Belarusian Association of Journalists (BAJ) MASS MEDIA IN BELARUS 2016 ANNUAL REPORT Minsk 2017 CONTENTS SITUATION IN THE SPHERE OF MASS MEDIA IN 2016 (OVERVIEW) ……………….…………………………………………….....…. 3 CHANGES IN LEGISLATION …………………………………………… 5 VIOLATIONS OF RIGHTS OF MASS MEDIA AND JOURNALISTS, CONFLICTS IN THE SPHERE OF MASS MEDIA ……………………………….................……...……....………………….. 8 Criminal cases ………………..…………………………………………………... 8 Other court cases (except for administrative prosecution) …….. 9 Detention of journalists, judicial administrative prosecution ….. 11 Physical attacks against journalists ……………………........................ 17 Seizure of equipment, damages, confiscation ………….……………. 19 Warnings of the Ministry of Information ………..……………………… 19 Restrictions on the free use of the Web ……………………………….. 20 Violations related to access to information ………….………………. 21 Violations during the elections to the House of Representatives of the National Assembly of the Republic of Belarus …................... 24 Economic policy in mass media field ………….…………………………. 25 Other forms of pressure and violation of rights of journalists and mass media ……………………………………………… 27 Mass-media in Belarus: 2016 SITUATION IN THE SPHERE OF MASS MEDIA IN 2016 (OVERVIEW) The main factor that influenced the media situation in Belarus in 2016 was the elections to the House of Representatives of the National Assembly of the Republic of Belarus. They took place in September 2016 against the backdrop of a worsening economic situation and a complex foreign policy environment. The Belarusian authorities sought to receive a positive assessment of the elections by international bodies, and as the election campaign approached and during its course, direct repression of journalists decreased. However, at the system level, the situation has not changed for the better, and the legislation in the field of media regulation has only become tougher. This shows the situational nature and volatility of some positive changes in the media sector in 2016. Proof of this is the persecution of Belarusian freelance journalists for cooperation with foreign media without an accreditation. For the first time, the Belarusian authorities used the practice of bringing them to justice for the "illegal production and distribution of mass media products" (Article 22.9, Part 2 of the Administrative Code) in April 2014. By August 2015, courts fined Belarusian journalists on 68 occasions for materials that appeared in foreign media. In all cases, the basis for bringing them to justice was not the content of their materials, but the very fact of their appearance in foreign media. In August 2015, on the eve of the presidential elections, Alexander Lukashenka promised to deal with the situation, after which the harassment of journalists for cooperation with foreign media was temporarily suspended. However, since January 2016 this practice has been resumed in the Homiel region. In the first four months of 2016 the courts held journalists from Homiel Kantantsin Zhukouski and Larysa Shchyrakova administratively liable ten times for cooperation with the TV channel Belsat (Poland), fining them for a total amount equivalent to 3,500 Euro. In May 2016, as the elections to the House of Representatives approached, the persecution of freelance journalists again stopped and until the end of 2016 new reports on administrative violations were no longer drawn up for cooperation with foreign media. However, in 2017, the situation changed again for the worse. Among the positive changes in the media sector in 2016 (which unfortunately also proved to be unsustainable), the Belarusian Association of Journalists recorded a decrease in the number of detentions of journalists: thirteen detentions against nineteen in 2015 (and 167 in the crisis year of 2011). On the other hand, in 2016 there were unpunished cases of use of physical violence against journalists by police. The most resonant of them was the detention and beating in the courthouse of Paviel Dabravolski, the journalist of the popular online portal tut.by. On the same day, Paviel Dabravolski was held administratively liable and fined for resisting police officers and hooliganism. He officially recorded the beatings and applied to the Investigative Committee, but the latter refused to instigate criminal proceedings against the police officers. Arrests and criminal prosecution of Belarusian citizens for online publications caused serious concern in 2016. During the year, four bloggers and media columnists were arrested in connection with the initiation of criminal cases against them on charges of inciting hatred on the grounds of race, nationality, religion, language or other social affiliation (Article 130 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Belarus). Eduard Palchys, the founder of the web site 1863х.com, was convicted on 26 October 2016 to one year and nine months of restriction of freedom without referral to a correctional institution and released in the courtroom. By that time, he spent about ten months in custody. The web site 1863.com was created about two years earlier; it sharply criticised the "Russian world" and the Russian authorities. In December 2016, Yuri Pavlovets, Dmitry Alimkin and Sergey Shiptenko were imprisoned. Their materials on Russian web sites Regnum, Lenta.ru, EADaily contained criticism of Belarusian statehood and, according to the Belarusian authorities, could sow discord between the peoples of Russia and Belarus. The criminal proceedings were initiated on the 3 Mass-media in Belarus: 2016 recommendation of the Ministry of Information on the basis of the conclusion of the National Expert Commission on Extremism (operating under the Ministry of Information), which stated that some articles of the authors could contain incitement to national hatred or discord. The Ministry of Information continued the practice of extrajudicial sanctions against the media. Eight printed media outlets and eight online resources received warnings. Since the receipt of two warnings during the year can create grounds for stopping the publication of the media, such measures have a serious "cooling effect". Forty-seven web sites were also blocked (twenty-one for distributing information aimed at selling narcotic drugs, thirteen for distributing extremist materials, eleven for improper advertising, and two for promoting pornography, violence and cruelty). Subsequently, access to one site was restored. The policy of discrimination against a number of independent media by the state-owned Belposhta and Belsajuzdruk distribution systems continued. These companies dominate the subscription and retail media distribution markets. Problems with the distribution of independent printed media in state networks arose on the eve of the presidential election campaign in 2006. Then, Belposhta refused to include in the subscription catalogues, and Belsajuzdruk branches - to sell about twenty independent socio-political newspapers through their newsstands. As a result, many of the non-state printed media ceased to appear. In 2016, at least eight registered socio- political newspapers, which remained on the market, continued to face difficulties in distribution. At the same time, the subscription to the state press was conducted with the use of an administrative resource; budgetary financing of the state media continued. Thus, the republican budget for 2017 provides for the allocation of 97,666,846 BYN (about 46.2 million Euro) to finance state media. This is about 1.4 million Euro more than in 2016. Financing is allocated by the government on a non-competitive and non-transparent basis. 4 Mass-media in Belarus: 2016 CHANGES IN LEGISLATION On 11 May 2016, the Law of the Republic of Belarus “On Introduction of Changes and Amendments to Certain Laws of the Republic of Belarus” was adopted. A) The Law of the Republic of Belarus “On the Rights of the Child” was supplemented by Chapter 4-1 “Protecting children from the information that is harmful to their health and development”. It provides for children’s right to protection from the information that is harmful to their health and development (Article 37-1). It includes the information: − inducing desire to consume alcoholic and low alcoholic drinks, beer, narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances, their analogues, toxic or other intoxicating substances, and tobacco products; − inciting to the commission of a crime or other socially dangerous act including the engagement in prostitution, begging, vagrancy, gambling, committing acts involving the production and distribution of pornographic materials or objects of pornographic nature; − positively assessing a crime or idealizing criminals, encouraging the behaviour that infringes on human dignity, including the commission of violent acts against people or animals; − displaying the bullying of a person or a group of people or their humiliation in connection with ethnic origin, nationality, race, religion, language, gender, belief or views, social status or illness; − encouraging or positively assessing cruelty, physical, mental or sexual violence, sexual exploitation, and sexual relations involving children; − encouraging the infliction of bodily harm or suicide, describing the means or circumstances of suicide; − containing technics or other materials about the ways to manufacture objects that are dangerous for life and health of people and about their use; − encouraging habits that are contrary to the formation of a healthy lifestyle; − containing obscene words and expressions; −