Poland: MFRR reasserts recommendations for democratic reform for press…

Poland: MFRR reasserts recommendations for democratic reform for press freedom and public media

The undersigned partner organisations of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) today renew their call for democratic and comprehensive reform to Poland’s public broadcasters which creates systematic safeguards to limit the ability of all governments, future and present, to meddle in editorial or institutional independence of the country’s public media.

The MFRR coalition also reaffirms the set of recommendations for steps that can be taken by the new coalition government to improve the wider situation for media freedom and independent journalism in Poland. These recommendations were jointly developed following a recent mission of the MFRR to Warsaw ahead of the election.

Our organisations jointly urge the new Civic Platform-led government to heed the concerns and recommendations of media freedom organisations. We call on political leaders to ensure that all reforms to the media space in Poland – both underway and planned – adhere to democratic values and follow the rule of law.

The call comes amidst an ongoing battle over the future of public broadcaster TVP and Polish Radio. Since coming to power, the new government abruptly dismissed the supervisory bodies of TVP and national news agency PAP and put the public media into liquidation, an unprecedented move which uses a legal loophole to allow the government to continue financing the broadcaster while also making internal changes.

While the new administration has defended the moves as necessary to dismantle the propaganda output of TVP, the former ruling party has criticized the changes as undemocratic and aimed at cementing a new form of political control over the channels.

While the MFRR continues to support much needed reforms by the new coalition government to restore the impartiality, reliability and professionalism of public media in Poland, the means used to do so must be democratic, legal and truly aimed at increasing pluralistic and balanced coverage, prioritizing the public interest over any one political interest.

With a new law on public service media reportedly being developed by the coalition parties, our organizations also call on the new government to conduct a thorough consultative process on any proposed legislative changes, urge that that the concerns of the media community are heeded, and stress that reforms are fully in line with the principles outlined in the European Commission’s European Media Freedom Act (EMFA), particularly regarding guarantees for political independence.

Crucially, any reforms by the new government must not perpetuate the cycle of capture and control that was taken to extremes by the Law and Justice (PiS) party during its years in power and ensure that deep structural changes to the management and regulation of TVP and Polish Radio are undertaken which will put an end to repeated periods of politicization after elections.

Given the importance of regulation of public media in Poland, the new administration must address the National Media Council (NMC), which has been identified as a key instrument created by PiS to wield greater control over TVP. The NMC remains an unconstitutional body dominated by PiS appointees and should be addressed under relevant law.

Democratic changes to address the ongoing crisis at public media in Poland are possible, but must be made with restraint and the utmost respect for the rule of law and democracy. The MFRR therefore reasserts the recommendations regarding the future of the public media that were made jointly by our organisations in September 2023 ahead of the election and calls on the new government to carefully consider and implement them. The full MFRR mission report can be read here.

Recommendations

Public service media

Public broadcasting requires a root and branch reform of both the governance structures and financing mechanism to guarantee political independence and the fulfilling of the public service remit. In particular:
The appointment process for management and governing bodies must be depoliticised with candidates appointed through transparent, open, and non-discriminatory procedures on the basis of their professional skills and experience with guarantees of political neutrality.
PSM funding must be conducted through arms-length decision making ideally through a form of TV licensing to ensure that the funds are free of political interference. Any government supplementary allocation should be taken in transparent decision making, that guarantees stable long-term financing, adequate to fulfil the public service mission.

———

The MFRR mission made further recommendations on wider improvements to the press freedom landscape in Poland.

Media regulation

Media regulators must be able to operate fully independent of government in line with Article 30 of the EU’s Audiovisual Media Services Directive that demands regulators are legally distinct from government and functionally independent of their respective government. Reform of KRRiT should include:

Depoliticising the appointments process to ensure candidates are appointed through transparent, open, and non-discriminatory procedures on the basis of their professional skills and experience with explicit guarantees of political neutrality.
Ensuring all processes with respect to licensing and investigations into breaches of the code are subject to clear and transparent procedures and collegiate decision making. Failure to meet those procedures, such as undue delays in licensing decisions, or manifestly politicized investigations, must have clear consequences for those responsible with commensurate compensation provided to the broadcaster affected.
All decisions must be duly justified in line with the regulatory powers of the office and broadcast code.
All investigations into alleged breaches of the broadcast code must be conducted by the full board and not placed in the hands of the Chair alone. Investigations should follow due process allowing the accused to present its arguments. Decisions should be accompanied by detailed justifications. There should be an appeals process for condemned media including the option to revisit rulings in the courts in line with European standards of free expression.
Information should be publicly available on the handling of all complaints received with detailed reports issued at least annually on all decisions with due justification.

Media pluralism

Media pluralism must be ensured through a diverse range of media and owners that operate independently of the state with strong guarantees of editorial independence. Recommended measures include:

PKN Orlen should be required to immediately divest its media investments and state-controlled companies, outside of the public media framework, should be barred from owning media.
A media plurality test should be developed to measure the impact of transfers of ownership in the media market on pluralism and to guarantee media pluralism.
The government must guarantee a level economic playing field for all media and end practices that discriminate against, and create a negative investment climate for, private media operating independent of government.
Media should guarantee minimum levels of editorial independence and ethical standards that protect the newsroom from external interference and ensure journalistic integrity.

State support to media

The discriminatory use of state resources to manipulate the media market must end.
Public funds and state advertising must be distributed according to transparent, objective, proportionate, and non-discriminatory criteria through open, proportionate, and non-discriminatory procedures.
Annual reports should be issued on the distribution of all state advertising to media. This should include details of revenue from contracts with state bodies received by companies that belong to the same business grouping as media companies.
The awarding of all public contracts to companies whose beneficial owners also own media must be subject to particularly careful scrutiny and safeguards to ensure that the awarding of such contracts are not used to influence editorial content of those media.

Vexatious lawsuits

The judicial appointment procedure must be transparent and independent in practice and in line with European norms and standards.
The judiciary must be properly trained on the use of strategic lawsuits and mechanisms should be put in place allowing for the early dismissal of evidently vexatious cases and a requirement for claimants to cover the cost of proceedings in such instances.
Defamation must be decriminalized and become a matter for civil law only.
The government must end the sponsoring of self evidently vexatious lawsuits taken against media or other actors, for legitimate criticism and free expression.

Signed by:

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

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

Library

Poland: Upheaval at Polish public broadcaster must lead to…

Upheaval at Polish public broadcaster must lead to comprehensive reform to restore and safeguard independence

Sudden dismissal of supervisory boards risks setting dangerous precedent. The new Polish government’s abrupt dismissal of the supervisory bodies of the country’s public television broadcaster TVP and national news agency PAP risks setting an alarming precedent that must be urgently rectified by new rules to permanently protect these institutions’ independence, the International Press Institute (IPI) said today.

The previous Law and Justice (PiS) government had shamelessly turned Poland’s public media into instruments of state propaganda. The new coalition’s goal of ending this situation is therefore unquestionably justified. However, these reform efforts must take care not to perpetuate a cycle of politicization or perceived politicization. The new government must now work to pass comprehensive reform that guarantees the right of Poland’s public media to work freely and shields them from future interference by political parties of all stripes.

On Tuesday, December 19, the new parliament passed a resolution calling for the restoration of “impartiality and reliability of the public media.”

On Wednesday, the minister of culture, Bartłomiej Sienkiewicz, announced the appointment of new supervisory boards for public television, public radio and the news agency PAP, as well as the appointment of new management in the three government-owned companies.

Minutes after the dismissal of the supervisory boards, TVP’s 24-hour news channel TVP Info, was taken off air, while TVP’s Channel One aired no news bulletins throughout the day on Wednesday.

The changes provoked a furious reaction from the outgoing party of Law and Justice (PiS) whose members staged an overnight sit-in on Tuesday in the broadcaster’s headquarters, also joined by PiS leader, Jaroslaw Kaczyński.

The new government asserted its right to act on two main grounds: firstly that the establishment of the National Media Council, the supervisory body for public TV and Radio set up by PiS in early 2016, had been ruled unconstitutional in December 2016; and secondly that the ministry of culture, as the sole owner of the public radio and TV, must now take on the NMC responsibilities and exercise the authority to restore impartiality to public media.

During their eight years in government (2015 to 2023) PiS converted the public media into an unapologetically hardline propaganda outfit designed not only to promote government policy but also to aggressively delegitimize its critics and the political opposition.

IPI visited Poland in September as part of the Media Freedom Rapid Response mission and concluded that the public media had been fully converted into a propaganda arm of the ruling party. Successive reports of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) monitoring of Poland’s elections concluded that PiS “enjoyed clear advantage through its undue influence over the use of state resources and public media” during the 2023 October elections; and that the broadcaster was ‘frequently portraying the [party’s] main challenger as a threat to Polish values and national interests’ in the 2020 Presidential elections.

“While there is no question that the TVP and Polish Radio are both in need of drastic reform, IPI is troubled by the approach adopted that appears to be stretching the rule of law,” said IPI Deputy Director Scott Griffen. “While the ultimate aim is unquestionably legitimate, such an act may set a dangerous precedent for every incoming government to use legal loopholes to overturn the actions of the previous government.”

“The government must now ensure that what emerges from the changes is a fully independent public broadcaster that represents the voices and views of all of society without discrimination. The Tusk government must work with journalists groups and media experts from across Poland to establish the necessary legal safeguards that can protect public media in the future from all forms of political interference.”

The Media Freedom Rapid Responses mission report from September 2023 outlines the full range of challenges facing media freedom in Poland including media pluralism, vexatious lawsuits and safety of journalists. We urge the Civic Platform-led government to make media independence and journalists rights a central element of their programme.

This statement by IPI is 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, Candidate Countries, and Ukraine. The project is co-funded by the European Commission.

Library

Hungary: Draft Sovereignty Protection Act poses fresh threat to…

Hungary: Draft Sovereignty Protection Act poses fresh threat to independent media

The Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) today alerts the European Union about the chilling impact that the Hungarian ruling party’s proposed Sovereignty Protection Act will have on what remains of the country’s embattled independent media community.

Our organisations stress that while media are not named directly within the text of the draft bill, the intentionally vague language and broad scope for application of the proposed law would effectively open the door to state-sponsored pressure on those media which receive foreign funding and produce journalism critical of the government.

The draft Sovereignty Protection Act is therefore the latest prong of a decade-long campaign by the government of Prime Minister Victor Orbán to harass critics and suppress democratic checks and balances. This has been effected in part through measures that restrict, punish, and stigmatize critical journalism and NGOs that are deemed to be hostile to national interests.

The bill, submitted to parliament on 21 November, would establish a new office headed by an individual appointed directly by the Prime Minister with a six-year mandate. Its main task would be to map and report on perceived threats to Hungary’s national sovereignty and identify bodies or individuals suspected of serving malign foreign interests. All foreign funding of parties’ election campaigns would be criminalised.

This new office would have broad investigatory powers to demand documents, financial records or data of any organisation or body operating in Hungary, including civil society groups, media organisations or journalist associations. It would publish public reports about these bodies’ allegedly negative impact on Hungarian public discourse or politics, with a focus on election periods. Organisations adjudged to be undermining national sovereignty could be unofficially labelled as such by the body in its reports.

While media and media activities are not referenced directly in the text, the vague language of the bill means it could easily be applied to media organisations and individual journalists. Within the current parameters, any media receiving foreign funding could be accused of undermining Hungarian sovereignty by spreading “disinformation”, carrying out activities which are “aimed at influencing the democratic debate” or “aimed at influencing the will of voters”. Domestic media freedom groups registered in Hungary could be included within the scope of the law, while international media freedom organisations carrying out work in the country could also be stigmatised in reports by the proposed Sovereignty Protection Office. Although it will be tasked with preparing recommendations, the body would have no legal powers to issue sanctions.

Government figures have indicated that the objective of the law is purely to stop domestic political actors from accepting foreign funds. However, when the bill was first announced, a leading Fidesz politician said that among other intended targets were so-called “dollar media” and “Soros media” – pejorative terms used to label media receiving money from the U.S. or European Union.

The bill therefore fits against the backdrop of a campaign of stigmatisation since the 2022 general election, and beyond, against media which receive foreign grants and funding. Last year, an organisation close to the government published a report examining the funding structure of several of the leading independent media, suggesting they were serving foreign interests. If this new body were to become operational, it would hang like a sword over the independent media and NGOs and represent an institutionalised escalation of pressure over acceptance of foreign funds.

Over the past decade, as numerous reports have documented, the Fidesz government has deliberately distorted the media market to weaken the finances of independent media. This has included abusing state advertising, pressuring private advertisers, engaging in smear campaigns against independent media and other tactics that drive readers away, using state funds to bankroll otherwise economically unviable pro-government media, and selectively applying competition law. Numerous independent outlets did not survive this onslaught, either closing or being sold off to pro-government owners. Those independent media that remain have been forced to modify their business models toward subscription systems and grants from foreign donors in order to survive and continue their watchdog work. This bill and the attacks on foreign funding must therefore be seen as the latest effort to undermine the business models and financial sustainability of the independent press.

The dire conditions for media freedom and independent journalism in Hungary have been constructed by the Fidesz government over the past decade under the eyes of the European Union. For too long, nothing was done to challenge the anti-pluralistic consolidation of a pro-government media bubble and the slow eradication of bastions of professional journalism through regulatory abuses and the politically-engineered takeovers of media houses. While the EU’s draft European Media Freedom Act (EMFA) does represent a principled effort to safeguard media pluralism and freedom in Member States, its fate remains uncertain.

As the debate continues in the Hungarian parliament, the EU must not flinch in its opposition to this bill. If the package of amendments is ultimately passed and the constitution and criminal code are changed by the parliament with Fidesz’s two-thirds majority, plans should already be in place for the EU Commission to launch infringement proceedings against Hungary and challenge the law in the EU courts. Even if the bill is never passed, the text and its proposed measures will have a chilling effect in the signal they send. We jointly call on the Hungarian government to scrap the bill and refrain from all forms of pressure on the media and NGOs.

In the coming weeks, our MFRR consortium partner ARTICLE 19 Europe will prepare a thorough legal assessment of the law’s alignment with European law and international media freedom standards. This will outline in detail the severity of the threat posed by the draft Sovereignty Protection Act to media and civil society organisations. Our organisations remain committed to protecting what remains of independent and pluralistic journalism in Hungary.

Signed by:

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

Library

North Macedonia: Ruling against Investigative Reporting Lab and its…

North Macedonia: Ruling against Investigative Reporting Lab and its editor must be overturned

The organisations of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) and the SafeJournalists Network (SJN) today express shared dismay at a recent defamation verdict by a judge in North Macedonia which recommends shutting down one of the country’s leading investigative media outlets and expects this damaging ruling to be swiftly overturned on appeal.

Our organisations warn that this ruling – and the alarming recommendation by the judge – represent a clear violation of international standards, a fundamental failure of the recognition of public interest of the journalism in question, and an attack on investigative journalism and media freedom in the country.

On 24 October 2023, a judge at the Basic Civil Court in the capital Skopje ruled against the Investigative Reporting Laboratory (IRL) and its editor-in-chief, Sashka Cvetkovska, and ordered they pay a symbolic €1 in damages to businessman Kocho Angjushev, the former Deputy Prime Minister of North Macedonia, plus thousands of euros for both sides’ legal costs.

However, in the written justification, published on 10 November, the judge inexplicably ruled that IRL should be classified as “non-media” and that its staff were “members of a group”, rather than professional journalists. She suggested the platform was operating illegally and recommended that the Ministry of Justice examine the operations of the media outlet.

The civil defamation lawsuit stemmed from a documentary IRL aired in May 2021, entitled “Conspiracy Against the Air”. The documentary, part of a joint investigation with the OCCRP, was broadcasted on public television and revealed how chemical-filled fuel oil used in heating systems throughout the country’s public institutions were causing pollution. It briefly named Angjushev as one of the officials involved in making introductions between buyers and sellers of heating systems, which he denies and claims is defamatory.

In the first hearing in March 2022, the judge Jovanka Spirovska Paneva ruled in favour of IRL and rejected Angjushev claims. After the verdict was challenged, the Court of Appeal in May 2022 dismissed the verdict and ordered a retrial. In the retrial, the same judge excluded the public from monitoring the trial, sided with Angjushev and found the defendants guilty of defamation. No new evidence was presented by the plaintiff during the retrial.

IRL, a member centre of the Organised Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP), will appeal the latest ruling to a higher court. It said it also intends to file a complaint with the constitutional court over the alleged violation of the constitutional right to freedom of the press.

The MFRR and SJN organisations stand firmly behind the Investigative Reporting Laboratory, Sashka Cvetkovska, and her staff, and support their principled legal challenge against this ruling and its serious consequences for investigative journalism in North Macedonia. This case bears some characteristics of a SLAPP — a strategic lawsuit against public participation – which are wielded by powerful business or political figures and are aimed at muzzling public interest journalism. It should be noted that the lawsuit by Angjushev comes against a backdrop of years-long attempts to pressure, discredit and verbally attack the media outlet and its staff.

While the demands for compensation and damages ordered by the judge were symbolic, the payment of the legal fees of both sides will represent a financial hit for the investigative media platform. The penalising nature of the verdict also carries a censorious chilling effect on the journalistic community in North Macedonia. As outlined in a recent report following a mission to Skopje by multiple international press freedom organisations, abusive lawsuits of this kind risk undermining the fragile press freedom progress achieved in recent years.

Furthermore, the judge’s verdict inaccurately claims that the IRL is not a media outlet and that its staff are not journalists. In fact, like many investigative media across the region, IRL is legally registered as a civil society organisation and has a specific mandate to report on issues such crime, corruption and good governance. It is clear that the verdict does not take into account the functional definition of journalism: an activity that can be exercised by everyone, as highlighted by the UN Human Rights Committee and by the Council of Europe Committee of Ministers.

IRL has been responsible for much of the most high-quality investigative journalism in North Macedonia in the last half decade and has published award-winning investigations. Its reporters are highly professional journalists who, along with other investigative mediums, fulfil a vital watchdog role which is lacking in the wider media landscape.

The recommendation by the judge that the Ministry of Justice shut down IRL therefore represents both an incorrect and dangerous attack on investigative journalism in North Macedonia. This ruling should be overturned as quickly as possible on appeal and legal rulings involving matters of journalistic freedoms should be assessed with full respect for international standards and jurisprudence.

The Association of Journalists of Macedonia (AJM) submitted a complaint to the Judicial Council about Judge Spirovska Paneva for a disciplinary violation over unprofessional and negligent performance of the judicial function. The European Federation of Journalists (EFJ) and the Association of Journalists of Macedonia (AJM) publicly reacted to the court verdict from October 24 and expressed support to the IRL and Cvetkovska.

The MFRR stands ready to offer financial support to cover the legal costs of challenging its ruling in the higher court and calls for increased international attention and solidarity over this worrying attempt to shut down one of North Macedonia’s finest independent media platforms.

Signed by:

International Press Institute (IPI)
ARTICLE 19 Europe
European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
OBC Transeuropa (OBCT)
SafeJournalists Network (SJN)

Library

Turkey: Repeal the “disinformation offence” and overreaching legal amendments

As the Turkish Constitutional Court reviews the constitutionality of the “disinformation offence”, today on 8 November, the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) partner organisations reiterate their call for the annulment of Article 217/A of the Turkish Penal Code and related legal amendments passed in October 2022 that undermine international standards on the right to freedom of expression and of the press.

Turkish translation available here.

Since its introduction a year ago, the offence of “publicly disseminating misleading information” under Article 217/A, known as the “disinformation offence”, has been weaponized to silence dissent. The broad and vague language of Article 217/A has resulted in at least 33 journalists confronting legal consequences, indicating the article’s potential to stifle legitimate dialogue and critical thought under the guise of curbing “false information.”

Any restrictions to the right to freedom of expression, which is guaranteed by the Article 26 of the Turkish Constitution, must be prescribed by law, must pursue a legitimate aim, be proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued and necessary in a democratic society. The Venice Commission’s urgent opinion on the offence highlighted that the ambiguous manner with which Art. 217/A is worded jeopardises the legality criterion and that it is doubtful the offence is proportionate or necessary in a democratic society considering the chilling effect it would create; making the law incompatible with international standards on the freedom of expression.

The review by the Constitutional Court presents a critical opportunity for Turkey to reestablish adherence to the principles of international human rights law and democratic values. We call upon the Turkish Constitutional Court to acknowledge the incompatibility of Article 217/A with international human rights conventions and to annul this and other restrictive amendments from October 2022.

In solidarity with those who champion free expression and media freedom in Turkey, we will be closely monitoring the Turkish Constitutional Court’s forthcoming hearing today, on 8 November, on the annulment of the “publicly disseminating misleading information” offence.

Background on the October 2022 amendments

In October 2022, the Turkish parliament passed a series of legislative amendments to several laws, including the Turkish Penal Code, the Internet Law and the Press Law. This new “censorship” or “disinformation law” criminalised “spreading false information” while additional provisions have imposed heavy obligations on social media platforms and over-the-top service providers.

Before the October 2022 amendments, Turkish legislation was already placing tight constraints on online platforms, mandating swift compliance with content takedown requests under the threat of substantial penalties. Since the October 2022 changes, social media platforms (SMPs) risk advertising bans, hefty fines that could be as high as 3 percent of their global income, and significant reductions in their bandwidth, or ‘throttling’, if they do not follow government orders. Not adhering to even a single demand for content removal or user information can lead to up to 90 percent throttling of their services and a six-month ban on advertisements.

Signed by:

ARTICLE 19 Europe
European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
International Press Institute (IPI)
OBC Transeuropa (OBCT)

Türkiye: “Dezenformasyon suçu” ve diğer kısıtlayıcı yasal değişiklikler yürürlükten kaldırılsın

ARTICLE 19 Europe ve Medya Özgürlüğü Acil Müdahale (MFRR) paydaşları; Anayasa Mahkemesi’nin “dezenformasyon suçunun” anayasaya uygunluğunu incelediği bugün (8 Kasım), Türk Ceza Kanunu’nun 217/A maddesinin ve Ekim 2022’de kabul edilen ve ifade hürriyeti hakkına ilişkin uluslararası standartları hiçe sayan yasal değişikliklerin iptali çağrısını yinelemektedir.

Bir yıl önce yürürlüğe girmesinden bu yana, “dezenformasyon suçu” olarak bilinen 217/A maddesi kapsamındaki “halkı yanıltıcı bilgiyi alenen yayma” suçu, muhalefeti susturmak için silah olarak kullanılıyor. Madde 217/A’nın geniş ve muğlak dili, en az 33 gazeteciye soruşturma açılmasına neden oldu. Bu durum, maddenin “gerçeğe aykırı bilginin yayılmasını” engelleme kisvesi altında meşru diyaloğu ve eleştirel düşünceyi boğma potansiyeline işaret ediyor.

Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Anayasası’nın 26. maddesi ile düzenlenen ifade hürriyeti hakkına getirilecek her türlü kısıtlama kanunla öngörülmeli, meşru bir amaç gütmeli, güdülen meşru amaçla orantılı olmalı ve demokratik bir toplumda gerekli olmalıdır. Venedik Komisyonu’nun suçla ilgili acil görüşünde, 217/A maddesinin muğlak ifadesinin yasallık kriterini tehlikeye attığı belirtilmiş, fiilin suç olarak düzenlenmesinin yaratacağı caydırıcı etkinin bu düzenlemenin demokratik bir toplumun gereklerine uygun veya güdülen amaçla orantılı olduğunu şüpheye düşürdüğü vurgulanmıştır. Komisyon, bu durumun yasayı ifade hürriyetine ilişkin uluslararası standartlarla bağdaşmaz hale getirdiği kanaatine varmıştır.

Anayasa Mahkemesi tarafından yapılacak inceleme, Türkiye’nin uluslararası insan hakları hukuku ilkelerine ve demokratik değerlere bağlılığını yeniden tesis etmesi için kritik bir fırsat sunmaktadır. Anayasa Mahkemesi’ni 217/A maddesinin uluslararası insan hakları sözleşmeleriyle uyumsuzluğunu kabul etmeye, Ekim 2022’de mevzuata eklenen bu ve diğer kısıtlayıcı değişiklikleri iptal etmeye çağırıyoruz.

Türkiye’de ifade hürriyetini ve medya özgürlüğünü savunanlarla dayanışma içinde, Anayasa Mahkemesi’nde “halkı yanıltıcı bilgiyi alenen yayma” suçunu düzenleyen hükmün iptaline ilişkin bugün (8 Kasım) yapılacak incelemeyi yakından takip edeceğiz.

Ekim 2022’de yapılan yasa değişikliklerinin arka planı

Türkiye Büyük Millet Meclisi; Ekim 2022’de Türk Ceza Kanunu, İnternet Kanunu ve Basın Kanunu da dâhil olmak üzere çeşitli kanunlarda bir dizi değişiklik yaptı. Bu yeni “sansür” veya “dezenformasyon yasası”, “gerçeğe aykırı bilgi yaymayı” suç olarak düzenlerken, sosyal medya mecralarına ve internet servis sağlayıcılarına da ağır yükümlülükler getirdi.

Ekim 2022 değişikliklerinden önce Türkiye’deki mevzuat halihazırda dijital mecralar için ağır kısıtlamalar öngörüyor ve önemli ceza tehditleri altında içerik kaldırma emirlerine hızlı bir şekilde uyulmasını zorunlu kılıyordu. Bu değişikliklerin yürürlüğe girmesinden bu yana, sosyal medya mecraları (SMM’ler), iktidarın emirlerine uymadıkları takdirde reklam yasakları, küresel gelirlerinin yüzde 3’üne kadar çıkabilecek ağır para cezaları ve bant genişliklerinde önemli düşüşler veya “daraltma” riskiyle karşı karşıya bulunmaktadır. Mevcut düzenlemeye göre içerik kaldırılması ya da kullanıcı bilgilerine ilişkin tek bir talebe dahi uyulmaması, bant genişliklerinin yüzde 90’a varan oranda daraltılmasına ve altı aya kadar reklam yasağı almalarına neden olabilmektedir.

Ekim 2022 değişiklikleri hakkında daha fazla bilgi için aşağıdaki kaynakları ziyaret edebilirsiniz:

https://www.article19.org/resources/turkey-dangerous-dystopian-new-legal-amendments
https://freeturkeyjournalists.ipi.media/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/turkey-throttling-the-media-in-crucial-election-year-turkish.pdf

İMZALAYANLAR

ARTICLE 19 Europe
Avrupa Basın ve Medya Özgürlüğü Merkezi (ECPMF)
Avrupa Gazeteciler Federasyonu (EFJ)
Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT)
Uluslararası Basın Enstitüsü (IPI)

Library

Media freedom groups dismayed at the abrupt closure of…

Media freedom groups dismayed at the abrupt closure of investigation into smear campaign against Romanian journalist

Journalists and media freedom groups today expressed dismay at the decision of Romania’s Prosecutor Office at the Bucharest Court of Appeal to close the investigation into the smear campaign against journalist Emilia Șercan. To do so the Prosecutor made the extraordinary ruling that ‘the offences’, including the publication of stolen private photos and the presumed disclosure of evidence held by the police, ‘were not provided for by the criminal law’.

This decision comes twenty months after Șercan first filed a complaint to the police about stolen personal photos posted on adult sites in February 2022. Within hours of filing the complaint, evidence provided by Șercan to the police was then posted on a Moldovan media web-site strongly suggesting that someone within the police had leaked the information.

On 26 October, in anticipation of the probable closure of the investigation, media freedom groups appealed to the Prosecutor General, Alex Florin Florența, demanding the investigation be kept open and transferred to a new team supervised by himself.

The letter noted the litany of failures and clear breaches of procedure in the original investigation, that suggest a deliberate attempt to scupper the investigation and to protect the perpetrators of the crime.

The smear campaign against Emilia Șercan began after she published, in January 2022, revelations that Nicolae Ciucă, President of the Romanian Senate who was at the time Prime Minister, had plagiarized his doctoral dissertation.

This decision fails both Emilia Șercan and all Romanian journalists who seek to hold political power to account.

We support Emilia Șercan’s search for justice and back her appeal to overturn this unjust decision.

Signed by:

ActiveWatch
Center for Independent Journalism (CIJ)
Committee to Protect Journalists
European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
Free Press Unlimited
International Press Institute
OBC Transeuropa (OBCT)
The Daphne Caruana Galizia Foundation

Library

Media Freedom Groups troubled with the CULT report on…

Media Freedom Groups troubled with the CULT report on the EMFA proposal

Apr 28, 2023

Dear Sabine Verheyen,

We, the undersigned journalists, press freedom, civil society, trade unions, and digital rights groups, are writing to you with regard to the proposed amendments to the draft European Media Freedom Act (EMFA) you have written as the Rapporteur on behalf of the Committee on Culture and Education (CULT).

We thank the rapporteur for the timely drafting and appreciate several amendments in the report, such as the strengthening of the independence of the European Board for Media Services.

However, we are very concerned about many changes that dilute the impact of the proposal , as well as the harmonization effort that drives the EMFA. Moreover, the removal of the explicit reference and guarantee of journalists and editors’ editorial independence throughout the proposal, and the changing of the media pluralism test from mandatory to optional in national rules raise our concern regarding the EMFA’s capacity to adequately protect media pluralism and media freedom in the EU.

Our main critical points are the following:

The removal of almost all references to editorial independence in the proposal and the insertion of media owners’ right to assume a leading editorial role (Art 6.2);
The insertion of VLOPs into the media plurality assessment and the exchange of a mandatory nature for a voluntary one (Art 21); and
The failure to strengthen media ownership transparency rules (Art 6.1).

Editorial independence is an essential pillar of media freedom that helps guarantee the integrity of a media’s journalism and protection against the undue influence of vested interests from political or business groups. The latest scandal surrounding Mathias Döpfner, the CEO of Axel Springer, seeking to interfere in editorial policy of Germany’s largest newspaper underlines the vulnerability of our media to vested interests and the necessity to maintain protections on editorial independence across Europe.

The inclusion of Very Large Online Platforms under the media plurality test under Art 21 should also be removed as it prejudges the methodology to be developed for protecting news media pluralism in Europe. News media plurality cannot be looked at in isolation and VLOPs as with other actors such as advertising companies have a significant impact on the media economy and this is recognised already in the Digital Markets Act (Regulation 2022/1925). However, to insert VLOPs into the EMFA which is primarily focused on a public interest test for news media is premature and ties the hands of the policy experts assigned to develop the media plurality test.

We kindly remind you that the media ownership transparency obligations on media under Article 6.1 should be strengthened as it is only through clear publicly available and verifiable information that the public can make informed decisions about the integrity of the media. This is also a request in the recently published independent research for the CULT Committee on the EMFA. Only this way will we achieve meaningful transparency.

We call on you, dear Sabine Verheyen, and on all CULT members as the lead committee, which has been a reliable and vocal campaigner for media freedoms across the European Union, to stick to your principles and help to improve this act as a regulation so much needed in the EU and beyond.

With kind regards,

Signed by:

Association of European Journalists (AEJ Belgium)
Civil Liberties Union for Europe (Liberties)
Eurocadres
European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
Global Forum for Media Development (GFMD)
International Press Institute (IPI)
OBC Transeuropa (OBCT)
Ossigeno.info
South East Europe Media Organisation (SEEMO)
Society of Journalists, Warsaw
The Daphne Caruana Galizia Foundation

Library

Multiple journalists threatened and harassed in Serbia, authorities must…

Multiple journalists threatened and harassed in Serbia, authorities must take urgent action

In the past month in Serbia, several journalists have been targeted by serious threats raising fears for their physical safety. Partners of the Media Freedom Rapid Response and the Safe Journalists Network in condemning in the strongest terms the intimidation and often orchestrated campaigns by pro-government media outlets and members of the public to silence journalists.

The undersigned organisations urge the authorities to take the necessary measures to ensure their protection and prevent further threats.

The latest shocking threat reported on 1 December 2022 targeted Nova S TV’s journalist Jelena Obucina. Obucina received messages via Twitter, threatening her with “impalement” and stating she “would be burned”. The chilling text is composed of repeated and meticulously described death threats and threats of sexual violence. The messages were sent after a statement published in the tabloid Alo wrongly accusing Obucina of threatening Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić on television and of making anti-state propaganda.

A few days ago, the home address of Serbian journalist Nenad Kulačin was published on posters pasted in downtown Belgrade. His colleague at the daily newspaper Danas, Marko Vidojković, received more than 20 death threats via social media following a guest appearance on TV Nova S, during which he commented on the FIFA World Cup match between Serbia and Brazil. Several tabloid newspapers published an identical article that targeted and insulted him over his views expressed regarding that match.

On 6 November 2022, Danas’ daily received a threatening email via an unknown Switzerland-based Protonmail email address directed at the newsroom, which listed specific journalists and columnists. The email read that “salvos of bullets” could be fired at them, and that it could “end up” like what happened to journalists of the French satirical paper Charlie Hebdo, who were killed in their offices by terrorists in 2015. The email called the journalists “enemy of the Serbian people”, “traitors” and mentioned the newspaper’s coverage of Kosovo, Montenegro, and the Republika Srpska. Since then, permanent police security has been positioned in front of the editorial offices in Belgrade.

The Safe Journalists Network said that, while the number of cases did not increase above the standard figures recently, the severity of those threats are of great concern: “It is again clear that narrative and negative campaigns that start with statements from high-ranking government officials, usually continued by tabloids, lead to terrible threats from unknown people, especially on social media. We are concerned because such cases and incidents create confusion among citizens, who receive a completely wrong message from government officials and tabloids, that says that journalists are working against their country, that they are targeting the president and senior officials, and that they are actually enemies of Serbia.”

The undersigned organisations urge the Serbian authorities to publicly condemn the threats against the media, thoroughly investigate these cases as well as all reports filed by journalists, and ensure prevention of further attacks by promoting an environment that respects pluralistic opinions and diverging editorial policies.

Signed by:

ARTICLE 19 Europe
European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
International Press Institute (IPI)
OBC Transeuropa (OBCT)

Library

Slovenia: Media freedom groups back legislative efforts to depoliticise…

Slovenia: Media freedom groups back legislative efforts to depoliticise public media

Reform aimed at limiting political interference over RTV SLO faces upcoming referendum challenge.

The undersigned international media freedom and journalists’ organisations today outline their tentative support for reform of the law on Radiotelevizija Slovenija (RTV SLO) and the urgent need to depoliticise the public service media and their oversight bodies amidst continued threats to their independence. Our organisations welcome the initiative of the new coalition government to reduce the influence of politics on the broadcaster’s operations and foster an enabling climate for its public service mission.

Events of the last few years at RTV SLO have provided a clear illustration of why such changes are urgently needed. Under the previous government, leading politicians created an atmosphere of hostility towards public service media, including smears against journalists and aggressive accusations of political bias, as reflected by the 2021 mission report of the undersigned organizations and Slovenia’s fall to 54th place in Reporters Without Borders’ 2022 World Press Freedom Index. This was accompanied by politicised appointments to RTV SLO’s programming council and supervisory board, on occasion through legal yet questionable practices. Politically-affiliated appointees to these two bodies then utilised voting majorities to approve controversial decisions on staffing and programming favourable to the ruling SDS party, particularly at the public television. These appointments of often unqualified candidates or individuals with links to the former government were pushed through despite the widespread criticism.

Since then, directors and management have been accused by staff of axing shows, removing editors, pressuring or reassigning journalists, and attempting to engineer a political shift in news and current affairs programming. Unions representing RTV SLO have repeatedly undertaken strike action to protest what they claim are unjustified infringements on editorial freedom, while repeated calls have been made by the largest journalist unions for the director general and director of television to step down. These near daily internal clashes, which have intensified in recent months, have led to more than 30 staff quitting and resulted in a damaging drop in viewership and a loss of public trust. Recently, 38 members of staff received warnings about the potential termination of their employment due to their public support for colleagues in the studio. Negotiations to resolve the situation remain unsuccessful. This situation jeopardises RTV SLO’s journalistic mission and undermines the public’s right to information.

It is clear to our organisations that efforts are urgently needed to address the root cause of these issues: the disproportionate influence of all forms of politics on RTV SLO’s governance structures. While previous governments have pledged to amend the 2006 law on RTV Slovenija to reduce political representation on the councils, proposals have always fallen away when reality of governing set in. This lack of political will to address the situation has left the RTV SLO at the mercy of political forces and open to successive periods of instability after election cycles. While concerns over independence in management are nothing new, the changes enacted under the previous government have left the broadcaster in the most challenging situation in decades. We therefore welcome the legislative initiative by the new coalition government led by Prime Minister Robert Golob to address this extraordinary situation.

The draft proposals would restructure the two current governing councils into a single, 17-member decision-making body. Appointments to this new Council of RTV would be made by representatives of civil society and RTV SLO employees. The National Assembly, which currently appoints the majority of members, would play no role. Under the reorganised system, the council would be led by a four-member management board, headed by a president, which would oversee financing and programming. Appointments would be made in a staggered manner. If the changes are approved, the mandate of the current members of the current program and supervisory councils, director general director, director of television, and director of the radio would end, though they would continue in their position until the new council is established. Current editors would remain in their posts, except in cases where it is determined that they do not enjoy the confidence of the majority of employees in their editorial team.

Our shared assessment is that overall these draft amendments represent a justified and principled attempt to revise an outdated legislative framework, depoliticise the broadcaster and foster a more enabling environment for the free exercise of RTV SLO’s journalistic mission. If approved, the new system of governance would significantly limit the ability of any government, current or future, to use its parliamentary majority to fill the councils with allies and interfere in the work of public media. The management model outlined is representative and would reflect a broad range of civil society groups.
However, we note that it is regrettable that the Parliamentary Committee for Culture did not first hold a public consultation on the bill or seek review of the draft from the Council of Europe or international media organisations and journalists’ organisations/unions. While we recognise the need to urgently address the situation at RTV SLO, such changes to the legal framework should have been developed in an open and transparent manner and with the full involvement of civil society and journalist organisations. To ensure full functional independence of this new council, it is vital that all candidates meet strict professional criteria, be selected under clear and transparent rules and be committed to ensuring pluralistic and professional programming. Candidates from civil society should not have any direct or indirect links to political parties. It is vital also that the new financial committee will fully operate in the public interest. Questions also remain about the management of the RTV SLO during the transition period. Nonetheless, in our assessment the draft amendments align with European standards on public service media governance and should have an overall positive impact.

The law was adopted by the National Assembly on 14 July 2022. Before any changes are made, the amendment will face a referendum initiated by the opposition on November 27. If passed, this should ensure the stability of RTV SLO in the short term. Even then, it must not be seen as an antidote to all the challenges currently facing public service media. The process of depoliticisation will be long and challenging. It is crucial also that this legislation be accompanied by a secondary bill which provides for long-term sustainable financing and establishes a solid economic foundation for RTV SLO to hire and train a new generation of professional journalists, re-establish public trust and meet the challenges of the future. This accompanying bill must follow quickly and should establish autonomy in editorial decision-making and modernise the organisation of the institution.

This reform is an important first step forward. If passed, this legislative amendment would move towards fulfilling a key recommendation of the European Commission’s Rule of Law report 2022 on Slovenia, which called for stronger mechanisms to enhance independent governance at public service media. Applying these standards would likewise represent a boost for the media freedom credentials of the new government, which made reform of public service media a priority during its election campaign. Our organisations will continue to closely monitor the situation and call for an end to all politically-motivated pressure on the editorial autonomy of the country’s public service media.

Signed by:

Balkan Free Media Initiative (BFMI)
European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
European Federation of Journalists
Free Press Unlimited (FPU)
International Press Institute (IPI)
Public Media Alliance (PMA)
Reporters Without Borders (RSF)
OBC Transeuropa (OBCT)

Library

Italy: a call of support for Roberto Saviano, defendant…

Italy: a call of support for Roberto Saviano, defendant in a defamation trial

Members of the Coalition Against SLAPPs in Europe (CASE), with the support of the coalition’s Italian group and Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR), express solidarity with Roberto Saviano who attended the first hearing in the proceedings for aggravated defamation initiated against him by current Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni.

We are seriously concerned about the criminal proceedings initiated in 2021 by the current Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, the leader of Fratelli d’Italia. Under the current provisions on defamation, Roberto Saviano risks imprisonment for his criticism of Meloni during a TV programme.

Such accusations act as a gag on freedom of expression, a fundamental right enshrined in the Italian Constitution and international law. No journalist or writer should be prosecuted for expressing their honest opinion on issues of public interest. A criminal defamation suit is not an acceptable response in a democracy, all the more so when it comes from a high ranking representative of the institution. This threat to Saviano reveals, once again, the degree of the abuse of defamation suits or SLAPPs (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation) in Italy.

The lawsuit for aggravated defamation was initiated by current Prime Minister Meloni in November 2021, in response to comments made by Roberto Saviano during the episode of the TV programme Piazza Pulita which aired on 3rd December 2020. Saviano’s comment was formulated in response to the controversial rhetoric employed in recent years by the two political leaders to describe the migration emergency in the Mediterranean.

In November 2020, the NGO ship Open Arms rescued a number of displaced individuals from a shipwreck, caused by a collapsing dinghy in the Mediterranean Sea. The delayed rescue by the Italian authorities had prevented timely assistance to the survivors who were in dire need of specialist medical care, including a six-month-old infant who later died on the Open Arms. Following Piazza Pulita’s coverage of the investigation on the authorities’ delayed response, Roberto Saviano had referred to both Meloni, the then leader of Fratelli d’Italia and the Lega secretary, Matteo Salvini as ‘bastards’.

The possibility that Roberto Saviano, in his role as a writer and journalist, could incur a prison sentence for expressing his opinion on a politically sensitive issue, such as the treatment of migrants in Italy, once again draws attention to the serious inadequacies of Italian libel laws. The right to freedom of expression is enshrined in Article 21 of the Italian Constitution. Furthermore, international law and jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) guarantees that the right to freedom of expression extends to statements and ideas that may ‘offend, shock or disturb’ and that opinions are entitled to enhanced protection under the guarantee of the right to freedom of expression. Further, the ECtHR has clarified that public figures and, in particular, political actors must tolerate higher levels of criticism and scrutiny given their public position within society, and that in such cases criminal prosecution has a chilling effect and is violating the right to freedom of expression as guaranteed by Article 10 ECHR.

Those who express their opinion on matters of public interest should not fear nor be exposed to intimidation, conviction, or imprisonment. On this last point, the Italian Constitutional Court has made its position clear, urging lawmakers to initiate a general reform of the legislation on defamation that would bring Italian legislation in line with the standards of European and international law. With the ruling of 9 June 2020 and the decision of 22 June 2021, the Court, in line with previous judgments of the ECtHR, declared prison sentences in cases of defamation in the press unconstitutional. However, the provision of prison sentences remains in place for cases of ‘exceptional gravity’. In accordance with such provisions, Saviano still faces a custodial sentence because the formal charge is aggravated defamation.

At the conclusion of the first hearing at the Criminal Court of Rome on 15 November 2022, it was decided that the trial will be re-assigned to a new judge and adjourned to 12 December. The current Minister of Infrastructure, Matteo Salvini, has filed a petition to become a civil plaintiff. The Lega leader has also a pending defamation lawsuit initiated against Roberto Saviano in 2018: its first hearing is scheduled for 1 February 2023. Further, on 28 January 2023 another defamation trial instigated by Gennaro Sangiuliano, current Minister of Culture, awaits Roberto Saviano.

At the end of the first hearing in the Meloni case on 15th November, Saviano reiterated the central role that writers play in a democratic society: “My tools are words. I try, with the word, to persuade, to convince, to activate”. Exiting the courtroom, he argued that: “Democracy is based not only on a consensus that can lead to winning the electoral lottery, but exists if dissent and criticism are allowed. Without such premises there is no democratic oxygen”.

The perilous situation in which Roberto Saviano finds himself must also be taken into account. Life under escort, already a cause of marginalisation for journalists, was only necessary due to threats made against Saviano by organised crime and these threats should not be amplified through further threats made by high ranking politicians.

Joining the dissent expressed by Italian and European journalists’ associations, the undersigned organisations call on Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni to immediately withdraw the charges against Roberto Saviano. We support the recommendation formulated by Italian and European civil society and international organisations to the new parliament to act against vexatious complaints and to quickly adopt a comprehensive reform of both civil and criminal defamation laws in Italy. Finally, we urge Italy to bring forward legislation to tackle the use of SLAPPs in line with the EU Anti-SLAPP Recommendation of 27 April 2022. The Italian Government is also urged to give its full support to the Anti-SLAPP Directive as proposed by the European Commission.

Signed by:

OBC Transeuropa (OBCT)
aditus foundation
Access Info Europe
ARTICLE 19
Articolo21
Blueprint for Free Speech
Center for Spatial Justice
Civic Initiatives
Civil Liberties Union For Europe
Ecojustice Ireland
European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
Global Witness
Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights
IFEX
Index on Censorship
International Press Institute
Irish PEN/ PEN na hÉireann
Justice for Journalists Foundation
Justice & Environment
Legal Human Academy
Libera Informazione
PEN International
Presseclub Concordia
Reporters Without Borders (RSF)
Solomon
The Daphne Caruana Galizia Foundation
Whistleblowing International Network

Poland: MFRR reasserts recommendations for democratic reform for press freedom and public media

Recommendations

Public service media

The MFRR mission made further recommendations on wider improvements to the press freedom landscape in Poland.

Media regulation

Media pluralism

State support to media

Vexatious lawsuits

Upheaval at Polish public broadcaster must lead to comprehensive reform to restore and safeguard independence

Hungary: Draft Sovereignty Protection Act poses fresh threat to independent media

North Macedonia: Ruling against Investigative Reporting Lab and its editor must be overturned

Turkey: Repeal the “disinformation offence” and overreaching legal amendments

Background on the October 2022 amendments

Türkiye: “Dezenformasyon suçu” ve diğer kısıtlayıcı yasal değişiklikler yürürlükten kaldırılsın

Media freedom groups dismayed at the abrupt closure of investigation into smear campaign against Romanian journalist

Media Freedom Groups troubled with the CULT report on the EMFA proposal

Multiple journalists threatened and harassed in Serbia, authorities must take urgent action

Slovenia: Media freedom groups back legislative efforts to depoliticise public media

Italy: a call of support for Roberto Saviano, defendant in a defamation trial

Get in touch