justice, Ministry of Interior, and several other ministries, as well as representatives of the AKP and MHP, declined to meet with the delegation or did not respond.

 

The mission delegation raised for consideration a wide variety of issues that have led to a further decline in press freedom in Türkiye, since our last mission in November 2024. The situation this year has been marked by a sharp escalation in political pressure, judicial harassment and censorship targeting the press.

 

Since 19 March 2025, high-profile detentions, including the imprisonment of opposition mayors and municipal officials that were largely viewed as politically motivated, were accompanied by large-scale protests that authorities met with mass detentions and restrictions on coverage. Journalists documenting the events faced early-morning police raids, physical assaults, and attempts from authorities to silence them, such as the warning from the former RTÜK chair that failure to “remain free from political bias” while covering protests would result in maximum penalties, including the revocation of licenses.

 

The mission delegation also highlighted a troubling pattern of punitive actions against critical outlets and journalists. Journalists across the country continue to face assault, threats, and intimidation, while criminal investigations and prosecutions against them remain commonplace. Prolonged arbitrary pre-trial detention and politically motivated investigations and prosecutions, such as those against journalists Furkan Karabay and Fatih Altaylı, reinforce the climate of fear and self-censorship.

 

Regulatory bodies continue to leverage their authority to silence dissent. As an institution with eroded independence that urgently needs reforms to restore its autonomy, RTÜK imposed heavy fines and broadcast bans targeting critical television outlets, a practice that deprives the public of critical voices. The Press Advertising Agency’s restrictive and one-sided criteria for distributing public advertising further strained the survival of local independent media. Although the Constitutional Court annulled parts of the agency’s mandate, economic pressure continues to serve as a tool of control. We also note with alarm the bandwidth throttling of social media platforms and messaging services during events of significant public interest, and the resurgence of “foreign influence” narratives used to justify interference in independent journalism.

 

The delegation urges Turkish authorities to end the judicial harassment of journalists, fully implement the decisions of the Constitutional Court on freedom of expression at all levels, and guarantee due process and fair trial rights. We call on regulators to cease arbitrary sanctions and repeat that they must operate independently and transparently. Türkiye must safeguard open debate, restore unrestricted digital access, and stop vilifying civil society or the press through vague accusations under its overly broad and vague criminal provisions including those in its anti-terrorism law, in violation of the country’s constitutional and international human rights obligations to protect the rights to freedom of expression, association and assembly. Türkiye should also respect international standards and practices in issuing press cards as a free decision of journalist associations and media.

 

Ensuring a safe, free and pluralistic media environment is essential to democracy, the rule of law, and the meaningful protection of human rights. The steps taken in 2025 have moved Türkiye further away from these standards. At the same time, the mission delegation underscores that ongoing peace negotiations could serve as a crucial opportunity to advance comprehensive reforms that strengthen journalists’ rights, safeguard pluralism and help rebuild respect for fundamental freedoms. We call on the authorities to reverse the current trajectory and to engage meaningfully with domestic and international stakeholders to uphold press freedom and freedom of expression.

Signed by:

  • International Press Institute (IPI)
  • Amnesty International
  • ARTICLE 19 Europe
  • Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ)
  • European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF) as part of MFRR
  • Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT) as part of MFRR
  • Reporters Without Borders (RSF)
  • South East Europe Media Organisation (SEEMO)

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.

Türkiye: Uluslararası basın özgürlüğü misyonu ziyaretleri tamamlandı

 

Basın özgürlüğü, ifade özgürlüğü ve insan hakları odaklı çalışmalar yürüten sekiz uluslararası kuruluştan oluşan heyetimiz Türkiye’deki basın özgürlüğü misyonunu tamamladı. Heyet, Türkiye’nin giderek kötüleşen medya özgürlüğü koşullarına ilişkin endişelerini gazetecilere, sivil toplum temsilcilerine, siyasi parti yetkililerine, milletvekillerine, yargı organlarına, düzenleyici kuruluşlara ve diplomatik temsilciliklere iletti.

 

Uluslararası Basın Enstitüsü (IPI) öncülüğünde 24-26 Kasım 2025’te Ankara’da düzenlenen yedinci uluslararası basın özgürlüğü misyonuna Uluslararası Af Örgütü, ARTICLE 19, Gazetecileri Koruma Komitesi (CPJ), Avrupa Basın ve Medya Özgürlüğü Merkezi (ECPMF), Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT), Sınır Tanımayan Gazeteciler (RSF) ve Güney Doğu Avrupa Medya Örgütü (SEEMO) katıldı.

 

Heyetin ziyaret ettiği kurumlar arasında Anayasa Mahkemesi, Radyo ve Televizyon Üst Kurulu (RTÜK), Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi (CHP), Halkların Eşitlik ve Demokrasi Partisi (DEM) ve bağımsız milletvekilleriyle Avrupa Birliği Türkiye Delegasyonu ve yabancı diplomatik temsilcilikler yer aldı. Ayrıca, Ankara Gazeteciler Cemiyeti ev sahipliğinde yapılan görüşmelerdeyse Türkiye’den basın özgürlüğü kuruluşlarıyla gazeteciler yer aldı.

 

İletişim Başkanlığı, Adalet Bakanlığı, İçişleri Bakanlığı ve diğer bakanlıklar da dahil çeşitli devlet kurumlarının yanı sıra Adalet ve Kalkınma Partisi (AKP) ve Milliyetçi Hareket Partisi (MHP) temsilcilerine gönderilen resmi görüşme taleplerine ya yanıt alınamadı ya da görüşme talepleri reddedildi.

 

Yapılan görüşmelerde, Kasım 2024’teki son misyondan bu yana Türkiye’de basın özgürlüğünü daha da zayıflatan çeşitli meseleler gündeme alındı. Heyet, 2025’te basına yönelik siyasi baskıların, yargı eliyle uygulanan yıldırma politikalarının ve sansürün artışına dikkat çekti.

 

19 Mart 2025’ten bu yana yaşanan gelişmelerde, muhalefet belediye başkanlarının ve yetkililerinin tutuklandığı, siyasi saikli olmakla eleştirilen sansasyonel davalar geniş çaplı protestolara yol açtı. Yetkililer, bu protestolara kitlesel gözaltılar ve haber kısıtlamalarıyla karşılık verdi. Toplumsal olayları belgeleyen gazeteciler sabah saatlerinde yapılan ev baskınlarıyla gözaltına alındı, fiziksel saldırıya uğradı. Eski RTÜK Başkanı’nın, protestoları haberleştirirken siyasi tarafsızlıktan sapmaları halinde en ağır yaptırımların, hatta lisans iptallerinin uygulanacağı yönündeki uyarısı da dikkati çekiciydi.

 

Heyet, eleştirel medya kuruluşlarına ve gazetecilere yönelik kaygı verici cezaları da gündeme getirdi. Gazeteciler gözdağı, tehdit ve fiziksel saldırılara maruz kalmaya devam ederken açılan davalar da yaygınlığını koruyor. Gazeteci Furkan Karabay ve Fatih Altaylı örneklerindeki gibi, uzun süren tutuklu yargılama ve siyasi saikle ilerleyen cezai süreçler korku ve otosansür ortamını pekiştiriyor.

 

Düzenleyici kurumlar da yetkilerini kötüye kullanarak muhalif sesleri susturmaya devam ediyor. Bağımsızlığı ciddi ölçüde aşınmış, özerkliğini yeniden tesis etmek için kapsamlı reformlara ihtiyaç duyan RTÜK’ün, eleştirel televizyon kanallarına uyguladığı ağır para cezaları, yayın yasakları ve ekran karartmaları kamuoyunu bağımsız seslere erişmekten mahrum bırakıyor. Basın İlan Kurumu’nun (BİK) kamu ilanlarının dağıtımındaki kısıtlayıcı kriterleri, yerel ve bağımsız medya kuruluşlarının ayakta kalma mücadelesini zorlaştırıyor. Anayasa Mahkemesi, BİK’in bazı yetkilerini iptal etmiş olsa da ekonomik baskı bir kontrol aracı olarak varlığını sürdürüyor.

 

Heyet ayrıca toplumsal öneme sahip olaylar esnasında sosyal medya platformları ve mesajlaşma uygulamalarına erişimin kısıtlanmasının ve bağımsız gazeteciliğe yönelik müdahaleleri meşrulaştırmak için yeniden dolaşıma sokulan “etki ajanlığı” söylemlerinin endişe verici biçimde arttığını vurguladı.

 

Yetkililer, yargı eliyle gazetecileri yıldırma politikalarının önüne geçip, Anayasa Mahkemesi’nin ifade özgürlüğüne ilişkin olumlu kararlarını uygulamalı ve adil yargılanma hakkını güvence altına almalı. Düzenleyici kuruluşları keyfi yaptırımları sonlandırmaya ve basın denetim organlarının bağımsız ve şeffaf bir şekilde faaliyet göstermesini sağlamaya davet ediyoruz. Türkiye özgür tartışma ortamını korumalı, dijital erişim sınırlamalarına son vermeli ve hem sivil toplumu hem de basını terörle mücadele de dahil muğlak ceza hükümleriyle hedef almaktan vazgeçmeli. Ayrıca uluslararası standartlara uyarak basın kartlarının gazeteci dernekleri ve medya kuruluşlarının özgür kararıyla verilmesinin önünü açılmalı.

 

Özgür, çoğulcu ve güvenli bir medya ortamı demokrasi, hukukun üstünlüğü ve insan hakları için hayati öneme sahip. 2025’teki gelişmeler Türkiye’yi bu standartlardan daha da uzaklaştırdı. Fakat halihazırda devam eden barış müzakereleri, gazetecilerin haklarını güçlendirmenin, çoğulculuğu güvence altına almanın ve temel özgürlüklere riayeti yeniden tesis etmenin önünü açacak kapsamlı reformlar konusunda yol almak için fırsatlar sunuyor. Misyon heyeti olarak yetkilileri, Türkiye’nin mevcut gidişatını tersine çevirerek basın ve ifade özgürlüğünü korumak için ulusal ve uluslararası taraflarla işbirliği yapmaya çağırıyoruz.

İmzalayanlar:

  • Uluslararası Basın Enstitüsü (IPI)
  • ARTICLE 19 Europe
  • Avrupa Basın ve Medya Özgürlüğü Merkezi (ECPMF) — Medya Özgürlüğü Acil Müdahale (MFRR) partneri
  • Gazetecileri Koruma Komitesi (CPJ)
  • Güney Doğu Avrupa Medya Örgütü (SEEMO)
  • Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT) — Medya Özgürlüğü Acil Müdahale (MFRR) partneri
  • Sınır Tanımayan Gazeteciler (RSF)
  • Uluslararası Af Örgütü

Bu açıklama, Medya Özgürlüğü Acil Müdahale (MFRR) tarafından koordine edilmiştir. MFRR, AB üye ülkeleri ve aday ülkelerde basın ve medya özgürlüğünün ihlallerini takip eden, izleyen ve bunlara müdahale eden Avrupa çapında bir mekanizmadır.

Allgemein

Hungary: New EU Media Board should assess Blikk acquisition…

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

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

21 November 2025

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

Signed by:

  • International Press Institute (IPI)
  • European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
  • European Federation of Journalists (EFJ) 
  • Médiafórum Egyesület (Hungary)
  • Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT)

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

Allgemein

Serbia: Election of REM Council undermines democratic principles

Serbia: Election of REM Council undermines democratic principles

The Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) today expresses renewed concern over the undemocratic process by which the National Assembly conducted the latest election for the Council of the Regulatory Authority for Electronic Media (REM), Serbia’s key media regulator.

20 November 2025

After a delay of more than one year, the National Assembly last week appointed eight members to the REM Council, including four candidates seen by media experts as independent. However, it failed to approve the ninth appointee representing the country’s national minorities after the ruling majority abstained, drawing criticism of obstruction and leading to the resignation of four of the elected members.

 

Our organisations warn the European Union that the deliberate exclusion of the representative of the national minority councils, which followed non-transparent adjustments to the nomination criteria and procedure, represents yet another effort by the ruling majority to retain government influence over the body and block democratic reform of the media ecosystem.

 

The recent vote violates Article 12 of the country’s Law on Electronic Media, undermines the right of minority communities to legitimate representation on the REM Council, and further undermines public trust in the independence of the regulator.

 

MFRR partners stress that this election follows two previous processes favouring pro-government candidates, which we previously criticised as making a mockery of EU mandated reforms. This latest vote repeats this unsatisfactory process and provides yet another example of an entrenched strategy of media and regulatory control.

 

In light of the recent resignations of elected members, the MFRR underscore to the EU that the only acceptable outcome remains the lawful and complete appointment of the REM Council, with independent members and a legitimate minority representative. Without this, the regulator will lack credibility and cannot fulfill its role in protecting media pluralism and media ethics.

 

European standards under the newly adopted European Media Freedom Act (EMFA) are clear: national media regulatory authorities must be legally, functionally, and financially independent, shielded from political interference and influence, and appointed through fair, transparent and merit-based procedures. This recent process again violates these rules.

 

The MFRR consortium therefore urges the international community and institutions such as the OSCE and the European Union to refrain from legitimising this outcome. We stress that any assessment of progress on media freedom in Serbia must be conditioned on a complete, lawful and transparent appointment of the REM Council.

 

More widely, Serbia remains in a period of deep crisis for media freedom and has experienced significant backsliding on media freedom and freedom of expression in the past year, as rightly recognised by the European Commission in its latest EU Enlargement Package.

 

Moving forward, the MFRR will closely watch the response of the European Union and the European Commission to this alarming development and continue to update European institutions on all future latest developments regarding the REM Council.

Signed by:

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

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

Library

Ukraine: IPI condemns unprecedented Russian attack on public broadcaster…

Ukraine: IPI condemns unprecedented Russian attack on public broadcaster offices

The IPI global network today condemns the unprecedented Russian attack on the offices of Ukrainian public broadcaster Suspilne in Dnipro on the night of November 17, which represents an escalation in the targeting of media infrastructure by Russian forces.

20.11.2025

No journalists or staff were injured in the attack, though the strike destroyed a significant amount of office space and technical equipment in what used to be the regional hub of Ukraine’s public broadcaster in the country’s fourth-largest city. An IPI member, Suspilne broadcasts from branches across the country’s territory, including from Dnipro.

 

The broadcaster reported extensive damage to the building, including blown out windows and doors. Cameras and editing stations belonging to the channel are believed to have been destroyed in the attack.

 

The offices of several affiliates of Suspilne were also partially destroyed, including Ukrainian Radio and Suspilne Donbas – the regional service of the broadcaster for Ukraine’s Donbas region which is operating in Dnipro for security reasons. The regional hub of the Institute of Mass Information (IMI), one of Ukraine’s leading media advocacy and support organizations, was also partially destroyed, as was a TV tower in Dnipro.

 

According to IMI, publications by Russian sources about the strike indicate that the attack on the TV tower was likely premeditated. The Russian military has not claimed responsibility for the strike.

 

“IPI condemns Russia’s latest strikes on media offices and infrastructure in Ukraine,” said IPI Eastern Europe Advocacy Lead Karol Łuczka. “While Russian forces have targeted Ukrainian media offices in the past, this attack is unprecedented both by the scale of the destruction caused and indications it was likely premeditated.”

 

The strike underlines a pattern of increased intensity of Russian attacks on Ukrainian and international media operating in Ukraine, which IPI has observed since the end of summer 2025.

 

Since the start of this year, IPI has documented 14 attacks on Ukrainian media infrastructure carried out by Russian forces. Attacks of this type stepped up in 2024, when 14 strikes were also recorded, as opposed to only four in 2023. The attack on the Dnipro office of Suspilne is the most serious observed incident to date: the only remotely comparable events of this type were the strikes on Ukraine’s state-owned TV channel Freedom in Kyiv, in February and in April 2025.

 

Russia has also stepped up its attacks on journalists working near front lines in eastern Ukraine. In October, three media workers were killed by Russian forces while carrying out their work, meaning that levels of attacks on media are now at their highest since March 2022. IPI also recorded eight non-lethal attacks on journalists by Russian forces since the end September, as opposed to only five between January and August of this year.

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

Allgemein

European Democracy Shield Bolstering independent media at the core…

European Democracy Shield Bolstering independent media at the core of democratic resilience

In the face of rising digital manipulation, shrinking civic space and collapsing media business models, the European Democracy Shield offers an important opportunity to ensure safety of journalists and media viability, among other things, but only if turned into concrete action. This is what MFRR aims to follow.

18.11.2025

On 13 November 2025, the European Commission adopted its European Democracy Shield, the first comprehensive, flagship strategy for strengthening democratic resilience within the bloc, with a key focus on free and independent media, fighting disinformation and creating healthier information ecosystems to protect European values and security. 

 

The Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) partners welcome the fact that many priorities from our submission on media freedom and security of journalists, as well as EPD-led joint submission of 65 organisations, have been incorporated in the text. 

 

Strengthening the economic viability of media, and updating the EU Recommendation on the safety of journalists and to combat Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs), which have become a pervasive tool for silencing critical voices, are important priorities. Media and press freedom priorities are defined under the umbrella of the second focus of the European Democracy Shield, aimed at strengthening democratic institutions, free and fair elections and free and independent media. A comprehensive list of commitments has been developed to address economic viability, safety of journalists, influence of AI and disinformation. 

 

The MFRR calls for these protections to be retained and enforced. We also call for further protections of journalists from digital pressures and harmful legislation to be introduced. The MFRR also calls for the strict implementation and timeline for the implementation of these commitments, as well as for strengthening the European Democracy Shield enforcement in relation to the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA), and Digital Services Act (DSA).

 

Below we outline  how the EU Commission’s priorities reflected the MFRR submission on media freedom and protection of journalists. 

 

Economic viability

 

Tackling the changing business models for media and the advertising market, now increasingly dominated by online platforms that divert funding away from independent media, is one of the main issues that media is facing in terms of its viability. The commitment to reviewing the Audiovisual Media Services Directive and the Directive on copyright in the Digital Single Market is a positive step toward ensuring the economic viability of the media sector. However, the MFRR cautions that these measures must be implemented swiftly and effectively to prevent further erosion of media pluralism.

 

The Shield’s detailed section on funding for democracy support is particularly significant. The organisations note the Commission’s acknowledgment that additional financial resources are necessary to sustain independent media, especially in the EU neighbourhood and candidate countries. Prioritisation of core funding for independent media is vital for countering the economic pressures imposed by dominant online platforms. The creation of the Media Resilience Programme and the new MFF Global Europe could be important additions to ensure impartiality and core support in the media ecosystem. It is welcoming that media is recognised as a part of defence budgets, but we urge for the precise clarification of the timeline and understanding of the scope Media Resilience Programme and MFF will have.

 

Safety of journalists

 

One of the key priorities detailed in the document is ensuring the safety and protection of journalists, including in the EU external action, in line with the highlighted needs of our submission. To intensify its efforts to protect journalists against undue pressure, threats and attacks, the Commission commits to updating its Recommendation on the safety of journalists, which is very welcomed by our consortium.

 

Reinforcing and strengthening measures on the safety of journalists and combating abusive litigation (SLAPPs) by reviewing its anti-SLAPP Recommendation remains crucial to addressing pressures on journalists. We hope that a high-level event on combating SLAPPs will translate into concrete policies, as indicated by this document. We highlight again that the revisions should include measures that foster a sustainable support system for journalists and media targeted with SLAPPs, ensuring that they are compensated for the damages incurred; as well as to equip the judiciary and legal community with the knowledge to recognise and address SLAPPs while upholding public participation rights. 

 

That being said, our organisations stress the need for robust legal safeguards against the criminalisation of defamation and the use of foreign-agent laws, which continue to drive self-censorship and force journalists into exile.

 

The Shield also highlights that it will continue assisting the civil society actors and journalists under authoritarian regimes to ensure that “tools for digital censorship circumvention, antisurveillance and anti-shutdown solutions are available to citizens, by scaling up the rapid response work with trusted partners”. It would, nevertheless, be important to ensure that the protection from digital repression, surveillance and online pressures is strengthened both within the EU member states as well as candidate and potential candidate countries. As indicated in the MFRR submission, journalists and media professionals are increasingly targeted by spyware across Europe, with the most recent examples in Serbia and Italy. Further protections from the misuse of spyware are essential to ensure that journalists feel free to conduct their roles in protecting democracy.

 

Moreover, the Commissions’ commitment to continue funding mechanisms to monitor press freedom in EU Member States and candidate countries, such as MFRR, is an essential way of contributing to the overall goal of supporting media freedom and pluralism, as recognised in the document.

 

Finally, we are happy to see that the Commission commits to supporting quality independent media and journalism in the EU and candidates and potential candidate countries, with a specific emphasis on core funding for independent media. In addition, continued core support to exiled independent journalists and media outlets, who are working from within the EU and its neighbourhood is essential. We also hope that the support and protection will be ensured in specific cases of transnational repression of exiled journalists. These proposed funding streams should be established in the upcoming Multiannual Financial Framework, and in line with the GFMD recommendations for media. 

 

AI and new technology 

 

As highlighted in the MFRR submission, the Democracy Shield recognises that AI poses significant threats to media viability and the integrity of the information ecosystem. These threats to media viability and information ecosystem are planned to be tackled through a welcomed review of the Directive on copyright in the Digital Single Market, with a focus on ensuring that the use of AI respects intellectual property rights and does not further destabilize media business models. Developing guidance to maintain fair competition in the digital environment is mentioned as well, particularly in light of the growing influence of AI-driven platforms that can distort media markets and advertising revenues.

 

The Commission also commits to investing in AI literacy and digital skills for both citizens and media professionals, aiming to strengthen societal resilience against AI-facilitated threats to democracy and media freedom. Though a large part of the document is focused on developing mechanisms for increased media literacy, such as the creation of European Centre for Democratic Resilience, which will host a multi-stakeholder platform, we welcome the fact that the document recognises the DSA as an important tool for media pluralism and media literacy. 

 

We therefore underscore the importance of the Digital Services Act’s provisions, which require very large online platforms and search engines to actively identify and mitigate systemic risks to media freedom and pluralism. Though the Commission commits to monitoring and enforcing these obligations, it falls short of providing actions for their implementation. We urge the Commission to formulate more concrete steps for ensuring the implementation of the DSA and to develop a risk-assessment that is reflective of the real needs of journalists on the ground. To ensure this, among other things, we call for inclusion of data from the protection mechanisms, such as MapMF, in the risk assessment process.

 

Final considerations

 

While the European Democracy Shield represents a strong initial commitment, these six organisations, alongside their partners on the ground, will remain actively engaged to ensure that the Shield not only meets but exceeds its stated goals, adapting to new challenges as they arise. The document’s success will ultimately be measured by its ability to translate promises into concrete actions that protect and sustain independent journalism in an increasingly hostile environment. 

 

We agree with Commissioner McGrath that the Shield will need to be adjusted and adapted, therefore we see the document as a strategy to enhance media viability, and safety of journalists, among many other things. In this context, we call for a development of a comprehensive action plan, that would provide clarity on how these commitments will be enforced, and in which timeline. We as MFRR commit to following the situation on the ground, and to alerting the Commission on the new developments, as well as to follow the implementation of all named commitments in the scope of our mandate.

 

An increased number of attacks against journalists and media professionals across Europe demonstrates the urgency of these commitments and recommendations. If action is not taken now, independent media risk collapse, democratic institutions will be further undermined, and the information space will remain dominated by hostile actors.

Signed by:

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

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

Library

Croatia: EFJ condemns court convicting assaulted journalist Melita Vrsaljko…

Croatia: EFJ condemns court convicting assaulted journalist Melita Vrsaljko of ‘disturbing public order’

On 7 November 2025, Croatian journalist Melita Vrsaljko, a contributor to Faktograf and Klimatski portal, was found guilty by the Municipal Court in Zadar, of disturbing public order after defending herself from a physical attack that occurred in July 2024 while she was reporting on illegal waste dumping. The European Federation of Journalists (EFJ) joins its affiliates in Croatia — SNH and HND — and the SafeJournalists Network (SJN) in condemning this ruling, which sets a dangerous precedent for press freedom and Croatian journalists.

13.11.2025

The attack dated back to 15 July 2024, when Melita Vrsaljko was assaulted in the village of Nadin, along with her camera operator. The perpetrator, an elderly man who was reportedly drunk, admitted he intended to prevent them from filming on a public street. In response, the police issued an order for both to maintain a distance of at least 50 metres away from each other. Vrsaljko reportedly had no choice but to act in self-defence to get rid of her attacker and to call the police for assistance. The following day, the attacker’s daughter strangled Vrsaljko at her home, attempting to force her to delete footage recorded of the aggression committed by her father.

 

In an interview for the EFJ podcast PressTalks, which was recorded at the 2025 Voices Festival in Zagreb, Vrsaljko bravely recounted both attacks and her fight for justice. “Much more painful are the scars in my head”, and “feeling not safe in my own house,” the journalist told us. Vrsaljko is in the process of filing an appeal.

 

“By ruling Vrsaljko equally guilty of disturbing public order as her initial attacker, the Zadar Municipal Court judge Maria Stopfer Mišetić sends a deeply concerning message regarding journalists’ safety, particularly in local communities where journalists are more easily identifiable and consequently more vulnerable to violence,” stated EFJ President Maja Sever.

 

Earlier this year, Vrsaljko faced another instance of violence. She was assaulted and subjected to misogynistic insults at a local festival in Benkovac.

 

From the outset, the EFJ and its Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) partners have denounced flaws in the police response and the legal classification of offences in Vrsaljko’s case. As assessed during our fact-checking missions to Croatia, the authorities considerably failed to classify the two related incidents as criminal offences. As a result, the incidents were excluded from government safety protocols jointly signed by the Ministry of the Interior, HND, and SNH, and established to enhance journalists’ safety.

 

Furthermore, the Municipal State Attorney’s Office in Zadar has yet to issue a decision on the criminal complaint filed more than a year ago for the assault by the perpetrator’s daughter.

 

Discussions with the Croatian Ministry of Culture and Media, Ministry of Justice, and Ministry of the Interior have raised additional concerns, as officials questioned the link between the attacks and her journalistic work, despite clear evidence that she was targeted for her reporting.

 

Journalists, and in particular women journalists, in the Balkan region are working in an increasingly hostile environment, where gender-based harassment and attacks are on the rise.

 

The EFJ urges the judiciary to reconsider its ruling and requests that the authorities ensure the journalist’s professional activity is duly considered from the initial incident through to the court’s final ruling. We also call on the Zadar Municipal Court to rule without further delay on the criminal complaint filed for the second attack.

 

Listen to the story of Melita Vrsaljko in the EFJ podcast PressTalks available on Spotify and YouTube.

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

Allgemein

Open letter regarding the dismissal of journalist Gabriele Nunziati

Open letter regarding the dismissal of journalist Gabriele Nunziati

The undersigned organisations of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) are writing to you to express our shared concern and dismay over the decision by Agenzia Nova to terminate its collaboration with journalist Gabriele Nunziati, following a question he addressed to the spokesperson of the European Commission on October 13, 2025.

12.11.2025

L’italiano è sotto

Da: redazione@balcanicaucaso.org 

A: redazione@agenzianova.com 

 

Direttore responsabile Riccardo Bormioli

Agenzia Nova. Agenzia di stampa quotidiana

Redazione Via Parigi 11, 00185 Roma

November 11, 2025

Subject: Concern over the dismissal of journalist Gabriele Nunziati

 

Dear Editor-in-Chief Bormioli,

 

The undersigned organisations of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) are writing to you to express our shared concern and dismay over the decision by Agenzia Nova to terminate its collaboration with journalist Gabriele Nunziati, following a question he addressed to the spokesperson of the European Commission on October 13, 2025.

 

As organisations dedicated to defending press freedom across Europe, we share the opinion that the dismissal of a journalist for asking a question deemed “inappropriate” to a representative of a political body represents a violation of media freedom and of the journalistic profession, which should be immediately remedied.

 

It is our view that the justifications provided by Agenzia Nova regarding the dismissal are neither convincing nor sufficient to justify this decision. They also serve to undermine the management’s asserted neutrality and objectivity. 

 

Journalists have both the right and the duty to ask questions, including critical or difficult ones, to ensure the democratic accountability of political decision-makers. Any attempt to silence such voices constitutes an unjustifiable form of censorship.

 

Nunziati was doing his job, professionally posing a legitimate question that sought to clarify the position of the European Commission regarding what UN experts have determined is the ongoing genocide in Gaza, a position that remains subject to legitimate questioning and public debate.

 

With respect to your concern about possible reputational damage, we believe that such damage does not stem from the legitimate work of your collaborator, but rather from the decision to censor his work on flawed grounds.

 

The silencing of those who carry out their watchdog role by posing legitimate public interest questions regarding the situation in Gaza represents a serious blow to freedom of information and a worrying sign for democracy in Italy, which harms not only journalists’ right to work without fear of retaliation but also citizens’ right to free, independent, and impartial information.

 

We therefore join the many organisations and colleagues, domestically and internationally, who have condemned what we consider to be an unfair and unjustified dismissal, express our solidarity with Gabriele Nunziati, and call on Agenzia Nova to review its decision and proceed with his immediate reinstatement.

Signed by:

  • Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT) 
  • European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
  • European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
  • Free Press Unlimited (FPU)

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

Oggetto: Sconcerto per il licenziamento del giornalista Gabriele Nunziati

 

Gentile direttore Bormioli,

 

Le organizzazioni sottoscritte del consorzio europeo Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) le scrivono per esprimere il proprio sconcerto e la propria preoccupazione per la decisione dell’Agenzia Nova di terminare la collaborazione con il giornalista Gabriele Nunziati, a seguito di un quesito da lui rivolto alla portavoce della Commissione Europea lo scorso 13 ottobre 2025.

 

In quanto organizzazioni impegnate nella difesa della libertà di stampa in tutta Europa, condividiamo l’opinione che il licenziamento di un giornalista per aver posto una domanda ritenuta “fuori luogo” a una rappresentante di un organo politico rappresenti una chiara violazione della libertà dei media e della professione giornalistica, a cui andrebbe posto immediato rimedio. 

 

A nostro avviso, le giustificazioni fornite da Agenzia Nova in merito al licenziamento  non appaiono né condivisibili né sufficienti a giustificare la decisione. Tali spiegazioni contribuiscono inoltre a minare la presunta neutralità e obiettività della direzione. I giornalisti hanno il diritto e il dovere di porre domande, anche critiche o scomode, per garantire la responsabilità democratica dei decisori politici: qualsiasi tentativo di silenziare queste voci rappresenta una forma di censura ingiustificabile.

 

Nunziati ha esercitato il proprio lavoro, ponendo un quesito legittimo volto a chiarire la posizione della Commissione Europea riguardo alla situazione a Gaza che gli esperti delle Nazioni Unite hanno definito come genocidio, una posizione soggetta a legittimo scrutinio e dibattito pubblico. 

 

Rispetto alla vostra preoccupazione legata a un eventuale danno d’immagine, riteniamo che tale danno non derivi dal legittimo lavoro di un vostro collaboratore, quanto piuttosto dalla vostra stessa decisione di censurare tale lavoro su basi infondate.

 

Silenziare la voce di chi svolge il proprio ruolo da “cane da guardia” ponendo domande di pubblico interesse sulla situazione a Gaza rappresenta un grave colpo alla libertà di informazione e un segnale preoccupante per la democrazia in Italia. Ciò danneggia non solo il diritto dei giornalisti di lavorare senza timore di ritorsioni, ma anche quello dei cittadini a un’informazione libera, indipendente e imparziale.

 

Ci uniamo quindi alle numerose organizzazioni e ai colleghi, in Italia e all’estero,  che hanno condannato quello che consideriamo un licenziamento ingiusto e immotivato, esprimiamo la nostra solidarietà a Gabriele Nunziati, e invitiamo l’Agenzia Nova a rivedere la propria decisione e a procedere con il suo immediato reintegro.

Firmato:

  • Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT) 
  • European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
  • European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
  • Free Press Unlimited (FPU)
Library

Impunity Day: MFRR renews urgent call for justice for…

Impunity Day: MFRR renews urgent call for justice for murdered journalists around Europe

To mark the International Day to End Impunity for Crimes against Journalists on November 2, the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) honours the memory of those who have lost their lives in the pursuit of truth and demands justice for the crimes committed against them.

3 November 2025

The killing of a journalist is an attack on freedom of expression, an assault on the public’s right to know and a fundamental threat to democracy. Tragically, this past year alone has seen a disturbing pattern of violence and inaction, with four killings of journalists in Europe in October alone: three in Ukraine and one in Turkey.

 

The most recent murder occurred on October 23 in Ukraine, when Olena Hubanova and Yevhen Karmazin were killed in a Russian drone attack in Kramatorsk. Earlier that month, on 3 October, French photojournalist Antoni Lallican was killed in a targeted drone strike. Reporting confirmed that Lallican was killed with the use of an FPV (first-person view) drone, which allows operators to visualise their targets at the moment of the strike with the use of a camera. Lallican was visiting visible PRESS markings at the time of his death.  

 

The ongoing and apparently deliberate targeting by the Russian military of journalists in Ukraine, and the fact that Russia refuses to investigate or even limit strikes on media workers, are stark reminders of the dangers journalists working in conflict zones face and the urgent need for protection and accountability.

 

These risks are not only confined to war zones, as demonstrated by the death of Victoria Roshchyna, a Ukrainian journalist detained and held in custody for over a year at an undefined location by Russian authorities. Roshchyna, whose death was confirmed in October 2024, weighed only 30 kilograms at the time of her death. Her body showed signs of torture while in Russian captivity.

 

In Turkey, Hakan Tosun, a journalist and activist known for his reporting on ecological destruction and local corruption, was brutally beaten in Istanbul and died from his injuries on 13 October 2025. The Büyükçekmece Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office is reportedly investigating the case. With two arrests made, authorities must now swiftly confirm whether his journalistic work was the motive behind the attack.

 

Impunity meanwhile continues for dozens more journalists killed in Europe in recent years. In total, 15 journalists were killed in relation to their activities since the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine on 24 February 2022. To date, no one has been held accountable for any of these killings.

 

Within the EU, seven years after the assassination of investigative reporter Ján Kuciak and his fiancée Martina Kušnírová in Slovakia, the alleged mastermind has been acquitted multiple times. In Malta, while two men were recently sentenced for their roles in the car bombing that killed Daphne Caruana Galizia in 2017, the alleged mastermind has yet to face justice, with a trial expected to start next year. In Greece, the murder of Giorgos Karaivaz in April 2021 remains unsolved, with two suspects acquitted due to insufficient evidence.

 

These tragedies are not isolated incidents but part of a global crisis of impunity for the killing of journalists, both in and outside of conflict zones. This lack of justice sends a chilling message that those who target journalists can do so without accountability and that violence is an acceptable means to silence the press. We call on governments to ensure thorough and independent investigations, to protect journalists at risk, and to support independent media in their vital work.

 

On this day, MFRR partners reaffirm our commitment to pushing for justice for journalists who have lost their lives. We will continue to monitor these cases, advocate for justice, and demand an end to the culture of impunity at the international level. Justice delayed is justice denied. The time to act is now.

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)
  • Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT)

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

Allgemein

Turkey: Journalists reporting LGBTQ+ issues risk criminalisation: Withdraw the…

Turkey: Journalists reporting LGBTQ+ issues risk criminalisation: Withdraw the proposed law!

As press and freedom of expression organisations undersigned below, we call for the removal of the reported anti-LGBTQ+ provision from the 11th Judicial Package which would restrict and possibly criminalise media reporting on the community.

22.10.2025

Türkçe açıklama aşağıdadır…

The draft of the 11th Judicial Package was shared with the members of the press last week and is expected to be submitted to Parliament in the coming days. Under the heading “Obscene acts,” the draft introduces a so-called “Turkish-style ban on homosexual propaganda.” It stipulates prison sentences of up to three years for any behaviour or attitude that is “contrary to one’s biological sex and public morality,” as well as for praising, promoting, or encouraging such behaviour. In its current form, the proposal is even broader and more vague than Russia’s 2013 “gay propaganda ban,” posing a grave threat to freedom of expression and press freedom in Turkey.

 

If enacted, this regulation would restrict LGBTQ+ people of their right to access and share information central to their lives.. Journalists reporting on  LGBTQ+ issues such as human rights violations, sexual health, Pride marches etc. risk criminal prosecution on the grounds of “promotion.”

 

Since 2025 was declared the “Year of the Family,” numerous violations have occurred targeting LGBTQ+ journalism in Turkey. In February, Yıldız Tar — Editor-in-Chief of KAOS GL, the country’s largest and oldest LGBTQ+ news platform, and a prominent LGBTQ+ rights advocate — was arrested.

 

In June, the KAOS GL news website and its social media accounts were blocked for allegedly “publicly inciting to commit crimes.” That same month, journalists covering the LGBTQ+ Pride March in Istanbul’s Beşiktaş district were detained and later prosecuted.

 

T24 correspondent Can Öztürk was questioned by prosecutors after publishing a story about sexual harassment allegations against an academic who claimed to offer “conversion therapy” to LGBTQ+ children. The Radio and Television Supreme Council (RTÜK) also fined streaming platforms such as Netflix for hosting LGBTQ+ content.

 

Following all these violations, the inclusion of the proposed provision in the 11th Judicial Package would escalate rights violations even further and criminalize the already difficult task of reporting on LGBTQ+ issues. Moreover, vague terms such as “contrary to one’s biological sex” or “contrary to public morality” would allow arbitrary interference with the press and civil society.

 

This proposal would not only target LGBTQ+ individuals but also place journalists reporting on LGBTQ+ issues and related rights violations under threat of criminal punishment.

 

For all these reasons, as the undersigned press and freedom of expression organizations, we urgently call for the immediate removal of this provision from the 11th Judicial Package.

Signed by:

  • Media and Law Studies Association (MLSA)
  • Dicle Fırat Journalism Association
  • European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
  • DİSK Basın-İş
  • P24 Platform for Independent Journalism
  • International Press Institute (IPI)
  • Progressive Journalists Association (ÇGD)
  • Journalists’ Union of Turkey (TGS)
  • European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
  • Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT)
  • International Federation of Journalists (IFJ)
  • Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ)
  • PEN International 
  • Foreign Media Association Turkey
  • PEN Norway
  • Media and Migration Association (MMA)
  • Balkan Investigative Reporting Network (BIRN)
  • Norwegian Helsinki Committee

LGBTİ+ haberciliği suç değildir, gazetecilik suç değildir: Tasarıyı geri çekin!

 

Aşağıda imzaları bulunan basın ve ifade özgürlüğü kuruluşları olarak, 11.Yargı Paketi’nde yer aldığı iddia edilen LGBTİ+ karşıtı düzenlemenin paketten çıkartılmasını talep ediyoruz. Türkiye’de özellikle LGBTİ+’ların ifade ve basın özgürlüklerini ortadan kaldıracak olan bu düzenleme, ifade ve basın özgürlüklerinin özünü ortadan kaldıracak, LGBTİ+’lar hakkında haber yapmayı suç haline getirecektir.

 

11. Yargı Paketi taslağı, geçtiğimiz hafta basınla paylaşıldı ve önümüzdeki günlerde Meclis’e sunulması bekleniyor. Düzenlemede ‘Hayasızca hareketler’ başlığı altında, Türk tipi bir eşcinsel propaganda yasağı düzenlemesi öngörülüyor. Düzenleme, doğuştan gelen cinsiyete ve genel ahlaka aykırı her türlü davranış ve tutumun yanı sıra bunları övmeyi, özendirmeyi ve teşvik etmeyi de üç yıla kadar hapis cezasıyla cezalandırıyor. Bu düzenleme, taslakta yer alan haliyle, Rusya’da 2013 yılında kabul edilen ‘Eşcinsel propaganda yasağı’ yasasından çok daha ağır ve muğlak ifadeler içererek, Türkiye’de basın ve ifade özgürlüğüne yönelik ciddi bir tehdit oluşturuyor. 

 

Yasalaşması halinde, LGBTİ+’ların haber alma ve haber verme haklarını ortadan kaldıracak olan bu düzenleme, LGBTİ+’lara yönelik hak ihlallerini, trans cinayetlerini, cinsel sağlıkla ilgili yayınları, Onur Yürüyüşlerini ve daha birçok LGBTİ+’ları ilgilendiren haber yapmayı ‘teşvik etmek’ gerekçesiyle suç unsuru haline getirecek.

 

2025 yılının Aile Yılı ilan edilmesiyle, Türkiye’de LGBTİ+ haberciliğine yönelik birçok hak ihlali meydana geldi. Şubat ayında, Türkiye’nin en büyük ve en eski LGBTİ+ haber platformu KAOS GL’nin Genel Yayın Yönetmeni ve LGBTİ+ hakları savunucusu Yıldız Tar tutuklandı. 

 

Haziran ayında, Kaos GL’nin internet haber sitesi ve sosyal medya hesapları ise ‘suç işlemeye alenen teşvik’ iddiasıyla erişime engellendi. Yine Haziran ayında, İstanbul Beşiktaş’ta LGBTİ+ Onur Yürüyüşü’nü takip eden basın mensupları gözaltına alındı, haklarında dava açıldı. 

 

T24 muhabiri Can Öztürk, LGBTİ+ çocuklara ‘dönüşüm terapisi’ adı altında terapi yaptığını iddia eden bir akademisyen hakkındaki cinsel taciz iddialarını haber yaptığı için şikayet üzerine soruşturmaya uğradı, ifade verdi. Radyo ve Televizyon Üst Kurulu (RTÜK) ise Netflix gibi platformlarda yayınlanan LGBTİ+ içerikler hakkında platformlara ceza verdi.

 

Bütün bu hak ihlallerinin ardından 11. Yargı Paketi’nde yer alacağı iddia edilen düzenleme, hak ihlallerini farklı bir boyuta taşıyacak, zaten zor olan LGBTİ+’lar hakkında haber yapmayı suç haline getirecektir. Öte yandan ‘doğuştan gelen biyolojik cinsiyete aykırı’ veya ‘genel ahlaka aykırı’ gibi muğlak ifadeler, basına ve sivil topluma yönelik keyfi müdahaleleri arttıracaktır.

 

Teklif yalnızca LGBTİ+’ları değil, onları ilgilendiren konuları, onlara yönelik hak ihlallerini haber yapan basın mensuplarını da ceza tehdidi altına sokacak, haber yapılmasını kriminalize edecektir.

 

Bu gerekçelerle, biz aşağıda imzaları bulunan basın ve ifade özgürlüğü kurumları olarak, 11. Yargı Paketi’nde yer alacağı iddia edilen bu düzenlemenin derhal tekliften çıkartılmasını talep ediyoruz. 

İmzalayanlar:

  • Medya ve Hukuk Çalışmaları Derneği (MLSA)
  • Dicle Fırat Gazeteciler Derneği  (DFG)
  • Avrupa Basın ve Medya Özgürlüğü Merkezi (ECPMF)
  • Punto24 Bağımsız Gazetecilik Derneği (P24)
  • Çağdaş Gazeteciler Derneği (ÇGD)
  • Uluslararası Basın Enstitüsü (IPI)
  • Avrupa Gazeteciler Federasyonu (EFJ)
  • Uluslararası Gazeteciler Federasyonu (IFJ)
  • Türkiye Gazeteciler Sendikası (TGS)
  • Balkanlar, Kafkasya ve Transavrupa Gözlemevi (OBCT)
  • Gazetecileri Koruma Komitesi (CPJ)
  • Yabancı Medya Derneği
  • Uluslararası PEN
  • PEN Norveç
  • Medya ve Göç Derneği (MGD) 
  • Balkan Araştırmacı Gazetecilik Ağı (BIRN)
  • DİSK Basın-İş
  • Norveç Helsinki Komitesi

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

Allgemein

Italy: Car bomb attack on investigative journalist Sigfrido Ranucci…

Car bomb attack on investigative journalist Sigfrido Ranucci rings alarm for media freedom in Italy

The undersigned journalists and media freedom organisations strongly condemn the car bomb attack on one of Italy’s leading investigative journalist Sigfrido Ranucci and his family. We welcome the opening of an investigation by the Anti-Mafia Investigation Division and call for an urgent assessment of the effectiveness of the protective measures applied to the journalist.

17 October 2025

On 16 October 2025, at around 10 p.m. a bomb consisting of 1kg explosive detonated near the car of Rai journalist Sigfrido Ranucci in Pomezia, near Rome. The bomb went off 20 minutes after Ranucci’s daughter parked the car. No one was injured in the attack, which damaged the two vehicles and a nearby home.

 

Ranucci is a longtime host of Report, the investigative programme broadcast on Rai 3, known for its in-depth reporting on corruption and organised crime. In recent years, he has been the target of numerous threats and intimidation. He was granted police protection in 2010, which was enhanced in 2021, following threats from mafia-style organisation N’drangheta. 

“Last summer, a year ago, we found two P38 bullets outside our house. Since then, a series of unusual situations have occurred in recent months, starting with the attempt to discredit me,” he told Il Fatto Quotidiano. Earlier this year, Ranucci appeared before the European Parliament, where he denounced that he had been under surveillance by the Italian secret services.

 

Following the attack, Interior Minister Matteo Piantedosi said that he has given instructions to strengthen the journalist’s protection “to the maximum”. The journalist was provided with an armoured car and armed escort, as he himself announced when leaving offices of the Carabinieri, where he had filed a complaint. Opposition parties have urged the Anti-Mafia Committee in the parliament to grant an urgent hearing to Ranucci, in order to acquire his position on the case.

 

Ranucci joined the public broadcaster Rai in 1991 and devoted most of his career to investigative journalism. Recently, he has been vocal on the growing difficulties in carrying out investigative journalism in Italy, especially at Rai. He often highlighted the tensions with the management of the public broadcaster and the government, which ultimately culminated in a number of vexatious lawsuits and disciplinary measures against him. He also denounced that four episodes of his investigative programme Report had been cut following an unprecedented decision by the Rai management in the programme’s 30-year history. 

 

Alessandra Costante, the General Secretary of the Italian journalists’ trade union, the Federazione Nazionale Stampa Italiana (FNSI), said the attack on Sigfrido Ranucci was “setting democracy in Italy back by several decades”: “It is an attack not only on our colleague at Report, but on freedom of information, on Article 21 of the Constitution, on the basic principles of civil coexistence and democracy. The FNSI demands that clarity be provided quickly on what happened. The attack on Ranucci shows an escalation in actions against journalism,” she added. 

 

The editorial committee of Rai Approfondimento has called a meeting of editors in the Rai headquarters today at 12 p.m. This will be followed at 4 p.m. by a sit-in organised by FNSI, Usigrai and Stampa Romana together with colleagues from other editorial offices.

 

We stand alongside our Italian partners in expressing solidarity with Sigfrido Ranucci and the wider journalistic community in Italy. This attack is particularly troubling as it coincides with the anniversary of the death of Maltese journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia, who lost her life to a car bomb on 16 October 2017. 

 

The undersigned organisations strongly condemn the attempted murder of a journalist, which constitutes a direct assault on media freedom, and urgently call for a thorough investigation to ensure that the perpetrators are identified and brought to justice. 

Signed by:

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

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