This project is funded by the European Union

Inspired by

EASTERN PARTNERSHIP MEDIA FREEDOM LANDSCAPE 2014

Kyiv-2015 УДК 342.732(47+57)СНГ"2014" ББK 67.9(4Укр)400.7+67.9(2)400 ISBN 978-617-7157-12-9 С25 Project partners:

«Yeni Nesil» Union of Journalists () Yerevan Press Club (Armenia)

Association Green Wave (Georgia) Independent Journalism Center ()

Partners from Belarus

Internews Ukraine (Ukraine)

This publication was prepared through the e orts of: Arif Aliyev, «Yeni Nesil» Union of Journalists (Azerbaijan) Gulu Magerramli, «Yeni Nesil» Union of Journalists (Azerbaijan) Boris Navarsardian, Yerevan Press Club (Armenia) Armen Nikoghosyan, Yerevan Press Club (Armenia) Ashot Gazazyan, Yerevan Press Club (Armenia) Elina Poghosbekian, Yerevan Press Club (Armenia) Tamar Tsilosani, Independent media expert (Georgia) Nadine Gogu, Independent Journalism Center (Moldova) Petru Macovei, Independent Press Association (Moldova) Ion Bunduchi, Electronic Press Association (Moldova) Doina Costin, Independent media expert (Moldova) Lyudmyla Opryshko, Regional Press Development Institute (Ukraine) Natalya Ligachova, Telekrytyka (Ukraine) Otar Dovzhenko, Ukrainian Catholic University, Telekrytyka (Ukraine) Nataliya Sad, Internews Ukraine (Ukraine) Anatoliy Martsynovskyi, Internews Ukraine (Ukraine) Vitaliy Moroz, Internews Ukraine (Ukraine)

This publication has been produced with the assistance of the

European Union. The content of this publication is the sole responsibility of its authors and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the European Union. Azerbaijan

CONTENT

Foreword...... 4

Armenia...... 6

Azerbaijan...... 21

Belarus...... 38

Georgia...... 55

Moldova...... 68

Ukraine...... 84

Infographics...... 98

3 Foreword

FOREWORD

This publication summarizes the two-year (mediafreedomwatch.org) and the Media activity of the Eastern Partnership Media Freedom Index of the Eastern Partnership Freedom Watch Project implemented from countries are the main informational and March 2013 to March 2015. analytical products of the Project and its efficient instruments. The Project sought to support the freedom of media in the Eastern Partnership The web resource is a concentrated source countries: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, of information on the events and processes Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine. To this end, taking place in the field of media freedom we highlighted and regularly analyzed all in the above-mentioned countries. It quickly events and processes taking place in the field reacts to sometimes difficult processes such of media freedom, made the target audience as the persecution of journalists during in the Eastern Partnership members and the Revolution of Dignity in Ukraine or the other countries aware of these developments. current hard times for the freedom of media Journalists’ working environment and in Azerbaijan. Highlighting and analyzing violence against them, , events is one of the priority tasks of the web- transparency of ownership in the field of site. media, relationships between journalists and politicians, quality of media legislation – all The site serves as a connecting bridge these and many other things were the issues between the journalistic communities and the Project team focused on. non-governmental media organizations of the Eastern Partnership countries, on one The Eastern Partnership Media Freedom side and official EU institutions, European Watch Project was inspired by the activities human rights and civil society organizations of the Media sub-group of the Eastern directly engaged with freedom of expression Partnership Civil Society Forum, initiated issues, on the other. The web resource also in 2009 by the European Commission. The acts as a platform for sharing best practices web-site of ENP East Media Freedom Watch of journalists’ rights protection in Eastern

4 Foreword

Partnership countries, which have a lot in Anna Israyelyan, Gegham Manukyan, common in their history and development Armen Nikoghosyan, Arthur Papyan, Elina paths, as well as in issues related to mass Poghosbekian, Nouneh Sarkissian, Lusineh media. The topicality of and the need in Vasilyan, Mikayel Zolyan (Armenia); Oleg the project is conditioned by the existing Ageev, Andrei Bastunets, Pavel Bykovskiy, common problems of the Eastern Partnership Svetlana Kalinkina, Yuriy Karmanov, countries in the field of media freedom and Aleksandr Klaskovskiy, Aleksandr Koktysh, their causes: unsatisfactory legislation, Zhanna Litvina, Lyudmila Otchenashenko, intolerance of political elite and officials to Aleksandr Starikievich, Mikhail Yanchuk critics, excessively large role of the state in (Belarus); Mamuka Andguladze, Sopho Bukia, regulating the information space and so on. Maraim Gogosashvili, Nino Jangirashvili, Nino Jojua, Ninia Kakabadze, Tamar Khorbaladze, The Media Freedom Index was another Natia Kuprashvili, Nino Lomjaria, Ia fundamental element of the Project Mamaladze, Giorgi Mshvenieradze, Ramaz calculated once in three months and clearly Samkharadze, Irakli Tabliashvili, Tamar demonstrating both the current situation Tsilosani (Georgia); Ludmila Andronic, Lucia in a certain country and the media freedom Bacalu, Cristina Bobirca, Ion Bunduchi, Doina situation dynamics. The research methodology Costin, Cristina Leva, Petru Macovei, Olivia was based on the expert poll comprising Pirtac, Alina Radu, Vladimir Soloviov, Ion the best approaches of the already existing Terguta, Alina Turcanu (Moldova); Oleksandr international indices. The Chekmyshev, Andriy Kulykov, Kostyantyn Media Freedom Index being focused on the Kvurt, Tetyana Lebedeva, Nataliya Ligachova, specific region made it possible to study the Anatoliy Martsynovskyi, Lyudmyla Opryshko, subject matter in greater detail and provide Natalya Pedchenko, Taras Petriv, Vitaliy more accurate estimates. Portnikov, Oksana Romanyuk, Nataliya Sad, Viktoriya Syumar, Oksana Voloshenyuk The Index was calculated by 60 media-field (Ukraine). specialists (10 experts from each country) The present review, as well as all the among local journalists, human rights materials, are forming its backbone, are advocates, lawyers, sociologists and public available in electronic format at the ENP figures. They have been working in their field East Media Freedom Watch Project site at for at least five years as well as maintaining www.mediafreedomwatch.org. close relationships with the media outlets. For the sake of obtaining more impartial Boris Navasardian (Armenia) media landscape of the region, the Project did Arif Aliyev (Azerbaijan) not involve the representatives of political Manana Jakhua (Georgia) organizations and government authorities in Nadine Gogu (Moldova) calculating the Index. Andriy Kulakov (Ukraine)

The project team expresses gratitude to journalists, media experts and public figures lending a helping hand in project implementation: Gulu Magerramli (Azerbaijan); Irene Aloyan, Vardan Aloyan, Levon Barseghyan, Shushan Doydoyan,

5 Armenia

Armenia

the development of an effective mechanism Policy for assigning the appropriate amount of Armenian media organizations are regulated compensation, will contribute to securing by the laws On Television and Broadcasting, citizens’ right to privacy and increasing On , On , On media responsibility. Copyright and Adjacent Rights, On , corresponding clauses of the Electoral Code At the same time, Armenian legislation related to the work of media during elections still does not protect citizens from non- and referenda, as well as by a number of other public abusive or libelous statements. legislative and normative acts. Despite the November 15, 2011 ruling of the Constitutional Court of Armenia proposing On May 2014, the National Assembly of that the Parliament address this issue, it Armenia adopted amendments to the Civic remains an open question. Code that introduced the concept of material compensation for moral damages. Before this On December 17, 2014, the Armenian amendment, the absence of a mechanism for Parliament approved amendments to legal protection against moral damage in the the laws On TV and Radio and On Advertising national legislation allowed for a situation prohibiting commercial advertisements on contradictory to the RA Constitution: Armenian public television. The legislative citizens were deprived of the opportunity to initiative, which was originally proposed demand material compensation when their and approved by the government at the end fundamental rights were violated. This was in of December 2013, was based on the premise violation of a number of documents ratified by that the abolition of commercials will allow Armenia and obstructed the proper execution for more time to programmes with greater of rulings of the European Court for Human informational value. The restrictions do not Rights. According to experts, the adoption of apply to social advertising or mentioning the the norm of material compensation for moral sponsors of cultural, educational, science, and damages into the RA Civic Code, along with sports programs; however, the legislation

6 Armenia

allows just one mention of sponsors for each and importing. Advertising liberalization program and the total duration of a statement will be beneficial primarily for two national on sponsors cannot exceed 90 seconds for TV channels, Armenia TV and Shant, which each hour of broadcasting. are affiliated with pro-government circles. According to experts, their combined share Other amendments to the broadcasting comprises more than two-thirds of the total and advertising legislation, adopted on June advertising market in the country. 21, 2014, lifted the ban on advertising strong alcoholic beverages on television and radio. At the same time, some fundamental Thus, the broadcast media were again allowed problems with the media legislation remain to advertise alcoholic drinks (with alcohol unsolved. Above all, the media community content of 20% or more) between the hours and international organizations continuously of 10 p.m. and 6 a.m. The ban on advertising criticize Armenia’s law On Television and Radio. alcoholic beverages (except for locally- The need to modernize the broadcasting produced brandy) and tobacco products in legislation to bring it in line with the broadcast media, as well as the restrictions recommendations of the OSCE, the Council on such advertising in print media (not of Europe, and Armenian media expert, is permitted in the first and last pages or on the most critical task in the effort to increase the covers of newspapers or magazines), pluralism in the information sphere. was introduced through a law adopted on June 26, 2002 and entered into force on The Yerevan Press Club, the Media January 1, 2003. At the time these rules Initiatives Center (formerly Internews - were implemented, the media community Armenia), and the Committee to Protect opposed the restrictions, noting that the ban Freedom of Expression, developed, and in would hit the pockets of broadcasters who October 2014 submitted to the Parliament, already suffer from financial difficulties. a new package of amendments to the law Furthermore, the imposed restrictions were On Television and Radio which, in addition not based on studies linking such advertising to conceptual reforms, suggests a better- to alcohol consumption in Armenia or to organized transition to digital broadcasting. specific social threats. The legislation served The ultimate purpose of the proposed narrow interests, if any. It took legislators 12 amendments is to modernize relations in years to realize their mistake, and now the the media industry, to promote free and fair authors of the new bill justify their initiative competition, to create a legal framework with the desire to help TV channels improve for the independence of broadcast media their financial conditions. According to the regulatory bodies, and to ensure quality and authors of the amendments, their initiative diversity in the Armenian broadcast media. will allow broadcasters to earn 1 billion AMD However, as of the end of 2014, terms have not annually on advertising strong liquor (about been established for discussing the reforms. €1.74 million according to the exchange rate at the A complete cessation of analog broadcasting time of the adoption of the document). Opposition in Armenia is scheduled for July 1, 2015, parliamentary factions did not take part in and if corresponding amendments are not the vote. Their representatives expressed the enacted by that time, the transition to digital view that oligarchs would benefit from lifting broadcasting will largely take place in an the ban on alcohol advertising, given that they environment of legal uncertainty (see section have a near monopoly over liquor production on TV and Radio Broadcasting).

7 Armenia

Armenia adopted the relatively progressive Homosexual Lobby: Black List of Enemies Law On Freedom of Information 11 years of the Nation and the State,” which was ago, but the legislation still does not contain published in Iravunk on May 17, 2014. The piece regulations for electronic requests, and contained a list of “traitors to the nation,” does not specify what information the who were, “aggressively trying to impose government is required to publish, or the their rules in our country,” as well as links grounds and procedure for the granting to their Facebook pages. The author of the or refusal of information requests. On publication urged “zero tolerance” for these February 7, 2014, a package of amendments people, suggested citizens not communicate designed to eliminate the above-mentioned with them or hire them, and called for them shortcomings was proposed in the to be dismissed from public service. Parliament; however, on March 24 it was deferred for a year. Additionally, in late 2014, On October 30, one of these lawsuits the Ministry of Justice, in cooperation with – filed by 16 NGO representatives - was non-governmental organizations, began to dismissed. The court not only dismissed the develop a decree establishing norms for the plaintiffs’ claim asking for a retraction of the application of the Law by the executive branch defamatory information and compensation of government. The absence of such norms in the amount of 5 million AMD (about €9,000 has been a subject of concern on the part of according to the exchange rate at the time of issuing Armenian civil society and international the court decision), but also actually ordered organizations for the last 11 years. the plaintiffs to compensate 300,000 drams (about €580) for their opponent’s legal fees.

The court ruling caused a public outcry from a large portion of society. It was argued Practice that the court might have been influenced by the fact that a few days before its decision, Judicial precedents and practice. In 2014, Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan awarded the courts of Armenia made three rulings Hayk Babukhanyan, chairman of the that will likely serve as precedents for future Iravunk editorial board, MP from the ruling cases. Two of these rulings are concerning in Republican Party of Armenia, and contributor terms of compliance with the principles of to the controversial Hovhannes Galajian, with democracy and respect for human rights. medals on the occasion of the newspaper’s 25th anniversary. In June, the court of general jurisdiction for the Kentron and Nork-Marash In a statement issued on November 5, administrative districts of Yerevan accepted 2014, 30 Armenian NGOs said that they found several lawsuits from individuals the incitement of hatred and discrimination, and representatives of non-governmental along with the Armenian judicial system’s organizations against the founder of the inadequate response, unacceptable. “No Iravunk newspaper (LLC Iravunk Media) and mechanism for protection of freedom of the editor-in-chief of the Hovhannes Galajian speech applies to hate speech,” reads a newspaper. The reason for the class action was statement released by the Information a piece written by the editor-in-chief titled, Disputes Council (an independent expert “They Serve the Interests of the International group) on December 9, 2014. The Council

8 Armenia

emphasized that the court did not take related to a preliminary investigation without into account that the disputed publications the permission of the prosecutor, investigator, contained “formulations and appeals that are or person conducting the investigation. expressions of extremism and hate speech.” The statement says that, according to the order of the Attorney General, in cases of a Another precedent threatening freedom media publication containing data on an of expression in Armenia, was set on June 26: investigation, the supervising prosecutor will the court of general jurisdiction of Kentron take legal action to find out the source of the and Nork-Marash administrative districts information. Journalistic organizations and of Yerevan ruled to require the Hraparak lawyers regarded the Prosecutor General’s newspaper and iLur.am news website to statement as “extremely problematic.” They disclose their information sources. view this provision not as a measure to strengthen the rule of law, but rather as a On May 9, 2014, Hraparak and iLur.am direct threat to journalists in conducting their published anonymous information about professional duties. Media experts pointed a dispute that took place in the evening out the contradiction between Article 342 of of May 7 on a street in Gyumri (Armenia’s the RA Criminal Code and Article 5 of the Law second largest city), between the regional On Mass Media, which states that the media or police chief, colonel Vardan Nadarian, and journalists may be required to disclose their two brothers, Artur and Rafael Aleksanians, source of information only through a court the first being a world-renowned athlete, a decision in course of a criminal proceeding multiple European champion, and Olympic with the aim of revealing heavy or most heavy bronze medalist in wrestling. According to crimes, “if public interest in law enforcement the published information, the police chief overweighs the public interest in protecting did not like that the car in which the brothers the sources of information, and all other were driving had headlights that were too means to protect public interest have been bright. Nadarian got out of his car and started exhausted.” Moreover, Article 9 of the Law On hitting the brothers with grip of his pistol, Mass Media stipulates that a person carrying out injuring both of them. Shortly after the media activities is not liable for dissemination incident, the Armenian Special Investigation of information that is classified as “secret” Service (SIS), ignoring the provisions of the if that information has not been received Law On Mass Media, which states that only the through means prohibited by law or it was court has the authority to demand disclosure not apparent that the information was secret. of the information sources, tried to get that Media representatives and journalists are also information from the editors of Hraparak. exempt from liability if the dissemination of When they refused, the SIS turned to the such information was done for the sake of court and got what it wanted. protecting the public interest.

This ruling, as well as other attempts to force A few other unjustified attempts to force the media to disclose sources of information, the media to reveal sources of information can be viewed in the context of a statement by were witnessed in 2014. According to some the Prosecutor General, published on May 22, representatives of media organizations, 2014, wherein the media is reminded of Article scandalous cases of corruption, abuse of 342 of the RA Criminal Code, establishing power, etc. are often revealed and made liability for the publication of information public thanks to the efforts of investigative

9 Armenia

journalists, rather than law enforcement Assaults, threats, detentions. In 2014, bodies. Investigators or courts, on one there has been a trend of more frequent cases hand, are trying to make their jobs easier by of obstruction of journalists’ professional requiring the media to show all their cards, activities by law enforcement officials. At and in doing so violate the law, jeopardizing the same time, police misconduct against not only journalists, but also the sources of representatives of the media in most cases information. On the other hand, some view remained unpunished. such actions as a conscious policy on the part of the authorities aimed at restricting On February 12, Ani Gevorgian, a freedom of speech in the country. correspondent with Chorrord Ishkhanutyun newspaper, and Sargis Gevorgian, a On December 17, 2014, the court of general cameraman with iLur.am, were detained in jurisdiction of Kentron and Nork-Marash downtown Yerevan while covering a public administrative districts of Yerevan made campaign of the Armenian National Congress. another landmark ruling on the case of the They were taken to the police station where NGO, Investigative Journalists, versus the founder they were held for about four hours. Police of 1in.am (LLC Skizb Media Center). The NGO officers seized the journalists’ cameras challenged eight pieces published on Hetq.am, and the head of the Yerevan Kentron Police (the online edition of Investigative Journalists) Department slapped Ani Gevorgian across that 1in.am had reprinted without proper the face. The journalist turned to the Special citation. The plaintiff demanded that 1in.am Investigation Service (SIS) to report the add proper links to all the disputed pieces and crime. The official statement reported three pay compensation in the amount of 200,000 main incidents: the attempt by policeman, AMD (about €350 according to the exchange rate at Vardan Gevorgian, to forcibly take away Ani the time of issuing the court decision). Given that Gevorgian’s camera during the public action, during the many months of the trial, 1in. the seizure of the memory card from her video am added the appropriate citations to the camera at the police department, and the disputed pieces, the court partly granted actions of Artak Poghosian, the head of the the claim and ordered the website to pay Kentron Police Department, who slapped the the plaintiff compensation in the amount of journalist and seized her phone. On February 100,000 AMD as well as cover the plaintiff’s 25, the SIS initiated criminal proceedings legal costs of 158,000 AMD. under Clause 2 of Article 164 (“Impeding the legitimate professional activities of a The court’s decision in this case set a journalist by an abuse of power on the part precedent since it was the first litigation of a state official”) and Clause 2 of Article 309 between two media organizations in Armenia (“Abuse of power, accompanied by violence, after the introduction of amendments to use of weapons or special means”) of the RA the RA Law On Copyright and Adjacent Rights, Criminal Code. However, on June 24, the SIS which was adopted in September 2013. terminated the investigation due to lack of These amendments established rules for evidence. Ani Gevorgian challenged this the complete or partial reproduction of decision in the RA Prosecutor’s Office but her materials in print and online publications, claim was rejected. She turned to the court as well as the conditions for compensation of general jurisdiction of Kentron and Nork for damages in cases of violations of those Marash administrative districts of Yerevan. rules. In court, the journalist challenged both the

10 Armenia

SIS decision to dismiss criminal proceedings a policeman forcibly seizing the journalist’s against the police officers, and the refusal of camera, ignored? According to Ani Gevorgian, Gevorg Kostanian, the RA Prosecutor General, the record of the criminal case reports that to investigate the grounds on which the case she was detained not as a journalist but as against the policemen had been closed. On a perpetrator who tried to block traffic, and September 30 the court of general jurisdiction that the policemen grabbed her by the arms rejected Ani Gevorgian’s complaint. She then and shook her allegedly to ensure her safety. challenged this decision in the RA Criminal Court of Appeal, which upheld the decision of The incident with Ani Gevorgian and the court of general jurisdiction. other issues concerning interactions between journalists and the police were brought up at several joint meetings. During these meetings, law enforcement officials complained that it is difficult to “identify” journalists at public events: press passes may be counterfeit or expired. For this reason, police continue to insist that journalists should wear distinctive markers, such as press vests. The media community almost unanimously disagrees with this suggestion, pointing to incidents when vests or video/ audio recording equipment, which the police are trying to seize in the first place, makes journalists targets for attack. Often the internal investigations conducted by the police in similar cases conclude with standard formulations such as, “abuse of power has not been identified in the actions of the police.” Instances where law enforcement officials are, at least to some extent, held responsible The police attacks Ani Gevorgian, the reporter of Chorrord for obstructing the activities of journalists are Ishkhanutyun newspaper. February 12, 2014. extremely rare.

Nevertheless, there is a precedent that The termination of the investigation and might be an exception to this rule. On the rulings of the two different courts are September 9, at the main entrance of the an indication that the authorities are not National Assembly, where the “Counterblow” interested in identifying and punishing those Art Group was holding a demonstration, the responsible for the obstruction of journalists’ chief of the RA National Assembly security work. The course of the investigation service, Karen Hayrapetian, obstructed the raises a number of questions that remain professional activity of Marineh Khachatrian, unanswered: why has the journalist not been a correspondent with A1+ TV company. Seeing recognized as a victim in the case? Why was at that the journalist was filming the scene, least one strong piece of evidence of violence, Hayrapetian hit her on the arm, knocking her video footage of the street incident showing tablet to the ground. Journalists who were

11 Armenia

present at the scene caught the incident on activities of the SIS and to ensure a thorough film. On September 12, the RA Prosecutor’s investigation of each case of violence and Office announced that all media coverage obstruction of journalists’ professional of the incident had been forwarded to the activities. On September 30, OSCE Special Investigation Service. On September Representative on Freedom of the Media, 22, the SIS refused to initiate a criminal case Dunja Mijatović, called on the Armenian due to lack of evidence. authorities to put an end this climate of impunity and bring those responsible for attacks on journalists to justice.

On October 7, prosecutor general Gevorg Kostanian invalidated the SIS decision and ordered it to initiate a criminal case against Karen Hayrapetian under Clause 1 of Article 164 of RA Criminal Code (“Obstruction of legitimate professional activities of a journalist”). However, the SIS once again refused to initiate a criminal case as investigators did not find corpus delicti (the fact of a crime being committed) in the Attack of the Chief Security Officer of the Armenian parliament actions of the head of the National Assembly’s against Marineh Khachatrian, the correspondent with А1+ TV company. September 8, 2014. security service. On November 28, the RA Prosecutor’s Office announced that it had canceled the SIS decision as the Service had, “conducted a preliminary investigation with On September 29, seven Armenian media serious procedural violations.” The Prosecutor’s NGOs condemned the SIS decisions on cases Office statement stressed specifically that the related to impeding the professional activities A1+ correspondent was not recognized as a of journalists. “In fact, a vicious tradition victim in spite of sufficient evidence to suggest is being set: after receiving reports on she was. The Prosecutor’s Office resubmitted obstruction of journalists’ activities or usage the case to the SIS with special instructions of violence against them, the RA Prosecutor’s to recognize the journalist as a victim, and to Office requests the SIS to investigate the explain her rights and obligations under the incidents, but the latter glosses over the cases RA Criminal Procedure Code, including “the with a standard explanation of ‘absence of right to make a motion for re-examination, in corpus delicti.’ And this happens even in the case of disagreement with the existing expert cases where the facts of violence and impeding conclusion.” had been filmed and published on the Internet and in numerous media outlets,” the Although this case was not concluded by statement reads. Journalistic organizations the end of 2014, it already stands out from demanded the SIS administration take similar cases given that, for the first time, the measures to review the decisions and hold supervising body disagreed - twice - with the the investigators who failed to employ investigative body’s decision not to initiate impartiality and professionalism accountable criminal proceedings in a case involving for their actions. The media NGOs also called an attack on, and the obstruction of the on the RA Prosecutor’s Office to supervise the professional activities of, a journalist.

12 Armenia

2014 was also marked by rising a week later. The decision acknowledged that tensions between journalists and certain the swearing in the session hall was a violation representatives of the legislative branch. The of parliamentary ethics. At the same time, the parliamentary session that ran from May 19 decision stressed that the Committee is not to 22 was exceptional in the number of cases authorized to penalize MPs, and also noted of openly aggressive and indecent behavior that according to the rules of accreditation, on the part of deputies. Four “people’s elected the journalists were not allowed to hold any representatives” - Shushan Petrosian and protests during the session. Mher Sedrakian from the ruling Republican Party of Armenia, Melik Manukian from the On June 26, 2014, the Committee on Ethics “Prosperous Armenia” party, and nonpartisan discussed the complaint of journalist Arevik Arayik Grigorian - in separate incidents each Isajanian against Hermineh Naghdalian, vice- verbally abused journalists accredited to work speaker of the National Assembly. The journalist in the National Assembly. reported that on June 10 she approached Naghdalian to ask her a few questions about On May 26, eight media NGOs urged the her entrepreneurial activities. According to journalists who had been insulted to file Isajanian’s statement, in response, the vice- complaints to the Committee on Ethics of the speaker insulted the journalist, calling her National Assembly. They also called upon the “ignorant.” The journalist offered to submit Armenian journalistic community to show an audio recording of her conversation with professional solidarity, provide moral support to Naghdalian to the Committee. According their colleagues, and to express their disapproval to media reports quoting the Committee’s of the MPs indecent behavior. At the same time chairman, Hovhannes Sahakian, the it should be noted that, historically, the work Committee decided that the appeal could not of the Parliamentary Committee on Ethics, at be processed because what happened was a least in matters between parliamentarians private conversation between two people. and journalists, gives every reason to doubt the expediency of this body. Prosecution of journalists. Despite the implementation of the practice of material On June 2, 2014, the Committee on compensation for moral damages, the number Ethics made a decision on a complaint of cases against journalists or media under filed by parliamentary journalists’ on the articles of the RA Civic Code on defamation behavior of Arakel Movsisian, an MP from and libel has decreased. In 2014, 17 such the ruling Republican Party of Armenia. claims (less than in the previous year) were The joint complaint dealt with an incident filed and experts say that none of the rulings that took place on December 23, 2013 during made on those claims can be characterized the ratification of the Armenia-Russia gas as violating freedom of expression. In other agreement. Parliamentary journalists held a words, this suggests that the judiciary does protest in the session hall with posters calling not exert pressure on journalists and media, for MPs to vote against the treaty. Arakel with the exception of the above-mentioned Movsisian spoke ill about the journalists’ court ruling requiring a media outlet to actions, saying “to get them f… out of here.” disclose information sources.

The content of the Committee’s decision Access to information. The existing was made available to the general public only Law On Freedom of Information generally

13 Armenia

provides the necessary conditions for the and export of animals in accordance with fulfillment of journalists’ rights to obtain the Convention on International Trade in information. Nevertheless, in practice, Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna journalists experience various kinds of (CITES). The Ministry of Nature Protection difficulties accessing information: provision responded merely with the list of the animals of incomplete information, delays beyond the imported and exported from Armenia and deadlines stipulated by the law, etc. At the refused to release the copies of permits, same time, state agencies often demonstrate saying they were commercial secrets, as the a selective approach to providing information documents contained the names of importers to media representatives. and exporters. In the following request, Investigative Journalists suggested the agency In this regard, Hetq.am filed a complaint to provide the requested information but redact RA human rights defender, Karen Andreasian the details containing commercial secrets; against judicial and law enforcement agencies however, the Ministry refused once again. that refused to provide information under the pretext of the unavailability of statistics Investigative Journalists appealed to the on the requested data. The online publication court, demanding it order the Ministry of was trying to find out how many times Article Nature Protection to provide the requested 42 of the Criminal Code (on self-defense) information in full and compensate the NGO served as grounds for the termination of for its legal costs. On May 7, the Administrative criminal prosecution in Armenia. Almost all Court of Armenia started hearings related to the state agencies provided the same response the lawsuit. During the hearings, the Ministry to Hetq.am’s requests: “such statistics are not representative admitted that the Ministry available.” However, after the intervention had provided copies of several CITES permits of the human rights defender, it turned to foreign journalists visiting Armenia to out that these excuses were not true. When film a documentary on animal trafficking. the human rights defender made a similar On December 8, the Administrative Court request, the police reported three such cases of Armenia granted the claim filed by in the period of 2009-2013. With Andreasian’s Investigative Journalists, obliging the Ministry to support, Hetk.am was able to access provide the requested information in full and previously restricted statistics on parole and to compensate the plaintiff’s court costs in life sentences in Armenia. the amount of 49,000 AMD (about €90).

Another striking illustration of this Censorship and self-censorship. selective approach to information provision Armenian law prohibits censorship; is the case of Investigative Journalists against the nevertheless, hidden censorship still takes Armenian Ministry of Nature Protection. In place in the media community. Examples October 2013, Investigative Journalists requested of hidden censorship, in the form of abuse the Ministry of Nature Protection provide of regulatory and supervisory power on information for the NGO’s journalistic part of government agencies, include the investigation into cases of the trafficking unsuccessful attempts of A1+ TV company into Armenia of animals listed in the to obtain a license for television or radio International Red Book. The request pertained broadcasting. A1+, which is openly critical specifically to copies of the permits issued of the authorities, failed to acquire a license by the Ministry in 2010-2013 for the import through competitions held by the National

14 Armenia

Commission on Television and Radio in the prohibiting ownership of more than one years 2002-2010. The company’s fate could channel in the same area of broadcasting. In not be changed even after the European Court recent years, monopolization has also affected of Human Rights recognized that its rights the measuring of media audience data as had been violated. The Armenian authorities a result of the establishment of a so-called paid the compensation the ECHR ordered, “sales-house” that creates the conditions for but have failed to truly restore its rights, i.e. the concentration of advertising revenue. provide the possibility of participating in On the other hand, these structures have an impartial competition for broadcasting contributed to fostering civilized relations in licenses. the Armenian advertising market.

Self-censorship and internal censorship The development of the advertising market, are also common in the newsrooms of along with the media industry in general, Armenia. Many incidents, including the significantly slowed down in 2014 due to the dismissal of journalists, suggest the existence economic crisis. The global economic crisis of defined boundaries between “can” and of the 2000s reached Armenia with some “cannot.” These boundaries are especially delay, but eventually the country became one rigid in television broadcasting, and have of the worst affected in the world. Processes resulted in a trend, which continued in 2014, related to Armenia’s Eurasian integration, of a drastic reduction of live broadcasting on and a sanction war resulting from escalating Armenian television. tensions between Russia and the West also negatively impacted the Armenian economy. Monopoly. Economic conditions. The The dramatic depreciation of the Russian state, in the face of corresponding agencies, ruble and other effects stemming from the abandoned its monopolistic position in the crises in Russian pose a serious threat to the Armenian media market more than 10 years socio-economic situation in Armenia and ago. Since then, there has been no talk of any consequently, to the media situation. Being kind of state monopoly. At the same time, politically and economically dependent under the existing legal framework, the on Russia, Armenia is not immune to the transition to digital broadcasting scheduled impacts of turmoil in that country. for mid-2015 assumes there will be only one digital broadcasting network, which is Prior to the completion of the round of operated by a state-owned enterprise. national and Yerevan municipal elections in 2012-2013, the flow of “political money” to Private broadcasters do exhibit some the media compensated, to some extent, for monopolistic tendencies. Legal mechanisms the economic downturn and the reduction designed to ensure fair competition in in commercial advertising revenues. Since the media market prove ineffective due to mid-2013, however, the majority of ambitious the dependence of regulatory agencies on media projects have begun to wind down. the government and their policy of “non- This process continued in 2014, with media intervention” into the activities of companies receiving less revenue from political sources affiliated with the authorities. In particular, than in the past. the existence of the PanArmenien Media Group holding, which encompasses at least Since early 2014, a number of print three TV channels, contradicts the legal norm media outlets were forced to increase their

15 Armenia

prices in order to compensate for rising channels. As a consequence, propaganda production costs. The reason for this, along disseminated by another state became one with a reduction in the already meager of the most important political influences in flow of advertising revenue, was the rise in Armenia in 2014. the price of printing services, which was, in turn, caused by increases in gas (17%) On April 7, 2014, the Armenian and electricity (27%) tariffs as of January National Platform (ANP) of the EaP Civil 2014. Thus, the issues of Aravot and Chorrord Society Forum issued a statement on the Ishkhanutyun newspapers now cost 200 AMD broadcasting of Russian TV channels, Russia 1 (about €0.35 according to the exchange rate and First Channel, in Armenia. The statement in late 2014) instead of the previous 150 expressed concern over the programmes AMD, and Hayots Ashkhar daily now costs and reports broadcast by these channels, 150 AMD instead of the previous 100 AMD. which are “overtly propagating xenophobia Azg daily, one of the most well-established and spawning hatred between nations.” periodicals since 1991, temporarily ceased ANP, which brings together about 200 its publication activities in early 2014 due to Armenian non-governmental organizations, accumulated debts to the printing house. Azg stressed that the dissemination of Russian resumed business on February 28, but with propaganda of this kind violates both national weekly rather than daily issues. As a result, legislation and international conventions one issue of the newspaper now costs 200 ratified by Armenia. “As a matter of fact, AMD instead of the previous 100. Russia 1 and the First Channel in occupying radio frequencies, which constitute a limited public resource, act against the national interests of Armenia,” the statement reads. Similar propaganda is also common on Broadcasting Russian TV channels like Russia 24, NTV, TVC, etc., which are relayed in Armenia through The increasing role and availability of the cable networks and by other means, further Internet in the recent years seems to have exacerbating the information and moral reduced the political relevance of television in damage to the citizens of Armenia. The Armenia. However, practice shows that in the authors of the ANP statement demanded current situation of geopolitical tension, which the Armenian authorities consider the has led to a strengthening of the weapons of legality of rebroadcasting Russia1 and the First information warfare, television has reaffirmed Channel in Armenia, suspend the channels’ its role as a powerful tool of propaganda. In broadcasting activities unless they stop this context, national broadcasters do not the promotion of xenophobia and hatred hold the dominant position of influence over between nations, and announce licensing the formation of public opinion in Armenia competitions for the frequencies made and the orientation of citizens in matters of available by the suspensions. The authorities international affairs. The Armenian broadcast did not react to this statement but its content media’s shallow and, at times, aloof coverage was widely discussed in society, including on of the events in Ukraine and other salient social networks. issues in world politics failed to satisfy the public, which turned to the most affordable In this light, there is urgent need alternative: Russian federal television for reforms to broadcasting legislation.

16 Armenia

Optimization of broadcasting remains a In 2014, an old reliable source of priority for the Armenian media community information suddenly became unavailable: in the context of the upcoming transition to as of June 1, the cable radio network, digital broadcasting in 2015. Media experts which aired the programmes of the Public have repeatedly stressed that the effective Radio of Armenia, ceased broadcasting. development of television broadcasting The Television and Radio Broadcasting during the transition to digital broadcasting Network of Armenia said it decided to requires civilized procedures and effective disable the cable radio network because it strategies. Discussions about the need for a was unprofitable. The termination of cable serious plan for digitization in the country radio broadcasting mostly affected elderly have been ongoing since 2006, but problems listeners, who were left without the radio persist. in the kitchen (where the receivers were usually installed); the majority of these At the end of February 2014, the government listeners do not have access to other reliable released a timetable for the transition from sources of information. analog to digital broadcasting. On July 1, 2015, analog broadcasting in Armenia will Public television. Public Television of be terminated; at that time, 14 regional TV Armenia (PTA), failed to establish itself as a stations licensed for only analog broadcasting viable institution able to offer the audience face the risk of being closed down. The sharp diverse and high-quality news coverage of reduction in the number of TV channels, topical issues, and, as a result, is now leaving and especially regional ones, will further the media scene. State television, which exacerbate the lack of diversity and pluralism was later changed into public television, in the Armenian television sphere, and will has always served as one of the main increase the threat of monopolization of instruments for the government in power the broadcast media market. One possible to ensure its reelection. Today, however, the solution, which is proposed in the above- political leadership accomplishes this task by mentioned package of amendments to the controlling private television channels. broadcasting legislation developed by three journalistic organizations, may be the creation PTA increasingly focuses on cultural and of private multiplexes. This would allow educational programs. This is a positive trend regional companies that are not licensed for in itself; however, this shift is taking place at the public digital network to continue their the expense of current affairs content, which activities after the termination of analog is contrary to the information needs of the broadcasting. public.

Additionally, the authors of the draft Until recently, PTA has been a leading player law propose a model for a social package in the advertising market, implementing that would make digital TV accessible to commercial projects no less effectively than financially vulnerable groups. To ensure the leading private broadcasters. Today, the right of access to information, the however, especially with the introduction draft emphasizes the need to provide low- of the ban on commercial advertising, it income families with decoders that would has been left out of the circle of business allow them to receive a digital signal on old competitors. With this new legislation, all television sets. the above-stated tendencies, which began

17 Armenia

to manifest a few years ago, arrived at their logical conclusion. Internet

Access to airtime. In general, both the and New Media government in power and the political opposition have access to television According to the Freedom House report, broadcasting airtime. For example, during “Freedom of Internet” released on December 2, the election period of 2012-2013, TV channels 2014, in 2013-2014, like in 2012-2013, Armenia ensured equal coverage for the authorities and retained its position among the countries with the opposition, and international observers free Internet. According to the report, during noted this as a positive element. Nevertheless, the studied period, there were no cases of outside of election campaigns (there were blocking social media or websites with political no national elections in 2014), when the law and social content, and there were no arrests does not provide for a specific technology to of bloggers. Internet access in Armenia has ensure political pluralism, different views increased over the past few years. According and positions on socially significant issues to the International Telecommunication are not proportionally covered by broadcast Union (ITU), the Internet penetration rate in media. Huge advantage is granted to Armenia was at 46% in 2013, compared with those who control different channels. Pro- 39% in 2012 and just 6.2% in 2008. While there government channels are dominated by the is not yet definitive data available for 2014, it views of the ruling circle while TV companies can nevertheless be assumed that this figure controlled by the opposition mainly present is now over 50%. Armenian Internet users have views critical of the current situation in free access to Internet resources, including the country. Accordingly, priority access to services like Skype and Google Talk, as well television airtime is given to opinion leaders as popular networks like Facebook, YouTube, (politicians, experts, journalists), whose Odnoklassniki (Classmates), and others. position is consistent with the agenda of the respective broadcaster. In other words, The development of the Internet and the Armenian broadcast media is characterized ever-increasing access to it has led to the by a lack of a versatile, objective, and rapid growth of online information resources. pluralistic coverage of events and realities on Although, according to www.circle.am, each individual channel. there are 232 online “News and Information” resources in the country, experts claim that Another serious issue is the lack of the number is actually at least 300. The lack willingness on the part of leading Armenian of accurate data is a result of the fact that no politicians to take part in debates and organization currently endeavors to collect and open discussion on TV and radio. Political classify data on online media. Some websites figures engaging in this kind of dialogue also deliberately avoid reporting data on could contribute to enhanced discussion themselves and do not publish their founders’ of approaches to controversial and socially addresses or phone numbers. Authors of significant problems. online publications and information sources frequently remain anonymous.

In general, online media outlets are gaining momentum from year to year and becoming

18 Armenia

more serious competitors for traditional through the reporting mechanisms that exist media (currently the online audience is the in social networks. European experts and second largest after television). Already, international organizations also criticized online media is well ahead of traditional the draft law. In parliamentary hearings on media in terms of efficiency and versatility of March 31, representatives of media NGOs news reporting and diversity of opinions. once again stated that the draft should either be significantly revised or withdrawn. At In 2014, there were no reported cases of the end of 2014, discussions on the proposed harassment for activism on social networks amendments were still in progress. or blogs and online activists describe the situation with respect to their rights in Armenia as satisfactory. Most experts believe that the Internet, and particularly social Conclusions networks, is a platform providing for the opportunity for the free exchange of views. Overall, in 2014, the level of media Accordingly, they consider any legislative freedom remained at about the same level as attempt to restrict this freedom unnecessary, in 2013. A decrease in the number of cases of emphasizing that emerging problems are defamation filed against journalists and the solvable within the framework of self- media, as well as reasonable settlements in regulatory mechanisms. Some thinkers have the cases that did occur, can be considered a gone so far as to propose that the right to positive trend. The RA Constitutional Court’s access the Internet ought to be equated with ruling of November 5, 2013, where it decided fundamental human rights and protected in favor of the legal regulation of non- from any kind of encroachment. pecuniary damages, unfolded in 2014 as a corresponding provision added to the RA Civic On March 4, 2014, the Armenian Code. According to experts, the establishment Parliament circulated amendments to of compensation for moral damage, in the Civil Code introducing liability for conjunction with the development of a clear the dissemination online of defamatory mechanism for determination of the amount publications and comments submitted from financial compensation, will contribute to fake accounts. This initiative, which a group the protection of the right to privacy and the of MPs proposed, resulted in protests from accountability of the media. journalists’ organizations, the media, and active Internet users. On March 14, nine Amendments to the RA Law On Copyright media NGOs released a statement urging the and Adjacent Rights, which were adopted in MPs to withdraw the draft as it, “does not solve September 2013 and supported by many the existing problems but rather creates new media organizations, were implemented in ones” and “contains serious threats to freedom 2014, and the first judicial precedent can be of expression, the right of citizens to receive deemed a success. and share information, and to the protection of personal data.” Journalistic organizations The absence of mechanisms for the believe that most of the conflicts that the draft protection of citizens, including journalists, is meant to settle can be resolved through from non-public abusive or defamatory existing legislation, case law, relevant statements remains a problem despite the comments of the RA Court of Cassation, and RA Constitutional Court’s November 15, 2011

19 Armenia

ruling recommending that the Parliament Western democracies has become optional. address this issue. There were no changes in 2014 in terms of the executive and legislative authorities’ On a more positive note, after an 11-year approach towards reforming the broadcasting impasse, there has been some progress on legislation and streamlining the process the issue of norms for the application of the of transition to digital broadcasting. As in Law On Freedom of Information. It is still difficult, previous years, it was mainly media NGOs however, to predict whether the proposed that advocated for these processes. mechanisms will meet modern international Finally, the escalating geopolitical tensions standards. in the world in 2014, and the resulting unprecedented propaganda war, pose a The year 2014 was marked by two serious threat to the quality of journalism and precedents that spurred a harsh critical civilized relations in the field of information. reaction from the media and civil society. Specifically, the influence of leading Russian Local and international experts view the court TV channels on the Armenian audience and ruling obliging a media outlet to disclose their the political environment may be detrimental information sources as a significant threat to to the media situation in the country. The freedom of expression in the media, which prevalence of propaganda over the principles depends on the protection of sources. of freedom of speech is the primary challenge with which the Armenian media community Another alarming precedent was set entered the year 2015. when a court dismissed a claim against a homophobic article, disregarding overt elements of discrimination and hate speech in the disputed piece. In 2014, some cases of obstruction of journalists’ professional activities (including by law enforcement bodies) occurred during public protests. The perpetrators were left unpunished despite the existence of ample evidence of the abuses. This past year also stood out with episodes of strikingly abusive behavior by government representatives, and especially parliamentarians, towards journalists. While there have always been some cases of illegal actions, impunity of perpetrators, and disrespect toward journalists, these occurrences were especially notable in 2014. Some observers relate this to the shift in Armenia’s foreign policy vector (namely its accession to the Eurasian Economic Union): part of the Armenian elite, including some government officials, apparently felt that in the new environment, adhering to the norms and standards of

20 Azerbaijan

Azerbaijan

issued by the National Council on Television Policy and Radio (NCTR) for a period of six years. In The Constitution of Azerbaijan contains cases where broadcasters violate the license articles that outline the basic principles terms or other requirements of the law, guiding media activities in the country: their broadcasting rights may be suspended, guaranteed freedom of speech and thought, through a court decision, for up to seven days. and the right to free exchange of information. The court is also entitled to revoke a license The legal framework for the work of media, if establishes that a broadcasting company in addition to the Constitution, includes submitted false information to obtain the laws On Television and Radio Broadcasting, license, has not started broadcasting activities On Public Television, On Mass Media, On within six months after receiving the license, Access to Information, and a number of other or promotes open calls for violent overthrow normative acts. Most of these laws have been of the state system, for encroachment on examined in due course by the European the integrity and security of the country, or institutions. By the time these acts were for incitement of ethnic, racial and religious adopted by the Parliament of Azerbaijan, strife, riots or terrorism. they were assessed as compliant with international standards. However, changes According to the law On Public Television and amendments introduced to the laws in and Radio Broadcasting, the Public Television recent years have led to serious criticism from and Radio Broadcasting Company (ITV) has local experts and international organizations. the status of an independent legal entity. The state provides it with free and unlimited The law On Television and Radio license, and a frequency on which to broadcast. Broadcasting establishes that creative and ITV is funded from the state budget, although professional independence is the guiding it may have additional sources of funding such principle for the activities of broadcasters. as subscription fees, sponsorship, donations, The necessary precondition for broadcasting and income from advertising and product is a special permission (license), which is sales. Subscription fees were expected to

21 Azerbaijan

become ITV’s main source of funding by 2011, freedom of mass information. In particular, but, at the end of 2009, this provision of the it stipulates the civil, administrative, law was amended, preserving the financial criminal and other responsibility of an dependence of the public broadcaster on state editorial office and of media workers for budget allocations. having disseminated information the disclosure of which is prohibited by law, In early 2011, the Cabinet of Ministers published information without identifying of Azerbaijan approved the State Program its source (save in a few instances stipulated On Establishment and Development on the as acceptable under the law), infringed on Territory of the Republic of Azerbaijan of the privacy of a citizen, or continued to Digital Television Broadcasting DVB-T. The produce and distribute media products after goal of the Program is to create the conditions a court decision suspending or terminating for a smooth and complete transition from the media outlet’s activities. The restrictive analogue to digital broadcasting. In September provision, introduced to the law in 2010, 2014, the Ministry of Communications and reads: “except for investigative activities, the High Technologies of Azerbaijan reported surveillance over a person, his or her video that the Program was nearing its final stage and photo filming, or recording of voice and that by January 1, 2015, the country would without consent or contrary to this person’s have completed the full transition to digital protest held by media representatives and broadcasting. other persons... is the cause to bring them to responsibility as required by the law.” The The law On Mass Media, adopted in 1992 Parliament of Azerbaijan adopted the most and updated in 1999, guarantees freedom of recent changes and amendments to the law the media and prohibits state censorship. On Mass Media on December 16, 2014. Under Media freedom may be limited only in an the amendments, the executive bodies have emergency situation. In all the other cases, the power to bring before the court the issue impeding the dissemination of media of closing down a media outlet, if it has products is prohibited unless there is a been established that it is illegally funded special court decision. The abuse of freedom by official bodies or natural or legal persons of information is also unacceptable under of a foreign state. State bodies possess the the law. The notion of ‘abuse’ implies, “the same powers with respect to any media use of mass media with the aim of divulging outlet that has been found responsible for state secrets, violent overthrow of the distributing ‘biased information’ twice in constitutional order and encroachment on a year. Previously, punishment could only the integrity of the state, propaganda of war, have been applied if a media outlet was violence and cruelty, ethnic, racial, social found liable three times in a year. hatred or intolerance, dissemination, under the guise of a ‘reliable source,’ of rumors, There is no special law in Azerbaijan that lies, and materials mortifying honour and regulates the activities of online media. dignity of citizens, pornography, slander, However, the article, General Definitions of or commission of other offences.” Media the law On Mass Media, specifies that the activities may be temporarily suspended Internet is a form of mass media. Therefore, or terminated by the court in the case of a all the legislative regulations on the rights major infraction. The law establishes the and responsibilities of media are applicable responsibility of journalists for abuse of to the Internet.

22 Azerbaijan

The law On Access to Information for Information Issues. The Ombudsman has ensures the right of every citizen to obtain still not taken on these duties. information that is at the disposal of any According to the Criminal Code (CC) public authority, municipality, legal entity or of Azerbaijan, defamation in media is individual that performs public functions, or considered a criminal act punishable by law. is owned by the state or established with its On May 14, 2013, the Parliament amended participation, or of a legal entity that holds the Criminal Code, introducing a provision a dominant position on the market of goods for criminal prosecution for defamation and services or is a natural monopoly. Under through online media. This act led to strong the law, responses to requests for information criticism from Azerbaijani civil society and shall be provided within seven days, and, if international organizations, which called for necessary, no later than in 24 hours. A public the decriminalization of defamation. A week authority may refuse to provide a response later, a representative of the Presidential only in situations when: the authority is not Administration said that the government the owner of this information, the disclosure had drafted a separate law On Protection of the requested information is restricted by from Defamation and sent it to the Venice law, the requestor fails to define the specific Commission of the for subject of the request, the requestor is not review. Later, the Secretariat of the Parliament authorized to request such information, or announced that this law was to be adopted the requestor has not identified himself or by the end of 2013. However, in October of herself. The law categorizes information as the same year, the authorities reported that either ‘public information’ or ‘information the current session of the Milli Majlis would with limited access.’ There are two types of not consider the bill because of “discrepancies information with access limited by law: secret between the positions of experts of the Venice information (state secrets), and confidential Commission and the Azerbaijani side, which information (proprietary, professional, delayed the adoption of the document.” commercial, investigative or judicial secrets, At the heart of the dispute was the Venice and personal information). Since June 2012, Commission’s view that the bill presented commercial confidentiality also includes by the authorities of Azerbaijan, “did not “information about founders (participants) comply with the principles of the European of legal entities and their share in equity Court of Human Rights, the case law and capital, and this significantly hampers the commitments of the state in this field” journalistic anti-corruption investigations.” as it “did not stipulate decriminalization of Provisions were made to set up the Office of defamation.” Ali Hasanov, the head of the the Commissioner for Information Issues, Department of Social and Political Issues of which is charged with supervising the the Presidential Administration of Azerbaijan, implementation of the law. However, over the commenting on the Commission’s conclusion, six years that followed its establishment, the stressed that the state authorities felt the Office failed to fulfill its legal requirement. abolition of criminal liability for defamation Only in June 2011 did the Parliament amend was premature: “We follow a slightly different the relevant legislation, abandoning the philosophy of the Law On Defamation. idea of the Commissioner position. At the Its implementation is a lengthy process. same time, the Parliament entrusted the Improving the competence of journalists takes Ombudsman for Human Rights with the time. At the same time, society should prepare former responsibilities of the Commissioner itself for adoption of the Law.”

23 Azerbaijan

International organizations continue government for restricting freedom of speech to insist on the speedy adoption of the Law and expression as, “an integral part of an On Defamation in Azerbaijan and see the anti-Azerbaijani campaign,” “interference criminal prosecution of journalists for libel with domestic affairs of a sovereign country” and insult as incompatible with the country’s and “warped judgment.” commitments to the European community. In early March 2014, the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe reviewed Azerbaijan’s progress on executing the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights, which Practice had ruled that the restriction of the right to freedom of expression was unlawful. The The previous chapter highlights the main Court noted that, despite repeated promises, shortfalls of the legislation of Azerbaijan in the government of Azerbaijan was not the field of freedom of expression and media. reforming the Law On Defamation. On As studies undertaken in 2013-2014 prove, the March 28, the EU published a report on the most serious problems in this sphere are in progress of Azerbaijan within the framework the application of this legislation in practice. of the European Neighbourhood Policy. The detention of a large number of journalists The document strongly recommended that and social activists in the country’s prisons is the country adopt the law decriminalizing also of special concern. The charges leveled defamation and intensify efforts to at journalists by the investigative authorities investigate all cases of inappropriate pressure almost never relate to the professional on journalists. activities of the accused, and society mostly believes that the harassment of media workers Azerbaijani authorities perceive the is politically motivated and instigated by statements and appeals of the European the authorities. Civic activists of Azerbaijan institutions in a negative way, and with have brought numerous complaints to the growing irritation. On December 11, 2013, Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Ziyafet Askerov, the Deputy Parliamentary Europe, to the Committee of Ministers of the Speaker, said that Azerbaijan not only Council of Europe and to other organizations, refused to decriminalize defamation, but accusing the government of using criminal also it “would prepare a special law On charges to intimidate outspoken journalists, Protection of the Honor and Dignity of the hoping they will restrain their criticism. President.” Askerov stressed that he was International organizations have expressed personally charged with the duty to draft serious concern at the violations of the rights the bill and added: “The Criminal Code of journalists and . already contains a provision protecting the In February 2014, Reporters Without honor and dignity of the President, but the Borders (RSF) released its annual world new law will be of a particular importance, Press Freedom Index, where Azerbaijan held as it will be protecting the head of state the 160th position out of 180 countries. The from any insults in the media.” Throughout Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) issued 2014, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the a statement in this regard, claiming that, “the Presidential Administration have repeatedly government of Azerbaijan continues to stifle issued statements calling international critical voices” and persecutes ‘uncontrolled’ organizations’ criticism of the Azerbaijani journalists and bloggers.

24 Azerbaijan

Cases of physical violence, threats, highest rate in the entire OSCE space” since blackmailing and arrests of journalists. The her office was established. A striking example number of physical attacks on journalists has of persecution of government critics is the decreased over the past five years. However, campaign of psychological pressure launched society is concerned about the government’s against Khadija Ismayilova, employee of reluctance to take necessary measures to Azadliq Radiosu and author of several identify and punish the perpetrators of such articles on government corruption, which offences. culminated in her arrest. The campaign On June 24, 2013, the family of Elmar started in government-owned and pro- Huseynov, the editor-in-chief of Monitor government media in July 2013. A video magazine who was murdered eight years exposing Ismayilova’s intimate life of was ago, once again accused the investigative published on the Internet. The persons who authorities of inaction. In March 2014, installed a hidden camera in the journalist’s Azerbaijani journalists commemorated the apartment were never identified, but the ninth anniversary of Huseynov’s murder. A journalist undertook her own investigation number of journalists’ organizations issued and accused government authorities of a joint statement in this regard that reads: being behind this ‘operation.’ On February “cases of attempting upon the life and health 19, 2014, Ismayilova was summoned to the of journalists are not properly investigated General Prosecutor’s Office as a witness in a in the country; the guilty ones remain criminal case of disclosing state secrets. The unpunished.” investigators examined her computer and e-mail, and required her to disclose the name On November 20, 2013, the Media of the source of information. In April, the Rights Institute (MRI) issued a statement journalist complained that her professional coinciding with the two-year anniversary activities were affected by the frequent of the murder of the political writer, Rafiq interrogations and summons by the police. Tagi. The statement stressed that though On September 5, upon arriving in after an investigation was officially conducted, being in Tbilisi, customs officers detained it was cursory in practice. The Institute Ismayilova at the airport. They searched the criticized Azerbaijani authorities, noting journalist and released her two hours later. that the large number of unsolved crimes On September 30, Ismayilova said that, while against journalists poses a threat to freedom attending an OSCE meeting in Warsaw, she of expression and is intended to intimidate received a phone call from a law enforcement the critically-minded segment of society. official warning her she would be arrested. On January 9, 2014, the Prosecutor’s Office On October 6, when the journalist returned to suspended its investigation into the murder Baku from Strasbourg, she was again detained of Rafiq Tagi, explaining this decision only at the airport for a customs inspection for with a statement that, “the investigation five hours. On October 13, Ismayilova was and the proceedings failed to establish the prohibited from travelling from Baku to identity of the murderer.” Prague to attend an international conference. The Prosecutor’s Office explained the ban In mid-2014, Dunja Mijatovic, the OSCE on leaving the country only by saying that Representative on Freedom of the Media, “there was a need for her participation in stated that “the number of press officers the investigatory actions on a case.” Finally, convicted or awaiting trial, has reached the on December 5, Ismayilova was arrested.

25 Azerbaijan

This time she was accused of the incitement to suicide of Tural Mustafayev, a former employee of Azadliq Radiosu who took poison on October 20, 2014, but survived.

The year 2014 set a record in the number of arrested journalists and social activists for the entire post-Soviet history of journalism in Azerbaijan: • On January 18, Elvin Kerimov, the In a month after the arrest of Rauf Mirkadyrov, the journalist of Zerkalo newspaper, his father died. The authorities allowed administrator of the Azad Soz (‘Free Mirkadyrov to be present at his father’s funeral. Elchin Shykhly, Speech’) Facebook page was arrested the editor of the newspaper, commented on this as follows: “By his death the father presented the son with several days of freedom”. on charges of drug possession. • On January 24, Omar Mammadov, a blogger, was arrested on charges of illegal possession and sale of drugs. Siraj Kerimli. They are both accused Mammadov’s lawyer reports that even of possession of illegal drugs. A before the blogger’s arrest the police representative of the press service of summoned him and demanded that the Ministry of Interior added that, he put an end to publishing critical “the detainee F. Kerimli was engaged in materials in social networks. The propaganda of psychotropic substances authorities deny this accusation. through social networks.” • On April 19, Rauf Mirkadyrov, a staff • On August 2, Rasul Jafarov, a journalist reporter of Zerkalo (‘The Mirror’) and the founder of the Human Rights newspaper in Turkey, was arrested on Club, was arrested. The Prosecutor’s charges of treason and espionage. The Office brought charges of tax evasion, Prosecutor General’s Office issued a illegal entrepreneurship and abuse of statement claiming that in 2008-2009 office against him. Mirkadyrov published information on • On August 2, Ruslan Naserli, the Azerbaijan’s military capabilities and creator of the Facebook page, ‘Supreme the deployment of the armed forces to Commander, Answer to the People,’ the intelligence services of Armenia. was arrested and sentenced to 30 days Mirkadyrov denied these accusations. of administrative arrest on charges of Subsequently, law enforcement officials disorderly conduct and disobeying the arrested Leyla Yunus, director of the police. According to Naserli’s lawyer, Institute for Peace and Democracy, and the youth activist was punished for Arif Yunus, a political scientist, who using the Facebook page to call on had previously been witnesses to the his peers to hold a protest against the case against Mirkadyrov. deaths of soldiers. • On July 23, Faraj Kerimli, chairman of • On August 29, police detained the youth movement of the Musavat Seymour Hazy, a journalist with the Party and the administrator of its Azadliq newspaper and the host of the website (musavat.org.az), was arrested. Azerbaijan Saaty television programme. A few days prior to his arrest, the He was prosecuted for disorderly police also arrested his older brother conduct – getting into a fight at a bus

26 Azerbaijan

stop. The court opted for a preventive in Sabirabad district. On October 12, police measure for the journalist in the form attacked journalists after an opposition rally of two months of imprisonment. At the in Baku. One of the journalists, an employee trial, the journalist said he was forced of website Нaftaichi.az, was hospitalized to defend himself from an attacker. with serious injuries. On April 25, 2014, The editorial staff of Azadliq newspaper Farakhim Ilharoglu, a correspondent with issued a statement claiming that the the Yeni Musavat newspaper, was beaten at authorities had deliberately set up this the entrance of his house. The newspaper provocation to punish Hazy for his undertook its own investigation and argued critical articles. that the beating of its journalist involved the • On October 29, Khalid Garayev, another nephew of Ziya Mammadov, the minister of journalist with the Azadliq newspaper transport. “Law enforcement officials lack the and an employee of Azerbaijan Saaty, courage to prosecute the contractor and the was arrested. He was sentenced to 25 one who committed this assault,” Ilharoglu’s days in prison for petty hooliganism lawyer said. and disobeying the police. According to the indictment, Garayev, “was swearing at no one in particular and using foul language in the center of Binaqadi settlement, and when police officers reprimanded him, he disobeyed them.” The journalist’s lawyer labeled the trial as ‘politically motivated’ and the case as ‘framed up.’

The years 2013-2014 have also seen cases of violence or detention of journalists in the performance of their duties. In April 2013, ANS TV journalists filming a public The camcorder of the car situated nearby recorded the moment of beating of Farahim Ilharoglu, the reporter of Yeni Musavat protest in a district of Baku was attacked newspaper, near the entrance hall of his house. by a representative of the executive power of the district. Inspectors of the Ministry of Transport beat two correspondents with the Azadliq newspaper who were trying to learn On May 7, unknowns attacked a the reasons behind the maltreatment of taxi correspondent with Internet television drivers by employees of the state body. In June, broadcaster, Obyektiv TV, near the courthouse police applied force against representatives during the trial of youth activists with the of the Institute of Reporters’ Freedom and NIDA movement. On May 16 and 26, in different Safety (IRFS) and ANS TV channel who were regions of Azerbaijan, Islam Shikhaliyev and covering a rally in support of mass protests in Elchin Ismail, both journalists with Azadliq Turkey. On October 5, more than 10 journalists Radiosu, were attacked. On August 21 in were beaten by unidentified perpetrators Nakhichevan, a group of unidentified persons at a meeting of the presidential candidate severely beat Ilgar Nasibov, a human rights from the opposition National Council of activist and journalist, landing him in the Democratic Forces (NSDS) party with voters intensive care unit of a local hospital.

27 Azerbaijan

Of all these cases, only one was properly businesses. However, it is worth noting that investigated and the culprit was punished: there have not been recorded violations of the the police officer who had attacked an ANS principle of confidentiality of information TV journalist in front of the Turkish Embassy sources by the courts. was brought to administrative responsibility. The case of Ilgar Nasibov, was settled in court On December 18, 2014, the CPJ released through an amicable agreement. a list of countries with media workers sentenced to prison terms. Once again, just Meanwhile in 2013-2014, many as in 2013, Azerbaijan was in the top ten. Over journalists were detained or summoned by the past two years, courts have sentenced law enforcement bodies for questioning: 10 journalists and bloggers to long terms of Aynur Imranova, an independent imprisonment: journalist,Mekhman Huseynov and Abulfat In 2013: Namazov, IRFS employees, Natig Adilov, • Avaz Zeynalli, the editor-in-chief a correspondent with Azadliq newspaper of Khural newspaper (12 years of and the host of Azerbaijan Saaty, Turkhan imprisonment on charges of extortion); Kerimov, a photographer, Shakhveled • Rashad Ramazanov, a blogger (9years Chobanoglu, a journalist, Emil Salamoglu of imprisonment on charges of illegal and Sevinj Telmanhyzy, correspondents with possession and sale of drugs); Yeni Musavat newspaper, and practically the • Hilal Mammadov, the editor-in-chief entire staff of Azadliq Radiosu. of Tolyshi Sado newspaper (5 years of imprisonment on charges of treason, In the years 2013-2014, the police and illegal drug trade, the incitement of prosecutor’s offices used various criminal national hatred); charges to raid the editorial offices of • Sardar Alibeyli, the editor-in-chief Moderator.az, Bizim Yol and Zerkalo of Nota Bene newspaper (4 years newspapers, and the office of the IRFS. At the of imprisonment on charges of end of the year – on December 26, officers of hooliganism). the General Prosecutor’s Office searched the In 2014: offices of the Baku Bureau of Radio Liberty • Parviz Hashimli, an employee of (Azadliq Radiosu), seized their equipment Bizim Yol newspaper and the editor of and documentation, and sealed the editorial moderator.az (8 years of imprisonment office. Nenad Pejic, the head of the Radio on charges of smuggling, illegal sales Liberty/Radio Free Europe Corporation of weapons); condemned this move on the part of • Ilkin Rustamzadeh, a blogger (8 Azerbaijani authorities, calling it a “flagrant years of imprisonment on charges violation of every international commitment” of organizing mass riots, unlawful and “an integral part of a thuggish effort to possession of explosives and drugs); silence Radio Liberty.” • Abdul Abilov, a blogger (5.5 years of imprisonment on charges of illegal Prosecution of journalists in courts. possession and sale of drugs); The authorities of Azerbaijan often use • Tofig Yagublu, an employee of courts to put pressure on journalists and newspaper Yeni Musavat (5 years the media. Such trials are mostly initiated of imprisonment on charges of by representatives of the government or big participation in organizing mass riots);

28 Azerbaijan

• Elsever Mursalli, a blogger (5 years of The country’s courts rarely acquit media imprisonment on charges of illegal outlets and journalists, and practically sale of drugs); never respond to their complaints about the • Omar Mammadov, a blogger (5 years of authorities. In 2014, courts rejected two of imprisonment for possession of drugs Yeni Musava newspaper’s claims against the and drug dealing). municipal executive body. They have also repeatedly refused to hear claims against the investigative authorities by, among others, Khadija Ismayilova, a journalist with Azadliq Radiosu, Tapdiq Ferhatoglu, a correspondent with the Voice of America, Rauf Mirkadyrov, an employee of Zerkalo newspaper (who has now been arrested), Nijat Aliyev, the editor of Azadxeber.org, Avaz Zeynalli, the editor of Khural newspaper, and Hilal Mammadov, the The last words of the 19-year-old Omar Mammadov, the University editor of Tolyshi Sado newspaper. The three student, blogger and activist of the youth movement, to the 58-year- old judge, who deprived him of freedom, were as follows: “My former are being sentenced. Facebook page was visited by half a million people every month. Evidently, the authorities considered it to be dangerous. Though the court of conscience is more important for a person as there are no Defamation lawsuits, filed mainly by pseudo-witnesses, frame-up criminal cases and false judges as you officials and representatives of big businesses, are. I am honest with my conscience”. often burden media outlets with large fines as compensation for moral damage. As a rule, opposition media tend to end up before courts The presidential decree of December 29, most often. In 2013, the court imposed monetary 2014 granted pardon to two journalists from sanctions in the amount of €62,000 on Azadliq this list – Avaz Zeynalli and Sardar Alibeyli. newspaper as a result of claims by the head of But the same month marked the beginning the Baku metro and the Director of the country’s of the trial of Seymour Hazy, a journalist with largest trading center that the newspaper had Azadliq newspaper. Two more well-known insulted their honor and dignity. In March journalists (R. Mirkadyrov and K. Ismayilova) 2014, the MRI reported that, “over 25 cases of and two bloggers (F. Karimli and R. Jafarov) defamation in the media are currently under are currently being held at detention facilities investigation. All of them relate to stories, waiting for trial. covering high-profile cases, where social activists, politicians, officials and executives of private companies, who are connected with the authorities, are plaintiffs. The amount of compensation ordered by the courts in these cases exceeds €2.5 million. Sustaining these cases will mean the financial destruction of media critical to the government.”

One of the most high-profile defamation Relatives and colleagues are meeting the journalist Avaz Zeynalli, cases in the recent years was the lawsuit pardoned on the New Year eve, at the gate of the penal prison. brought by Ramil Usubov, the interior minister, against Eldaniz Guliyev, a movie

29 Azerbaijan

director and a member of the National Council The problems with access to official of Democratic Forces. The Ministry of Internal information are not limited to the illegal Affairs’ press statement on this issue, dated refusal of authorities to respond to requests August 27, 2014 and circulated on Facebook for information. The right of journalists and published by Azerbaijani media, says to access information is violated both by that Guliyev, in a statement to the Ministry’s courts and the Parliament. For instance, in leadership, had admitted to “insulting the 2013, six cases were recorded of journalists entire Azerbaijani police, their honor and being barred from covering trials even dignity and reputation.” Guliyev, however, said though all the hearings were open. In late that the claims were completely unfounded: 2013, the Parliament forbade journalists to “I just pointed out that policemen who are bring not only recording equipment, but well-equipped with technical facilities and also smartphones, to the meeting room. The modern uniform should have the appropriate reason behind this decision was video footage level of culture and ethical behavior. I just recorded by a journalist on a smartphone described the situation I had seen. The traffic and published on the Internet several days police stopped drivers for no reason and the earlier. This video clearly showed MPs voting protocols were inappropriate. I called on the with the e-cards of their colleagues. On May Interior Ministry to take steps to eliminate 2, 2014, Leman Alashrafhyzy, a parliamentary such phenomena.” After linguistic experts correspondent with ANS TV, was denied established the presence ‘of elements of libel entry to the Parliament meeting room and and insult’ in Guliyev’s words regarding the told that his accreditation had been revoked. police, the court sentenced him to 480 hours The ANS TV claims that this move was of community service and ordered him to pay retaliation for the journalist publishing a a fine of 1,000 manat (about €1,000). story revealing that a Milli Mejlis employee was walking the rows of the session hall Access to information. In their day-to-day voting for absent MPs. work, the media and journalists face difficulty accessing official information. The problem, The years 2013-2014 were marked by a however, is not common across all official number of cases of barring or expelling bodies: some state agencies often provide foreign journalists from the country. In April complete and timely responses to requests 2013, the Russian Embassy in Azerbaijan for information, while others usually ignore addressed a protest note to the Azerbaijan journalists’ requests and, in some cases, a MFA in connection with an incident particular ministry will decide to restrict access involving the editor-in-chief of the weekly to information for journalists. In January 2014, Nastoishcheie Vremia based in Dagestan. The the minister of education signed a decree journalist was detained in the Baku airport forbidding heads of educational institutions, and deported from the country. In October, including universities, to make information several German periodicals reported that public without approval from the ministry’s their correspondents were refused visas to press service. In February 2014, acting under visit Baku to cover the presidential elections. this decree, the security service of the Baku State In May 2014, French journalists Laurent University barred journalists from covering a Richard and Emmanuel Bach were detained student protest. As a result, journalists who at the Baku airport before their departure and were trying to interview students were injured authorities seized their recorded footage and and had their cameras broken. photography equipment.

30 Azerbaijan

It is noteworthy that during the 2013 its issue was not delivered to subscribers in presidential elections, some government Nakhchivan and not sold in news stalls by an agencies, including the Central Election order of the authorities of the Autonomous Commission (CEC), and political parties, were Republic. On May 23, 2014, the newspaper more open to the media than during previous complained that the executive bodies of elections. Representatives of the ruling party, Ganja had imposed a ban on the sale of Yeni participating in a televised debate, spoke about Musavat in the city. the need to expand access to information and promised to establish strict penalties for While explicit censorship is rare, some those who violate the relevant laws. At that topics are taboo for state-funded and pro- time, Elmira Suleymanova, the ombudsman government media and TV channels, of the Republic of Azerbaijan for human including criticism of the President and the rights, for the first time, openly demanded army. During the 2013 election campaign, that the Cabinet of Ministers expedite the the CEC attempted to impose taboos on the establishment of a mechanism to manage representative offices of foreign radio stations. complaints of illegal refusal to provide For instance, the Commission warned the information to journalists. Suleymanova said Azerbaijan bureau of Radio Liberty that it was that after three years of attempts, she had not allowed to broadcast a series of interviews been unable to convince the government to with presidential candidates because it had allocate the necessary staff and funds to take not completed the required CEC registration. on this task. The management of the radio station rejected the Commission’s claim, pointing to the On the positive side, in 2013-2014, various Electoral Code of Azerbaijan and international Azerbaijani state agencies organized events rules. to strengthen the relationships between their press services and the media. With One of the worst trends limiting freedom this goal in mind, they held Walk-in Days in of the media is the excessively high level of line with the Open Government Initiative self-censorship at almost every Azerbaijani National Action Plan. However, a number of media outlet. A striking example was the opposition and independent media critical refusal of all the TV channels in the country, toward the government claimed that they both public and private, to participate in were not allowed to attend these events. the fall 2013 election campaign. Experts see this event not only as the refusal of the TV Censorship and self-censorship. Official channels to fulfill their professional duty, but censorship was abolished in Azerbaijan also as the abandonment of about €4 million in 1998, and the country currently has no in advertising revenue; it hardly seems a bodies exercising pre-emptive censorship. In voluntary move. There are many factors the years 2013-2014, there were no recorded contributing to self-censorship among instances of prohibitions against an issue journalists: political (severe punishments, of a newspaper, cancellation of printing or including for defamation, stipulated in laws), distribution of a periodical for ideological economic (risk of losing advertisers, or state reasons, or confiscation of a circulation (or financial support), judicial (unreasonably a part of it) anywhere in the country except high fines). Administrative resources are used in Nakhchivan and Ganja. On November 22, for this purpose as well. Frequent threats, 2013, Yeni Musavat newspaper reported that summons to the police, and phone tapping are

31 Azerbaijan

all designed to create a climate of fear among At the beginning of 2013, there was no journalists. For example, on December 4, 2013, state monopoly in the sphere of distribution one of Azadliq newspaper’s correspondents of printed products, although the market was was summoned to a police station where dominated by the so-called ‘self-supporting’ he received a Prosecutor’s warning about company, Gasid, whose controlling interest is liability for critical publications. owned by the state. The main battle between the authorities and independent press in Reports from numerous human rights 2013-2014 involved this printed products organizations present evidence that social distribution network. network activists are also often subject to Since the beginning of 2013, Gasid has such intimidation: “The Government tightens nearly completely ceased paying newspapers control over Internet users, as it is not able to their revenues from sales of their print restrict their access to social networks,” reads products. Under the current conditions, a December 5, 2013 MRI statement. Searches where profit from sales is the only source of and seizures of computers from the offices income for independent periodicals, many and apartments of journalists and bloggers of them have found themselves in difficult reinforces this climate of fear, though economic positions. In the autumn of 2013, the crimes with which these journalists the authorities used the pretext of ‘restoring are charged are usually unrelated to their order’ to ban the sales of newspapers at professional activities. metro stations, resulting in a 20% decline in their circulation. The two largest social Monopoly and economic conditions. There and political periodicals of the country, are various forms of government control over Yeni Musavat and Azadliq, were forced to most of the media and the major publishing suspend their publishing activities and facilities. Mass media are not transparent in seek support from the public. The money terms of property (owners, sources of income), collected during a one-day fundraising and this complicates the application of the marathon and donations from readers antimonopoly legislation, hampering the law allowed them to resume work. In January from preventing media concentration in the 2014, the government revoked all permits to hands of one political force. conduct street sales of newspapers under the pretext of ‘improvement of the capital city,’ Under the current conditions in Azerbaijan, costing the periodicals and additional 20% the media cannot function without political of lost circulation. The municipality forbade support or financial assistance from one journalists’ protests while the courts rejected side or another. The advertising market is the lawsuits filed by editorial offices. As a poorly developed. State agencies place their result, many independent media were on messages only in media outlets loyal to the verge of bankruptcy: they could not exist them and have forced big businesses to do without financial support from the Fund of the same. The government uses a selective State Support for Media Development (under approach in financing media outlets. The the ), oligarchs or government uses state support programs for political parties. protectionism and to subdue independent media. Fines resulting from court decisions In May 2014, one of the most popular pose a serious economic threat to newspapers newspapers in the country, Aina-Zerkalo, and websites. was forced to close down. On August 1, the

32 Azerbaijan

Broadcasting

Underlying the rapid technical development of telecommunication systems, the main problem plaguing television and radio journalism in Azerbaijan remains the State control over all the broadcasters in the country. Both terrestrial and cable The Mayor’s office prohibits installing newspaper stands in the broadcasters are subject to licensing streets and squares – “they spoil the city outlook”… requirements.

On paper, the public broadcaster (ITV) exists as a form of public service television. In reality, its line-up differs little from that of commercial channels. In April 2013, ITV elected a new chairman. Journalistic organizations issued statements noting violations during the elections. Although, according to the law, the election of the ITV chairman is the responsibility of an independent Council for , the process was administered from the beginning by the And these boxes – do not spoil the outlook of the city National Council on Television and Radio (NCTR). This is an example of how regulatory bodies are used as a tool of political control Azerbaijan state publishing house suspended over broadcasting. the printing of the opposition newspaper, Azadliq. Rahim Hajiyev, the first deputy editor The journalistic activities of Azerbaijani of the newspaper, said, “The reason is that TV channels are marked by low levels of the publishing house requires the newspaper pluralism, absence of sharp debate, and bias to pay off debt amounting to more than in coverage of social and political events. 20,000 manat (€20,000). At the same time, These features manifest particularly strongly the state-owned, Gasid, owes the newspaper during major political campaigns. During the 3.5 times that amount, but refuses to pay. presidential , all nine The authorities deprived the newspaper of national and 14 regional TV channels in the its natural sources of income. We couldn’t country failed to show a single programme pay salaries to our staff for months.” The that included the opposition candidate, newspaper managed to resume it work within except for on ITV within the framework of a week, after it paid off a portion of its debt to free political advertising, as required by law. the publisher with donations of readers. There are no private radio stations in the On November 1, Gasid declared bankruptcy, regions of Azerbaijan. While the law requires never paying off the huge debt it owed to the the NCTR to publish the list of frequencies impoverished periodicals. available for broadcasting on an annual basis,

33 Azerbaijan

this data has not been made public since 2002. to broadband Internet, and the number of On February 17, 2014, the NCTR denied license Facebook users exceeded 1.25 million people. renewal to the regional channel Aygun TV The National Strategy for Information Society (the city of Zaqatala). The official statement Development of the country predicts that provided by the Council claimed that the by the year 2020, online media and social company had not submitted the necessary networks and other modern media will documents for license renewal. However, the come to the forefront in the everyday lives director of Aygun TV claims that the previous of and such universal values as day he refused an offer to buy the channel Internet freedom and access to information and was therefore punished. will be fully ensured.

The NCTR has committed itself not The current laws and regulations do not to allocating available frequencies for pose a serious threat to Internet freedom. broadcasting, but to regulating of the number However, the frequent calls, especially on of broadcasters in the country. On April 22, the part of MPs, to toughen these laws and 2014, Nushiravan Maharramli, the chairman to establish a national regulatory authority of the Council, said that Internet TV channels for the Internet are of great concern. in Azerbaijan would not be issued licenses Moreover, there have been numerous cases for cable broadcasting: “they have to make of persecution, and administrative or judicial a choice. If they want to broadcast on cable, punishment of bloggers and active Internet then they are to establish a cable TV, and then users with critical positions. As mentioned they are to contact us and we will consider earlier in this report, in the past two years, the issue and make a decision. Otherwise, six famous bloggers have been arrested on the number of television channels will charges of illegal possession of drugs or increase dramatically. And today Azerbaijan disorderly conduct, and five of them were has a sufficient number of TV channels for a sentenced to long prison terms. country with such territory.” In August 2013, the country saw its first victim of the legislative changes on criminal responsibility for defamation on Internet resources, introduced to the Criminal Code Internet and New by the Parliament three months earlier. The Court of Astara sentenced city resident Media Mikayil Talibov to correctional labour for one year and deducting 20% of his salary for Internet resources and online journalism alleged libel against AccessBank committed are rapidly developing in the country. The on Facebook. The court of appeal overturned number of readers of online versions of the verdict and sent the case for retrial, but popular newspapers and magazines is at least the district court, after revising the case in 7-10 times their print circulation. In 2013- June 2014, only reduced the sentence to nine 2014 dozens of new information websites, months. Internet TV and Internet radio emerged in Azerbaijan. According to the official data, in There is no monopoly in the provision mid-2014, more than 70% of the population of Internet services, but government used the Internet, 50% of them were connected organizations dominate the market. There have

34 Azerbaijan

been cases of blocked access to certain websites media, but, on the contrary, it extended this and online media, although there is no evidence norm to the Internet in 2013. The changes government authorities were behind these and amendments to the law On Mass Media, restrictions. In 2013, the website of Azadliq adopted by the Parliament in December 2014, newspaper and opposition website Minval.az gave the executive authorities the right to faced continuous cyber-attacks resulting in launch lawsuits to close down a media outlet intermittent outages. Minval.az was forced to that had been accused of disseminating suspend its activities for a few days. The signals ‘biased information’ twice in a year. The of satellite broadcasts of Azadliq Radiosu and 2014 amendments to the laws on non- Azerbaijan Saaty were being jammed. The governmental organizations, on grants, and country’s popular media outlets Mediaforum. to the Code of Administrative Offences have az, Moderator.az, Gunxabar.az, Azadliq Radiosu, complicated the situation for media and and Internet TV Channel-13 all reported serious journalistic associations supported by foreign problems linked to cyber-attacks on their donors. Some periodicals and websites have websites in 2014. closed down, and a number of professional organizations have practically suspended High prices for Internet services are a their activities. serious obstacle to access to the Internet for certain segments of the population; however, Against this background, official calls to in recent years the costs have decreased. toughen mass media legislation, which have become more frequent in 2014, cause serious concerns. In January 2014, the chairman of the Parliamentary Committee on Human Comparative analysis Rights announced that a new law On of press freedom in 2013 Psychological Security of Information was and in 2014 being drafted. According to the official, this law will “establish the conditions for effective fighting against immorality, radicalism, and The freedom of speech and media situation other negative phenomena in the media.” On in the country has not changed much in September 4, the Prosecutor General’s Office general in recent years. The Media Freedom of Azerbaijan stated that it had drafted a bill Index for Azerbaijan, presented by experts on on amendments to the existing regulations a quarterly basis from the beginning of 2013, that would ensure information security remained at the same level (3) at the end of and protection of state secrets. According to 2014. However, a comparison of the research the head of the press service of the General results for different quarters suggests the Prosecutor’s Office, “It is expedient to revise situation is gradually deteriorating. The total the list of information related to military score, which is the basis for calculation of the secrets and to expand it given the current Index, dropped from 571 to 532 points in 2014. developments.” On September 11, the deputy executive secretary of the ruling party said that Legislation has become increasingly the Parliament may soon adopt amendments restrictive. Azerbaijan, contrary to to the laws regulating media activities: “Any expectations, has not only refused to abolish user should register using his ID number to the provision of the Criminal Code on be able to comment on a website or in a social criminal punishment for defamation in the media… Any information received by media

35 Azerbaijan

has to be double-checked by the press office Conclusions of a correspondent institution. Media outlets publishing unverified information will be This study has revealed a gradual issued a considerable fine.” deterioration of media legislation in Azerbaijan in the years 2010-2014. Another Four journalists and bloggers in 2013, and threat to freedom of expression and media six in 2014 were sentenced to long terms of in the country is imprecise interpretation imprisonment in Azerbaijan (subsequently, and application of the laws by the executive two of them were pardoned by a presidential and judiciary branches of government. Thus, decree). Additionally, five well-known currently, the media sphere of Azerbaijan journalists and bloggers arrested between suffers from two especially pressing issues: April and December 2014 are being held in • The growing number of legislative the country’s prisons awaiting trial. provisions unduly restricting freedom of expression and journalistic activities; The study suggests a growing rate of self- • The arrest and prosecution of censorship among journalists. The worst journalists criticizing the government. score the country received was in the second half of 2014: 48 points. For comparison, for The main issues raised by international the same period in 2013 Azerbaijan scored 57 organizations before the government of points. Azerbaijan in the sphere of freedom of expression and media are a result of these Another worrying trend is the further circumstances. Yet the authorities of deterioration of the financial condition of Azerbaijan do not respond to international media outlets, which is also highlighted in pressure, requirements and requests, and the Media Freedom Index report. This score argue that the country’s laws comply fully has been steadily declining since September with international standards and that the 2013 (64 points), and by the end of 2014 it journalists and bloggers in question have reached its lowest level ever (58 points). been arrested for crimes that are not related to their professional activities. The Media Freedom Index experts have noted no significant change in the freedom of Still, many experts believe that by mid- broadcasting in Azerbaijan (40-44 points) and 2015, the stance of the Azerbaijani authorities the role of courts in prosecution of journalists on these issues will be softened. On the eve (43-46 points) for the past two years. of the first European Summer Games and parliamentary elections, the country, which At the same time, the experts note that wants to improve its international image, access to information in the country by should introduce some changes to the media the end of 2014 (50 points) seems to have laws in line with the requirements of the improved compared to the beginning of Council of Europe and the EU, and pardon 2013 (42 points). This is as a result of the several convicted journalists. Such concessions development of the Internet, the creation of would not likely have a significant impact on regional information and resource centers, the status quo in the media sphere. The most and the implementation of some measures in restrictive aspects of the laws on mass media line with the State Program for Promotion of are used as deterrents and are rarely applied in Open Government. practice to punish the media and journalists.

36 Azerbaijan

For example, for the whole period covered by during the presidential elections of October this study (2013-2014), there have been no 2013. Azerbaijani media failed to ensure instances of imprisonment of a journalist for comprehensive public awareness about defamation in Azerbaijan, or of closing down the elections or to provide balanced and a media outlet through a court decision, impartial coverage of the election campaign. although such penalties are stipulated in the This happened partly because of restrictions law. Journalists are being arrested on charges set out in the Electoral Code; however, the of disorderly conduct, drug possession, principal reason was that all the attention treason, smuggling, tax evasion, and so on of state media and television was focused on instead, while independent media shut down the candidate from the ruling party, while mainly due to financial problems. On the the few opposition periodicals and websites other hand, based on experience, even the promoted only ‘their candidate,’ and quasi- most persistent critics of the authorities, who independent media opted to keep a distance have been placed to prison and subsequently from politics and refused to participate in the pardoned by the President, rarely create coverage of the election campaign. All these further problems for the authorities. facts and experiences illustrate the political bias of the vast majority of Azerbaijani media, The impact of such moves to soften the and their division into warring ideological legislative stance on media may be minor camps as a direct consequence of the above- and impermanent. In order to improve the mentioned problems in the sphere of media situation in the sphere of freedom of speech freedom. and mass media, Azerbaijan requires a deeper transformation, including legal, judicial and economic reforms. Only reforms can free the media from the political control of the authorities and give them the opportunity to function independently. Yet the country lacks the economic environment for the existence of independent media; television is controlled by the authorities, there is no transparency in the activities and sources of income of online and print press, editorial offices are characterized by a high level of self-censorship, and state services hold a dominant position in the provision of Internet services.

Today Azerbaijani media are generally unable to perform such important functions as protection of public interests, coverage of the activities of state institutions, coverage of major political campaigns, and adherence to professional norms and international standards. These weaknesses were apparent in the way media behaved

37 Belarus

Belarus

Belarus has always consistently ranked Act at the end of 2014. These amendments last among Eastern Partnership countries made matters worse for traditional media by during the period of the Media Freedom enhancing state control over the mass media Index evaluation. The results of the expert and enabling the Ministry of Information to inquiries (both in 2013 and 2014) show that block Internet sources in pais (without a court repressive legislation in the field of freedom decision) even for a single violation (at the of expression and total state control over ministry’s discretion) of the laws on the media. television and radio broadcasting have the most negative impact on the media freedom The tendencies revealed at the end of 2012 index. have long underlay reguyulatory enforcement in the field of . Though Evaluating Belarusian defamation laws, all conditions remained very unfavourable for experts gave them the lowest possible score journalistic activity throughout 2013-2014, (zero) on all assessed aspects. This attributable no overtly repressive actions in relation to the fact that the Criminal Code of the to the media and journalists (newspaper Republic of Belarus contains, and applies shutdowns, initiation of criminal cases, etc.) from time to time, six articles providing for were observed. The major problems at the criminal liability for defamation and insults beginning of 2013 were as follows: with a stricter liability for defamation in • media registration permission relation to the President and high-ranking procedure (according to 2010- officials. The Criminal Code also contains an 2011 official data, the Ministry of article criminalizing the discrediting of the Information issued 105 refusals to Republic of Belarus. register mass media companies); • detention of journalists by law- Legislation in the field of freedom of enforcement representatives (2014 expression has become even more repressive saw a reduction in the number in view of amendments introduced to the of journalists detained. While, in (already rather undemocratic) Mass Media 2013, the Belarusian Association

38 Belarus

of Journalists reported 50 cases of roubles (more than €1,500 euros) was exacted detention with four of them resulting from journalists accused of participating in in 3-12 day administrative arrests, unauthorized events. Additionally, printed in 2014, 29 cases of detention were press distributors were fined 25.5 million reported. None of these journalists roubles for the unlawful distribution of mass were arrested for their professional media products (same paragraph 2, Article activities); 22.9 of the Administrative Offences Code). • interference with the activity of journalists cooperating with foreign 2014 saw the initiation of several criminal media; cases related to freedom of expression. • restriction of journalists’ access to information; In February, the Prosecutor’s Office of • economic discrimination against the Bobruysk initiated a criminal case related to independent media. insults to a law-enforcement representative published in Aleh Zhalnou’s personal blog In the latter half of 2014, however, things (Article 369 of the Criminal Code of the for the media got significantly worse, Republic of Belarus). The Department of owing primarily to increased pressure on Internal Affairs of the Mogilev Regional journalists cooperating with foreign media. Executive Committee claimed that the If earlier the Prosecutor General’s Office and personal website “Aleh Zhalnou’s Blog” the Committee for State Security may have published a range of materials in 2012-2013 only issued a warning, in 2014 they started that insulted a police officer. Later, criminal bringing administrative actions against proceedings were also launched against journalists for “the unlawful manufacturing the blogger’s son and wife. The blogger’s of mass media products” (paragraph 2, son was sentenced under Article 364 of the Article 22.9 of the Administrative Offences Criminal Code (Violence or threat of violence Code). Law-enforcement bodies and courts in relation to an internal affairs agency viewed the preparation of materials for the officer) to three years in a detention centre foreign media by Belarusian journalists and fined 50 million roubles (about €3,500). not accredited by the Ministry of Foreign Reporters Without Borders condemned Affairs as the unlawful manufacturing of Bobruysk court’s three-year confinement mass media products. 2014 witnessed the sentence (http://en.rsf.org/belarus-blogger- initiation of 14 administrative cases against s-son-sentenced-to-three-24-07-2014,46696. such journalists with 10 of these resulting html). “Unable to silence Aleh Zhalnou (a in fines amounting to 4.5-6 million roubles blogger who is very critical of the local police), (€350-450). Another case is still pending the authorities are now targeting his son,” consideration in 2015, and three cases said Johann Bihr, the head of the Reporters were withdrawn due to the expiry of the Without Borders Eastern Europe and Central period of limitation for the institution of Asia desk. “We deplore this verdict, which administrative proceedings. preserves the impunity of the local police, and we call on the courts to overturn it on appeal.” The total amount of fines exacted from Reporters Without Borders highlighted that journalists cooperating with the foreign media Belarus was ranked 157th out of 180 countries in 2014 was 52.5 roubles, which is equivalent in the 2014 Reporters Without Borders press to almost €4,000. Another 21.45 million freedom index.

39 Belarus

in the country has also worsened recently. According to December’s amendments to the Mass Media Act, the Ministry of Information has the power in pais to block websites for hosting information whose dissemination is prohibited. This being the case, the list of “information whose dissemination is prohibited” is not well-defined and includes, inter alia, information whose dissemination can do harm to the interests of the Republic of Belarus.

Blogger Aleh Zhalnou

June 19 saw the initiation of criminal proceedings against 68-year-old Ekaterina Sadovskaya for insulting the President of the Republic of Belarus (paragraph 2, Article 368 of the Criminal Code). The criminal charges were a result of an entry in the comment book of the Minsk Savyetski District Court in which Sadovskaya expressed indignation at the groundless arrests of activists on the eve of the Ice Hockey World Championship, Military columnist Aleksandr Alesin allegedly, “using insulting words, word combinations and phrases containing a humiliating and indecent appraisal of the President of the Republic of Belarus.” More than ten online media sites had already been blocked before the amendments The greatest public outcry, however, to the Mass Media Act took effect. Only in came following November’s initiation of one case did the state assume responsibility criminal proceedings against Aleksandr for blocking a website, accusing onliner. Alesin, a journalist with the Belorusians and by of violating Internet trading rules. Market newspaper (Белорусы и рынок). Nevertheless, the data shows that the state- The journalist was arrested for ten days on owned Beltelekom (Белтелеком) was behind charges of treason (Article 356 of the Criminal the blocked the websites; the move was most Code) and cooperating with the special likely related to a dramatic upsurge in public security service bodies or an intelligence interest in accessing unbiased information body of a foreign country (Article 356-1). One amid a foreign-exchange crisis in the country. of the charges (treason) was dismissed ten Experts also note that this blocking may be “a days later and Alesin was released on his own common practice before the upcoming 2015 recognisance not to leave town. presidential campaign.”

Though it remains to the freest segment of As for the television and radio broadcasting information space in Belarus, internet freedom situation, it remained relatively constant

40 Belarus

during 2014. Belarusian experts still ranked guided by its practice in the field of freedom it the worst of all the Media Freedom Index of expression. sections (Index 1 out of 7 with Belarus’ overall index being 3 according to the last inquiry). The Mass Media Act, which came into effect All experts gave minimum scores (zero) when six years ago, provides for: responding to the question about the public • non-transparent media registration television – there is simply no such thing in permission procedure; the country. Most experts agree that it would • using an institute of accreditation be impossible to create independent public to restrict journalists’ access to television in Belarus without carrying out information; significant political reforms. • discrimination against freelance journalists; Thus, the mass media situation in Belarus • the possibility of shutting down a mass had changed for the worse by the end of media company through a lawsuit of 2014. This decline is associated not only the Ministry of Information regardless with the stricter regulatory enforcement of the severity of violations. (which has a cyclical nature associated with election campaigns and other publicly- All media outlets are registered by the relevant events, including economic crises), Ministry of Information. After registration, but also with systemic legislative changes the television and radio broadcasting media toughening up state control over both the are also granted a special license. Licenses are traditional media and the Internet, the book also issued by the Ministry of Information, publishing industry, and the distribution of but the procedure is not transparent and printed products. licenses can be easily revoked.

Belarus does not have public political broadcasters independent of executive authorities. Their function is partially Policy performed by foreign broadcasters, namely European Radio for Belarus (Европейское The Constitution of the Republic of Belarus радио для Беларуси), Radio Broadcasting guarantees the freedom of expression, storage (РадыёРацыя), Radio Freedom (РадыёСвабода) and dissemination of information, and and Belsat TV channel (Белсат), whose forbids censorship. However, legislative acts programmes are prepared mainly by (primarily the Mass Media Act), regulations Belarusian journalists for a Belarusian thereunder, and their application in practice, audience. Only European Radio for Belarus and rigidly restrict these freedoms. Despite the Radio Freedom have legal status in the country. fact that Belarus ratified the International The Supreme Court of the Republic of Belarus Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the made the decision in September 2014 to state does not observe its provisions on the prohibit Belsat TV channel from using its logo permissibility of restrictions to freedom of in the territory of Belarus, in effect, forbidding expression. As the Republic of Belarus is it from broadcasting. not a member of the Council of Europe, it does not recognize the jurisdiction of the Radio Broadcasting and Belsat journalists European Court of Human Rights and is not work in Belarus without the authorization

41 Belarus

required under Belarusian laws for foreign to make claims against the media. The media journalists (as well as journalists amendments expanding the scope of the Act who are Belarusian citizens). As a result, to Internet sources are the most disturbing. they frequently receive warnings from These amendments provide for the possibility the prosecutor’s office and the Committee of the blocking in pais of websites even for a for State Security. Since spring 2014, single violation of the laws on the media such journalists have often been accused (in particular, for information whose in accordance with Article 22.9 of the dissemination can do harm to the interests Administrative Offences Code for the unlawful of the Republic of Belarus). This ability will manufacturing of mass media products. be introduced pursuant to the decision of Experts note that law-enforcement bodies the Ministry of Information. The procedure and courts interpret the norm of this for such a move will be established by the Article more broadly than it is intended, Operative and Analytical Centre under the equating all journalistic activity with the President of the Republic of Belarus together manufacturing of mass media products. with the Ministry of Communications and (Pursuant to the Mass Media Act, mass media Informatization of the Republic of Belarus. products are manufactured by the media’s In accordance with the amendments editorial staff, rather than by journalists). introduced to the Mass Media Act, an Internet source owner is liable for the comments of At the end of 2014, the Mass Media Act was website visitors; it is not clear, however, the amended without any public discussion, time limits on such liability and what steps which significantly damaged the freedom an Internet source owner must take to avoid of expression situation in Belarus. It is responsibility for a posted comment. telling that as early as October 23, 2014, responding to a request of the Belarusian These amendments to the Mass Media Act Association of Journalists sent to the House tighten state control over the information of Representatives of the National Assembly, space in Belarus (primarily on the Internet) the head of the field-specific commission and restrict the citizens’ constitutional rights said that the authorities believed that the to freedom of expression. laws on freedom of expression did not need any adjustment. On December 17, the The State Secrets and State Service draft law amending the Mass Media Act was Acts, criminal laws, and legislation on approved in two readings at once, despite not administrative offences create additional initially being included on the agenda of the barriers to freedom of information. Belarusian Parliament session. Legislation on state secrets does not contain an Amendments to the Act, inter alia, provide exhaustive list of data to which access can be for the creation of the State Registers of legally limited. This being the case, more than Printed Matter Distributors and Television 60 state bodies and organizations can claim and Radio Broadcasters and the application their information contains state secrets, of sanctions to certain distributors referred including the Ministry of Information, to in the Mass Media Act (up to depriving Ministry of Culture, Ministry of Education, as them of the right to distribute mass media well as (in addition to executive authorities) products), and an increase in the window of seven executive bodies of territorial units, time available for the Ministry of Information five concerns, Belarusian Republican Union

42 Belarus

of Consumer Societies, Plenipotentiary government ownership is widespread), Representative for Religious and Nationality education and cultural institutions (libraries, Affairs, National State-owned Television and schools, universities etc.). As of January 1, 2015, Radio Company. access to websites included on the “black list” The Criminal Code and the Administrative may be blocked for all citizens. Moreover, at Offences Code include ten articles providing for present, persons using the Internet to post punishment for defamation, six of which are information about protests or criticising contained in the former. Articles 367 and 368 state bodies or officials are quite frequently of the Criminal Code provide for enhanced held accountable. culpability for slander or insults in relation to the President of the Republic of Belarus. International organizations have These articles are applied often. The Belarusian repeatedly called on Belarus to bring its Criminal Code also provides for liability for legislation on the media in line with “the discrediting of the Republic of Belarus”. democratic standards. Nevertheless, legislative acts approved in Belarus in 2014 The Republican Commission for Evaluation of suggest that the democratization of the Information Products for the Presence (Absence) media field in Belarus is unlikely in the of Signs of Extremism was established under near future. Recent events, in fact, show the the Ministry of Information in September government’s desire to intensify its control 2014. Similar commissions were established over freedom of expression and expand it under oblast territorial authorities. These beyond the media and into the Internet and commissions’ decisions may serve as a book publishing sectors. pretext for pointing the finger at journalists and media outlets, destroying information materials, and consequently imposing censorship. Practice There is no Access to Information Act in Belarusian legislation. Instead of approving In 2014, Belarusian authorities continued the progressive Access to Information on State to severely restrict freedom of speech, Bodies’ Activity Act, a draft of which was applying both new legislative limitations and published on the Belarusian Parliament’s other methods of putting pressure on the website, the legislator, at the end of 2013, media and journalists. As a result, authorities instead amended the Information, Informatisation were not ready to face the new challenges and Information Protection Act, which has no associated with the aggressive propaganda direct relation to the media. Public comments machine wielded by the neighbouring on the draft law were not taken into account. Russian Federation.

The Internet remains the freest segment The key problems of the media sphere in of information space. However, there is Belarus in 2014 were as follows: an order through which, and according to • toughening of the Mass Media Act to non-transparent procedure, practically any equate independent websites with the Internet source can be placed on a “black list” media, which allows authorities to shut of websites. Access to these sites is limited down and block Internet publications for state organizations (in a country where they deem offensive;

43 Belarus

• arbitrary blocking of several key The amendments to theMass Media Act independent websites altogether; make the owners of online media websites • persecution of freelance journalists for responsible for the content posted on their working without accreditation; sites, including information that authorities • fines, detention of journalists, could consider as extremist or damaging to and initiation of proceedings national security. against independent journalists on Furthermore, the amendments allow the exaggerated charges; Ministry of Information to block access to • confiscation of printed products by news websites without a court decision. the customs officials on charges of “extremism” and creation of special Several key independent websites in Belarus state commissions; were blocked at practically the same time • preservation of seven articles of the parliament approved the amendments. the Criminal Code providing for Charter97.org, Belaruspartisan.org and punishment for disseminating Gazetaby.com were blocked on December 19 information about the national leader through the Baltelekom (Балтелеком) network and other high-ranking authorities (the state telecommunication company (for example, articles on discrediting regulating broadband Internet access). of the Republic of Belarus, slander and Baltelekom denies responsibility, referring to insulting of the President, activity on DDoS attacks. behalf of an unregistered legal person); • refusals to register and accredit One day after they published articles independent media companies; criticising the government’s economic • economic discrimination of the non- policy, the websites UDF.by, Zautra.by, 21.by state media; and three BelaPAN information agency • restriction of access to information on (БелаПАН) sites (belapan.by, belapan.com the activity of government entities; and naviny.by) were blocked from public • inability of the state media to resist the access. Their private hosting company, Russian propaganda machine. Hoster.by, changed the websites’ IP- addresses on December 21, but by mid-day Having succeeded in establishing control over the new addresses were also blocked. traditional media, in 2014, the Belarusian government focused on censorship on the Internet: the last BelaPAN editor, Ales Lipay, condemned this remaining haven for independent news and opinions in blocking as an act of censorship and argued Belarus. that the websites could only be blocked on government orders. Belarusian journalists, On December 17, 2014, the House of who regarded the Internet as their last island Representatives of the National Assembly of freedom, have received a clear message approved the amendments to the Mass Media about the authorities’ plans for the future of Act, which were further adopted by the Council online freedom of expression. of the Republic on December 18, and signed by Alexander Lukashenko on December 20. The In 2014, authorities started extensively using the amendments entered into force on January 1, institute of accreditation to restrict journalists’ activity 2015 and presidential elections are expected through legal means – a practice that was not to take place in autumn 2015. common in 2013.

44 Belarus

The situation began worsening in April 2014. For the first time, authorities started targeting reporters whose names and materials appeared in the foreign media with Article 22.9 of the Administrative Offences Code providing for responsibility for, “the unlawful manufacturing of mass media products.” Andrey Meleshko was fined three times and Ales Zalevsky twice. When Belarusian journalist Aleksandr Burakov published material on the German Wave (Немецкая волна) website, it resulted in court hearings, warrants to appear in the local Vitebsk journalists and activists made a photo in support of the campaign of the European Federation of Journalists “Stand Up for tax office, and a search of his and his parents’ Journalism!”. 7 participants of the photo session were fined for this flats, culminating in the seizure of computers, photo, placed in the Internet. flash drives, and base units. The search was performed on the day of OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media, Dunja Mijatović’s visit to Belarus. The journalist was accused of working without accreditation and was later fined €450.

Journalist Aleksandr Burakou

In total, 14 administrative cases charging journalists with working without accreditation have been initiated in Belarus since April. Most of these are related to Belsat “Stand Up for Journalism!” campaign in Minsk: attraction of the attention to the problems of journalists, who cooperate with foreign independent channel broadcasting in Belarus mass media from Poland . the post-election and crisis year of 2013, when 2014 saw near 30 detentions of journalists, which 160 journalists were detained). is less than in previous years (about 50 journalists were detained in association with On November 5, on the world “Stand Up For their professional activities in 2013, and a Journalism” day celebrated at the initiative record number of detentions occurred during of the European Federation of Journalists,

45 Belarus

a group of journalists and activists with the and Belarusian human rights advocates Belarusian Association of Journalists had entitled, “Half an Hour Before Spring: Report their picture taken in front of an old building on Discrimination and Inequality in Belarus,” decorated with urban graffiti: prison cells which had been printed in Great Britain and with birds made of newspaper flying out of sent to Belarus by regular mail. The period of them. The photographs were posted online, examination was extended several times. resulting in seven of the participants being forced to appear in court and ordered to pay Human rights advocates attribute the a fine for participating in the unauthorized intensification of customs activity to the event. (The European Federation of Journalists establishment of special commissions formed protested and held a similar photo session in to screen information products for signs of in solidarity with their Belarusian extremism. These commissions are primarily colleges). comprised of state officers who are not true experts on extremism. The composition of Grodno journalist Mikhail Karnevich, these new commissions is approved through accredited in Belarus as a Radio Freedom government resolutions and they adopt correspondent, was fined on a similar decisions through voting. charge after reporting on-site from an event dedicated to the memory of Konstanty The most memorable case of 2013 was Kalinowski, the national hero of Belarus. certainly the identification of a photo album The police report reads: “He was near the containing the photographs of the winners monument and was moving as a part of an of the “Press-Photo of Belarus 2011” contest organized group.” as extremist materials. The jury consisted of professional and famous photographers from The total amount of fines exacted from all over the world. journalists and printed matter distributors in 2014 amounts to 105 million roubles Belarusian independent media continues to work (about $10,000). Journalists cooperating under conditions of economic discrimination. with the foreign media were fined 52.05 million roubles, journalists “participating in In 2014, more than ten non-state social and unauthorized events” 21.45 million roubles, political print media outlets (about one-third and printed matter distributors 25.5 million of all the independent print media in these roubles. subject areas in Belarus according to data of the Belarusian Association of Journalists) Authorities extended their application of the had the same distribution problems working Extremism Prevention Act in 2014. In the past two with Belpochta (Белпочта) and Belsoyuzpechat years, there have been at least seven cases of (Белсоюзпечать), two state-owned the Belarusian customs office confiscating enterprises that dominate the retail and printed literature at border crossings. On subscription mass media distribution market. the Lithuanian-Belarusian border, customs officers confiscated Valeriy Karbalevich’s Additionally, there are different book, “Aleksandr Lukashenko: Political printing service prices for state and non- Portrait” for examination. In August, customs state publications. Non-state publications officers in the Minsk airport confiscated an sometimes face unjustified refusals from edition of a joint report published by British printing houses to publish their newspapers.

46 Belarus

In December 2014, the weekly Free News Plus justice, and 65.5% view the events in eastern (Свободные новости плюс) unexpectedly Ukraine as “the national protest against the received a refusal from Plutos-market private illegitimate power.” printing house (Плутос-маркет) (this happened just after a meeting of the Minister Manipulation of public opinion has of Information with the editors and directors become a global problem that goes beyond of national publications and printing houses; national borders. It is especially easy to govern more than ten websites were blocked in a country with the help of lies if that country Belarus in the days around the meeting). has no freedom of expression. Authorities also continued limiting the advertising efforts of non-state media. There is an unspoken ban on state-owned enterprises placing ads in independent publications, Broadcasting while other (primarily national) advertisers are discouraged from doing business with the The field of television and radio broadcasting non-state media. This is happening against in 2014 was marked by further progress toward the backdrop of generous subsidies to state the switch to digital television broadcasting media. Government support to state media and the intensification of state control over amounted €52 million in 2014, and about €60 broadcasting activity. The state programme million in 2015. for the Introduction of Digital Television and Radio Broadcasting in the Republic of Belarus In view of the conflicts in Ukraine in 2014, the by 2015 was approved through a Resolution Belarusian information sphere was heavily influenced of the Council of Ministers of the Republic by an aggressive Russian propaganda machine of Belarus on December 08, 2005. No. 1406 reminiscent of that operating during the stipulates that the last nine analogue cold war. Belarusian authorities have been television transmitters in Belarus will be shut building a system of information security down on May 15, 2015. designed to deal with internal dissenters and Western influence for many years; however, There are already three digital multiplexes this has completely failed to resist Russian operating in the country (the first one is free propaganda. of charge, consists of eight channels, and broadcasts using the DVB-T system; the other Belarusian state-owned media two are paid and broadcast in DVB-T2, which organizations have demonstrated their lack is technologically incompatible with the first of preparation and their inability to resist system and requires different equipment). information aggression from the outside in The second and third multiplexes each have formulating and promoting the Belarusian 18 channels. As of the middle of November position with regard to the Russian and 2014, the second one is accessible to 77% of Ukrainian crisis. According to the opinion poll the population, and the third one to 64%. The results of the Independent Institute of Socio- first multiplex potentially covers 97.8% of the Economic and Political Studies, between one- Belarusian population. half and two-thirds of Belarusians believe in the version of Ukrainian events presented At the time this material was prepared, the by the Russian media: 62.2% regarded largest state-owned Belarusian newspaper the annexation of Crimea as a historical published the television programming

47 Belarus

schedules of 56 channels (+2 with regard to Channel of Belarusian Radio). Four out of the situation developing a year ago) that are eight of these channels include Russian news legally broadcasted on Belarusian territory and journalistic programmes in their line- by means of terrestrial retransmitters or ups. cable networks. The difference of 14 popular channels between those broadcasted by Before the start of the Russian-Ukrainian digital multiplexes and those accessible in war, a rather limited group of Belarusian other ways shows that a digital switchover experts was concerned about this. However, will somewhat impoverish the country’s once the Russian federal channels had television market. Channels not included in transformed into the Kremlin’s propaganda multiplexes will be available only through mouthpiece, their broadcasting on Belarusian cable networks or the digital networks of territory became a direct threat to national Internet providers as IP-TV with a limited security. The autumn public-opinion polls coverage. However, in accordance with show that the number of Belarusians the effective legislative norms, analogue supporting the annexation of Crimea by broadcasting in cable networks will continue Russia exceeds 60%, despite the fact that the operating after the country’s digital Belarusian state-owned channels take a more switchover. balanced and neutral position on this issue. It is clear that the Belarusian authorities were The completely non-transparent process, not ready to meet the challenges associated in both commercial and legislative terms, with information flow in this new geopolitical of the formation of national multiplexes, is situation and are losing the battle over their the first major challenge facing Belarusian own citizens’ opinions. broadcasting digitalization. The public did not have access to information about the That being said, Belarusian authorities process and was simply informed of the preserve strict control over both access development of multiplexes, waking up to broadcasting time (at the level of state suddenly in a new television reality. This licensing) and over the content of programmes. public confusion was reflected as low uptake At present, it is impossible for independent or on the new option. As of November 2014, the foreign broadcasting companies with content number of paid subscribers to the second and not subject to state censorship to broadcast in the third multiplexes, despite their low price Belarus. Under such restrictive conditions, the (less than five dollars) did not exceed 45,000 market is essentially closed to new television in a country of 9.5 million (about three million initiatives that have not received prior households). approval from the state ideological structures. Simple declarations of loyalty on the part of The presence of hybrid Russian-Belarusian new broadcasters are not enough to secure channels in the programming mix of the free such approval. This restrictive attitude shows multiplex is the second serious challenge that state control over mass media activity in facing the digitization process, and this Belarus is deeply entrenched. became even more pressing in 2014. The unpaid multiplex includes the following It is also worth noting that Belarus is channels: ONT (National Television), the only European Broadcasting Union Belarus-1, Belarus-2, Belarus-3, RTR-Belarus, (EBU) member without a national television NTV-Belarus, STV, MIR (plus the First National broadcaster, which is in direct violation of the

48 Belarus

charter of this international organization. inconsistent with the interests of the Republic In Belarus, television is state-owned and is of Belarus” as well as the broadcasting of treated by authorities as a state body – with content “containing information whose all the consequences for information policy dissemination is either forbidden or limited that come with it. by law” also hints at authorities’ restrictive intentions in the field of television and radio The size of the television advertising broadcasting. market in Belarus, according to the autumn estimates of Gemius Belarus by the results A potentially-prohibitive measure on of 2014, amounts to $100 million. In the access to satellite TV is still in force in the European countries of the former socialist form of Resolution No. 384 of the Council block (Czech Republic and Hungary) the of Ministers (adopted May 16, 2013), which advertising market is several times larger approved the Regulation on Conditions and despite similar population sizes. The Internet Procedure for Installing Individual Antennas advertising market, according to the same and Other Constructions on Roofs and source, amounted to approximately $15 million Facades of Apartment Houses. last year. However, the Belarusian advertising market is allocated rather strictly among Under this regulation, satellite-receiving a handful of advertisers and is practically equipment can only be installed on the roofs inaccessible to potential new players. and facades of apartment houses with a permit from a local executive and regulatory There are also more direct restrictive body. To receive such a permit, it is necessary measures. Pursuant to the Resolution of the to submit to the executive committee the President No. 456 (as of October 07, 2013), following documents: which amended previous decrees regulating • application form, the media, officials in Minsk have further • passport or other form of identification, tightened their control over access to the • technical passport and a document television market. Now, the only television confirming the property rights to an broadcasting that does not require a license is apartment (in the case of an apartment the retransmission of foreign TV programmes owner), without changes to their content. However, • layout of the roof or façade of the even in this case, broadcasters must acquire apartment house (prepared in any an official permit from Belarusian authorities form) with the proposed location of the in order to distribute foreign mass media installation indicated. products. Employees of TV and radio stations who are involved in broadcasting activities Having received a permit, it is necessary must pass qualification tests according to sign an engineering agreement with a to a procedure defined by the Ministry design documentation developer. The overall of Information, and those responsible cost of legally installing a satellite dish in for broadcasting must have field-specific Belarus, following this procedure, amounts to education and/or at least five years relevant approximately $300. So far, there have been experience in the field. only a handful of cases where local authorities demanded the dismantling of a satellite dish The vague language of the decree on the that had been installed without observing the prohibition of broadcasting “for purposes proper procedure. However, the government

49 Belarus

may decide at any moment to begin enforcing the prosecutor’s office for cooperating with this rule to significantly limit citizens’ access unaccredited foreign media after the 2010 to free international broadcasting. presidential elections, and the Committee for State Security seized and searched the As it was in 2013, the current situation in channel’s unofficial office in Minsk. Belarus is such that, without fundamentally changing the social-political situation, media In summary, without large-scale, systemic outlets located or funded from abroad and transformations within the country, it will be relying on sponsorship seem to be the only impossible to free the Belarusian TV market alternatives to Belarusian TV channels. from economic and political influence.

The lack of free access to terrestrial and cable television inside the country is supplemented only by the satellite and online broadcasting of such channels. At the same time, as mentioned previously, according to the amendments to the Mass Media Act, as of Internet January 1, 2015, authorities can legally block online broadcasters by classifying websites as and New Media mass media and placing them on a “black list.” According to gemiusAudience data, the Fortunately, satellite television number of Internet users in Belarus has broadcasting is harder to stop. However, increased by about 79,000 users in 2014 (to the costs of operating a satellite television nearly 5 million from 4.9 million in 2013) . channel without access to advertising in the local market are very high. This is exemplified In the news media sphere, the picture by the only Belarusian-speaking satellite TV has remained essentially the same as in project that is not controlled by the official 2013: about half of Internet users visit online Belsat TV. The channel broadcasts from news websites. The remainder of internet- Warsaw with the help of Astra 4A satellite. connected citizens spend their time online The channel’s annual budget is about $5.5 in social networks and using search engines. million and more than 90% of its costs are In fact, online media ranks second in the covered by the continuous support of the country as a source of information about Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Poland and, to current events, outdone only by television as a lesser extent, sponsorships from foreign the popular choice for accessing news. aid organizations from other EU member states. A number of trends in the online media field also persisted in 2014: The Belarusian authorities’ attitude • independent media dominate in toward such projects is revealed by the fact online Belarusian news: the number of that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs refused visitors to independent news websites three times to grant Belsat TV channel far exceeds those to state-owned permission to open a news office during its media; six years of operation. Belsat journalists and • the advertising market in Belarus in operators regularly received warnings from general, including Internet advertising,

50 Belarus

is poorly developed, hindering the court blamed Zhalnou for the fact that the profitability of online media outlets; footage appeared on the Internet. • many advertisers and advertising agencies avoid doing business with On July 15, Zhalnou learned of criminal independent media fearing reprisals proceedings against his wife under Article by authorities; 364, “Violence or threat of violence in relation • the Belarusian Internet audience is to an internal affairs agency officer.” The not ready to pay for content, as it has blogger claims that his wife was the victim access to a lot of free sources; of aggression by the internal affairs agency • as a result of advertising difficulties officers who searched Zhalnou’s home at the and the inability to charge for content, end of May 2014. Zhalnou asserts that his the vast majority of independent wife tried to shut the door on policemen who media editorial offices struggle were bursting into the apartment without financially and are often significantly showing a warrant and was thrown down underequipped; on the floor. One of the policemen, however, • the problem of access to information claims that she “used violence” against him is as persistent as ever: authorities are not (bit him). receptive to requests from independent media. On July 22, the Bobruysk court finished In February, the Prosecutor’s Office of considering a case against Alyaksei Zhalnou, Bobruysk initiated a criminal case related to Aleh Zhalnou’s son. On September 4, 2013, insults to a law-enforcement representative father and son filmed traffic police cars published in Aleh Zhalnou’s personal blog illegally parked on a pedestrian crossing (Article 369 of the Criminal Code of the and spoke to the police officers about this Republic of Belarus). The Department of incident. As a result, they both were detained. Internal Affairs of the Mogilev Regional The blogger’s son, was also accused of Executive Committee claimed that the violating Article 364 of the Criminal Code. The personal website “Aleh Zhalnou’s Blog” judge, Julia Bereziuk, sentenced the young published a range of materials insulting a man to three years in a detention centre to be police officer during 2012-2013. served over nights while working outside the centre during the day. He also must pay a fine On March 17, the Bobruysk District Court amounting to 50 million roubles (€3.5 million fined Zhalnou 45 basic amounts (€4,300 at at the time). the time) for publishing footage on YouTube of a meeting with Aleksandr Vasiliev, the In 2014, there were also cases of the distribution head of the Department of Internal Affairs of of falsified messages and the creation of fake email the Mogilev Regional Executive Committee. accounts. The court considered the blogger’s actions as insubordination to the lawful order of an On March 5, the BelaPAN information official (Article 23.4 of the Administrative agency received an e-mail from the Offences Code), namely, not complying opposition party, “Just World” discussing “the with the Department of Internal Affairs’ unconstitutional coup d’etat in Ukraine.” The requirement to leave all audio and video “Just World” party leader, Sergei Kaliakin, recording devices, including mobile phones, claimed that the Party did not approve or outside the meeting room. The police and the send any such document concerning the

51 Belarus

situation in Ukraine. The e-mail address from reported the distribution of provocative which the message was sent differs from that messages on his behalf from his e-mail of the Party by only one character. Kaliakin account, though he claimed they did not hypothesized that government special originate with him. Mr. Burakov demanded services were involved in the deception. that police investigate the author of these e-mails and bring them to justice, as well as Two candidates for Bobruysk City Council block this e-mail account. associated with the opposition “Tell the Truth” campaign each received a threatening e-mail The editorial staff of Nashaniva (Наша from M. Molchanova, a journalist with the Ніва) weekly newspaper issued a statement Bobruysk Courier non-state regional newspaper about the creation of a fake Twitter account. (Бобруйский курьер). The journalist claims According to the editorial staff, someone, that someone else had created the fake with the help of this fake account and using account from which the e-mails were sent the name, design elements, and content of and also suspects that government special the newspaper, disseminated information services were involved. that had no relation to the newspaper.

2014 also occasionally saw problems with access to independent online media.

On March 13, one of the largest Belarusian opposition information sources, “Charter-97” (Хартия-97), said that its website was under attack from hackers. Unknown attackers attempted for several hours to break into the website’s server before starting a DDoS attack. The website’s editorial staff suggested that the attack was linked to, “the active Journalist Marina Molchanova highlighting by charter97.org of events in Ukraine and the Russian aggression against our southern neighbour.” On March 14, the independent Mogilev website, Free Format (Свободный формат), The website of Nashaniva independent posted two articles allegedly written by Ales newspaper was unavailable for several Lenevsky – the domain’s owner. The published hours on March 25 while Minsk witnessed materials discredited and humiliated a procession dedicated to Freedom Day, opposition activists of the Mogilev oblast. All an annual celebration by the democratic posts since September 9, 2013 were deleted forces of Belarus. “We are most likely dealing from the website. The editorial staff ofFree with the intentional blocking on the part Format stated that the slanderous materials of Beltelecom,” Nashaniva online journalists were posted as a result of the website being suggested. “One couldn’t get on the website hacked. even using TOR… Perhaps, somebody is trying out “new tactics” on NN.BY before 2015 During these very days, Aleksandr [the year of the next presidential elections] Burakov, the Mogilev independent journalist, arrives?”

52 Belarus

The Radio Freedom website also reported its In all likelihood, such a serious attack was live stream of the Freedom Day procession related to the dramatic upsurge in Belarusians’ was blocked. The problems accessing the appetite for unbiased information in the video only occurred in Belarus. context of the foreign-exchange crisis in the country. We may also theorize that this On July 31, the web editorial staff of widespread blocking was a kind of practice- the international consortium, EuroBelarus, run in the lead up to the 2015 presidential reported that the website had been the election campaign. victim of a hacking attack. Attackers posted provocative materials about the events in In conclusion, these issues, combined with Ukraine on www.eurobelarus.info for a few the recent amendments to the Mass Media Act days and actively spread these messages with regards to online media outlets, paint a in social networks. The website owners grim picture of the freedom of online media attribute these attacks to the editorial in Belarus in 2014. staff’s active approach to highlighting the Russian-Ukrainian conflict: the special column, “Events in Ukraine: A Belarusian Perspective,” has been posted regularly since the beginning of the conflict. Cоnclusions

On August 14, the state monopolistic Belarus still has one of the most repressive provider, Beltelecom, blocked access to media landscapes of all Eastern Partnership charter97.org for users inside Belarus. Visitors countries (approximately on-par with notified the editorial staff that they could not Azerbaijan). This is confirmed through various get on the website through regular access, but ratings by international organizations could using a proxy server. Access problems evaluating press freedom, including through were reported for the entire day. the Media Freedom Index calculated in Eastern Partnership countries within the Finally, since December 19, Belarus has framework of the ENPEastMediaFreedomWatch seen an unprecedented, in terms of scale project. and duration, blocking of independent online media. Without any explanation, After the post-election crises of late 2010 users’ access was restricted to belapan.com, and early 2012 associated with the repression belapan.by, naviny.by, belaruspartisan.org, of the political opposition and civil society, and charter97.org, udf.by, 21.by, gazetaby.com, after the 2011 devaluation, the media situation and zautra.by. has stabilized somewhat during 2013-2014 (though at a very low level and with depressed As usual, most of these websites were population). Detentions of journalists peaked inaccessible only from Belarusian IP addresses; in 2011 (with more than 160 detentions), but foreign users, and Belarusians using proxy in 2013, the situation returned to the “annual servers, were able to access the sites with no norm”: that is, 50-60 short-term groundless problem. According to available data, it was detentions per year. These numbers improved Beltelecom who blocked the websites and some again in 2014, falling to just 29 detentions. This of them remained blocked at the end of 2014 is one of the year’s few positive outcomes and and into 2015. is the result of hard work on the part of the

53 Belarus

Belarusian Association of Journalists and the with regard to the political opposition, civil office of the OSCE Representative on Freedom of society, and the media, the situation could the Media, which organized, with the consent change for the worse any moment. The crisis of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, a seminar on that followed the 2010 presidential elections cooperation between law-enforcement bodies confirmed these assumptions. A new round and journalists, and which has been quick to of dialogue between Belarus, Europe and the respond to violations of journalists’ rights in United States of America prompted by the Belarus. Additionally, a decrease in the number conflict in Ukraine, combined with a more of mass demonstrations held in Belarus during restrained policy in Minsk, which refused 2013-2014 also contributed to a lower number to go along with the aggressive Russian of detentions. The upcoming presidential approach to the conflict, created more hope elections and the ongoing economic crisis for the possible democratization of Belarus in Belarus may lead to an upsurge in these among some politicians and community numbers; these factors have already impacted leaders. However, the changes introduced other media freedom indicators evaluated to the Mass Media Act at the end of 2014 have within the framework of this project. dramatically impaired the situation with regard to freedom of expression and civil and By contrast, the legal environment in which political rights in the country. the media, distributors of print periodicals, Moreover, the blocking of more than ten book publishers, and online journalists leading online information sources even operate has worsened. This is the result of before the amendments to the Mass Media Act amendments to the Mass Media Act to equate took effect, as well as a print house’s refusal all Internet sources, including blogs, with to print the SN Plus. Free News Plus (СН плюс. mass media in terms of obligations, though Свободные новости плюс) independent these new media have not yet earned the same newspaper (a popular independent social rights as their traditional counterparts. The and political newspaper of Belarus with Ministry of Information will be able to block a circulation of more than 31,000 copies) in pais access to online sources on the basis of shows that authorities do not always follow extremely broad and arbitrary interpretations the provisions of even their own repressive of this Act. Enhanced government control over legislation and that private printers, print media distributors exacerbates economic distributors, and providers, at the threat discrimination against independent media of losing their business, may act in an even outlets because the state-owned Belpochta and more discriminatory manner in “protecting Belsoyuzpechat refuse to negotiate agreements national interests,” than state-owned for subscription or retail distribution with organizations. many of independent editorial offices. At the same time, the state media continue receiving Thus, the media situation in Belarus is (without any competition) budget support worse at the end of 2014 than it was when amounting to €60 million per year as of 2015. the year began. Legislative and regulatory acts adopted in 2014 as well as the actions of During conditional dialogue between authorities show the government’s intention Minsk and the West in 2009-2010, to tighten its control over freedom of independent experts noted that there were expression for traditional media and expand no systemic improvements in the country its reach to the Internet, and book publishing, and even though there were fewer repressions and sales sectors.

54 Georgia

Georgia

Code, and the General Administrative Code Policy together with the Law on Advertising, the According to experts, Georgia has all the Law on Consumer Rights Protection, and the necessary constitutional and legislative Law on Copyright and Related Rights. guarantees for freedom of speech and freedom of the media. There are no laws in The Internet is not currently subject to conflict with the basic principles of media government regulation. freedom. Georgia adopted the Law on Freedom of Speech and Expression in 2004. There were no significant changes to Georgian media legislation in 2014; however, Broadcasting is regulated by the Georgian in the reporting period some important steps National Communications Commission were made toward the transition to digital (GNCC), which acts in accordance with the broadcasting. following legislative documents: the Law of Georgia on Broadcasting, the Law of Georgia on In 2014, the Georgian Parliament Electronic Communications, TheLaw on Licences considered two important issues: the status and Permits, the Law on Independent National of social advertising and the duration of Regulatory Authorities, the Law on Advertising, the commercial advertising. Both bills were Law on Consumer Rights Protection, the Law on the widely discussed. Protection of Minors from Harmful Exposure, the Law on Control of Business Activity, the Law on Copyright A number of mass media organizations and and Related Rights, the Law on Occupied Territories, NGOs demanded that the parliament postpone the Law on Control of Industrial Activity, the Labour the implementation of the regulations on Code, the Code of Conduct for Broadcasters, and the social advertising until after the transition General Administrative Code. to digital broadcasting is complete. They also urged the Georgian President to use his The activities of the press are regulated by veto right on the Law on Social Advertisements. the Civil Code of Georgia, the Civil Procedure Media representatives believe this law will

55 Georgia

cause financial damage to media outlets in outlets, including the popular television the country, since it makes it obligatory for channel, Rustavi-2. broadcasters to air social advertising for free. In 2014, as in the previous year, no At present, the Parliament has clarified the grave crimes were committed against status of social advertising and has appointed journalists. No journalists were killed, the GNCC to evaluate it. arrested, detained, or abducted in connection with their professional activities. The prospect of limiting the length of advertisements also caused protests by According to an expert from the Georgian national television companies, which are Young Lawyers Association, the number concerned this could mean a decrease in of cases of violations of journalists’ rights their advertising revenues. Some of the decreased in 2014. However, investigations national broadcasters have also suggested were ongoing into some earlier cases that had that MPs intend to adopt this law without stirred public opinion. taking advertising standards into account. Regional broadcasters and a number of While serious crimes and violations were national broadcasters generally agree with rare, there were some reported cases of the provisions of the new bill; however, psychological pressure and threats toward they believe that more time is needed to journalists. For instance, in May 2014, Jaba implement the changes it stipulates. The bill, Ananidze, a journalist with the Batumi which the GNCC drafted, includes a measure, television company, Channel 25, filed a lawsuit stipulated by the principles of the Association with the Prosecutor General’s Office of Adjara Agreement with the EU, for limiting the against Medea Vasadze, an MP of the Adjara duration of television advertising spots. If the Supreme Council. The latter, according to bill is adopted, television advertising will not Jaba Ananidze, and supported by recordings exceed 12 minutes per hour, including during he provided, threatened him with “launching prime time. In addition, the proposed limits a process” and hinted that his sexual also apply to children’s shows, broadcasting of orientation “is in question.” These threats official national events, speeches of officials, happened after the airing of Jaba Ananidze’s religious ceremonies, election debates, and investigative film, “High Class” (made within documentaries shorter than 15 minutes. The the IREX project); the film showed how Adjara bill also restricts surreptitious advertisement Supreme Council MPs were spending budget and sponsorship. Drafted amendments to funds. Giorgi Surmanidze, CEO of Channel the Law on Broadcasting, which regulates 25, called on civil society and the diplomatic advertising in electronic mass media, are also service to condemn the pressure the Council under review. was applying to the channel.

Earlier, Channel 25 had appealed to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), accusing the government of turning a blind Practice eye to the abuse of power on the part of the Prosecutor General’s Office, which had The primary Georgian mass media outlets launched proceedings against the company’s are not all government-controlled; there are founders. Surmanidze believed that the MP’s powerful independent oppositional media threat toward Ananidze was just one part of

56 Georgia

an overall strategy of exerting pressure upon happened just before a concert of Russian the broadcaster. The Council of the Charter of singer Grigory Leps. The musician’s security Journalistic Ethics of Georgia addressed the team detained a journalist from the Maestro Supreme Council of Adjara Republic, asking television company for an hour. The Interior it to hold the MP accountable for her actions. Ministry initiated a case. However, the case The MP, in turn, accused the journalist of was never heard in court. Some experts violating the profession’s ethical standards. believe that the authorities simply put on a This case became a precedent when the show since any real action in relation to the Council of the Charter of Journalistic Ethics case was delayed. examined the conflict and engaged both parties in a discussion. NGOs and local mass media outlets reported that law enforcement agencies In September 2014, Natia Mikiashvili, were interfering with the editorial policy of a journalist with the Anatomy television the independent local newspaper, Samkhretis studio, accused Zviad Dzhankarashvili, the Karibche (The Southern Gate) in December former head of the General Inspection of the 2014. In addition, in February and December Georgian Ministry of Internal Affairs and, 2014, several cases were reported of verbal until recently, the executive secretary of abuse and attempts by high-ranking officials the Georgian Dream party, of pressure and of Ozurgeti Municipality (Western Georgia) threats. to threaten journalists with the regional newspapers, Guria News and Guriis Moambe. There have been several cases of journalists NGOs and mass media urged authorities to being detained or verbally abused during investigate the abovementioned offences and public demonstrations and police operations, to hold the officials involved accountable for of journalists being illegally impeded in their actions. their work, and journalists having their filmed materials deleted. Examples include According to some experts, authorities the cases of Tabula-TV reporter Giorgi making statements critical of mass media Sikharulidze on August 24, 2014, Tabula web activities is a form of pressure on media portal photojournalist Alexander Grigoradze and journalists. For instance, in June 2014, on October 19, 2014, and Media.ge web portal Prime Minister Irakli Garibashvili criticized journalist Nata Dzvelishvili on September 7, journalists for the way they covered current 2014. No information is available about the events. He accused journalists of focusing investigation of these cases. predominantly on negative issues and not taking into account positive developments. Zaza Davitaia, a journalist with the Asaval- During a press conference in December 2014, Dasavali, newspaper was beaten up. The victim Garibashvili called some of the journalists’ reports he was attacked by representatives questions “provocative” and “artificial.” of the Free Zone NGO, whose members are Moreover, in November, the Majority Leader supporters of the former ruling party, National of the Georgian Parliament, an MP from the Movement. The assailants were subsequently ruling Georgian Dream party named David detained. Saganelidze, boycotted the media for one week, as he believed that journalists had Georgian police launched an investigation distorted the truth in their coverage of events into a December 7 incident in Tbilisi that in the country.

57 Georgia

In March 2014, a resonant case occurred others. The results of the investigation into involving TVMR-Georgia, the licensed this case were not made public before the representative of Nielsen Television Audience end of 2014. The wiretapped conversations Measurement (the only entity in Georgia were published and NGOs resumed their measuring television audiences). The audit “This Affects You Too” campaign against department of the Revenue Service demanded illegal wiretapping adding the slogan, “They that the company reveal the addresses of Still Listen to Us.” The President expressed some 330 households where it conducted TV solidarity with the activists and vetoed a bill ratings measurements. The company refused that would have increased the government’s to disclose this confidential information capacity for secret wiretapping. However, the and was fined as a result. Following this Parliament overrode the presidential veto, case, TVMR-Georgia temporarily suspended forcing the President to sign the law. This its activities. Some experts believe that the new piece of legislation establishes a so-called Revenue Service’s request was politically double-key system of secret wiretapping. One motivated. Allegedly, the Revenue Service of the “keys” will be held by the Ministry of was trying to obtain the addresses so that Internal Affairs, which will have direct access authorities could manipulate TV ratings to corresponding means of communication. and introduce a new player to the market. The second key will remain with the Privacy Subsequently, TVMR-Georgia resumed its Protection Inspector. Activists and NGOs activities and the Revenue Service took the believe that such provisions are a step in company to court, attempting to impose the wrong direction on the part of Georgian 3,500 GEL (approximately €1,600) in fines for authorities. refusing to provide the information requested by the state agency. The court found no grounds for the case to be heard. It is not clear how this story will end.

On May 6, Nika Gvaramia, the CEO of the opposition television company Rustavi-2, claimed that he found surveillance equipment in his office. The Prosecutor’s Office started an investigation into this case. They stated Campaign of journalists and human rights activists against adoption of the new law on wiretapping later that the State Security Service had installed the wiretapping equipment in December 2012, when the Service was under the control of the Georgian president. Radical Orthodox groups have put increasing Gvaramia refuted this explanation, accusing pressure on freedom of expression in Georgia. two of his former colleagues of installing the In May 2014, the Law on the Elimination of all Forms of special surveillance equipment to spy on the Discrimination took effect. The adoption of this law company on government orders. At the same prompted a strong reaction from the Orthodox time, Rustavi-2 handed over secret recordings Church. On June 19, 2014, protesters gathered of the conversations of the company’s in front of the Georgian Public Broadcasting management and state officials; these company, demanding the company put an end recordings, according to Rustavi-2, proved that to “Red Zone,” a TV show created by well-known Georgian authorities secretly wiretapped film critic, Gogi Gvakharia. The programme,

58 Georgia

which the protesters accuse of disseminating find solutions to the problems with regard to LGBT propaganda, covers democratic and employment contracts. liberal values, and analyses anti-democratic trends as well as the country’s totalitarian past. The majority of experts believe that Since the Orthodox Church is respected by a Georgian opposition political parties have lot of Georgians and since politicians use this appropriate free access to the Georgian Public sentiment to influence voters, political forces Broadcaster. often tolerate spiritual leaders’ criticism of mass media. Some media outlets benefit from the The economic environment for the support of the Church but incite hatred towards media did not improve in 2014. The Georgian certain minorities. The existing institutions of advertising market is not big enough to self-regulation and media ethics in Georgia are financially support a vibrant media sector. not strong enough to ensure that journalists According to the experts, the advertising adhere to professional standards and respect market is still not completely free, even the rights of consumers of information. though politicians no longer play any significant role in the distribution of money According to the expert evaluation and for advertising. an IDFI report (August 2013), access to information has improved significantly in At the same time, according to a report by the Georgia. However, as of spring 2014, experts NGO, Media Development Foundation (MDF), say the situation started getting worse. In the Georgian government’s administration addition, according to an IDFI report (May and some of its ministries are using state 2014), the access to information situation budget money to disseminate information deteriorated significantly with regard to and pay for advertisements. The MDF report the Interior Ministry and the Ministries of argues, “the practice of paying news agencies Finance and Economy. At the same time, for services such as covering the activities of experts say the government often takes their client according to the client’s requests a selective approach to providing public and disseminating the client’s information information to journalists. exists in the majority of ministries and in the government’s administration. This undermines The situation pertaining to the rights of the editorial independence of media.” journalists did not change significantly in 2014. The New Labour Code improved the Only a few experts believe that there is status of journalists slightly; however, onerous some kind of state monopoly in the media. contracts remain an issue in the media sphere. However, in Georgia, private companies have The Independent Association of Georgian a monopoly over the printing and distribution Journalists reacted to the mass dismissal of printed press materials. of Maestro and TVZ journalists in 2014. The Association announced that it was ready to give them legal advice and, if necessary, to become a mediator between the journalists and their employers. Together with a group Broadcasting establishing an independent trade union for media workers, the Association urges Television and radio broadcasters’ employers to engage in negotiations and adherence to journalistic standards and ethics

59 Georgia

remains low. Experts suggest that legislation not the mass media. In particular, MDF in this sphere needs to be improved. experts note that in cases resolved through self-regulatory mechanisms, only one Under the influence of NGOs, in 2014 the television channel, Rustavi-2, complied with mass media tended to self-regulate in a more the resulting decisions. informal way than in previous years. Within In just the last two weeks of December the increasingly pluralistic society, television 2014 there were four cases (or claims) of companies in some cases apologized for national television channels violating the materials considered to be offensive or rights of citizens. entered into debates on controversial topics. 1. Three NGOs turned to the self- This is especially true with issues related to regulatory body of the independent religious or national minorities. television company, Imedi in relation to a show that, according to the NGOs, A number of local and international demonstrated discrimination against watchdog organizations are active in Georgia. Muslims on the basis of religion and They monitor mass media on a number of violations of children’s rights. issues, including media behaviour during 2. Incidence of violence against women election campaigns, coverage of topics related has been rising recently in Georgia (in to children and gender, and instances of hate 2014, 25 women were killed by their speech and discrimination. husbands or partners). The Public Defender expressed concern with the According to observers, during the local “so-called jokes of the Comedy Show elections of 2014, mass media coverage of programme on Rustavi 2 TV channel the political campaigns and the elections … where a woman — a victim of themselves generally complied with violence — was mocked and presented journalistic ethical standards. Moreover, as helpless.” He has also stressed “the during the election campaign and on Election important role of the media in the Day (June 15, 2014), observers recorded no context of the protection of women major violations of journalists’ rights. against violence and raising awareness among the population.” Based on these observations, it seems that 3. The Council of the Charter of the Georgian mass media worked harder in Journalistic Ethics of Georgia ruled that 2014 compared to previous years to ensure Maestro TV journalists twice violated their work complied with generally-accepted the first principle of the Charter: they journalistic standards. Even though there disrespected the right of society to were still numerous cases of the violation know the truth and to receive accurate of these standards (some examples are information. listed below), some experts believe that the mass media has become rather sensitive in Recent developments in the editorial this respect and media outlets try to turn offices of several independent broadcasters to mechanisms of self-regulation more have further hindered improvements to the often. In contrast, another group of experts media’s adherence journalistic standards. maintains it is Georgian society in general On December 28, 2014, the Coalition of and the Charter of Journalistic Ethics of Media Advocacy (uniting 11 Georgian Georgia, that have become more sensitive, media and civil society organizations)

60 Georgia

has been functioning in Georgia since 2005. However, according to local and international observers, the GPB has always been under the “direct or mediated influence of the Government.” Thus, media experts state that, in general, the Public Broadcaster does not comply with the corresponding international standards and does not serve the public interest; its existence is a formality. Charter of Journalistic Ethics of Georgia is carrying out a presentation on the results of the monitoring of journalists’ work during the election campaign In May 2013, the Parliament adopted the Law on Broadcasting. This legislation changed the procedure for appointing the GPB’s Board of Trustees, ensured the financial transparency issued a statement in which it expressed of the GPB, created the Adjara Public its concern with the fact that five well- Broadcaster, and introduced the principles known TV personalities and 20 journalists of Must Carry / Must Offer. Notwithstanding with Maestro, which is ranked third among these changes, in December 2013, the television channels in Georgia, left their members of the Board’s selection committee positions in protest against news that the said political forces were artificially delaying channel might be changing its ideology. the process of appointment of the Board of The Coalition promised to closely follow Trustees in order to control the GPB. developments related to the independent editorial policies of Georgian television As a result of two rounds of voting (the companies. Journalists working for Maestro first round was held at the end of December claim that the channel’s editorial policy 2013 and the second on January 23, 2014), the changed significantly after a certain Parliament appointed only four out of nine individual, close to political circles, started members of the GPB Board of Trustees. The interfering with the company’s affairs. MPs tasked with the appointments rejected the majority of the 27 candidates pre-selected by the committee (mostly they represented the Parliamentary majority). This prompted protests on the part of mass media and activists. However, there was also a positive side to this process: it was transparent. The selection of candidates and their interviews were broadcasted online.

Nino Zhizhilashvili, a journalist at “Maestro” channel, left television Dunja Mijatovic, the OSCE Representative with other journalists on Freedom of the Media, expressed her disappointment with the fact that the Georgian Parliament did not manage to Georgian Public Broadcaster. The nominate all the members of the new Board Georgian Public Broadcaster (GPB), created of Trustees. In December 2013, after the first on the basis of state-owned broadcasting, round of voting failed to select candidates,

61 Georgia

Mijatovic forwarded a letter to Davit monitored (some suggest international Usupashvili, the parliamentary speaker, and organizations fulfil this role). expressed her concern about the situation around the GPB. In November 2014, the NGO, Transparency International Georgia, published a post The GPB reform was slowed down by the on its blog about the Ministry of Internal Parliament’s failure to appoint the Board Affairs’ practice of appointing security of Trustees (2013-2014) as well as by the officers (so-called ODRs or“ОДР” in Russian Constitutional Court’s April 11 decision that – офицер действующего резерва; literally the key provisions of the Law on Broadcasting, translated as Active Reserve Officers) in which served as a basis for reforming the GPB, state institutions and other organizations, were unconstitutional. The Court reinstalled including the GPB and the Georgian National the old Board of Trustees members, while the Communications Commission (GNCC). Parliament appointed new members (except Transparency International Georgia called candidates from the opposition National on the Georgian Parliament to create a special Movement Party) and elected the Board’s commission to investigate the legitimacy of chairperson. such security officers. Previously, in 2013, the organization turned to the Interior Ministry, On May 2, 2014, the Georgian Parliament requesting it investigate the possibility that adopted an amendment that allowed new ODRs were putting pressure on the GBP members of the Board of Trustees to assume Board of Trustees. Nino Giorgobiani, head office, while the former Board of Trustees of the Ministry’s PR service, argued these was renamed as the “Monitoring Board” claims were baseless. If it were found to be and granted advisory functions. Despite this true that ODRs were present in the GPB and resolution, by the end of 2014, the Board GNCC, this would constitute a serious breach still did not include any members from the of law. opposition National Movement Party. According to experts participating in the According to the experts, the Law on Public survey, the GPB should be totally depoliticized. Broadcaster needs to be improved. Two failed While political forces need to resist the rounds of voting showed that MPs, when temptation to control the public broadcaster, electing candidates, pay less attention to both former and present authorities are guilty their professional competences than to their of attempting to do just that. political views and loyalties. Transition to digital broadcasting. A Some experts suggest that the rules for governmental decree on February 7, 2014 electing the Board should be completely formalized a strategy for the transition to revised. They believe that it is important digital broadcasting that had been under to free the GPB from government control. development for several years. The document Since the Law allows room for interpretation reveals the government’s perspective on when it comes to electing members of the the transition process. The document Board of Trustees, it should be amended to was elaborated with the assistance of be better defined. Other experts believe that the European Bank for Reconstruction implementing existing laws should suffice and Development in accordance with the provided these processes are effectively recommendations of non-governmental

62 Georgia

organizations and the GNCC. On February Georgian National Communications 14, the Ministry of Economic Development Commission. The Georgian National established the Digital Broadcasting Agency. Communications Commission (GNCC) The Agency’s main task is to conduct a large- became a chair of the EaPeReg Network scale information campaign on the transition beginning on December 15, 2014. to digital broadcasting; however, the Agency was not active during the 2014 reporting Some media experts are critical of the period. As of the end of 2014, the government GNCC’s activities, suggesting it does not act in has taken no serious steps toward ensuring a transparent manner, is often guided by the the population is aware of the upcoming authorities, and in some cases acts unfairly changes. or unethically when distributing licenses. According to media managers, the interests The GNCC has also been accused of not being of all existing television companies were proactive, failing to take the Public Defender’s taken into account in the process of multiplex remarks seriously, and disregarding reports distribution. The government is currently in of the Temporary Investigative Commission the process of developing amendments to of the Parliament. It has also been blamed for the relevant legislation, which should have protracting legal cases related to licensing, been adopted in December 2014. It is of vital which damages the financial interests of importance for the new digital system of broadcasters that wish to expand their broadcasting to be properly regulated by laws. business. For example, Ereti radio station It is still uncertain specifically what these has been trying for seven years to acquire a amendments will entail. Owners of media license to broadcast in Tbilisi. outlets hope that the government will engage with all stakeholders in the process of drafting Experts say that the GNCC has to be held and adopting the amendments. Their priority accountable for its activities and that it needs is to ensure the results of the legislation do not to provide justification for its decisions, harm the media market. By July 2015 it will be such as rejecting an appeal for license. They clear whether broadcasting companies have urge a complete overhaul of the GNCC and managed to transition to digital broadcasting advocate for the active participation of the without any serious technical difficulties. non-governmental sector in the reforms The process of digitalization should favor process. pluralism in the mass media; however, this process is threatened by the short timeframe Experts have also noted that the GNCC for the transition and the unstable economic has never conducted any systematic and situation in Georgia. continuous monitoring of digital media aimed at uncovering violations of the Code of Stereo+, the company that won a competition Conduct for Broadcasters, even though this is for proposals for building and operating so- one of its responsibilities. called multiplexes (digital networks that each carry between seven and 15 TV channels) for At the end of 2013, the Temporary the transition to digital broadcasting has not Investigative Commission of the Parliament, yet presented its digitalization plan. However, which investigated the GNCC’s activities, on December 24, 2014, it started testing the finished its work. Georgian society followed network in Tbilisi and its vicinities using the the investigation closely and the process DVB-T2 standard. was transparent. Materials produced by

63 Georgia

the Commission were available via social networks (Facebook) and various other Internet resources. After the investigation concluded, the Commission forwarded the results to the Prosecutor’s Office, where they remain unavailable for the moment.

Protest action against adoption of the anti-discriminatory law Internet and New Media The expression of personal opinion via the Internet is not supressed in Georgia. In recent years the number of Internet users The country has no legal restrictions on in Georgia has increased significantly. The the freedom of the Internet. There were no development of information technologies has cases of arrests, punishment, harassment or fostered the establishment and development beatings of bloggers or active Internet users of various news and entertainment websites. in 2014. The vast majority of traditional media outlets now have their own webpages. Some Nevertheless, there were cases when media outlets, particularly local ones, have public servants could not restrain themselves transformed completely into digital versions and condemned or insulted journalists of themselves. Georgian bloggers are plentiful; or bloggers. Several regional journalists they publish their texts either on their own from Western Georgia announced on the blogs, within the framework of a digital pages of their newspapers (Guria News media outlet, or in social networks. The most and Guriis Moambe) that local authorities popular social network in Georgia is Facebook. were expressing dissatisfaction with According to diverse data, 600,000 Georgians, certain materials published by mass media including journalists, experts, politicians, outlets and some of their representatives public servants, leaders of non-governmental even insulted journalists. An example of organizations, and representatives of big this is the case of an editor of a regional business, have Facebook accounts. news portal called the Information Centre of Kakheti. According to the New Media Digital media and activities in cyberspace Association, in June 2014, the head of public have become more and more dynamic. These relations for the state-owned Georgian Oil & processes influence developments both in Gas Corporation LLC (which falls under the politics and in society in general. Through Ministry of Energy and Natural Resources), Facebook, Georgians can plan spontaneous Nino Jgarkava, together with the head of the protest actions (in order to protect Kakheti Regional Prosecutor’s Office, Tato architectural and cultural heritage, the Margebadze, disseminated a statement on environment, human rights, and so on) and Facebook defaming Gela Mtivlishvili, the online media outlets often publish thenotes head of the Information Centre of Kakheti. of politicians, public servants, and activists.

64 Georgia

In some cases, public servants and There were no fundamental changes to representatives of political parties (including the legislation regulating media in 2014. This the ruling one) actively publish critical was in contrast to 2013, when the parliament materials and oppose journalists in social adopted important amendments to the networks. Law on Broadcasting. In 2014, the Georgian Parliament considered two important issues: Freedom of expression in Georgia is the status of social advertising and the protected by law, but this does not always duration of commercial advertising. Both mean that bloggers feel completely safe. If a bills were widely discussed. A number of mass blogger or a journalist publishes materials on media organizations and NGOs wanted to violations of the rights of sexual, religious, or postpone the implementation of regulations other minorities, they may become targets on social advertising until after the transfer of persecution and verbal assaults over the to digital broadcasting was completed. The Internet committed by members of the draft legislation stipulating further limits on majority religious group. the duration of advertisement spots caused protests by national television companies and, In 2014, Freedom House included Georgia at the moment, it is still under consideration in the list of 19 countries (out of 65 examined) by the Parliament. with Internet freedom (Freedom on the Net – 2014). The Georgian media is not subjected to censorship. There is no censorship agency In Georgia there is no state monopoly on in the country. In 2014, as in the previous Internet services and no artificial obstacles to year, executive bodies did not issue any Internet access. However, prices for Internet decrees restricting the freedom of the services are quite high and did not fall in 2014. media or access to information. As to self- Combined with the high cost, the relatively censorship, expert opinions differ: some slow speed of Internet in the country creates believe that self-censorship is present in serious obstacles to network access, especially many government and private mass media in rural areas. outlets, while the others believe it to be non- existent.

In 2014, similarly as in 2013, no grave Comparative analysis crimes were committed against journalists. of press freedom in 2013 Journalists were not killed, arrested, detained and in 2014 or abducted in connection with their professional activities. However, there was a case of a journalist being detained while In 2014 there was little to note in terms performing his professional duties. of either dramatic progress or decrease of freedom of speech in Georgia. There were Authorities are often accused of applying spheres in which there was some progress, psychological pressure, threats, verbal while in other spheres the situation remained abuse and criticism toward mass media. the same. In yet other areas, setbacks were Additionally, there have been the odd obvious. reported instances of tailing and wiretapping of journalists or media managers’ phones.

65 Georgia

The rare physical assaults against journalists Board of Trustees. According to the experts are blamed on ideological opponents. Radical participating in this survey, the Georgian Orthodox religious groups continue to put Parliament disregarded the Law on Public pressure on freedom of expression. In the Broadcasting last year. It violated procedure cases of conflicts and confrontations, law many times, only managed to nominate enforcement agencies protect the rights of some members of the Board of Trustees, and minorities and journalists. did not appoint any candidates from the opposition. While experts call on political The situation pertaining to the rights forces to step away from GPB, the current of journalists in 2014 did not change government, like previous administrations, significantly. The New Labour Code improved continues to attempt to control the the status of journalists slightly. However, broadcaster. the issue of onerous contracts persists in the media sphere; journalists’ labour rights are Some experts believe that the Georgian not sufficiently protected. National Communications Commission In 2013, Georgian journalists did not is not acting in a transparent manner, is experience any difficulties accessing official guided by the authorities, and must be held information. However, in spring 2014, the accountable for its activities. The GNCC should situation deteriorated. Data gathered by the provide justification for its decisions, such 2014 survey gives access to information the rejecting an appeal for license, for instance. lowest grades (1.50). In addition, according These experts urge a complete reorganization to the IDFI report (May 2014), the situation of this sphere and reform of the GNCC with the with access to information deteriorated active participation of the non-governmental significantly in the Interior Ministry and the sector. At the end of 2013, the Temporary Ministries of Finance and Economy. At the Investigative Commission of the Parliament same time, experts say the government tends concluded an investigation into the GNCC’s to employ a selective approach to providing activities and the results of this inquiry were public information to journalists. sent to the Prosecutor’s Office.

In terms of the economic environment Expert evaluations differ in terms of the in which the Georgian mass media functions, Georgian mass media’s compliance with 2014 brought no real changes for the better. generally-accepted journalistic standards. Politicians no longer play any significant role Some believe that the mass media has become in the distribution of money for advertising, increasingly sensitive to violations of these but, according to the experts, the advertising standards and that media outlets try to turn market is not yet completely free. to self-regulatory mechanisms more often, including offering more frequent apologies. In The issue of the management and contrast, another group of experts maintains administration of the Georgian Public that it is Georgian society at large and the Broadcaster remains problematic. In Charter of Journalistic Ethics of Georgia that early 2014, Dunja Mijatovic, the OSCE have become more sensitive, not mass media. Representative on Freedom of the Media, Under the influence of non-governmental expressed her disappointment with the organizations, self-regulation of mass media fact that the Georgian Parliament failed is less formal and more applied compared to to nominate members of the GBP’s new previous years. Experts believe that legislation

66 Georgia

on self-regulatory mechanisms in the media of public servants condemning or insulting sphere should be improved. journalists and bloggers. In Georgia there is Considerably more progress was made no state monopoly on Internet services and in the transition to digital broadcasting there are no artificial obstacles to Internet in 2014 than in 2013. In 2013, the legislation access. However, in 2014, prices for Internet for the adoption of the digitalization services remained quite high while Internet concept was delayed. At the beginning of speed is rather low. These are serious obstacles 2014 the Government made the concept to network access, especially in rural areas. of digital broadcasting public, established corresponding structures, and adopted a budget to facilitate this process. Experts and media managers praised the move toward digital broadcasting. The downside of these processes is that up until now there has been no action on carrying out an information campaign to educate the public about the digital switchover. According to media managers , the interests of all existing television companies were taken into account in the process of multiplex distribution. At the moment, amendments to laws regulating the process of multiplex distribution are being drafted; this may present a new challenge to the transition. The process of digitalization should favour pluralism in the mass media; however, this process is threatened by its short timeframe (the transition should be accomplished by July 2015). Stereo+, the company that won a competition for its plan for building and operating so-called multiplexes, has not yet presented its plan for digitalization; however, as of December 24, 2014 it has already started using the network in a test regime.

Every year, digital media and social networks become more active and strengthen their influence over social and political processes. The expression of personal opinions via the Internet is not persecuted in Georgia and there are no laws limiting the freedom of the Internet. There were no cases of arrest, punishment, harassment or beatings of bloggers or active Internet users in 2014. However, there were some instances

67 Moldova

Moldova

groups in the Gagauz region, who even Policy conducted a referendum on the issue of the The political and social situation in Moldova country’s external development vector, which in 2014, which is implicitly the subject of was found illegal by courts. As a consequence, the work of the mass media, was marked by the political struggle between the parties that several international and national events. declare themselves pro-EU and those that These events determined the course of the promote a closer relationship with Russia country’s development for the following years and association with the Customs Union and emphasized the challenges that must be intensified. The tensions reached a climax overcome in Moldova on the country’s way during the Moldovan parliamentary election to fulfilling its European aspirations. These campaign, when the pro-European parties won challenges include, first of all, the liberalization by a small margin. The antagonism associated of the visa regime with EU member states and with the political struggle was also evident the signing of the Association Agreement in the messages of media outlets, especially and the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade given that, at the beginning of the year, some Agreement with the EU. The signing of these repositioning occurred in the media sphere in documents, combined with multifaceted connection with the nearing elections. support offered by the EU, positively impacted Moldova’s development, promoting reforms Tensions were fueled by the information in various areas. At the same time, Moldova’s warfare started by Russia against Ukraine, strengthening ties with the EU raised the Georgia and Moldova around the time of the discontent of the Russian Federation, which signing of the Association Agreement with imposed embargoes on some Moldovan the EU. Given that the country’s information agricultural products on the Russian market space is dominated by television rebroadcasts and offered direct and indirect support from Russia, the effects of this information to political parties and groups inside the warfare were strongly felt in Moldova. Thus, country that oppose the process of European some politicians and civil society leaders integration. These include, for example, called for the adoption of information

68 Moldova

security measures, including the interdiction mass media, in 2014, the national public of rebroadcasting on the country’s territory policies in the field of mass media failed to Russian news and analysis programs that undergo some essential changes. In January, are used as instruments of propaganda and a group of MPs representing the Liberal Party manipulation of public opinion. On July submitted a draft of a new Broadcasting 4, 2014, after a week of monitoring several Code, which was developed by the Electronic local television channels that rebroadcast Press Association (APEL) and presented to information and analysis programs from the Parliament in May 2011 but blocked by the Russian Federation, the Broadcasting the governing coalition that, until 2013, also Coordinating Council (BCC) announced it had included Liberals. Unfortunately, the draft of found frequent violations of the principles of the new Broadcasting Code did not get to be balance, neutrality and objectivity, elements examined by the Parliament before the end of of aggressive propaganda, and manipulation its mandate. through text and images. The BCC suspended the rebroadcasting of the Rossia24 television Throughout 2014, civil society continued channel for six months and imposed fines to promote the modification of the legislation and issued public warnings to the Moldovan in order to ensure media ownership outlets that rebroadcast the Russian channels transparency. In 2013, the Independent RTR, Ren TV, PervyKanal and NTV. Journalism Center (IJC) developed the draft law on modifying and supplementing the Generally, there are sufficientBroadcasting Code, which would require constitutional and legal guarantees of broadcasters to publish information about freedom of expression and press freedom in their owners and beneficiaries. The draft was Moldova. There is no official censorship, and registered as a legislative initiative by a group in 2013, the Criminal Code was supplemented of MPs representing the Liberal Democratic with articles penalizing censorship and Party and voted in during the first reading intimidation of journalists performing their on July 21, 2014.Politicians promised to adopt professional duties. Print media outlets do not it in final reading after the parliamentary need a license to work, they only need to be vacation; however, this never happened. registered as legal entities, and the process of As a consequence, media owners remain in issuing licenses and granting frequencies for the shadows, and media consumers have no broadcasters was not used as an instrument access to that information. In this context, for repression of press freedom in 2014. in September, Lise Christoffersen and Defamation was decriminalized in 2004, and Piotr Wach, co-reporters of the monitoring the plenum of the Supreme Court of Justice commission of the Parliamentary Assembly ruled that courts must apply reasonable of the Council of Europe, at the end of a compensations in cases of defamation. documentation visit to Moldova, expressed Nevertheless, the guarantees provided by their concern with the concentration of mass the national legislation fail to ensure real media in the hands of several politicians. freedom, and their implementation often leaves much to be desired. On July 17, 2014, the Parliament adopted in first reading the draft law on fighting Although civil society insisted on the extremism; however, some of its provisions adoption of some laws and regulatory acts were harshly criticized by the Moldovan that are important for the development of online community, mass media, civil society

69 Moldova

representatives, and the OSCE representative broadcasters’ appeal inadmissible, cementing on freedom of the media for the fact that it the BCC’s ability to exercise its role of might jeopardize freedom of expression on guarantor of the public interest and intervene the Internet. Previously, a group of MPs from in order to ensure broadcasters’ compliance the governing coalition and the opposition, with the legislation. and members of the parliamentary commission for culture, research, youth, Contrary to legislation, both the BCC and sport and mass media, had registered a the Supervisory Board (SB) of the national legislative initiative that proposed the public broadcasting company Teleradio adoption of a Declaration on the neutrality Moldova are formed using political criteria. and freedom of the Internet and the Because of this, in 2014, the question of the development of information society, which functionality of the Teleradio-Moldova SB contained several general commitments remained unsolved. Although 12 candidates aimed at “maintaining the openness and for filling SB vacancies were selected by the neutrality of the Internet.” The declaration, BCC in December 2013, the parliamentary however, was not adopted by the end of the commission could not agree on selecting Parliament’s mandate. six of them. This once again proves politics’ interference with the work of the public The majority of experts see the Moldovan broadcaster. Later, Valeriu Saharneanu, authorities’ process of transitioning to digital the deputy chairman of the parliamentary television, which must end in June 2015, commission, found further evidence of this as insufficient and non-transparent. The problem. He recognized that the Parliament government only approved the Program of had sabotaged the work of the SB, and that transition from analog television to digital television the impasse had occurred because political in May 2014 and the approved version of parties wanted to have more Board members the plan was not published. This fact leaves affiliated to them. Moreover, the legal room for interpretation, and, according to mechanism of periodic renewal of the SB some experts and analysts, media-owning one-third at a time was also disrupted. To politician sare interested in delaying this comply with the regulatory framework, the process so as to obtain the most benefits for Parliament would have to appoint the six SB their outlets by the end of the transition. members for different terms.

In 2014, a year-and-a-half-long conflict Political interference with and influence ended between the BCC and broadcasters on the work of public broadcasters also directly supported by politicians, including manifested themselves in the case of the the chairman of the parliamentary public broadcasting company of the Gagauz commission for mass media. These region, GRT. During 2014, the work of the broadcasters challenged the legality of the GRT was disrupted by scandals provoked by BCC’s September 2012 decision, which obliged the dismissal of the company’s management broadcasters to fill at least 30% of their weekly by the Supervisory Board (SB), which was airtime with their own programs, including elected by the People’s Assembly of Gagauzia half in the hours of maximum audience in based on political criteria. The GRT’s year was the Romanian language. On September 17, marked by the election of a new president 2014, the Supreme Court of Justice adopted and director and lawsuits challenging the SB an irrevocable decision declaring the decisions.

70 Moldova

Moldova saw no improvement in access practically the only distributor of print to information, either. During 2014, the press in the rural areas of Moldova. The Independent Journalism Center (IJC) company’s relationship with media discussed, formulated and presented to publishers worsened significantly in 2014; the Parliament amendments to the law many publishers complained that its tariff on access to information that was adopted policy hinders the work of newspapers in 2000 and that needs improvements and magazines. In September 2014, Posta in order to provide additional guarantees Moldovei announced that it would no for journalists, definition of areas with longer accept non-packed newspapers for limited access to information, exclusion distribution, and that publishers would of abusive interpretation and, unjustified have to pack their print products separately limitation of access to information by public for every post center in the country. Further officials. The draft law was registered as a angering publishers, Posta Moldovei legislative initiative by Liberal-Reformers simultaneously proposed that it would pack parliamentary party, but has not yet been their newspapers for an additional fee. In adopted. The problem of the limited media response, the Association of Independent access to the Parliament’s plenary meeting Press (AIP) asked for the urgent involvement room also remains to be solved. Journalists of the government and of the parliamentary have been affected by this issue since the end commission for mass media in order prevent of 2013, when MPs returned to the repaired abuses associated with the tariff policy of Parliament building. Despite the repeated Posta Moldovei. Meanwhile, publishers appeals of journalists and civil society, the refused to sign distribution contracts for prohibition of journalists’ access to the 2015. Only after these actions on the part of meeting room has been maintained. This is the media organizations did Posta Moldovei indicative of the government’s intention to reverse its policy on separate packing control the video footage transmitted from of newspapers for every post center and the Parliament and, indirectly, to limit access meetings took place to negotiate a new to information of public interest. contract for the distribution of periodicals. Another problem that hinders the development of mass media concerns the tariff policy of the state-owned Posta Moldovei (Post of Moldova), which is Practice

The security of journalists in Moldova is guaranteed by law and no killings of journalists in connection with their work have occurred since the declaration of independence. In 2014, there were no cases of kidnappings or arrests of journalists while performing their duties. At the same time, legal provisions on security in performance of a job do not Flash mob organized during Press Freedom Days in 2014 with the always work in practice, and authorities are aim to draw attention to the limited access of journalists to the Parliament hall for plenary sessions, May 8, 2014 not sufficiently firm in punishing attacks on journalists.

71 Moldova

In 2014, there was an incident where take these reports seriously, or at least never an intern journalist was detained and publicized any investigations. several cases of psychological pressure and threats against journalists, illustrating These cases, and the anemic, or lack of, that these methods of intimidation are reaction on the part of authorities to violence still used in attempts to influence editorial and threats against journalists are indicative policies. In June 2014, representatives of the of the tenuousness of the security guarantees ministry of internal affairs detained Vadim provided by law. Ungureanufor 72 hours. Ungureanu was an intern at the information portal Deschide. It is worth mentioning that the year md, and was suspected of “blackmailing began with a large scandal, after some cable persons in positions of responsibility in order television operators excluded from their basic to obtain compromising information about packages (or transferred into more expensive famous Moldovan artists.”The website, which packages) several broadcasters, including had published several investigations about Accent TV, which is affiliated to the opposition the ministry’s employees, characterized Party of Communists, and Jurnal TV, which the incident as revenge and an attempt to criticizes governing parties(especially the intimidate. Although the case had important deputy chairman of the Democratic Party, implications for issues of media freedom, Vlad Plahotniuc, who is the undeclared the public was not informed about the owner of at least four television channels investigation. and other media outlets). After protests from some politicians and journalists, statements Activist and journalist Oleg Brega, a by media NGOs, and criticism from some videographer for the Curaj.tv portal, reported ambassadors including Dunja Mijatović, the two cases of intimidation in connection with OSCE representative on freedom of the media, his work, including a serious case of physical operators reintroduced these channels into violence, in which a group of people in masks their basic cable packages. sprayed him in the eyes and kicked him repeatedly. The police started investigations, into these incidents, but they were never solved.

Investigative journalists with RISE Moldova, a local branch of the international RISE project, which unveils schemes of corruption, money laundering, and organized crime at an international level, reported being threatened by individuals they had identified in an investigation about money Protest of the Jurnal TV employees against exclusion of the channel from the basic packages of some cable television operators. Source – laundering schemes in Eastern Europe. The www.ziarulnational.md editorial board of the investigative weekly newspaper Ziarul de Garda also reported threats after publishing an article about the property and travels of the Metropolitan of Moldova. Over the past two or three years, the judicial Contrary to expectations, authorities did not system of Moldova stopped the practice,

72 Moldova

common in past years, of taking a biased provide incomplete information or refuse to approach in cases involving mass media. As provide the requested information at all, citing a result, court decisions ruling against media trade or fiscal secrets. In some cases, public outlets are increasingly rare. The fines applied institutions refuse access to information to to media outlets and journalists in cases of media outlets because they wrongly interpret alleged defamation have steadily decreased, the law to mean that only individuals have and lawsuits initiated by politicians, officials, the right to request information. Access to and businesspeople against mass media information of public interest is even more were often dropped in the early stages. difficult in the regions, especially in Gagauzia. There were, however, some exceptions: on There is still no solution to the problem of July 4, 2014, a primary court in Chisinau journalists’ lack of access to the databases admitted a complaint against the Accent TV of Cadastre (a public company) or the State channel, which is affiliated with the Party Registration Chamber. These restrictions of Communists of the Republic of Moldova severely complicate the work of investigative (PCRM), filed by Ruslan Popa, chairman of journalists. These problems could be solved the Reformatory Communist Party (some through amending the law on access to communists consider this party a clone information, removing some ambiguities and created to destroy the PCRM). After Popa was supplementing it with provisions that might accused, in a television broadcast, of selling facilitate journalists’ access to information. himself to discredit the PCRM, he requested In addition, it is necessary to ensure swift compensation for moral damages for the and consistent application of penalties on publication of defamatory information. The officials who unjustifiably hinder access to court partially upheld his claim and ruled information. that Accent TV must pay MDL 130,000(about €7,000) to Popa. The channel declared the There is no official censorship in Moldova, decision to be revolting and asserted that it and censorship in public media outlets is would appeal it, but there is no information punishable under criminal law. Although on whether it ever did. Media experts also there was no public information available noted the inconsistent application of the about cases of censorship in public or private law on freedom of expression, which has media outlets, experts still suggest the been in force since 2010and establishes the phenomenon exists, disguised in the form requirement of filing preliminary applications of “editorial policy.” The existence of self- for the correction or invalidation of allegedly censorship is more certain, especially in some defamatory information. private media outlets controlled by politicians and businesspeople. Media monitoring in Access to information continues to be 2014, which was an election year for Moldova, an obstacle for journalists in their work. showed that some television channels Information is still sometimes artificially filtered the topics they covered and that their restricted or limited because of bureaucratic coverage of some issues was manipulative. barriers and insufficient transparency among public institutions. Additionally, journalists Although there is no state monopoly do not always have the necessary knowledge of media outlets or printing companies in or abilities to access some of the data that is Moldova, the situation with monopolies is available online. Media outlets and journalists still worrisome because there is no assurance often say that officials and public institutions of media ownership transparency and the

73 Moldova

Moldovan media experts are presenting the final report on monitoring of the Parliamentary elections, carried out on November 30, 2014. Source - www.api.md

law does not provide for limits to media a result of non-transparent conditions and ownership concentration or for transparency criteria, in the media outlets favored by in the funding of media outlets. Also, the state authorities. The development of a new law has not managed to limit the concentration on advertising, with clear provisions and of ownership in the advertising market or to efficient actions against market monopolies, de-monopolize the print press distribution would be a solution to this problem. In 2014, market, because it has failed to create the the ministry of justice began work on a draft proper conditions for the development of of such a law. Under the new legislation, alternative entrepreneurship. This hinders the tariff policies of the national distributor the development of media outlets and makes of print press, Posta Moldovei, would be them dependent on the often-abusive tariff subjected to firm control by the government, policies of the companies that have a dominant and indirect subsidies would be provided to position in the advertising or distribution print press distribution, based on the example markets. Thus, although the advertising of some Western European countries. market is not controlled by the state, it is dominated by private companies managed Unfortunately, in 2014 Moldovan from the shadows by public employees or authorities failed to ensure favorable economic politicians. At the national and local levels, conditions for the development of media the so-called state advertising is placed, as outlets, and there is no strategy that would

74 Moldova

aim at increasing the economic capacity of the press, which might, accordingly, increase its independence. Furthermore, a legislative initiative proposed to the Parliament in support of print press was not adopted. At the same time, the state did not intentionally create obstacles to the economic activities of mass media, and has stopped directly interfering with their work. As of 2014, checks from fiscal or other authorities are no longer Iurie Leancă, the Prime Minister of Moldova, is signing the EU- Moldova Association Agreement on June 27, 2014. perceived by media outlets as a mechanism of intimidation or criticism: they are becoming less frequent and any resulting fines cannot lead to suspension of the editorial process. framework, political advertising is regulated by electoral laws, which exclusively refer to Media monitoring during the electoral electoral advertising, allowed only during campaign of 2014 showed that the parties of electoral campaigns. Law experts found the parliamentary and extra parliamentary that the legislation does not expressly opposition had access to airtime provided by prohibit political advertising outside of the national public broadcaster and by the election campaigns and the pro-European majority of commercial broadcasters. parliamentary majority failed to propose clear modifications to the legal rules. As a result, electoral advertising was broadcast throughout nearly the entire year. Television broadcasters, on their own initiative, added a Broadcasting note at the end of these ads saying they were “commercial political advertising.”Since no For about100 broadcasters, the main one intervened in the process, broadcasters events of 2014 were the signing of the later started broadcasting the ads of other Association Agreement with the EU and the political parties, including those with pro- parliamentary elections of November 30. European values. The situation spun of The division of political forces in the country control, and by the time the electoral period into two sides – pro-EU and pro-Customs began, the majority of large broadcasters Union – also divided society, and mass media, were divided according to party affiliation. including local broadcasters, served as a resonance box to this process. The country has a national public broadcaster and a regional public broadcaster. At the beginning of the year, several large The national broadcasting company, television broadcasters, including the national Teleradio-Moldova (TRM), continues public television, had been broadcasting a large to implement reforms according to a amount of political advertising by the Party development strategy created with European of Socialists (PSRM), which advocates for the support. In the opinion of experts, however, country’s integration into the Customs Union the implementation process is too slow. In and for the denunciation of the Association 2014, TRM worked with an austere budget Agreement. According to the national legal (about one million dollars less than in 2013)

75 Moldova

and in the absence of a Supervisory Board company was instable, marked by political (SB), which, according to the legislation, is the struggle in the region. After repeated institution’s supreme administrative body. In attempts, members of the Supervisory Board July, seven local media NGOs publicly asked (SB), appointed based on political criteria, the Parliament to speed up the process of the finally managed to choose a director for appointment of SB members, but lawmakers the company in September. However, the ignored their request. One way or another, the newly-appointed director was suspended SB must be restored, given that in early 2015 from that position through a court decision the mandates of TRM’s president and director several days later. Throughout the year, the expire and it is the responsibility of the SB to institution was repeatedly criticized by the appoint, via a public contest, the company’s People’s Assembly (the regional parliament) top managers. At the beginning of December, and by the bashkan (the region’s governor). after the parliamentary elections, the TRM At a press conference in early October, the president resigned with the justification of public company’s president asked for police having obtained a post-doctoral scholarship protection, claiming that she had been abroad. intimidated by the speaker of the People’s Assembly; she resigned from her position In the autumn of 2014, after a delay of soon after. The SB appointed a new president, several months, a new modern studio was but dismissed him in early December for up and running at the public television negligence at work, replacing him with an broadcaster, which visibly improved the interim president. Experts believe that the quality of broadcasting. Experts find that tumultuous situation at the regional public TRM’s media products of generally meet the broadcaster has been strongly influenced by information needs of the public and that the political struggle preceding the elections over the past four years it has managed to of the bashkan and the local general elections maintain an acceptable level of journalistic of spring 2015. quality. The current legislation obliges national broadcasters to cover parliamentary elections, including through hosting electoral debates. Additionally, at the beginning of the electoral period, every broadcaster that intends to cover elections must submit a declaration of their editorial policy during the electoral campaign to the Broadcasting Coordinating Council (BCC), including the names of their owners and the format and schedule of electoral debates. Renovated studio of the public broadcaster “TV Moldova 1”. Source It should be mentioned, that in this case, - www.trm.md the BCC, which, according to some experts, is influenced by the Democratic Party (PDM),again took an inconsistent attitude to While 2014 saw some progress with the these declarations. Thus, some broadcasters, national public broadcaster, the work of including Prime TV, Publika TV, Canal 2 and the Gagauz regional public broadcasting Canal 3, did not reveal the names of their

76 Moldova

owners, but their declarations were still accepted by the BCC. Moreover, Canal 2 and Internet Canal 3, despite having the legal obligation to organize electoral debates, failed to do so. and New Media The BCC did apply sanctions, including the maximum fine provided by the legislation In 2014, online journalism continued its (MDL 5,400, or about USD 350), but these rapid development, which is explained, on sanctions are not an efficient mechanism the one hand, by the lack of rigid regulations for combating violations, since television in cyberspace and, on the other hand, by the broadcasters’ income for one minute of speed of the Internet. Moldova, according to electoral advertising could cover monthly netindex.com, ranks sixth in the world among fines for an entire year. the countries with the fastest Internet (almost 50 MB/s) speeds. A study published in October The monitoring of broadcasters during 2014 by the European Neighborhood and parliamentary elections conducted by the Partnership Instrument (ENPI), shows that BCC and by three media NGOs (Association of Moldovan citizens are the largest consumers Independent Press, Independent Journalism of mass media in the Eastern Partnership Center and Electronic Press Association), countries: they are leaders in the use of social showed than none of the electoral candidates networks (53%), Internet (55%), radio (62%) and had their access to broadcasting (including online television (35%). access to electoral debates and paid electoral advertising)limited. In newscasts, however, According to official data, at the beginning some broadcasters provided better visibility of 2014, about 24,000websites were registered to some candidates at the expense of in Moldova on the .md domain. Approximately others. Thus, four out of five broadcasters 200 of these contain media content. Since with national coverage (Prime TV, Publika then, these numbers have been growing. For TV, Canal 2 and Canal 3) massively favored example, in March, the Realitatea online media the Democratic Party (PDM), including in group was launched as a platform for public newscasts. According to experts, all four benefit that produces six types of specialized broadcasters are owned by Vlad Plahotniuc media products. The Realitatea team, which and the second person in the political party; is made up of young journalists, assumed the two other television broadcasters, N4 and principles of professional ethics and the values TV 7, favored the Liberal Democratic Party of modern journalism from the inception of (PLDM). Accent TV significantly favored two the organization. The main platform for the electoral contestants, the Patria (Homeland) group is the news website realitatea.md, which Party (PPP) and the Party of Socialists (PSRM), works around the clock. In July, the group also while neglecting the other two contestants; launched “Realitatea” television. Jurnal TV significantly neglected the PDM. The regional public broadcaster of The mold-street.com portal, which Gagauzia covered the electoral campaign contains news, analyses and journalistic very sketchily, providing little in terms of investigations on economy-related topics, newscast coverage. started its work in the spring of 2014. A new electronic journal, Justice Journal, specializing in the field of justice and managed by a group of law professionals, has been working since

77 Moldova

June. Also, a men-oriented online journal, in the long-standing conflict between the BCC UniCOOL.md, was launched in July. and the Internet service provider, StarNet. MPs found that the uncertain and ambiguous Newsmaker.md, a news and investigative national legislation on broadcasting led journalism website, was launched in August, the BCC to erroneously interpret some legal and published the first issue of the electronic provisions. The phrase “rebroadcast by any bulletin of the ministry of education, which means,” which is used in the legislation, contains information and analyses about the in reality refers to analog and digital cable most important initiatives of the ministry, systems, and not to client-server technologies including the creation of the National or the distribution of media content over the Agency for Ensuring Quality in Professional Internet, where users do not receive signals, Education, reforms in technical professional but access media content by themselves. The education, modifications to the primary Internet, as a global network of free access to school evaluation system, etc. information, cannot be regulated by means of licensing, as the BCC had claimed. Based on The Audit Bureau of Circulations and these findings, members of the specialized Internet and the Gemius company, which commission unanimously approved the is the largest agency specialized in the decision to create a working group that study of the Internet market in Central and would include representatives of civil society, Eastern Europe, began regularly compiling academics, business people, and international and publishing a rating of the most-viewed experts, who would develop proposals for information portals. the elimination of these imperfections from the national legislation. At the same time, Existing online media platforms are commission members decided to develop looking for new forms of operations and and propose an official parliamentary business management. For example, in declaration stipulating that the Internet in October, the Privesc.eu portal, which is well- Moldova cannot be regulated or subjected known in Moldova, launched two types of to censorship. Such a declaration on the subscriptions for those who want to have neutrality and freedom of the Internet was access to exclusive events and live broadcasts. developed and then voted on, in mid-July, by The price of “Pro” subscriptions is €29.99 the majority of the parliamentary commission per month, and “Corporate” subscriptions on mass media. The declaration recognizes are€119.99 per month. Subscribers have full the essential role of the Internet in the access to all events and can download free promotion of democratic values, in ensuring video materials from the portal. transparent and efficient government, and in guaranteeing the fundamental human Since January 1, 2014, Moldova has been right of access to information. The document a member of the Freedom Online Coalition, reconfirms that the Internet is an important created in 2011 as an initiative of the tool for education and for real exercise of Netherlands with the goal of facilitating freedom of expression. The declaration was global dialogue on government responsibility to be examined at the plenary Parliament in the active promotion of Internet freedom. meeting on July 18 (before the parliamentary vacation), but its examination was deferred At a meeting in June, the parliamentary to the following session of Parliament at the commission for mass media called for a truce request of democratic MPs, who justified

78 Moldova

the move saying they needed more time to year after a law with the same provisions was consider the document. withdrawn from the government agenda. The NGOs asked the Parliament not to allow this These actions on the part of authorities limitation of Internet freedom. might seem to reveal a firm political will to safeguard the openness of the Internet. In September 2014, the OSCE representative However, also in July, just before the on freedom of the media, Dunja Mijatović, parliamentary vacation, MPs voted in the first said, “it is worrying that an administrative reading of a draft law on fighting extremism. institution might have the discretionary In essence, the Parliament returned to the power to block access to online content draft law proposed in 2013 by the General without a reason,” She appealed to Moldovan Prosecutor’s Office and the Information and authorities to eliminate the problematic Security Service (ISS) but withdrawn from the provisions of the draft law. government’s agenda as a result of pressure It should be noted that the Parliament from national providers, information portals, failed to vote in the draft law on fighting mobile telephone operators, Internet service extremism before the end of its mandate, providers, and mass media. This time, the ISS though it also failed to return to examining argued the initiative was needed in order to the declaration on the neutrality and freedom realize its objectives in the areas of combating of the Internet. and preventing extremism. Online journalism and blogging have In addition to provisions that intended no legal support in Moldova. The social for combating extremism and separatism status of bloggers is not defined and so we in Moldova, the draft law also contains cannot comment on their protection like is a problematic article (no. 8) that has the possible with the protection of journalists. potential to stifle Internet freedom. The In 2014, no bloggers publicly reported cases provisions of this article allow the ISS to block of intimidation, threats or interference with any news website, social network or other their work. similar resource if it contains comments of an extremist nature. Article 8 states: “If The exact number of blogs and bloggers an information system (a web page, portal, existing in the country is unknown. forum, social network, blog, etc.) contains Moldovan bloggers have self-organized material of an extremist nature, the ISS shall and created an active community using a rule, by an order to providers of networks common online platform – blogosfera.md. At and/or services of electronic communication, the time of this commentary, the platform on the temporary blocking of access to this contained 2,039 blogs, categorized into 24 material on the territory of Moldova.” It should fields of interest, from local administration be noted that two important web portals, and business to mass media, religion and Unimedia.info and Privesc.eu, published a tourism. The bloggers’ community organizes declaration asking the Parliament to exclude the Festival of Moldovan Blogs (“Blogovat”), Article 8 from the draft law on fighting conducts opinion polls, establishes bloggers’ extremism, arguing that it censors Internet ratings, and develops other projects aimed at freedom. Media NGOs publicly supported the promotion and consolidation of blogging this declaration, reminding the public that and the creation of an alternative space for the draft law was being proposed nearly a expression.

79 Moldova

Websites with media content more Overall, the situation of mass media in and more often have become the subjects Moldova did not change significantly, having of media monitoring, although they are had small successes and downfalls in different not defined by law and their work is not areas. Throughout the year, Moldova’s score regulated. In 2014, the monitoring of online in the assessment of the four chapters journalism focused on many different of this commentary – Politics, Practice, areas: from informational manipulation Broadcasting, Internet and New Media – to gender equality. The study titled, “Mass fluctuated. These fluctuations, however, did Media Pluralism in Moldova: opportunity not influence the country’s overall index. and reality,” which was based on an analysis In contrast with 2013, in the three assessed of the external and internal pluralism of quarters of 2014 (January–March, April–June the eight most representative information and July–September), Moldova maintained portals, was presented in September. During the second position among the six countries the parliamentary elections of November of the Eastern Partnership, surpassed only 20, 2014, 10 news portals were monitored. by Georgia. Moldova earned1,340, 1,284 and The results of this monitoring show that 1,321 points in each quarter respectively, and online media actively covered the electoral maintained an Index of 6 out of 7. Variations campaign, but, unfortunately, some of them in Moldova’s score over the course of the clearly demonstrated political partisanship year were not significant enough so as to in favor of certain candidates. In this sense, conclude a general increase or decrease in the online journalism during the electoral period index. Nevertheless, a constant index does behaved much like traditional journalism. not necessarily mean stability in the media situation or in freedom of expression; rather, in major segments, it means stagnation prevented the country from earning higher Comparative analysis scores. It is worth mentioning that in 2013 of press freedom in 2013 there was a clear jump from Index 5 and and in 2014 second place in the first reporting period (March–June) to Index 6 and first place in the second reporting period (July–September). 2014 was a special year for Moldova; its social, Since then, Moldova has consistently political and geopolitical situation was marked obtained Index 6 and the second place among by major events, which influenced, on the one EaP member states. hand, the political agenda of the country’s Diagram 1. The general score obtained by Moldova between March authorities, and, on the other hand, the public 2013 and September 2014, per quarter. agenda of media outlets. Differing views on the Score 1600 meaning of events divided society mainly into 1400 1200 Euro-optimists and Euro-skeptics: supporters 1000 800 Score of the EU and supporters of the Customs Union. 600 400 This phenomenon added an antagonistic tone 200 0 to the political struggle, which was strongly March-June 2013 Jule-Semtember 2013 January-March 2014 April-June 2014 July-Semtember 2014 felt in the media. As a result, the people’s trust in mass media, which had been consistently quite high over the past years, dropped to 48% The general score (1,321) in the last in October 2014 from 54% in October 2013. reporting quarter (July–September 2014) is

80 Moldova

15% higher than the one obtained in the first ThePolicy chapter maintained a relatively reporting quarter, March–June 2013 (1,111). stable score in 2014, which allowed it to This growth, however, is not a result of obtain Index 6 in all three evaluated quarters. major improvements in press freedom or in Things were better than in 2013, when, in the the practices of journalists or media outlets second quarter of assessment, the Politics in Moldova. According to experts, in 2014, chapter obtained 165 points and Index 5. The journalistic activities did not take place in a low 2013 score was caused by the government climate of full freedom; internal and external decision to suspend online broadcasting pressures remained important influences of its meetings and by the president of the on journalists. At the same time, in 2014, Supreme Court of Justice’s declaration that authorities declared their intention of he would be promoting the reintroduction of working toward solving some of the problems criminal penalties for defamation. The fees in the media field; however, only some of that journalists must pay for information of these intentions materialized into concrete public interest also influenced the low score actions, and their sustainability is unclear. in that period. In other periods of assessment, the Policy chapter obtained the necessary A valid explanation of the score’s increase, score to attain Index 6 (179 points in March– however, is the high score obtained in the June 2013, 175 points in January–March 2014, area of Internet and New Media, Moldova 179 points in April–June 2014, and 183 points being among the countries with the highest in July–September 2014). speed of Internet and fewest regulations of cyberspace. Additionally, online media The high 2014 score was also influenced by continued to develop rapidly in 2014and there the fact that the Broadcasting Coordinating were no major cases of abuses against online Council (BCC) became more active, taking media, online journalists, or bloggers. notice of events or responding to civil society appeals and making timid attempts to fulfill Over the course of the year, the media its role of guarantor of the public interest. landscape did not undergo any dramatic The BCC monitored and applied penalties changes. The market maintained its 2013 in connection with the quality of programs levels, with some improvements, especially rebroadcast from Russia, and conducted in online media, which developed and monitoring and reacted during the electoral diversified. campaign, though not always effectively or in a timely manner. After the law on protection Diagram 2. Comparative score obtained by Moldova between March 2013 and September 2014, per chapter of children from the possible dangers of mass 1600 media entered into force in 2013, the BCC, 1400 together with civil society, monitored the 1200 content of some programs and intervened 1000

800 Internet and New Media when necessary. At the same time, after a

600 Broadcasting decision in its favor by the Supreme Court Practice 400 Politics of Justice, the BCC announced that it would 200 monitor broadcasters to see if they complied 0 with the legal obligation to have 30% of local programs in their weekly airtime in Romanian and in prime time; concrete actions, however, did not follow this declaration.

81 Moldova

The country advanced, although with small 2013, when the chapter obtained 125 points steps, on the path toward digitalization, which thanks to progress in digitalization and the must be accomplished by the end of 2015. In BCC’s openness to civil society appeals, a year 2014, the government adopted the program of later the situation worsened because there transition from analog to digital television, but were no major reforms to Teleradio-Moldova the decision was not immediately published (TRM) and because of the perception that in the Official Monitor, leaving room for TRM is controlled by the government. This speculation and interpretation about the perception is supported by the fact that TRM unspoken intentions of the authorities. is operating without its Supervisory Board (SB) because the parliamentary majority In 2014, the score for the chapter on failed to appoint the necessary members. Practice was also relatively constant, which Another reason the score for this chapter allowed it to obtain and maintain Index 6 did not increase is the difficult situation of throughout the entire year. However, while the regional public broadcaster, of Gagauzia, since the beginning of the project in March which has recently had very unstable 2013, the score for this chapter has grown leadership. overall, there was a decrease in the second quarter of 2014, from 913 points in January– The chapter on the Internet and New March to 857 points in April–June 2014, after Media had the best indicators in 2014, which the situation somewhat improved, receiving Index 7 throughout the year. It reaching 900 points in July–September should be noted that in 2013it had a lower 2014.The dip in the score was caused by the index, (6 out of the 7 possible), with 115 points, perception of the experts of weaknesses after which it grew and stayed constant in some segments of the field of justice. between 132 and 140 points. This high score is Nevertheless, the situation was better than thanks to the lack of Internet restrictions or in 2013, when Moldova obtained Index 5 for harassment of bloggers and online journalists the Practice chapter in the first quarter, with and to the accessibility of Internet services. only 713 points, growing in the following The decrease from 144 points in April–June period to 845 points and Index 6. This leap was 2014 to 132 points in July–September 2014 primarily due to the decrease in the number was caused by the voting on the first reading of lawsuits initiated against journalists for of the law on combating extremism, which defamation and the establishment by judges contains provisions that experts believe of reasonable penalties. could contribute to Internet censorship and endanger freedom of expression. The chapter on Broadcasting obtained the lowest score in 2014. Only in the first quarter, January–March 2014, did it obtain 113 points and Index 6. The score then dropped to 104 Conclusions in April–June and 106 in July–September, leading to Index 5 for both reporting quarters. Generally, the constitutional and legal It should be noted that the score obtained at guarantees of freedom of expression and press the end of the monitoring period in 2014 was freedom in Moldova are sufficient, but some the same level as in the first quarter of 2013, laws need improvement and changes in order when the project started. Although experts to secure the development of an independent saw some improvement in July–September mass media. After a period of openness

82 Moldova

toward civil society initiatives concerning authorities. The law on access to information the development of mass media, in 2014, the of public interest is not perfect and penalties Parliament’s collaboration with media NGOs for obstructing access to information were was stagnant, and important initiatives in not effectively applied in order to ensure this field were blocked or delayed for political the integrity of the process. In summary, reasons. the imperfect and ambiguous nature of Changes for the better that were expected public policies on media allows for political in the mass media sphere in the electoral year interference in the work of the national of 2014 did not occur. Expectations centered and regional public broadcasters, creates primarily on reducing monopolies on the institutional block a gesto the detriment of broadcasting and commercial advertising the public interest, and stimulates unfair markets. Because of group interests in competition. the media market, politicians did not demonstrate the necessary political will to adopt legal guarantees for establishing media ownership transparency and avoiding concentration in the media market. Consequently, the continued existence of some forms of monopoly on the media market, such as concentration of ownership, lack of transparency in funding sources, and control over the advertising market, created the conditions for unfair competition and the financial and editorial dependence of media outlets.

Throughout the year, there were no improvements in Moldova in terms of law- making or in the daily work of the mass media. On the contrary, during the electoral period, as in past years, the majority of mass media did not have sufficient capacity to resist political influence and admitted deviations from professional standards.

Overall, journalistic practices in Moldova took place in a climate of relative freedom in 2014. Although there was no direct pressure from the state, the day-to-day activities of journalists and media outlets were influenced to some extent by artificial limitations on the access to information of public interest. Meanwhile, the rare cases of attacks on or intimidation of journalists in connection with their work were not efficiently investigated by

83 Ukraine

UKRAINE

others, the Acts on: Information, Access to Policy Public Information, Television and Radio The right to freedom of speech is enshrined in Broadcasting, National Council of Ukraine the Ukrainian Constitution, which guarantees for Television and Radio Broadcasting, each person the right to the free expression of Telecommunications, Printed Media (Press) his or her views and beliefs, as well as the right in Ukraine, Information Agencies, State to freely collect, store, use, and disseminate Support of Mass Media and Journalists’ Social information by oral, written or other means, Protection, Procedure for Ukrainian Mass prohibits censorship, guarantees free access Media Highlighting the Activity of State to information about the environmental Authorities and Self-Government Bodies in situation, the quality of food and consumer Ukraine, Publishing Industry, and Advertising. goods, and stipulates the right to disseminate such information (see Articles 34, 15, 50 of the The Ukrainian print media is not subject to Constitution). Moreover, Ukraine ratified the licensing, but media outlets must be registered Convention for the Protection of Human Rights before they are permitted to publish and and Fundamental Freedoms on September 11, distribute newspapers and magazines. This 1997, and the Verkhovna Rada (parliament) does not adhere fully to European standards; of Ukraine approved the Implementation however, in practice this is not a serious of Decisions and Application of Practice of obstacle to freedom of speech in Ukraine. the European Court of Human Rights Act on February 23, 2006, requiring Ukrainian courts Under the laws of Ukraine, satellite, on-air, and state authorities to directly apply, in court cable and wire broadcasting and multiplexing and in administrative practice, the norms of is subject to licensing. On-air broadcasting the Convention and the principles formulated licenses and licenses for multiplexing with in the ECHR’s decisions. Thus, Ukrainian laws the use of radio-frequencies are only issued by establish high standards for freedom of speech. tender. At the same time, satellite, cable and The main laws regulating freedom of wire broadcasting licenses, as well as licenses speech and the media in Ukraine are, among for on-air broadcasting on multichannel

84 Ukraine

networks (in cases provided for by law as in Information Act of Ukraine and Access to paragraphs 7 and 8 of the Television and Radio Public Information Act of Ukraine, which Broadcasting Act of Ukraine) are issued without were passed on March 27, 2014, harmonized the use of competitive tenders. Internet Ukraine’s legislation and improved access to broadcasting is not subject to licensing. public information. Ukraine also introduced amendments to the Personal Data Protection Offences like insult and slander have been Act, removing the confidentiality from data decriminalized in Ukraine since 2001, and concerning the powers of public officials and defamation disputes are settled within the data from declarations submitted pursuant to framework of civil proceedings. Although the procedure provided for by the Principles the court has wide discretion in defining the of Corruption Prevention and Counteracting amount of compensation to be awarded for Act. Moreover, Ukrainian laws stipulate that the dissemination of unreliable information, journalist status may be confirmed either with in recent years, large fines have been rare. an editorial certificate or a document issued by the professional association of journalists. The start of 2014 in Ukraine was This enables freelancers and Internet media significantly impacted by the debates around employees to obtain the status of journalist. the approval, in the last days of 2013, of laws that were labelled by the public as “dictatorial” The Public Television and Radio or “the December 16 laws.” These include the Broadcasting Act was adopted on April 17, Amending Judiciary and Judges’ Statuses 2014 and entered into effect on May 15, 2014. Act of Ukraine and the Laws of Procedure It provides for the creation of the National with Regard to Additional Citizens Safety Public Television and Radio Broadcasting Protection Measures Act of Ukraine. This latter Company of Ukraine on the basis of a range of Act, inter alia, introduced criminal liability for national, oblast and other state television and “extremist activity,” which was interpreted radio broadcasting companies. As of the end very broadly and applied to slander, insults of 2014, the public company has not started toward law-enforcement officers, state broadcasting; the reorganization process is officials, and the judicial system, as well as ongoing. for unlawfully collecting, storing, using, and disseminating confidential information about These facts show that Ukraine’s legislation those affiliated with the law or the state complies, in general, with European standards and their family members. Furthermore, it in the field of freedom of speech. At the same introduced a mechanism for control over time, Ukraine’s media sphere does have the work of online media and information areas in need of improvement, including disseminated on the Internet by providing for the protection of the physical integrity of the possibility of restricting users’ access to journalists and other media representatives. such information. These amendments limiting freedom of speech in Ukraine were repealed as a result of public pressure on January 28, 2014. Further positive developments in Practice Ukraine in 2014 include the approval of laws promoting freedom of speech. In particular, Almost one thousand violations of the the amendments to the Legislative Acts freedom of speech was reported in 2014 with of Ukraine in Relation to Approval of the March and May being the worst months.

85 Ukraine

The data of the annual study of the Many journalists were seriously Institute of Mass Information Barometer of injured by traumatic weapon used by the Freedom of Speech shows that the overall law enforcement bodies’ representatives number of violations of the freedom of speech supporting Yanukovych’s regime. As journalists in 2014 is 977, which is twice as high as in 2013 say themselves, the special forces aimed at a (496 cases), and three times higher than in head with intention causing the loss of sight. 2012 (324 cases). Attacks became the category In particular, Spilnobachennia’s reporter with the greatest number of violations (285 Yanyk Falkevych who caught a plastic bullet cases, and 97 cases in 2013). In particular, on January 19 and Pavlo Ivanov working for the pursuant to the data of the Institute of Mass Ukrainian Youth Information Agency who was Information, the record number of attacks shot four times in the face lost sight. on journalists was registered in January and February 2014 when 82 and 70 journalists were beaten, respectively.

Particularly, after the annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation in March 2014, ATR channel representing the ethnic Crimean- Tatar minority and broadcasting in Russian, Ukrainian and Tatar languages was repeatedly the object of “increased attention” on the part of pro-Russian authorities with its journalists being attacked. In September, the Russian law-enforcement bodies accused ATR channel Pavlo Ivanov, Journalist of Ukrainian Youth Information Agency of promoting extremism and required that the channel’s administration should provide a whole range of documents, including January 26 saw the clashes at the registration documentation, licenses and building of oblast state administration in information on employees. Dnipropetrovsk. Two cameramen of the local 34th channel turned for help. They both Ukraine has never before witnessed the wore reflective jackets with a print “Press” on kidnapping of journalists by unlawful armed them. They say that young fellows hired by units, as well as had no internally displaced authorities shot them with traumatic weapon journalists who had to leave their homes in the back (on the photo). The camera crew of because of their professional activity. The record ICTV channel was stoned in Dnipropetrovsk number of kidnappings was observed in April as well. with 20 journalists captured, all in Donetsk oblast. Seventy six journalists were held captive Seven journalists died last year in Ukraine, on average last year. one of them during Maidan events and six of them in the area of antiterrorist operations. In 2014, such international organizations That fact that journalists were killed and as Reporters Without Borders and Committee physical aggression towards them increased to Protect Journalists recognized Ukraine to is caused by two key factors — Maidan events be the third (after Syria and Palestine) most and, consequently, Russian aggression and dangerous country for journalists to work in. warfare in the territory of Ukraine.

86 Ukraine

Broadcasting

When speaking to Ukraine’s adherence to journalistic standards, the year of 2014, which was rich in political upheavals, is best divided into several periods.

January-February. Most of the country’s media was focused on mass protests in early Sergiy Kochet, Journalist of local 34th channel in Dnipropetrovsk 2014. Before the Verkhovna Rada approved the “dictatorial” December 16 laws, which, inter alia, threatened freedom of speech, even The number of censorship cases in 2014 the media dependent on the authorities and is twice as high as in 2013 (134 in 2014 as their oligarchs was neutral in highlighting compared with 62 in 2013). The record number the Maidan events. Once the clashes on of censorship was reported in May (38) and Hrushevsky Street had started, however the June (28), it was due to the shutting down of media split: the state television and media close Ukrainian channels on the east of the country. to authorities on one side, and those supporting the protesters on the other. The government 2014 also saw 63 attacks on editorial offices, camp included the Inter Media Group (Интер) which is almost eight (!) times as many as of Serhyi Liovochkin and Dmytro Firtash (who in 2013. The record number of attacks was regained control over the channel’s editorial observed in May and related to the programs policy at the start of the year), Ukraine Media of the editorial offices of local publications in Group (Украина) of Rinat Akhmetov, pro- Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts. Attackers raided Russian Vesti Group (Вести) of Igor Guzhva the offices of the local media with bats for (Multimedia Invest Group holding), Ukrainian refusing to cooperate with the separatists. Media Holding (Украинских медиахолдинг) of Serhyi Kurchenko (Institute of Mass Several dozens of journalists and cameramen Information monitoring data), Era (Эра) of had their expensive professional equipment Andriy Derkach, and a range of other media damaged during Maidan events with some of outlets blatantly trying to discredit Maidan. On them losing the recorded material. the other end of the spectrum, Igor Kolomoisky’s 1+1 Group openly supported the protestors, In particular, during the live stream from sometimes violating journalistic standards of the Hryshevskyi Street in Kyiv on January balance of opinions and the separation of facts 22 the representative of Berkut police unit from commentary. Victor Pinchuk’s group (TV smashed the camera of Inter channel’s channels, STB (СТБ), ICTV, and Novyi (Новый)) news cameraman Dmytro Kazantsev. In took a middle-ground position. Zaporizhia, in the course of skirmishes on January 26, UKRINFORM’s photographer According to the monitoring activities of Dmytro Smolienko, despite the fact that the Telekritika (Телекритика) community he presented the press identification card, organization, during the week of January a Berkut representative stamped on his (20-25), the most standards violations were equipment costing $8000. observed in the news broadcasts of Inter

87 Ukraine

Regions. At the same time, it is worth noting that most journalists supported the Maidan protests, and it was not only the opposition and independent media that suffered from the clubs, grenades and bullets of the police; many journalists devoted to the government were victims as well. For example, Viacheslav Veremiy, an employee of Vesti newspaper, was killed by titushky (mercenary agents posing as street hooligans) on January 18.

Maidan, January, 2014 March-April. During this period, the media focused on Russia’s occupation and later annexation of Crimea, pro-Russian meetings in (53) and First National (66). Half as many the country’s eastern and southern oblasts, the violations occurred on 1+1 (31), Ukraine (29) and siege of Sloviansk town, and the proclamations ICTV (27), and nearly no violations occurred of the Luhansk and Donetsk People’s Republics. on Novyi channel (13), which belongs to the All the largest media holdings, except Ukraine opposition leader Petro Poroshenko, Channel and Vesti, highlighted these events from a (12), TVi (ТВі) (7) and STB (6). The most frequent patriotic, pro-Ukrainian perspective (which manipulations perpetrated by media outlets also frequently led to violations of journalistic loyal to Yanukovych’s regime included omitting standards). By contrast, in April, media outlets Maidan events inconvenient for authorities owned by Rinat Akhmetov supported and (including the use of weapons, deliberate firing justified the pro-Russian meetings, portraying at journalists, kidnapping, etc.), justifying the the events as a symmetric response to Maidan December 16 laws, and portraying protestors as and saying that Kyiv should “hear Donbas out.” radicals or mercenaries. These manipulations continued up until February 20, when Inter Despite some violations, in general, attempted to justify the decision of internal the observance of journalistic standards affairs minister, Vitaliy Zakharchenko, to give significantly improved during this period. police forces assault weapons and permission to During the Telekritika check week in March, shoot to kill. On February 22, after Yanukovych most violations were observed in the news was reported to have fled the country, the media broadcasts of Inter and First National channels, that had supported him instantly changed the but the numbers were significantly lower rhetoric, calling the Maidan participants heroes than in January. Most of First National’s (“extremists” suddenly became “activists”) explicit standards violations were in skewing and criticizing the runaway president and his the facts toward government interests, while followers. Inter started protecting Russia’s interests. For instance, Inter suppressed the fact that it was Yanukovych failed to create a system of total the Russian military that captured Crimea. The censorship and information suppression. This is most widespread violations included failing to why his attempts to canalize information flows present a balance of opinions, using unreliable and control public opinion were successful only sources, and violating the principle of the in isolated eastern and southern oblasts that separation of facts from commentary. During were under the total control of the Party of this period, many media outlets, in particular

88 Ukraine

the groups of Pinchuk and Kolomoisky, events in Donbas, Odesa (the May 2 tragedy), frequently used patriotic propaganda in their and Crimea from the patriotic or neutral news. A lot of the media also had difficulty perspectives. Though they both belong to the highlighting the situation in occupied Crimea Multimedia Invest Group, the Vesti newspaper and the section of Donbas to which Ukrainian highlighted the pro-Russian position to a journalists had no access. greater extent, and Reporter.News magazine (Репортер.Вести) frequently published more While the regions of Ukraine controlled balanced, objective reports from Eastern by Russia and pro-Russian terrorists were Ukraine. essentially outside the reach of the Ukrainian information sphere, in the rest of the May also saw the pre-term presidential country, cable network providers stopped election campaign, which, for the first time retransmitting Russian channels following a since the 2000s, was not accompanied by court decision that closed six Russian channels the violation of journalistic standards and because the National Council for Television covert political manipulation of the media. and Radio Broadcasting deemed they did not According to Telekritika’s monitoring, the level adhere to Ukrainian legislation. The shut-down of observance of standards in television news in channels included: First Channel. Worldwide May remained the same as in March, with First Network (Первый канал. Всемирная сеть), Channel and 1+1 news significantly improving RTR-Planet (РТР-Планета), NTV-World (НТВ- their performance in this respect. Even Channel Мир), Russia-24 (Россия-24), TVCI and RBK- 5, belonging to the clear leader in the election TV (РБК-ТВ). Providers were forbidden from race, Petro Poroshenko, did not broadcast any transmitting another nine channels: Russia-1 materials blatantly in favour of its owner. The (Россия-1), NTV (НТВ), TNT (ТНТ), Petersburg-5 May news broadcasts presented no reasons (Петербург-5), Start (Звезда), REN-TV (РЕН-ТВ), to suppose that authorities were somehow Life News, Russia Today and History (История)). influencing the media’s agenda; however the In fact, while there is no ban on broadcasting government’s openness and the quality of its them, providers may have their license revoked communications left much to be desired. for transmitting Life News or Russia Today. At the same time, May witnessed the May. The situation in Donbas escalated into beginning of a confrontation that continues a real war with the use of heavy armament, to this day — primarily in television news requiring special attention from the media, — between two media outlets belonging to including adapting journalistic standards to the oligarchs, namely Igor Kolomoisky (1+1) and the conflict situation and ensuring staff reporting group of Serhyi Liovochkin and Dmytro Firtash from hot spots had the appropriate training. The (Inter). The clash soon resulted in each taking violation of standards or flaws in journalistic weekly stabs at discrediting the other. Thus, materials on the confrontation in the east were May was marked by the increasing tendency of often simply a result of the media’s inability to media owners to wield the media for their own deal with such topics under such conditions. interests. Since radio and television media could not work in the field, this promoted a rapid growth in Summer. Three months of a worsening photo- and text-based reporting. Practically all armed conflict in Donbas completely significant media holdings, with the exception reoriented most national media toward of Igor Guzhva’s Vesti, continued highlighting primarily highlighting the “anti-terrorist

89 Ukraine

operation.” Standards were frequently violated covert political manipulation of public opinion during this period due to lack of understanding through the news. While in September the of the principles of reporting on a war, the number of standards violations was relatively absence of reliable information sources, and small, in October, the number of violations in the attempts of some media to compensate for television news returned to a level comparable the deficit of pro-Ukrainian propaganda (for with Yanukovych’s time: during the September example, 1+1 group launched its own channel check week, the information programmes of of overseas broadcasting, Ukraine Today, on Inter had 65, Ukraine had 48, and ICTV had August 24). At the same time, the confrontation 39 materials that included grave violations of between oligarchs escalated and transformed standards or appeared to be ordered and paid into an asymmetric (the Liovochkin-Firtash for by a certain group. The number of violations group was much more aggressive) exchange on 1+1, STB, and Novyi channels, though lower, of discrediting materials through the media. increased as well. First National and Channel Pinchuk’s and Akhmetov’s groups also joined 5 remained free from pre-election covert the attacks on Kolomoisky from time to time. manipulation of public opinion. The regional Meanwhile, Akhmetov turned the media outlets media displayed similar tendencies. The Radical he owns into a platform for daily distribution Party of Oleh Lyashko, and the political parties, of eulogistic public relations materials about Opposition Block, Strong Ukraine, Zastup, his charity work. As of June, almost no Ukraine and Motherland, were the worst offenders in channel news broadcast neglected to mention terms of the number of promotional materials it at least once, or, more often, two or three they covertly inserted into television, press and times. Internet media, although all political forces used this unlawful method of campaigning to Inter’s news quality worsened significantly a certain extent. According to the monitoring in the summer, violating journalistic standards activities of the Academy of Ukrainian Press, the three times more often than Ukraine and ICTV, equilibrium level of television news in October while the number of violations of other Pinchuk was 10%, while it was 21% in April. The monitoring group channels, 1+1 and Channel 5 remained of the Institute of Mass Information also showed relatively low. The state-owned First National a reduction in the level of journalistic standards channel did not purposefully violate standards, in printed and online publications. It should but often produced low-quality products be noted that the 2014 elections were marked mainly retelling news from the Internet. In the by the mass participation of journalists in radio broadcasting sphere, government-loyal politics — Vikroria Siumar, Egor Sobolev, Serhiy Era radio station competed with Vesti, which Leshchenko, Olha Chervakova, Mustafa Naem, sometimes gave over the floor to terrorists Serhiy Vysotskyi, Konstiantyn Usov, and many and pro-Russian politicians. Ukrainian Media other representatives of mainly the liberal and Holding publications also drifted toward the democratic media community, became people’s opposition. deputies.

September-October. Against the November-December. Despite the end backdrop of the unceasing war in Donbas, the of the elections, the on-air television wars extraordinary parliamentary elections forced between oligarchs did not cease. The battle the Ukrainian media back to its old habits of continued in two main directions: Kolomoisky accepting money to publish content favourable versus Firtash-Liovochkin, and Kolomoisky to certain candidates or interest groups and versus everybody else. During this time, Inter

90 Ukraine

and Ukraine ultimately transformed into PR revised timeline, the transformations of platforms for the Opposition Bloc and their the broadcasting companies may begin in owners, neglecting the principle of balance spring 2015. The Cabinet of Ministers and the and imposing the point of view of this very President verbally support the creation of political force. Opposition Bloc representatives public broadcasting, but it is doubtful that they became the heroes of the story and were have the genuine political willingness to part studio guests at at least one of these channels with the state media resources. practically every day. The number of politically- motivated segments in the television news Meanwhile, all experts point out that there decreased considerably as compared to October, has been significant improvement in the but remained high for “peaceful” times. This quality of the information products coming unfortunate tendency was also observed in the out of the state television and radio companies. printed media. It is fair to say that at the end Transformations began in the days directly of the year, the Maidan momentum, which had following the conclusion of the Maidan spurred many publications to improve their protests, when the companies’ administration quality and editorial standards and intimidated provided airtime to the public media initiatives, media owners, was completely exhausted. The Hromadske TV (Громадське телебачення) and deterioration of the business environment Hromadske Radio (Громадське радио). The and the advertising market crisis increased appointment of Alasania as CEO of the First the media’s dependence on their owners and National television channel led to staff changes; sponsoring politicians. however, he did not stop the broadcasting of the political talk-show “Shuster live” (Шустер Public television. Achievements on the live), whose creators are often accused of road to media denationalization and the manipulations. The administration of the creation of Ukrainian public television and National Television Company, with the support radio have so far been rather illusory. In March, of Western donors, managed to hold high- the media community (specifically the “Stop quality televised debates with transparent Censorship!” movement) succeeded in lobbying rules in the lead-up to the presidential and for the appointment of Zurab Alasania as the parliamentary elections. The quality of the CEO of the National Television Company of news and political programming of most oblast Ukraine. Alasania promised progress toward state TV and radio companies also improved transforming the state television broadcaster to a great extent during 2014. Nevertheless, into a public one. The Verkhovna Rada adopted without completely transforming into public the relevant law on April 17, and in October, media entities, there is a high risk that the state the Cabinet of Ministers adopted a decision to media resources could fall back into serving the reorganize the National Television Company interests of the authorities. and the National Radio Company into public joint-stock companies. The government also Summing up, we can say that the political decided to liquidate oblast state television changes in Ukraine — including the Revolution and radio companies and replace them with of Dignity, the three-stage change of power, small production companies. However, the Russian occupation of Crimea, and the war resistance from the employees of the state in Donbas — have not led to any significant television and radio companies, combined changes in the country’s media market and with interference from a range of politicians, media space. Ukraine has witnessed neither thwarted these reforms. According to Alasania’s a reallocation of media property (members of

91 Ukraine

the nature of communication and creating opportunities for self-organization among Ukrainian citizens during the Euromaidan protests, which are also called the Revolution of Dignity (Nov 2013-Feb 2014).

Rooted in online communication and the active use of social media, popular protests sparked offline in November 2013, eventually leading to the toppling of the Yanukovych regime. Hromadske TV Studio, February, 2014 The Internet continues to play a significant communication and mobilization role in the the so-called Yanukovych Family retained their ongoing war between Ukraine and Russia in assets following his removal), nor punishment Donbas. Technologies and online platforms are of media managers and journalists guilty of helping to mobilize Ukrainians in confronting violating standards or manipulating facts. Russian aggression in Donbas and Crimea. Thus, after a period of improvements during the Maidan, the media outlets returned to The Internet is also rapidly changing the political propagandizing, catering to the public landscape for Ukrainian media, pushing them relations needs of their owners, and becoming into the digital age and encouraging them pawns in battles between oligarchs. The state to adapt to the new digital culture. From the media is the only segment demonstrating perspective of democratic governance, the obvious changes for the better; however, the Internet empowers citizens to hold government process of transforming these companies accountable and allows investigative journalists into public broadcasters has been postponed to oversee government activities, particularly indefinitely. At the same time, aside from some tender procedures and budget expenditures. public concern about the establishment of In the coming years, the Internet will remain the Ministry of Information, which is headed a driving force behind the transformation by the former general producer of Channel of government, business, and civil society in 5, Yuriy Stets, the new Ukrainian authorities Ukraine. show no proclivity for censorship or systemic interference with the editorial policy of media The Internet is an essential part of everyday outlets, state-funded or otherwise. life for millions of Ukrainian citizens, letting them consume news, shop online, and play 1 games. According to Gemius research , as of June 2014, 18.8 million Ukrainians out of a population of 45 million had Internet access: a Internet 12% increase over 2013. In 2014, almost 90% of Internet users went online on a daily basis. In and New Media the past five years, Internet access has expanded to both urban and rural areas in every region. In 2013-2014, the Internet became a vital tool Since 2012, the number of Internet users in of a vibrant civil society in Ukraine, transforming rural areas has been increasing. As of June 2014,

92 Ukraine

20% of all Internet users lived in rural areas. Media outlets in the digital era. During Internet access remains inexpensive in Ukraine 2013-2014, Ukrainian media rapidly expanded — the average monthly fee for home Internet is their online presence and audience reach about US $10. as a result of the increase in Internet usage and the ongoing conflicts in Ukraine. Since After the change of political regime in the beginning of the conflict, the audience February 2014, the new pro-European Ukrainian of Ukraine’s biggest online media outlet, government set no barriers to Internet freedom Ukrainska Pravda, has grown from about 1 in Ukraine — citizens have free access to the million to 3 million views per day, and from Internet, and there have been no recent signs 300,000 to 1 million unique users per day. of centralized censorship. At the same time, in November 2014, the government declared the In 2013-2014, a number of new Internet creation of the Ministry of Information: a move media outlets were launched in response to the that has been widely criticized by the Ukrainian growth of the online media market: media community. For the government, the The Insider — http://www.theinsider.ua/; new Ministry is a response to the propaganda Hubs — http://hubs.com.ua/ war led by the Russian media against Ukraine in Apostrophe — http://apostrophe.com.ua/ the context of the ongoing conflict. For Russia, Hromadske TV — http://www.hromadske.tv/ the Internet is a key platform (Vkontakte, Espresso.TV — http://espreso.tv/ Odnoklasniki, sites, blogs) for disseminating propaganda targeting both the Ukrainian While key Ukrainian online media population and international audiences. Russia outlets have been growing, revenues remain has used various methods of propaganda, a significant challenge for management. including misinformation, the use of bots and Nevertheless, the leaders of the media trolls (paying Internet users to misinform and market can anticipate revenues from online distract the attention of Internet users), and advertising: DDoS attacks against Ukrainian websites. Ukrainska Pravda — http://www.pravda.com. ua/ Further development of the Internet in TSN — http://tsn.ua/ Ukraine is stalled awaiting the launch of 3G Obozrevatel — http://obozrevatel.com/; mobile Internet. Until the government adopts Segodnia — http://www.segodnya.ua/; the required legislation to pass the state-owned Focus — http://focus.ua/; 3G frequency onto mobile operators, the growth Comments — http://comments.ua/; of mobile internet in Ukraine is postponed. Levyi Bereg — http://lb.ua/ Day — http://www.day.kiev.ua/ The Ukrainian media continues to expand Radio Svoboda — http://www.radiosvoboda.org/ its Internet presence. Key media outlets such as Ukrainska Pravda, Liga.net, LB.net, Podrobnosti. The main Ukrainian online media outlets are ua, Dzerkalo Tyzhnia, and Obozrevatel have structured within holdings. Many successful modern websites that attract hundreds of online media are part of larger media holdings thousands of visitors every day. The market that involve many different types of media. of online media has structured to key media holdings. Media holding / Online resources

1 watcher.com.ua/2014/08/19/audytoriya-ukrayinskoho-internetu-spovilnyla-sviy-rist-za-rik-zrosla-lyshe-na-12/

93 Ukraine

1. Ukrainian Media Holding: Facing an onslaught of propaganda from korrespondent.net, focus.ua, kp.ua, Russia, Ukraine is in need of effective tools vgorode.ua, focus.ua, dengi.ua, bigmir. to inform international audiences about the net events in Ukraine. The launch of UkraineToday, 2. Ukrainska Pravda: pravda.com.ua, the first English language 24-hour TV station, epravda.com.ua, champion.com.ua, and its website (http://uatoday.tv/) helps istpravda.com.ua transmit Ukraine’s message to the world. The 3. 1plus1: tsn.ua, unian.net, glavred.info, launch of StopFake.org helps to investigate 1plus1.ua, glavport.net methods of Russian manipulation and refute 4. Inter Media Group: podrobnosti.ua, false messages spread by the Russian media. inter.ua, ukranews.com 5. RIA: 20minut.ua, ria.ua, vsim.ua Internet tools help to expand the capacity 6. CitySites: 048.ua, 057.ua, 061.ua, 0322.ua, for and the influence of investigative 0632.ua reporting. For example, Slidstvo.info follows 7. Lux: zaxid.net, 24tv.ua, lux.fm the corruption schemes of state officials and 8. Evolution Media: comments.ua, phl.ua, exposes government corruption by producing weekly.ua TV programs on 1st National Channel of 9. Sanoma Media Ukraine: cosmo.com.ua, Ukraine. NashiGroshi.org continues to work story.com.ua, menshealth.com.ua as a professionally-led resource to expose corruption on a government level based on Trends for online. Going digital is a key open source government information. The trend in the media market both in Ukraine and results of these reports are widely disseminated worldwide. It means that the media can no longer among other media outlets and have received be seen in terms of a strict division between international recognition. Ukrainska Pravda print, online and television. Rather, all types continues to investigate political corruption in of media are expanding their online presence. the Ukrainian government. Television broadcasters create platforms for an online audience and adapt their content to the In conclusion, due to the pressure of evolving rules of digital communication. Newspapers technologies and the rapid development of transform from print to online to reduce their online tools, the Ukrainian media landscape costs of production. One of the most successful is changing dramatically. On the one hand, examples of traditional media going digital is media businesses have increased their online 1+1 channel and its TSN.ua website, which works presence, expecting growth in revenues from effectively online and in social media. the new online initiatives. On the other hand, news consumption has shifted from websites Social media has recently become a key to social media, and from desktops to mobile platform for Ukrainian civil society. Twitter, devices. Facebook, and YouTube appeared on the scene as tools to mobilize Ukrainian citizens to action The ongoing conflict between Russia during the protests and in ongoing conflict in and Ukraine has clearly demonstrated that Donbas. Social media has helped to coordinate online media organizations are vulnerable to the efforts of hundreds of volunteer groups, manipulation and hate speech. The Russian to investigate Russian media manipulation propaganda disseminated over the Internet techniques, and to track Russian military and through social media poses a threat to deployment in Ukraine. democracy in Ukraine. As a response to this

94 Ukraine

threat, the Ukrainian government plans to For instance, in 2013, Ukraine was ruled by launch a Ministry of Information, which could, authoritarian president, Viktor Yanukovych, in turn, threaten freedom of speech in Ukraine. and this regime culminated in the events of the Revolution of Dignity, which happened in 2014. From the perspective of democratic On the other hand, free of Yanukovych, in 2014 governance, the Internet continues to empower Ukraine was faced with the Russia-supported citizens to hold the government accountable and eastern separatist movement, resulting in a lets investigative journalists provide an oversight war and influencing the overall media freedom function to government activities. In the coming picture. years, the Internet will remain the driving force for the transformation of government, business, In other words, both authorities and and civil society in Ukraine. geography influenced media freedom in 2014.

Recommendations: If we consider the statistics alone, 2014 looks 1. The government of Ukraine should much worse than the previous year. According to rethink its strategy of launching the the Institute of Mass Information’s monitoring Ministry of Information. Instead, activities, Ukraine witnessed 977 cases of information policy functions can encroachment on freedom of speech in 2014 be fulfilled by existing government — twice as many as in 2013 (496 cases). Most authorities, specifically the Ukrainian of these violations were aimed at journalists Council of Security and Defense. (285 cases compared to 97 in 2013). 2014 saw 2. Free and sustainable media are central twice as many cases of censorship as in 2013 prerequisites for democracy in Ukraine; (134 compared to 62), and 63 attacks on editorial their development should be encouraged offices were reported in 2014, compared to just by the privatization of state-owned eight in 2013. media. 3. Internet freedom and Internet rights At the same time, it is important to should be guaranteed for all citizens of understand that the negative statistics of Ukraine at the legislative level. 2014 accumulated primarily as a result of the confrontation between Yanukovych’s regime and the Maidan, and the conflict started by Russia-supported separatists in Eastern Comparative analysis of Ukraine. For example, the most cases of media freedom journalists being beaten and attacked occurred in 2013-2014 during January-February 2014: the period of the most severe confrontations on the Maidan. The record number of attacks on media offices In 2013-2014, Ukraine experienced the registered in May 2014 was largely a result of Revolution of Dignity, a change of power, the the demolition of the editorial offices of local Russian annexation of Crimea and a war in publications in Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts Eastern Ukraine (that is still ongoing). In one for refusing to cooperate with separatists. way or another, all of these events influenced The greatest number of cases of censorship the media freedom situation and, as such, it was observed in May and June, and these is difficult to perform a simple comparative were related to the cutting-off of Ukrainian analysis. television channels by separatists in Eastern

95 Ukraine

Ukraine. Additionally, seven journalists died and 2014, respectively, there were 11 and six while reporting on Maidan events and the cases of journalists being attacked and beaten, hostilities in the east. eight and five cases of media employees being It should be noted that by autumn 2014 threatened, one and three cases of political the media situation in Eastern Ukraine had pressure, and nine and 14 cases of cyber attacks. stabilized, but in a less-than-ideal state. By that time, the territories controlled by This data suggests that the current separatists supported by Russia were relatively authorities’ attitude toward media freedom clearly defined. Journalists with Ukrainian is nearly the same as that of the previous publications (who had experienced attacks government, and if there were some and had even been kidnapped by gunmen) improvements in 2014, they were a result of effectively stopped visiting these territories public pressure and the post-revolutionary because of the very high risks associated with circumstances, rather than the political will of such trips. Meanwhile, separatists ousted all the new Ukrainian government. the media they did not like from the territories. In general, the media space in Ukraine Roughly since that time, the statistics on in 2014 looked more pluralistic than in the the violation of media freedom in 2014 suggest previous year. The media (especially the a “peaceful” state as they do not account for the television media) now has more opportunities turmoil in the isolated occupied territories. to express diverse views (including dissenting opinions) on developments in the country and In this context, we may draw conclusions critically assess the government’s activities. about the second factor influencing the freedom of the media in 2013-2014: government actions At the same time, the traditional “illnesses” (or lack thereof). It is useful to consider the inherent to the Ukrainian media sphere in 2013 data from the month of October in both 2013 persisted in 2014. These include, for instance, and 2014 to better understand the difference the great influence of media owners over between these years. In October 2013, the media outlets’ editorial policies, and impunity Maidan protests had not yet started and Viktor for deliberately preventing journalistic activity. Yanukovych’s regime was not restricting media Therefore, despite the many changes the activity. country experienced, it is fair to say there has been no revolution in the area of media freedom The comparison shows interesting results: in Ukraine in 2014. statistically, the freedom of the media situation under the new leadership installed following the pro-democratic revolution is practically the same as under the government the revolution Conclusions was against. In fact, October 2013 indices were somewhat better than those of October 2014. Ukraine has not witnessed any substantial progress in the field of media freedom in 2014. In October 2014, the Institute of Mass Despite the fact that the media environment Information registered 17 cases of the has become more open and pluralistic thanks to prevention of journalistic activity, compared to the fall of Yanukovych’s authoritarian regime in 15 in 2013. In 2014, eight of these cases related to February, the old persistent problems plaguing censorship, compared to three in 2013. In 2013 Ukrainian media still need to be solved.

96 Ukraine

Oligarchs, who are actively involved in Nothing has changed with regard to the political and economic processes of the the impunity of those guilty of preventing country, still have too much control over the journalistic activity. Attacks on journalists, media. This is particularly so with regards to prevention of filming, and threats are still television channels. The influence of owners’ common, and authorities show no desire to interests over their media outlets’ editorial deal with this situation and protect media policies was clearly revealed in the campaign representatives from this lawlessness. Although leading up to the parliamentary election in Article 171 of the Criminal Code provides autumn 2014. for severe punishment for interfering with journalistic activity, just as when Yanukovych Political will was lacking for the creation of was in office, this law is still not applied in public broadcasting, which could significantly practice. improve the television media landscape. April The development of online journalism, 2014 saw the approval of the Public Television and especially Internet television, is one area and Radio Broadcasting Act and it was decided of progress in 2014. The latter, in many cases, that the new public broadcaster would start provides an informational alternative to functioning on January 1, 2015, but this never traditional television channels and is popular happened. At the beginning of December, the in urban areas. Parliamentary Committee for Freedom of Speech The media situation in annexed Crimea, and Information prepared an amendment however, and in the territories controlled intended to improve the public broadcasting by Donbas separatists supported by Russia, act and, by doing so, allow the broadcaster to is a different story. The situation in these begin its work. However, an alternative draft turbulent areas is much more complex than law submitted by Petro Poroshenko’s bloc soon in Ukraine in general. Russian authorities and torpedoed the Parliamentary Committee’s their supporters use authoritarian methods to amendment. The media community viewed suppress any dissidence, which destroys the the new draft as an attempt to hinder the freedom of the media. creation of public broadcasting. In the end, the Parliament adopted a compromise, dividing the broadcaster into television and radio companies, which allowed the process to move forward.

The issue of the denationalization of community media has not been solved. The Parliament failed to approve the relevant act in April 2014. On December 1, the Verkhovna Rada registered the Reformation State and Community Printed Media draft act, which is slightly different from the act it failed to approve in April. At the same time, the editors of a range of community media organizations accused local governments of interfering with their editorial policy and imposing censorship.

97 Infographics 3 491 7 high level of of high level media freedom 3 502 Belarus 3 486 January - March 2014 - January June 2014 - April 2014 October - July 3 532 1 meaning of Index meaning of low level of of level low media freedom

3 560 3 Azerbaijan 571 5 1094 5 1071 Ukraine 4 721 5 946 5 935 Armenia 5 955 6 1322 6 1284 Moldova 6 1340 Eastern Partnership Media Freedom Index 7 1367 7 1409 GEorgia 7 1367 0

900 600 300

1500 1200

1650 max. points, of number - index The project is funded by the European Union

98 Infographics 2 69 7 high level of of high level rights and freedoms 2 70 Belarus 2 77 January - March 2014 - January June 2014 - April 2014 October - July 4 119 1 meaning of Index meaning of low level of of level low rights and freedoms 4 124 4 124 Azerbaijan 5 161 5 157 Ukraine 3 108 6 178 170 6 170 Armenia 6 172 6 183 6 179 6 Moldova 175 Policy the constitution rights and freedoms for the Media/journalists granted by of (Defines the level of presence to international norms and standards, their conformity the country, and laws of etc.) official censorship, 7 201 7 207 Georgia 7 200

0

50

250 200 150 100

240 max. points, of number - index

99 Infographics 3 345 7 high level of of high level media freedom 3 356 BelaRus 3 347 January - March 2014 - January June 2014 - April 2014 October - July 3 330 1 meaning of Index meaning of low level of of level low media freedom 3 344 3 Azerbaijan 351 5 717 5 697 Ukraine 3 459 4 596 4 603 Armenia 4 599 6 901 6 857 6 Moldova 913 Practice as well as the Media/journalists, by rights and freedoms enjoyed (Defines the actual state of 6 parts: of The section consists illicit restrictions thereof. of reaction in cases authorities' and self-censorship; to information; censorship arrests; prosecution; access threats, assaults, conditions) monopoly; economic 6 914 7 947 GEorgia 6 924 0

800 600 400 200

1000

1110 max. points, of number - index

100 Infographics 1 28 7 high level of of high level freedom TV/radio 1 26 Belarus 1 23 January - March 2014 - January June 2014 - April 2014 October - July 2 41 1 meaning of Index meaning of low level of of level low TV/radio freedom 2 41 2 45 Azerbaijan 5 91 5 91 ukraine 3 61 3 65 3 65 armenia 3 65 5 106 5 104 6 moldova 113 Broadcasting etc.) to airtime, access freedom in broadcasting, of (Defines the level 6 113 6 119 Georgia 6 114

0

80 60 40 20

120 100

150 max. points, of number - index

101 Infographics 2 49 7 high level of of high level freedom Internet 3 51 Belarus 2 39 January - March 2014 - January June 2014 - April 2014 October - July 2 42 54 1 meaning of Index meaning of low level of of level low freedom Internet 3 50 3 51 Azerbaijan 6 125 6 126 Ukraine 5 93 6 115 6 117 Armenia 6 116 7 132 7 144 7 Moldova 139 Internet and New Media etc.) to Internet, access Internet freedom, of (Defines the level 7 139 7 136 Georgia 6 129

0

90 60 30

150 120

150 max. points, of number - index

102 Moldova

Managing editor – Nataliya Sad

Editors – Nataliya Sad and Nataliya Pivovar

Editor of English version – Allison McCabe

Translation – Illya Gavrylenko, Khrystyna Chushak, Anastasiya Morenets

Proofreader – Nataliya Pivovar

Infographics – Yaryna Mykhaylyshyn

Internews Ukraine

15 Ryz’ka Street, 04112 Kyiv, Ukraine

tel/fax: +38 044 458 44 40

http://internews.ua/

http://mediafreedomwatch.org/

: EaPMediaFreedomWatch

: mediafreewatch

This publication has been produced with the assistance of the European Union. The content of this publication is the sole responsibility of its authors and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the European Union.

The European Union is made up of 28 Member States who have decided to gradually link together their know-how, resources and destinies. Together, during a period of enlargement of 50 years, they have built a zone of stability, democracy and sustainable development whilst maintaining cultural diversity, tolerance and individual freedoms. The European Union is committed to sharing its achievement and its values with countries and peoples beyond its borders.

103