Journalist shooting Martinique Library

France: EFJ statement on four journalists who were shot…

France: EFJ statement on four journalists who were shot at in Martinique

Four French journalists covering the protests against the Covid-19 rules and civil unrest in Martinique have been fired upon three times. The European Federation of Journalists (EFJ) joined its affiliates in France (SNJ, SNJ-CGT, CFDT-Journalistes) in expressing full support to the targeted journalists and strongly condemning a new attack on press freedom, which must be promptly investigated by the French authorities.

On the night of the 25 and 26 November 2021, photographer Loïc Venance from Agence France-Presse (AFP), journalists Maureen Lehoux and cameraman Julien Taureau from BFMTV/RMC Sport and journalist Raphaël Lafargue from Abaca Press were filming and taking pictures of a burning roadblock from a quiet street near the Levassor canal in Fort-de-France. The street was at the time deserted when two men on motorbikes drove by and started firing at them. No bullets hit them and they managed to flee the scene quickly, going for cover in their vehicle parked nearby and drove away.

Authorities on the Caribbean island of Martinique ordered a curfew yesterday after protesters looted stores and burned barricades amid strong protests over Covid-19 measures in the French overseas territories. A general strike started five days ago, notably against the compulsory vaccination of health workers. It is reported that seven policemen have been injured last night in Fort-de-France.

EFJ General Secretary Ricardo Gutiérrez said: “The civil unrest in Martinique reflects a complex situation that is exacerbated by the virus and all that it entails, so it is crucial that journalists be able to do their work freely and safely in order to best inform the public and the rest of the world about what is happening there. We give them all our support. We have taken the matter to the Platform for the protection of journalists of the Council of Europe.”

Slovenia flag Library

Slovenia: Concerns over controversial changes to RTV programming

Slovenia: Concerns over controversial changes to RTV programming

The undersigned partners of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) today express concern over proposed modifications to news programming at the Slovenian public television RTV, which would reduce the broadcaster’s ability to inform the public and scrutinise power. We therefore urge the broadcaster’s management to enter into dialogue with its editorial board to ensure adjustments are proportionate and in the best interest of public interest reporting.

Under the draft Program-Production Plan (PPN) for 2022, shows such as the flagship foreign policy programme, Globus, and many news talk shows would be cancelled. Daily news programs such as Dnevnik and Slovenska kronika would be shortened, while others would be shifted to the broadcaster’s second channel, which has far lower viewership. Election programming would likewise be transferred to the secondary channel, where it would be broadcast in the absence of major sporting events.

The proposed shakeup has already proven controversial. In October, the editor-in-chief of the TV Slovenia news program, Manica Janežič Ambrožič, stepped down in protest. She was followed by three other TV Slovenia editors: Dejan Ladika, Meta Dragolič and Mitja Prek. A letter criticising the scale of the changes was recently signed by more than 90 percent of employees, who argued it would limit their ability to produce quality public service reporting.

Since the letter was sent to the management, headed by new RTVSLO director Andrej Grah Whatmough, only minor amendments have been made to the draft changes. RTV management has said the alterations to programming are necessary due to the current financial situation, the departure of employees and low ratings of news shows. RTV’s program council is due to vote on the proposals during its next meeting on Monday, November 29.

The country’s biggest journalistic unions, the Slovene Association of Journalists (DNS) (DNS) and the Trade Union of Journalists of Slovenia, have spoken out against the changes, which they argue are unrealistic, unfeasible and will be detrimental to the quality of journalistic content and the future development of the broadcaster.

Our organisations are concerned that, in their current form, these changes will marginalise public interest reporting and undermine the broadcaster’s core mission: to provide the country’s citizens with professional and informative reporting on both domestic and foreign current affairs. We are also concerned that these changes have been developed without sufficient consultation. It is vital that such changes to programming must be proportionate and, crucially, have the support of the editorial board.

The quality and content of a country’s public broadcasting is a mirror to the overall strength of its media landscape. Despite its financial challenges, RTVSLO has historically ranked among the best and most independent public service broadcasters in the region. While all parties agree that reform to its funding model is urgently needed to improve its finances, it is crucial this is done without jeopardising its core journalistic mission.

We therefore call on the Radiotelevizija Slovenija program council to postpone its meeting until further dialogue is conducted by management with RTV employees. Separately, we also urge the National Assembly to ensure adequate and sustainable funding for RTVSLO that allows it to provide a high standard of news reporting, as well as uphold the commitment to public service news determined by the RTV Slovenija law.

Over the last year, journalists at RTV have faced increasing intimidation and threats both on social media and on the streets. Conspiracy theorist protesters recently stormed the headquarters and impeded broadcasting. Editors have endured relentless disparaging smears and attempts to discredit their work by elected politicians. Concerns have meanwhile been raised about politicised appointments to oversight bodies. We hope the proposed changes to RTV programming and production will not create additional pressures in the coming months.

Signed by:

  • ARTICLE 19
  • European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
  • European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
  • 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.

Poland Belarus Border Library

Poland: Journalists must be allowed access to Belarus border

Poland: Journalists must be allowed access to Belarus border

Reporting crews facing increasing intimidation by border guards. The undersigned partners of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) today call on the Polish government to respect and facilitate the free flow of information by allowing journalists access to the border with Belarus to report on the humanitarian situation. We also urge Polish police and military personnel to refrain from arbitrary detentions and intimidation of media workers working in the area around the restricted zone.

Since early September, journalists have been unable to report from inside a three-kilometre-wide stretch of land along the Belarusian border placed under a state of emergency. The measure limits the ability of journalists and aid workers to enter the restricted area and prohibits the taking of photographs or video footage that shows the border or its infrastructure. Those convicted of violating the state of emergency can face a prison sentence of up to 30 days or a fine of up to 5,000 Polish złoty.

Concerns about the lack of information and transparency about what is happening within the restricted areas escalated in November as thousands of migrants and asylum seekers attempted to enter Polish territory via Belarus, sparking a geopolitical dispute that Polish and EU leaders have accused authoritarian leader Alexander Lukashenko of orchestrating in retaliation for Western sanctions.

The disproportionate restrictions have severely limited the ability of journalists and media organisations from Poland and around the world to cover this dire human rights situation and ensure adequate protection is given to those stranded in inhumane conditions. The state of emergency is also resulting in the criminalisation of journalists trying to report on a matter of significant public interest. Such restrictions on media freedom within a member state of the European Union are unprecedented.

Earlier last week, two journalists from RT France were detained by police near the city of Usnarz Gorny for allegedly violating the state of emergency. A police spokesperson said that the two French nationals, reporter David Khalifa and cameraman Jordi Demory, were detained for working without a permit inside the restricted zone. They were interrogated at a police station and ordered to pay a fine.

In late September, three journalists from French-German broadcaster ARTE TV were arrested, held in a cell overnight and then taken to court the next day in handcuffs to face charges of violating the state of emergency. They were released without a fine. Earlier in September, Onet journalist Bartłomiej Bublewicz and his camera operator faced criminal charges from police for violating the same rules due to their reporting.

In the last week, even those reporting from outside the restricted zone have faced arbitrary detention and intimidation from police and military personnel. On 16 November, three photojournalists, Maciek Nabrdalik, Maciej Moskwa and Martin Divisekwere, had been taking photos at a temporary army base outside the zone when they were detained by soldiers in the Polish Army. They were aggressively pulled from the car and handcuffed for over an hour. The guards searched their car and memory cards on their cameras, violating journalistic privacy. The trio were later released without charge.

On 14 November, a reporting team from the Balkan Investigative Reporting Network (BIRN) was pulled over outside the zone near a checkpoint in Czeremcha and briefly detained by police and border guards, who demanded the unique identifier of their mobile phones, which can be used to track the device. When reporter Claudia Ciobanu and photojournalist Jaap Arriens questioned the legal basis of the demand, the officers said they were suspected of stealing the phones. The guards also falsely claimed the emergency zone had been extended to where the journalists were at that time.

These acts of intimidation and restrictions mean journalists are facing major barriers in verifying information from the border. Allegations of rights abuses remain extremely difficult to either verify or debunk, including claims of illegal pushbacks by Polish border guards. With media barred, the only snippets of news and images from the barbed wire border come from Belarusian and Polish authorities’ social media posts. The result of this information blackout is that disinformation is thriving and facts are hard to come by, meaning a severe humanitarian crisis, likely involving serious human rights violations, is going unreported.

Despite protests by Polish media and rights groups, the state of emergency remains in place. We find it hard to avoid the conclusion that part of this decision by Polish authorities has been to intentionally keep the media from documenting the scale and nature of the crisis and shielding itself and border security services from scrutiny. The free and uninterrupted flow of information at the border is vital. We therefore join the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, Dunja Mijatović, in urging the Polish authorities to immediately allow journalists to re-enter the border zone.

Signed by:

  • ARTICLE 19
  • European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
  • European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
  • 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

Greece: Answers needed over alleged state surveillance of journalist

Greece: Answers needed over alleged state surveillance of journalist

Intelligence service leak reveals monitoring of investigative platform and journalist in Greece. The undersigned partners of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) today urge the Greek government to immediately provide clarity over allegations that a state intelligence agency conducted surveillance on journalist Stavros Malichudis and the investigative media organisation Solomon, which focuses on refugees and migration in Greece.

The revelations published by Greek newspaper Efimerida ton Syntakton (EFSYN), which indicated the government’s National Intelligence Service (EYP) had secretly been conducting monitoring of Malichudis, pose serious questions over journalistic source protection and the right to privacy in Greece, which is already facing growing questions over a decline in media freedom.

The November 14 report revealed that the EYP, which gathers intelligence on national security, had requested information on citizens, including a lawyer, a journalist, a worker for a United Nations agency focused on migration and protest organisers. The information was leaked to the newspaper by a whistle-blower. The newspaper redacted the names and private information of the journalist and others who were monitored. However, Malichudis recognised the description of events and identified himself as the journalist in the story.

The alleged surveillance relates to an article that Malichudis and the director of Solomon, Iliana Papangeli, had published in April 2021, seven months prior to the newspaper’s revelations. Their article had reported on a 12-year-old boy from Syria living in a refugee holding camp on the island of Kos, whose artwork was exhibited in a museum and then published on the website of the French newspaper Le Monde. In April, Malichudis, a freelance journalist who works for AFP, is a member of Solomon and collaborates with Investigate Europe and Reporters United, had tried to track down the boy to interview him about his artistic success and the experiences of his family reaching Europe. The journalists had not informed anyone outside Solomon of their plans.

A redacted file published by EFSYN showed that while Malichudis was researching the story, officials at EYP’s headquarters sent a request to colleagues based on Kos asking them to confirm whether the boy and his family were being held in the camp and to gather information. The request included Malichudis’s name and ID number and said the EYP had information “from a source of high reliability” that the journalist was planning to speak with the family. Solomon was also mentioned by name. It also requested information on an employee of the International Organization for Migration (IOM) in Greece, a source with whom Malichudis had spoken on the phone before the conversation switched to an encrypted messaging app.

The Greek authorities have yet to deny the alleged surveillance of the journalist. Given the seriousness of the allegations, and the paucity of information provided by authorities so far, our organisations urge the government to provide immediate answers to parliament as to why the National Intelligence Service had knowledge of Malichudis’s reporting before it was published. Information should also be made public about exactly how this information was gathered and the nature of the “reliable sources” the EYP had on his work. Details must also be provided about why a request was made to monitor the journalist’s confidential source, with whom he spoke only in a telephone call and an encrypted messaging app, and how the EYP had knowledge of these private communications.

The evidence provided so far indicates that Malichudis and possibly other members of the team at Solomon have had their communication illegally monitored without their knowledge and that this information was then shared with a state security agency tracking their work. In addition to raising serious privacy concerns, this surveillance would constitute a clear interference in the freedom of the press and a serious violation of the confidentiality of journalistic sources, which is protected under Article 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights. These rights are a fundamental element of media freedom, and confirmation of their violation would have a chilling effect on watchdog journalism and undermine transparency by discouraging whistle-blowers to come forward.

Given that the EYP’s mandate is to investigate threats to Greece’s national security, we also question why a journalist’s reporting on a refugee’s experience in a holding camp should even be justified as a legitimate target for intelligence gathering of any form. Immediate justification should be provided as to why this was the case. If such a human-interest story drew the attention of the EYP, it then begs the question to what extent the security services are monitoring the work of investigative journalists probing an issue such as illegal pushbacks. We hope this case is not the tip of the iceberg of wider surveillance of journalists by state authorities, which we have recently observed in other EU member states. The longer the Greek government remains silent or dodges questions, the longer it will invite scrutiny. The Special Standing Committee on Institutions and Transparency should examine this case as a matter of priority.

Our organisations stand in solidarity with Stavros Malichudis and the journalistic team at Solomon, which is a current grantee of the Investigative Journalism for Europe (IJ4EU) fund led by the International Press Institute (IPI), and whose work documenting the stories of unaccompanied minors in Moria’s refugee camp was nominated for a major European journalism award. Moving forward, we will continue to monitor this case closely and will demand concrete answers from the government on this issue during an MFRR media freedom mission to Greece later this year. In the meantime, we also urge the European Commission and European Parliament to seek immediate responses from the Greek government about these extremely serious allegations.

Signed by:

  • ARTICLE 19
  • European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
  • European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
  • 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.

INGEBORG BEUGEL, the dutch journalist targeted by greek media for exposing the Prime Minister's lies Library

Dutch journalist forced to leave Greece after threats and…

Dutch journalist forced to leave Greece after threats and intimidation

The IPI global network today expresses regret over the involuntary departure of Dutch journalist Ingeborg Beugel from Greece, after she faced physical and online threats following a heated exchange with the Greek prime minister over refugee pushbacks in the Aegean Sea. IPI stands in full support and solidarity with Beugel and calls on Greece to provide a safe working environment for all journalists.

On 17 November 2021, Beugel, a Dutch freelance correspondent, revealed she planned to leave the country over fears for her safety after she experienced an aggressive smear campaign online and in pro government media following her questioning of PM Kyriakos Mitsotakis on 9 November over allegations of his country’s illegal pushbacks.

During the joint press conference with the Dutch PM Mark Rutte, Beugel openly asked the Greek PM when he would “stop lying” about the pushbacks, to which Mitsotakis responded: “Look, you will not come into this building and insult me. Am I very clear on this?” The exchange was shared widely on social media, garnering both praise and criticism.

Beugel was then targeted with insults and accused of spreading Turkish propaganda. She was also the focus of attempts to discredit her by numerous media in Greece, including comments which accused her of spreading lies and being a “pro-Turkish” agent. Other reports delved into her personal life. Recently, she was hit by a stone thrown at her by a man in a dark street, who called her a “Turkish spy”.

“The threats and violence against Beugel, as well as her involuntary departure from Greece, are unacceptable”, IPI Deputy Director Scott Griffen said. “Journalists fulfilling their watchdog role and asking uncomfortable questions – however pointedly – about a matter of clear public interest should never face such extreme intimidation. The shameful and coordinated attempt to discredit Beugel work and bully her out of the country raises yet more worrying questions about press freedom in Greece. IPI stands in full solidarity with the journalist and will offer practical assistance through the Media Freedom Rapid Response project.”

Since the press conference, the threats directed at her have become increasingly severe, Beugel told IPI. “I cannot return to the island of Hydra where I have a house, because people will throw stones and tomatoes at me, and I will be attacked. I cannot leave the house unaccompanied anymore. Some newspapers now write multiple negative stories about me each day. My life here has become very unsafe.”

Beugel, who is a permanent resident and has lived in Greece for 40 years, said that the online harassment and threats she was facing had made it impossible to remain in the country. “People write that my head should be shaved, that I should drown together with the refugees, that I deserve to be tarred and feathered. Many of the comments are very sexist. I cannot read it anymore.”

Beugel said the harassment was part of a wider campaign to silence critics of Greece’s migration policies. “They intimidate, demonize and criminalize aid workers and NGOs that help refugees, and all those who question the policies and the pushback of migrants”, she said. “Many journalists on the Aegean islands are arrested and interrogated, their material is taken from them and from TV crews. Many get slapped with court cases. I have two court cases against me. The only goal is to make people afraid and to have a chilling effect on others to speak out.”

Beugel made the decision to leave the country after security advice from the Dutch Foreign Ministry and the Dutch embassy in Greece, as well as the Dutch Journalists’ Association NVJ. “They all told me my safety is not guaranteed here”, she said. “Then the only right decision is to come home for a while at this point.” She said she would return home for an “indefinite period” and one day wished to return to Greece.

The journalist will file a complaint with the Greek police over some of the threats she received. When exactly she will return to the Netherlands has been kept a secret for her safety. She was previously arrested in June 2021 and is currently facing trial in Greece on charges of illegally hosting an Afghan refugee in her house, which carries a 12-month prison sentence and fine of €5,000.

Despite the threats, her questions at the press conference have also led to some positive development, she added: “After my remarks, a fierce debate has finally exploded in Greek society about the close government involvement in the media”, she said. People tell me that I have brought both matters – lies about pushbacks and the quality of journalism – on the political agenda with just one question.”

IPI is concerned about Greece’s deteriorating state of press freedom, after multiple violations against journalists occurred this year. On April 9, the Greek journalist George Karaivaz was brutally murdered by unknown individuals in a suburb of Athens. More recently, parliament voted to approve a vaguely-worded legal amendment to the criminal code which allows journalists to be prosecuted and jailed for publishing “false news” deemed capable of causing “concern or fear to the public or undermining public confidence in the national economy, the country’s defense capacity or public health”. On November 15, the Greek journalist Stavros Malichudis was reported to have been secretly surveilled and monitored by the National Intelligence Service over a report about a refugee child from Syria.

 

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 and Candidate Countries.

Hellas Gold SLAPP Greece Library

SLAPP lawsuit in Greece underscores need for swift EU…

SLAPP lawsuit in Greece underscores need for swift EU directive

The undersigned partners of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) today express serious concern over a SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) targeted against the small independent media outlet Alterthess and its journalist Stavroula Poulimeni by a Greek gold mining executive convicted of serious environmental crimes. Our organisations note that this case again underscores the need for a swift European Union directive and Council of Europe Recommendation to protect journalists and media outlets reporting in the public interest from this kind of abusive litigation.

On 19 October 2021, the cooperative journalistic website Alterthess in Thessaloniki received the lawsuit filed against them by Efstathios Lialios, an executive at the firm Hellas Gold. It demanded €100,000 in damages over an article the site had published on 27 October 2020, alleging it had illegally processed his “sensitive personal data”  when it reported his criminal conviction. It argued the plaintiff’s names should not have been published and that Lialios’s reputation was damaged as a result, jeopardising his ability to find new work. The lawsuit also threatened Poulimeni with criminal sanctions.

The article, ‘Two high-ranking executives of Hellas Gold were convicted of water pollution in North Halkidiki, reported the first instance conviction of Lialios and a colleague, the then CEO of Hellas Gold, for the company’s responsibility in the systematic pollution of the local water in Halkidiki with heavy toxic metals and liquid waste. The pair were accused of failing to monitor, control or report to authorities the pollution of surface water, which vastly exceeded the legal limit and caused serious environmental degradation. Hellas Gold is a subsidiary of the Canadian Eldorado Gold Corporation.

The article by Poulimeni reported the initial verdict, which was made by the Court of First Instance of Polygyros. The Court of Appeal of Thessaloniki later confirmed the verdict on 1 September 2021, with the two executives handed a suspended sentence. Shortly after this second decision, Lialios filed the lawsuit:  a full year after the original article was written. The legal case against Alterthess and Poulimeni is due to be heard in court on 25 November 2021.

Rather than aimed at settling a legitimate legal dispute, our organisations believe it is clear that this lawsuit is aimed at silencing Alterthess and Poulimeni by forcing them into a time-consuming and costly legal battle, draining them financially and discouraging them from further reporting. For the last decade, Alterthess and Poulimeni have documented the impact of Hellas Gold’s mining operations on the environment and the local community. The extortionate financial demands seem to be an attempt to intimidate the publication and drive it to financial ruin. We therefore consider this a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP).

The grounds for the lawsuit are baseless. Court reporting by journalists and media is legally protected because of the importance of informing the public at large how justice is done. The trial was held in open court, without reporting restrictions, and the verdict was publicly available. Given the seriousness of the environmental crimes, publishing the names of the plaintiffs was both standard journalistic practice and overwhelmingly in the public interest. We cannot avoid the conclusion therefore that this lawsuit is an effort by Lialios to shield himself and Hellas Gold from critical coverage and punish Alterthess for its reporting.

This lawsuit is not a proportionate or principled attempt to seek legal redress. We therefore urge Mr. Lialios to withdraw the claim and refrain from trying to weaponise civil law in the future. If the case ends up before a court, our organisations hope that the court will take into consideration the European Court of Human Rights standards on article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Concerningly, this is not the first time that Hellas Gold has used the threat of legal action to bully those critical of its operations. This is, however, the first time that a media outlet has been the target.

This case is yet another reminder of the need for an EU Anti-SLAPP Directive that creates preventive measures and procedural safeguards to better protect journalists from abusive lawsuits by rich and powerful individuals. The overwhelming adoption by MEPs on 11 November of a report on SLAPPs was a timely reminder of the seriousness and urgency of this issue, one that sends a clear message to the European Commission that far-reaching legislation is needed. Our organisations stand by to assist the Commission and are preparing our submission to its public consultation on anti-SLAPP regulation.

With such a Directive in place and legislation implemented at the national level, we hope cases such as this involving Alterthess will be immediately dismissed or avoided altogether. Until then, the MFRR expresses our full support and solidarity with the affected journalists and all other battling abusive gag lawsuits. We will continue to monitor this case closely, have reported the lawsuit to the Council of Europe’s platform for the protection of journalism, and will provide immediate financial support to help fund Alterthess’ legal defence.

Signed by:

  • ARTICLE 19
  • European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
  • European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
  • 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.

Poland flag Library

Poland: Access to public information must not be constrained

Poland: Access to public information must not be constrained

The undersigned partners of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) are highly concerned about new possible restrictions on the right to information in Poland that could further erode press freedom in the country. On 17 November 2021, the Constitutional Tribunal will hold a hearing on the constitutionality of core provisions of the bill that regulates access to public information.

The right to information is a vital right of the public for holding governments to account and vital to the work of journalists who investigate abuse of power. We believe that imposing extensive constraints on existing legislation would undermine public transparency and thereby impede media outlets from duly fulfilling their role of watchdogs.

On 16 February 2021, the First President of the Supreme Court, Małgorzata Manowska submitted an application to Poland’s Constitutional Tribunal requesting that several essential provisions of the Act of 6 September 2001 on Access to Public Information (AAPI) be ruled as inconsistent with the respective articles of the Polish constitution. Her statement consists of six allegations concerning the elementary provisions of the AAPI.

The First President argues that several core provisions of the AAPI lack clarity and precision and contravene the right to privacy and to the protection of personal data. Małgorzata Manowska requested to find certain articles of the bill unconstitutional as they allegedly do not unequivocally regulate the relationship between them and the respected provisions on access or limitation on access to data written in the Constitution and the other legal acts.

This is not the first attempt to constrain access to public information in Poland. Małgorzata Gersdorf, Manowska’s predecessor, also sought to find certain provisions of the AAPI unconstitutional, although in a much narrower scope. In an interview with Gazeta Wyborcza, Mirosław Wróblewski, attorney at law from the Polish Ombudsman’s office, notes that his office believes that the law in force adequately balances the public and private interests, including the right to privacy. In Mr. Wróblewski’s opinion, voiding the aforementioned provision would damage the foundation of the law on access to public information in Poland: “It would not be clear what to share and who is supposed to share anything”, he stresses.

If the Constitutional Tribunal rules in favour of Manowska’s claim it may greatly impair the possibility, let alone efficiency of monitoring and controlling the activities of state institutions or state-owned enterprises. This may lead to a situation in which solely public officials (not only high-ranking politicians but all of the entities that have public funds at their disposal) arbitrarily decide which information may be disclosed. Hence, the transparency of public life would be seriously damaged. Wróblewski notes that the request of the First President could violate the right to freedom of speech guaranteed in the Constitution and directly affect press freedom in the country. The MFRR finds such a scenario dangerous as it would deprive journalists of their basic right of using the official route to obtain information on public institutions or public spending. The checks and balances mechanism that enables civil society to have control over the activities of state institutions may thus be disrupted.

Contesting the key elements of Polish legislation on access to public information would violate international law and standards, including Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights as elucidated by the Human Rights Committee in its General Comment No. 34, and  Council of Europe standards on right to information, in particular those specified in Recommendation Rec(2002)2 on access to official documents, as well as in the recently entered into force Tromso Convention.

The MFRR is monitoring the ongoing erosion of media freedom in Poland with great concern. The government continues to wage a multi-pronged attack on independent media to muzzle critical reporting and to discredit journalists by fostering a hostile working environment. These potentially grave restrictions of access to information would blaze the trail to blatant lack of accountability of public officials. We urge the Government to ensure this scenario will not materialise and reiterate how vital unrestrained access to information is for democracy and press freedom. If difficult questions are asked by citizens or journalists, public institutions should answer in a transparent manner rather than change the law as a remedy to avoid similar situations in the future. Journalists must be able to conduct their investigations and raise critical issues freely in order to fulfil their role of a primal, unbiased source of information for civil society.

Signed by:

  • ARTICLE 19
  • European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
  • 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.

Slovenian Press Agency (STA) Library

Slovenia: MFRR welcomes end to STA funding crisis

Slovenia: MFRR welcomes end to STA funding crisis

The Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) today welcomes the signing of a contract which ends the immediate financial crisis at the Slovenian Press Agency (STA). However, the MFRR also raises concerns that the current conditions of the deal could leave the agency in a financially weaker position in the long term as it carries out its vital public service mission.

On 8 November, the new acting director of the STA, Igor Kadunc, and the director of the Government Communication Office (UKOM), Uroš Urbanija, signed an agreement on the STA’s public service for November and December 2021. The deal restored state funding to the agency for the rest of the year and agreed to a court settlement on overdue back payments from UKOM.

It brings to a close a gruelling 10-month crisis, during which time the STA was forced to operate without legally-mandated state funding for 312 days and narrowly avoided bankruptcy. During this time, the MFRR repeatedly appealed to UKOM to reinstate the financing, raising the issue at the EU level and visiting Ljubljana in mid-October to meet with representatives from the STA.

While our organisations welcome the end of the immediate crisis, the issues for the STA are far from over. Ultimately, these payments were always due to the agency under two separate laws. We note that the agreement came shortly before a court was due to rule on the STA’s lawsuit over unpaid compensation, which should now be resolved via settlement. Moreover, the fact that the contract was concluded under the conditions of a legally dubious government decree rather than a solid legal foundation is regrettable. Meanwhile, several outstanding issues in the contract need to be resolved and a new business plan and agreement for 2022 need to be approved.

Moving forward, based on UKOM’s handling of this dispute, we also retain concerns that its new oversight of STA’s financial activities could infringe on editorial independence. Observation must not morph into interference. We also share the concerns of journalist groups that the commercial aspects of the deal could, if not addressed next year, weaken the sustainability of the STA’s business model in the long term. Under the conditions of the current contract, the agency will see an overall drop in monthly funding for the rest of the year. In the next agreement for 2022, a careful balance must be struck to safeguard its financial viability.

This crisis has left the STA drained psychologically as well as financially. Numerous staff and some of its most experienced journalists have left. As the MFRR heard during our mission, some of its workforce is suffering from mental health problems as a result of stress and anxiety.  Despite these pressures and smears from top government officials, its newsroom has continued to work with great professionalism and dignity. While the STA draws up a fresh business plan for 2022, a period of stability and fresh recruitment is now required to rejuvenate the agency for the future.

We also take this moment to pay tribute to the indefatigable work of the Association of Slovenian Journalists (DNS) and the Slovenian Journalists’ Union (SNS), whose crowdfunding campaign for the STA has raised a total of €385,000 to keep the STA afloat. The phenomenal support displayed by individual citizens and the solidarity expressed by the wider media community both acted as a timely reminder of the extent of the support for independent journalism in Slovenia.

However, the unavoidable conclusion is that this funding crisis should never have reached this point. The STA was financially drained over many months to the point where it had little choice but to accept UKOM’s terms or face liquidation. We maintain that this manufactured dispute was driven primarily by an effort by the government to try and exert greater control over the STA and its reporting. The effects on media freedom have been significant and concerns remain over recent politicised changes at the public broadcaster RTVS.

The STA has been the lifeblood of the Slovenian media ecosystem for the last thirty years. As we move forward it is vital that it continues to carry out its important public mission free from political pressure or further financial coercion. Adequate and fair funding for the STA and the guarantee of its editorial autonomy, as prescribed by law, will be vital. Looking ahead, greater safeguards must be put in place to stop this kind of crisis from happening again. The MFRR will continue to monitor the situation moving forward.

 

Signed by:

  • ARTICLE 19
  • European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
  • European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
  • 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.

HQ of Helsingin Sanomat Library

Finland: EFJ reacts to three journalists being accused of…

Finland: three journalists face jail term for allegedly “disclosing state secrets”

Three journalists from Finland’s largest national daily Helsingin Sanomat were charged on 29 October 2021 with “attempted disclosure of a security secret” and face jail term. The European Federation of Journalists (EFJ) joined its affiliates in Finland, the Finnish Journalists’ Union (UJF), in expressing solidarity with the journalists and condemning Finland’s deputy prosecutor general’s decision to prosecute them.

Laura HalminenTuomo Pietiläinen and Kalle Silfverberg face four months to four years in prison for publishing in December 2017 an article about the Finnish Defence Intelligence Agency (VKoeL), at a time when a constitutional change gave the Finnish security services increased surveillance powers.

Following publication of the story, authorities opened an investigation into the newspaper for allegedly disclosing “state secrets” that would endanger national security. On 17 December 2017, police raided the apartment of Laura Halminen, seizing her computer as well as flash drives.

Pre-trial investigation found out that the editorial team did not obtain information through illegal means. According to Helsingin Sanomat, all information made public was available in public sources.

Following a four-year investigation, Finland’s prosecutor decided to prosecute three of the five journalists involved and to hold most of the trial – whose date is not yet known – behind closed doors.

In an editorial, Helsingin Sanomat editor-in-chief Kaius Niemi warned that the threat of imprisonment for investigative journalists is “conducive to creating fear and self-censorship” throughout the Finnish media field.

“This is unique in the history of Finland and even highly exceptional in Western democracies,” said UJF president Hanne Aho. “The prosecutor has so far been very tight-lipped in explaining the grounds for the charges. This is a matter of such international importance for freedom of expression that the trial must be public. This will also allow the journalists to prove their innocence not only to the court but to the public”, added Aho.

EFJ President Mogens Blicher Bjerregard said: “Journalists should be rewarded, not prosecuted, for doing investigative journalism for citizens, in the public interest. It is shocking to see now that Finland attacks press freedom and thereby sends a wrong signal to all Finnish journalists doing investigation.”

Library

Finland: IPI criticizes Finland for charging three journalists with…

Finland: IPI criticizes Finland for charging three journalists with ‘disclosing state secrets’

IPI strongly criticizes decision to prosecute Helsingin Sanomat journalists following four-year investigation

The International Press Institute (IPI), the global network of editors, publishers, and leading journalists for press freedom, today expressed grave alarm over the decision by Finland’s deputy prosecutor general to charge three Helsingin Sanomat journalists with disclosing state secrets.

Helsingin Sanomat, Finland’s leading daily newspaper, started to publish a series of articles beginning on December 16, 2017, on plans – which required a constitutional amendment – to give Finland’s security services greater powers to carry out surveillance and covert operations domestically and abroad. The articles shed light in particular on the operations of the Finnish Defence Intelligence Agency (VKoeL).

Following publication of the story, authorities opened an investigation into the newspaper for allegedly divulging “state secrets”. Five Helsingin Sanomat employees were named as suspects in the investigation, including Editor-in-Chief Kaius Niemi. On December 17, 2017, police raided the apartment of journalist Laura Halminen, seizing her computer as well as flash drives.

Today, on October 29, 2021, nearly four years after the publication of the story, prosecutors announced charges for disclosure and attempted disclosure of state secrets against Halminen and journalist Tuomo Pietiläinen as well as Kalle Silfverberg, who was head of Helsingin Sanomat’s political news department at the time. Niemi as well as managing editor Esa Mäkinen were not charged. The three charged journalists face four months to four years in prison.

Helsingin Sanomat has said that the articles did not contain any state secrets and emphasized that all information that was published in the story was available in public sources. It has also underscored that the story was in the public interest. Finnish news reports said that investigators previously determined that the newspaper had not acquired the information illegally. Authorities opened a separate investigation into the source of the leak.

IPI Executive Director Barbara Trionfi expressed dismay over the decision to file charges.

“IPI is deeply alarmed by today’s decision, which poses a serious threat to the ability of journalists in Finland to work freely”, Trionfi said. “It is unacceptable and absurd that journalists in a European democracy like Finland are facing imprisonment for doing their job and reporting on an issue of massive public interest, which the discussion about the activities and powers of Finland’s security agencies undoubtedly was.

“This investigation itself – which has dragged on for years – had already cast a shadow over Finnish reporting on national security issues. These charges will now worsen this chilling effect, jeoparadizing the public’s right to be informed on issues of tremendous importance to society. IPI calls on Finnish authorities to swiftly drop all charges against the journalists in this case, and offer reassurance that upholding press freedom remains a priority in Finland.”

Khadija Patel, the chair of IPI’s global Executive Board, also criticized the move by prosecutors.

“This case undermines Finland’s reputation as a global safe haven for press freedom. At a moment in which governments around the world are ramping up pressure on independent media, to see a country like Finland take steps to punish journalists for public-interest reporting is disturbing and disheartening. Unfortunately, cases like this can inadvertently give cover to authoritarian states, and they undermine the ability of Finland and other democratic countries to defend independent journalism across the globe.”

Helsingin Sanomat has gained widespread recognition as a leading voice in the defence of independent journalism. During the 2018 summit in Helsinki between former U.S. President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin, the newspaper published ads across the city with messages in support of press freedom. It has also launched initiatives to support media working in restricted environments, such as the Hungarian online news website Telex.