Report on the Situation of the Press in Moldova in 2010
This report includes a brief description of all the important events that characterized the situation of the press in Moldova in 2010. Also, the report includes one section dedicated to the situation of the press in the Transnistrian region. Independent Journalism Center
Contents1:
I. Developments and trends in the Moldovan press in 2010
• Press freedom in Moldova according to international reports • Political context • Media in electoral campaigns • Media market
II. Public broadcasting sector
• Broadcasting Coordinating Council • Public broadcaster Teleradio-Moldova • Regional public broadcaster Teleradio-Găgăuzia • Teleradio Bălţi
III. Freedom of expression and defamation in 2010
• Legislative developments • Defamation cases against media • Violations of journalists’ rights
IV. Press freedom in Transnistria
V. Conclusions and predictions for 2011
1 The report is available in Romanian, English and Russian. It was prepared by Doina Costin, Coordinator of the Department for Media Policy and Law of the Independent Journalism Center, with the financial support of Civil Rights Defenders, Sweden. The opinions expressed in this report are those of the Independent Journalism Center and do not necessarily represent those of the sponsors.
2
Independent Journalism Center
“Mass media has the task of informing the public about issues of public interest and of performing, in accordance with its responsibilities, journalistic investigations on issues of public interest.” (Article 4 paragraph 2 of the Law on Freedom of Expression no. 64/2010)
I. Developments and trends in the Moldovan press in 2010
Press freedom in Moldova according to international reports
According to the report “Press Freedom Index 2010” published by Reporters sans Frontières (RsF) in October 2010, the Republic of Moldova has climbed 39 positions since last year’s press freedom ranking. In 2010, Moldova ranked 75th with a score of 19.13 compared with the rank of 114th and a score of 33.75 in 2009. This year Moldova ranked only two positions behind Greece and four positions behind Bulgaria. Romania was 22 positions higher than Moldova. The first five positions in the ranking of world press freedom according to the RsF report were held by Finland, Iceland, Holland, Norway and Sweden. Turkmenistan (176), North Korea (177) and Eritrea (178) were the countries with the worst scores regarding the situation of the press.
In 2009, both the RsF report and the report published by Freedom House noted a decline in press freedom and in democracy in Moldova, but in 2010 press freedom indicators improved visibly, a trend that was registered in all reports measuring press freedom in Moldova. This trend is primarily due to the diversification of media sources, to encouragement of media competition, to the adoption of laws favorable to the freedom of expression and to the decrease in cases of aggression registered against media professionals.
Political context
The political situation in the country in 2010 was absolutely different from what it had been for the previous decade. The changes in the political arena that began in late 2009 continued to surprise and sometimes invigorate society in 2010; however, it was all somewhat precarious because of the imminence of new early parliamentary elections. In the course of the year, Moldova experienced the initiation of several reforms. It is true that not all of these beginnings had tangible effects or were received with enthusiasm by all social groups.
In 2009 after Parliament failed to elect the President of the Republic of Moldova, the country was governed for almost a year and a half by an interim president. The year 2010 saw several attempts to solve the problem of failing to elect the president and of avoiding new parliamentary elections. Initially an attempt was made to change the procedure for electing the country’s president. There were two initiatives: one from the ruling Alliance for European Integration (AEI) and the second from the opposition—the Party of Communists—(PCRM). Neither of these initiatives for modifying the Constitution was supported by a sufficient number of votes. As a result, on September 5, 2010 the Republic of Moldova experienced the first constitutional referendum in its history aimed at directly involving voters in changing Article 78 of the Constitution of Moldova so that the president of the country could be elected by a direct vote of the citizens, thus ending the political crisis that affected the country. The referendum, however, failed owing to insufficient participation in voting, and the dissolution of Parliament became inevitable. 3
Independent Journalism Center
New early parliamentary elections took place on November 28, 2010. The parties forming the AEI chose to participate in the electoral campaign separately. While at the beginning of the campaign citizens had the impression that former components of the AEI maintained solidarity and a common strategy, with the intensification of competition, the messages of some parties became visibly oriented against former partners. That caused difficulty for voters who in many cases would have voted for the AEI rather than for a separate component of the Alliance. The race for early parliamentary elections was joined by 20 political parties and by the same number of independent candidates.
The Election Code was amended in 2010, and the threshold for parties to enter Parliament was lowered from 6% to 4%. Also, the amended Code included permission for electoral blocks, excluded the interdiction against candidates with dual citizenship in Parliament and amended provisions regarding coverage of the electoral campaign by mass media in order to increase freedom and to facilitate coverage among others. Due to these changes and to the interest of authorities in encouraging competition and participation in voting, the campaign for early parliamentary elections of November 28, 2010 was different from previous ones. Civil society and the electoral authorities launched and promoted educational campaigns in the press, broadcast media organized interactive electoral debates and competitors used novel campaigning approaches.
The results of the November elections were not a lot different than those of the early parliamentary elections of July 29, 2009. Apart from minor dissimilarities, the outcome was again the inability to form a parliamentary majority able to elect the country’s president.
After the elections of November 28, four parties were represented in Parliament: PCRM with 39.34% of the votes and 42 seats, the Liberal Democratic Party (LDPM) with 29.42% of the votes and 32 seats, the Democratic Party (DPM) with 12.70% of the votes and 15 seats and the Liberal Party (LP) with 9.96% of the votes and 12 seats. The other 35 candidates and parties together garnered 8.58% of the votes which were distributed among the four winners equally. The rate of participation in voting was 63.37%.2
The most spectacular leap in elections was made by LDPM which gathered about 13% more votes than in July 2009 thus obtaining 14 additional seats in the 19th Parliament. This party’s rating increased during the last year and a half when its leader held the position of Prime Minister. During his mandate in government, Vald Filat ranked at the top of politicians most trusted by citizens3 with 18.2% of respondents’ preferences.
Our Moldova Alliance (OMA), on the contrary, did not manage to pass the threshold for representation gathering only 2.05% of the votes and was the only one of the four parties in the original AEI formed after the elections of July 2009 that was left out of Parliament in November 2010 and thus out of AEI-2. Currently, AEI-2 holds 59 seats; 61 votes are necessary to elect a president.
In the first months of 2011, Parliament must elect a president in not more than two attempts. If it fails to do so, the ensuing political crisis will jeopardize any democratic efforts of the Executive Branch. The year 2011 will also witness local elections in Moldova, including in Chişinău
2 http://www.e-democracy.md/elections/parliamentary/2010/results/ 3 Barometrul Opiniei Publice (BOP), noiembrie 2010, http://ipp.md/libview.php?l=ro&idc=156&id=558&parent=0
4
Independent Journalism Center
Municipality which has been governed for the past four years by Mayor Dorin Chistoaca, Vice- President of LP.
Mass media in electoral campaigns
In June 2010, the Moldovan Parliament adopted a number of modifications to the Electoral Code. Several articles referring to media involvement in electoral campaigns were amended, and some new provisions were introduced. In general, these amendments were deliberated with civil society, political parties, mass media and experts in the field. Civil society suggested several amendments, 80% of which were included in the draft law on the modification of the Code. Among others, they included the following: (i) provisions regarding electoral advertizing and coverage of the electoral campaign by mass media were split; (ii) a new article was included that contains the principles for media activity during electoral campaigns; (iii) guarantees were included both for electoral competitors and their access to media and for editorial independence and transparency among broadcasters and (iv) the responsibilities of the Broadcasting Coordinating Council (BCC) were separated from those of the Central Electoral Commission (CEC).
Some of these modifications to the Electoral Code, however, contradict certain provisions of the Broadcasting Code. The authors of modifications to the Electoral Code excluded the BCC’s redundant task of adopting a concept on coverage at the beginning of the electoral campaign since the CEC’s adoption of Regulations on the Coverage of the Electoral Campaign by the Mass Media was sufficient in this regard. But while this responsibility of the BCC was excluded from the Electoral Code, it nonetheless remained in the Broadcasting Code creating legislative inconsistency. Also, a new provision in the Electoral Code refers to broadcasters’ obligations to submit statements to the BCC regarding their owners and their editorial policies during the campaign which practically compels broadcasters to increase their transparency. Yet this article conflicts with a provision in the Broadcasting Code that compels broadcasters at the beginning of an electoral campaign to submit to the BCC concepts on coverage only. There are more provisions in the Broadcasting Code that are inconsistent with the the Electoral Code.
In the new political situation in 2010 and in the context of more favorable conditions for the press, the media had to pass exams on the topic “behavior during electoral campaigns” during the campaign for the referendum on September 5, 2010 and during the campaign for early parliamentary elections of November 28, 2010.
The attention of national and international monitors on media behavior during the campaign for the constitutional referendum was clearly less thorough than the monitoring during other campaigns. A total of 48 broadcasters covered the campaign, and the BCC published two decisions on coverage—on August 25 and September 3—that were not genuine monitoring since they did not analyze the quality of the media products during the campaign but simply summarized the amount of air time dedicated to participating parties. At the same time, the BCC published three decisions sanctioning public TV station Moldova 1, Publika TV and NIT TV for violating electoral legislation. Civil society criticized4 the BCC decision to sanction the first two stations because they had allegedly suggested on the day of the referendum that citizens should vote and for broadcasting an educational video. NIT was sanctioned with a fine for “non-observance of the principle of informing from several sources and distortion of reality in topics presented in the informational program ‘Curier’.”5
4 http://www.ijc.md/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=544 5 http://www.ijc.md/Publicatii/mlu/Buletin_44_ro.pdf 5
Independent Journalism Center
In contrast, the Electronic Broadcasters Association (APEL) found that the public broadcaster Teleradio-Moldova had for the first time since 2003 covered a campaing (in this case the constitutional referendum) by observing legal norms and professional standards in its information programs while Teleradio-Găgăuzia, on the other hand, mainly applied the same flawed coverage practices used in previous campaigns.6
Media behavior was thoroughly monitored during the campaign for early parliamentary elections by the Independent Journalism Center (IJC), by the Association of Independent Press (API), by APEL, by the members of the Civic Coalition for Free and Fair Elections—Coalition 2009, by the Election Observation Mission of the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE)/Office for Democratic Inistutitons and Human Rights (ODIHR), by the BCC and by Teleradio-Moldova which monitored its own programs. In addition, specific monitoring reports were published by the Anticorruption Alliance7 and the Child Rights Information Center of Moldova (CRIC).8
In all, 45 broadcasting outlets covered the campaign, 26 of which were TV stations. According to Article 641 of the Electoral Code, broadcasting outlets with national coverage were compelled to offer 5 minutes of TV time and 10 minutes of radio time gratuitously each week to each of the electoral competitors to present their programs, and public media stations had to offer 1 additional minute per day for electoral advertizing. Also, media outlets with national coverage reporting on the campaign were compelled to organize debates.
IJC and API monitored 7 TV stations (Moldova 1, Prime TV, 2 Plus, NIT, N4, Jurnal TV, Publika TV), 3 radio stations (Radio Moldova, Prime FM, Vocea Basarabiei), 12 local and national periodicals (Moldova Suverană, Nezavisimaia Moldova, Flux, Jurnal de Chişinău, Timpul de dimineaţă, Komsomolskaia pravda v Moldove, Evenimentul Zilei, Panorama, Golos Bălţi (Bălţi), Vesti Gagauzii (Comrat), Cuvântul (Rezina), Gazeta de Sud (Cimişlia)), 2 press agencies (Moldpres, Infotag) and 2 online portals (www.omg.md, www.unimedia.md) during the electoral campaign.
According to the monitoring reports of these two non-government media organizations and to the reports by OSCE/ODIHR and the BCC, the national public broadcasting institution Teleradio- Moldova made significant progress regarding the observance of the principle of providing objective, pluralistic and accurate information to voters. Monitors found a similar tendency among other broadcasters with national coverage except for NIT TV, which campaigned intensely for the PCRM defying legal and professional provisions.
According to the “Final Report on Media Monitoring of the Election Campaign for the Early Parliamentary Elections,”9 published by IJC, NIT behaved like a partisan TV station: journalists accompanied PCRM candidates to most meetings with voters and openly campaigned for this competitor. “NIT offered the most limited range of political opinions and failed to show real efforts to present the general range of political subjects in a fair, balanced and impartial manner.”10 Because of this incorrect editorial policy, the BCC punished NIT three times during the campaign.
Media market
6 http://www.apel.md/public/upload/md_Raport_APEL_monitorizare_Referendum_2010.pdf 7 http://www.e-democracy.md/files/elections/parliamentary2010/report-aac-elections-2010-ro.pdf 8 http://www.e-democracy.md/files/elections/parliamentary2010/report-ciddc-elections-2010-ro.pdf 9 http://www.ijc.md/Publicatii/monitorizare/Report_elect_final_en.pdf 10http://cca.md/sites/default/files/Raportul_nr._III__final__monitorizarea_reflectarii_campaniei_electorale_alegeri_parl amentare_anticipate_28.11.2010.pdf 6
Independent Journalism Center
In 2009 competition in the Moldovan media market intensified. Indeed, with the change of government, some important segments of society shook off their shackles. Anyone in the country or abroad could notice this phenomenon with the naked eye, especially on TV and online media. Print media, in contrast, seemed to lose ground in the media market though 2010 saw the launch of new periodical publications. Four newspapers, three in Romanian and one in Russian, appeared that year: Evenimentul Zilei, Gazeta de Sud, which is in fact the new name Business Info out of Cimişlia, Adevărul and Novosti dnya.
Evenimentul Zilei owned by Ltd. Evenimentul Zilei denied any affiliation with political entities. Whereas the editorial policy and the belonging to any of the trusts existing in the country remain unspecified.11 Novosti dnya was equally non-transparent though its website at least shows the names of the journalists on the editorial board.12 Adevărul, launched in December 2010, is part of the Adevărul Holding Trust of Romania held by Dinu Patriciu. The newspaper declared its detachment from the editorial policy of the paper with the same name published in Bucharest. The team of Adevărul/Moldova is made up of 14 journalists from the Republic of Moldova and from Romania. Previously, Dinu Patriciu had announced that he would also launch the newspapers Click and Blik (in Russian) in Moldova in 2010.13
Two TV news stations also started up in 2010: Jurnal TV and Publika TV. The former was launched on March 5, 2010 with a German investment of about 1 million euros.14 Jurnal TV is a part of Jurnal Trust Media that in addition to the TV station holds the Jurnal FM radio station; the periodical publications Jurnal de Chişinău with its online version www.ziar.jurnal.md, the tabloid Apropo with its electronic version www.apropomagazin.md and the economic publication ECOnomist (online page www.eco.md); the online news portal www.jurnal.md and the advertizing agency Reforma Advertising. Publika TV, which initially was worth 4.5 million euros, was launched on April 7, 2010 and is a part of Realitatea Caţavencu Media Holding in Romania. The same media trust launched the Publika FM radio station which so far has been relaying programs from the TV station.
These two TV news stations stunned the Moldovan media market. The hourly news bulletins, talk shows in Romanian and Russian, political debates, entertainment programs and the many other offerings that fill the schedules of these two stations reanimated local media products and revitalized the media market in general. Their emergence initiated migrations of journalists among outlets; it increased the “market price” of the profession which occasionally resulted in a crisis at some newspapers, press agencies and TV and radio stations. The outcome has benefited consumers of information.
If prior to 2010 the Moldovan public had not seen any genuine TV debates, this year registered an excess of them. Also this year, Prime TV which relays Moscow public station Pervy Kanal in Moldova made large investments in its own productions. Prime launched a series of its own news bulletins, debates and entertainment talk shows in Romanian which caused dissatisfaction among Russian media consumers and Russian authorities as Pervy Kanal’s relay time was decreased. In protest, 500 Moldovan veterans addressed an open letter to Russian authorities and to Pervy Kanal in which they accused Prime of broadcasting only 40% of the authentic Russian product.15
In November 2010, the Romanian TV station TVR1 resumed relays in Moldova on station 2 Plus, a station with national coverage. TVR1 held a broadcasting license for this frequency that was
11 http://evenimentul.md/?l=ro&a=7 12 http://daynews.md/?l=ru&a=9 13 December 6, 2010, Monitor Media agency 14 Jurnal de Chişinău, October 6, 2009 15 October 6, 2010, Monitor Media agency 7
Independent Journalism Center valid until 2011, but the BCC withdrew TVR1’s license in 2007 and awarded it to TLFM International, the owner of 2 Plus. TVR1 immediately appealed the BCC’s decision but lost the case in all instances in the courts of Moldova. In August 2008, TVR1 filed an application at the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) claming the violation of their right to free expression and of their right to property. After the change in government in Moldova, TVR1 and the Moldovan authorities negotiated an amicable settlement of the case.
Four radio stations were launched in 2010 in Moldova: Radio Sport, Publika FM, Prime FM, and Aquarelle FM. Radio Sport is the first specialized sports radio station in Moldova and broadcasts in Chişinău; Publika FM, a component of the Realitatea Caţevencu Trust, has declared itself to be a news, analysis and comment station; Prime FM, part of Prime Holding, is in fact the new face of the former municipal radio station Antena C and Aquarelle FM is a station dedicated to women.
Another entity launched in 2010 in Chişinău was the Media Image Group, a media monitoring and content research company. Media Image Group has its headquarters in Romania and provides professional services for media monitoring and content analysis to government organizations, public companies, multinational corporations and non-government organizations. The company employs 15 professionals in Chişinău who with their colleagues in Bucharest provide daily monitoring reports on print media and TV news bulletins.
According to data published by the BCC, at present 50 TV stations, 48 radio stations and 180 service providers operate in Moldova. Of these, 25 TV stations and 18 radio stations have their headquarters and broadcast outside Chişinău. As for print media, according to data of the National Bureau of Statistics, in 2008 518 editorial offices (magazines, periodical publications and newspapers), were in operation in the country while www.moldpres.md indicates 170 periodical publications were published in Moldova that year. Despite the lack of statistical data regarding the number of online media outlets, over 20 news portals can be accessed in Moldova. Also, at present there are eight functional news agencies. In addition to these media that operate exclusively online, the majority of the TV, radio and print media outlets manage their own web pages.
Online media continued to develop in 2010. This trend was evident in the amount of advertising directed to these organizations. In Moldova, similar to worldwide trends, online media advertising is the most popular form among advertising agencies. According to the portal totul.md, prices for banner ads have dropped and are now 0.55–3.00 euros per 1000 postings, while average prices in Europe, Russia and Romania are over USD 10 per 1000 postings. Experts forecast a 2% drop in advertising prices in magazines and newspapers and an approximately three-fold increase in prices for online advertising from 2010 to 2013.
The growth in the TV and Internet market was accompanied by a loss among press agencies of subscribers because access to promptly produced, high-quality information became easier on TV stations and informational web sources.
8
Independent Journalism Center
II. Public broadcasting sector
The situation in public broadcasting remained virtually unchanged in 2010. Except for the progress made by Teleradio-Moldova, the public broadcasting sector still bears the marks of a corruptible and obsolete system.
Broadcasting Coordinating Council
Although in 2010 the BCC apparently managed to recapture some of its lost authority in the field, this institution remains powerless in the face of political, economic and other interests in the broadcasting market. The institution has given the impression it is recovering and healing, but the democratic approach of some BCC members is doubtful as until recently their decisions brought bursts of criticism from society. After the change of government, they have “seriously” assumed their mission as representatives of the public interest. If overall the BBC’s activity in 2010 was far more professional than in previous years, the peculiarities related to the process of regulation confirm the anachronistic nature of this institution. How can the BCC impose its authority on broadcasters and gain the trust of society as long as NIT TV remains invincible in its defiance of democratic principles?
In 2010, the BCC had to pass several exams to prove its dedication to rehabilitation: attitude during electoral campaigns, relations with the new government, relations with broadcasters and authority over them, decision making, openness to civil society and resistance to pressure from interest groups.
The BCC’s performance differed during the two campaigns of 2010. It is certain that the BCC failed the exam during the campaign for the constitutional referendum in September reverting to passivity and inefficiency. The Coalition for Free and Fair Elections issued a press release criticizing the BCC for not performing its duties in full compliance with legal provisions because: a) it did not make public the list of national broadcasters within the term stipulated by the electoral legislation; b) it failed to ensure that broadcasters comply with article 641 paragraph (2) of the Electoral Code by which they are compelled to submit to the BCC in the first week of the electoral period a statement regarding their editorial policy for the campaign in which they must indicate the name(s) of the outlet’s owner(s); c) it adopted a superficial and negligent attitude on the content of the statements on editorial policy and e) it failed to submit monitoring reports to the CEC every two weeks according to the provisions of the Electoral Code.16
On the other hand, during the campaign for early parliamentary elections in November, the BCC managed to raise the interest of civil society and even to involve it in some activities. As part of the assistance program launched by the Council of Europe, foreign experts developed a methodology for the BCC and Teleradio-Moldova for monitoring programs broadcast that the BCC adopted in Decision no. 129/29.10.2010. Also, Marek Mracka of the Slovak organization MEMO 98, one of the experts provided by the Council of Europe, assisted the BCC with monitoring the coverage of the campaign by broadcasters with national coverage. In addition, with the assistance of foreign experts and the involvement of media NGOs, the BCC developed a common form for monitoring adopted at one of the BCC sessions. During the campaign, the BCC published four monitoring reports on national broadcasters.
16 http://www.e-democracy.md/files/elections/referendum2010/pr-coalition-19-08-2010-ro.pdf 9
Independent Journalism Center
Both the reports and the monitoring methodology complied with standards of professionalism in the field. It is very important that the BCC managed to professionally monitor the products of the broadcasters with the greatest coverage, but monitoring must produce the required effects since the BCC not only monitors but also controls products. All the monitoring reports confirmed the illegal behavior of TV station NIT with national coverage, at least during the electoral campaign, but the BCC proved to be absolutely helpless regarding these violations. Except for applying minor sanctions, the BCC failed to compel the broadcaster to make corrections in its editorial policy in accordance with the law and with ethical principles. On the contrary, the media campaign against the BCC and the public authorities led by NIT and the PCRM managed to some extent to intimidate BCC members. So, on the topic “exercising authority in relations with broadcasters,” the BCC failed to make a passing grade in 2010.
For the first time in the history of the BCC, in June 2010 the Parliament of the Republic of Moldova rejected the institution’s annual report for the previous year because it had failed in its mission as guarantor of the public interest. According to the Broadcasting Code, if Parliament rejects the annual report, the BCC must present a rehabilitation plan. Nevertheless, Parliament failed to control the BCC because the Broadcasting Code does not provide for any mechanisms to exercise control but only offers the possibility to reject the BCC’s annual report, a decision that does not have any consequences.
As for the BCC’s resistance of political or economic influences, the regulatory institution failed to prove its independence, especially during the contest for radio frequencies in October 2010. On October 19, 10 frequencies of the 11 in the contest were awarded to a single broadcaster—VDT— virtually unknown in the broadcasting market of Moldov at the expense of two important stations, Jurnal TV and Publika TV. Later, VDT renounced eight of the frequencies. At the same session, the BCC granted four frequencies out of seven to be awarded to a single radio station, Maestro FM. The fact alone that all the TV frequencies were granted to a single broadcaster raises doubts as to the impartiality of the BCC’s decision making and the independence of this institution from political and economic influences.
In the first months of 2011, Parliament will appoint three new members to the BCC to fill the three positions vacated in November 2010. The positions in question were previously held by Carmelia Albu, Valeriu Soltan and Ruslan Plesca.
Public broadcaster Teleradio-Moldova
The progress shown by the public broadcaster in 2010 regarding the independence of its editorial policy and fairness and pluralism in covering events was noted by both Moldovan society and international observers. The BCC and civil society reports on monitoring the behavior of the national public broadcaster during the campaigns in 2010 demonstrated this company’s regard for professional media standards.
In 2010, the public institution demonstrated a visible detachment from an editorial policy favorable to the governing power. This progress was confirmed by monitoring studies and encouraged by investments of European organizations in this institution. The visible detachment from the practice of serving the government was possible due to the appointment of six new members of the Supervisory Board (SB) as well as to the appointment of a new administration.
At the end of 2009, the SB of Teleradio-Moldova dismissed the company’s president and two directors because they had failed to ensure a pluralism of opinions and had transformed the institution into a political instrument. In early 2010, a new administration was chosen. The public contest for the three vacancies had 27 candidates and resulted in the election of Constantin Marin 10
Independent Journalism Center for the position of president, Angela Sirbu for the position of Director of TV Moldova 1 and Alexandru Dorogan for the position of Director of Radio Moldova.
The appointment of the new administration for the public broadcaster was followed by contests for some key positions at the TV and radio stations. Thus, a new editor/presenter at Radio Moldova and a new Director of the News Department at Moldova 1 were hired. Also, in March 2010 a new contest was organized for the positions of special correspondent, news producers and editors/presenters.
Thus, APEL remarked in a report on monitoring the coverage of the campaign for early parliamentary elections17 that, “Teleradio-Moldova in its news programs has significantly recovered the public character of broadcasting…,” and that, “It adequately used the opportunities offered by the legislative acts referring to media coverage of elections.” In its monitoring reports for the same period,18 IJC remarked that Moldova 1 and Radio Moldova behaved differently than they had done during the electoral campaigns of 2009. They renounced the practice of beginning news bulletins with items on the central administration and governing parties and managed to provide a pluralism of opinions in the news. The BCC19 remarked that from the perspective of legal requirements, there were no cases raising concern as to the modality in which the electoral campaign was covered in news programs on public TV station Moldova 1. Finally, the OSCE/ODIHR mission20 concluded in its preliminary report on the early parliamentary elections that, “Overall, the public television station observed the legal requirement of ensuring accurate, balanced and impartial electoral coverage for competitors.”
In light of last year’s progress at Teleradio-Moldova regarding independence and professionalism, foreign donors and European institutions showed their interest in supporting this progress through training personnel and technical equipment projects. In November 2010, the Government of the Slovak Republic donated equipment to Teleradio-Moldova worth 100,000 euros. Since July 2010, Teleradio-Moldova has been receiving logistics and training assistance as part of a project implemented by IJC in Chişinău in partnership with the IJC in Bucharest.
In July 2010, the SB approved the development strategy for Teleradio-Moldova for 2010–2015 which contains an analysis of the company’s current situation and a series of development suggestions. The strategy was developed by Boris Bergant, a radio and television expert from the European Union, with the financial support of United Nations Development Programme/ Moldova.
In November 2010, a new contest was organized to fill the position of SB member Igor Muntean after his appointment as Ambassador to the United States of America. He had held the position since 2006. According to the Broadcasting Code, the BCC must select two candidates for each position on the SB and submit its proposal to a specialized parliamentary commission. However, because of Parliament’s dissolution in September 2010, the appointment of a new member of the SB was postponed until the formation of a new Parliament following the elections of November 28.
Regional public broadcaster Teleradio-Găgăuzia
Teleradio-Găgăuzia (TRG) made no progress as a public institution in 2010. On the contrary, in contrast with the development of Teleradio-Moldova, the failure of the regional public
17 http://www.e-democracy.md/files/elections/parliamentary2010/report-apel-elections-2010-3-ro.pdf 18 http://www.ijc.md/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=568&Itemid=1 19 http://www.cca.md/sites/default/files/Raport_de_monitorizare_perioada_18_-_29_octombrie_2010__.pdf 20 http://www.osce.org/odihr/elections/73835 11
Independent Journalism Center broadcaster was even more evident. According to monitoring reports, the editorial policy of this company is far from professional standards, and the public interest that it is supposed to represent has been replaced by the authorities’ interests.
APEL monitored TRG news programs both during the campaign for early parliamentary elections in November and during the campaign for the election of the Bashkan. According to APEL’s report on the November 1–28 campaign,21 TRG covered the events of electoral competitors disproportionately from the point of view of frequency and duration and neglected the educational function of a public broadcaster during a campaign. In addition, electoral debates violated legal norms.
While monitoring TRG during the campaign for the election of the Bashkan showed a better organization of electoral debates compared with that for parliamentary elections, the broadcaster provided no free air time to competitors to present their programs or to advertize. 22
Vitalie Gaidarji, director of TRG, declared on November 8 at a press conference that the public television station in Gaguzia does political campaigning in favor of the PCRM. He said that Ecaterina Jecova, president of the company, controls its editorial policy which is favorable to the PCRM. According to Info-Prim Neo News Agency, 23 Gaidarji declared that since May 2010 he had been forbidden to appear in the station’s broadcasts and that Jecova was directly involved in organizing electoral debates and had prohibited him from asking uncomfortable questions to Communist candidates during the electoral campaign of 2009. Mr. Gaidarji had been dismissed in 2007, but in November 2008 he was restored on the basis of a court decision.
In November 2010, the SB of TRG dismissed Ecaterina Jecova as president. According to the INFOTAG Press Agency,24 the decision was made behind closed doors in the absence of the media, and the reason for the dismissal was a holiday leave uncoordinated with the SB. With five SB members voting, Maria Parfionova, the director of the public radio station, was elected as interim president of the company. The leadership of the SB expressed their dissatisfaction with the fact that the television station broadcasts few reports on remote villages of Gagauzia.
Since spring 2009, the SB of TRG had been incomplete with only five members. Civil society blamed the poor operation of the company on this fact, so in the autumn of 2010 the Popular Assembly appointed four new members: Denis Pintea, Alexandru Gheorghita, Nicolae Sucanov and Fiodor Kirovici. In connection with the dismissal of the TRG president in November, the Union of Young Journalists Opinion-MD issued a press release in which they protested against the pressure exercised on the editorial staff by the new composition of the SB and by the political forces controlling the latter. Their declaration claimed that by dismissing Ecaterina Jecova the SB, which had held no sessions for over six months, wished to subject the company to private interests.25
Teleradio Bălţi
At the end of 2009, the BCC compelled the Bălţi Mayoralty to divest itself of Teleradio Bălţi (TVB) before February 1, 2010. The Bălţi authorities decided to put TVB up for privatization on December 3, 2009 by announcing an investment contest, but no interested persons registered at the privatization commission. An additional four contests for TVB’s privatization failed, the last taking
21 http://www.apel.md/public/upload/md_Raport_Monitorizare_APEL_11_2010.pdf 22 http://info-prim.md/?a=10&x=&ay=35975 23 http://info-prim.md/?a=10&x=&ay=34603 24 http://www.azi.md/ro/story/14671 25 http://www.newsmoldova.ru/newsline/20101116/188445639.html 12
Independent Journalism Center place on June 22, 2010. In the first three contests the Bălţi Mayoralty—TVB’s owner—maintained the price for TVB’s assets at 1.5 million lei. Later the price was lowered to 900,000 lei, and the new owner would have to make investments in the amount 0.5 million lei in 2010 and 2011.26
Meanwhile, on April 12, 2010 TVB’s broadcasting license expired, but the outlet continued to broadcast. Although TVB’s broadcasting license had expired and the company was up for privatization, the Bălţi Municipal Council decided in June to allocate approximately 160,000 lei to TVB to cover expenses for producing programs on the activities of the mayor’s office. In September 2010, the Communist majority on the Municipal Council voted for the allocation of other 123,500 lei “to pay for services provided by TVB” about the activities of the mayor’s office. For services provided by TVB in September-October, the Municipal Council allotted about 82,000 lei.27 According to the Monitor Media Agency, “Local observers consider that the Mayoralty and the Municipal Council controlled by a Communist majority have levers to influence the editorial policy of the TV station.”28
A number of councilors on the Bălţi Municipal Council expressed their displeasure with TVB’s activities, and in January 2010, 11 signed a declaration condemning the editorial policy of TVB which favored and promoted PCRM’s interests. According to those councilors, in news bulletins TVB used biased news from press agencies close to the PCRM, especially OMEGA Agency, and non-Communist councilors had no access to the TV station.29
After the four contests for privatization failed, the Bălţi administration declared that they would forward a request to Parliament asking for a modification of the Broadcasting Code so that TVB could become a regional company with the status of a public media institution. According to the Monitor Media Agency, however, on December 27 the Bălţi Municipal Council decided to liquidate TVB after the BCC on November 9, 2010 prohibited it from broadcasting because its license had expired. The liquidation process will begin on March 1, 2011.30
26 May 06, 2010, Monitor Media agency 27 September 30, 2010, December 09, 2010, Monitor Media agency 28 Monitor Media agency, idem. 29 January 22, 2010, Monitor Media agency 30 December 27, 2010, Monitor Media agency 13
Independent Journalism Center
III. Freedom of expression and defamation in 2010
Legislative developments
In addition to the amendments to the Electoral Code mentioned in the first section, after a considerable effort by the IJC over several years, in April 2010 the Law on the Freedom of Expression was adopted and entered into force in October 2010. This law was a compilation of European standards on the freedom of expression and on protecting privacy. It contains provisions regarding the extension of the right to free expression, specific aspects of freedom of expression for mass media outlets, prohibition against censorship, the freedom to criticize the state and public authorities, the right for respect for privat life including the privacy of public persons, the presumption of innocence in relation with the freedom of expression and the protection of sources among others.
The law introduces a pretrial procedure for solving cases of defamation (by submitting a preliminary claim to the information disseminator). Also, it introduces additional requirements regarding the application for summons and new provisions on the modality for calculating the state tax for examining claims. The law limits injunctions that can be issued by the court in defamation cases, clarifies probation and the presumptions applicable in such cases and explains the modality for publishing refutations and replies and the modality for assessing moral damages caused to individuals and legal entities and the circumstances that exclude responsibility for defamation.
As for the implications of this law for the media, it protects the confidentiality of sources so that an outlet that disseminated information to the public obtained from confidential sources cannot be forced to disclose the source’s identity at civil or at misdemeanor proceedings. At the same time, an editorial office’s refusal to disclose the source of information does not deprive it of the other guarantees of a defendant in judicial proceedings. In addition, in criminal proceedings the criminal prosecution body or the court, under conditions of the law, can compel the media outlet to disclose the source of information only if several conditions are met. Also, the law imposes deadlines after which it is impossible to claim moral damages. Furthermore, if a person who considers him/herself defamed fails to submit claims for compensation for moral damage in a preliminary application, he/she cannot claim them in the application for summons.
The Law on the Freedom of Expression will contribute to an adequate examination of defamation cases. Proper application of the law will virtually remove the possibility of violating the right to freedom of expression which will significantly reduce convictions of Moldova at the ECHR.
Another law adopted in 2010 is the Law on Denationalization of Public Periodical Publications that will enter into force in early 2011. This law is an important step toward increasing editorial independence and media freedom in the Republic of Moldova in which there are over 40 (state- owned) national, regional or local periodical publications that are financially and editorially controlled by their founders. The law sets modalities and procedures for denationalizing public publications by reorganization, privatization and liquidation. It aims to: a) guarantee, under conditions of political pluralism, freedom of expression and people’s access to information to contribute to the free formation of public opinion; b) consolidate the editorial and creative independence of periodical publications; c) harmonize the proportion of public property with the functions of the state and of administrative-territorial units; d) develop competition in periodical 14
Independent Journalism Center publications and e) attract investments and ensure efficient management in periodical publications.
In 2010, Parliament modified Article 66 paragraph (3) of the Broadcasting Code so that a broadcaster can now hold a maximum of five broadcasting licenses in one administrative/territorial unit while before the introduction of this modification a broadcaster could hold only two. Media experts believe that this fact facilitates the establishment of monopolistic positions in the broadcasting market and the “berlusconization” of the electronic media thus endangering the diversity of media content and discouraging competition.
Defamation cases against media
According to data provided by the courts of Moldova (courts of Botanica, Buiucani, Centru Districts of Chişinău and courts of Basarabeasca, Cantemir, Călăraşi, Ceadîr-Lunga, Donduşeni, Floreşti, Ocniţa, Rezina, Soroca, Străşeni, Şoldăneşti, Teleneşti and Vulcăneşti31), in 2010 there were 22 cases under examination on the protection of honor, dignity and professional reputation in which media outlets were defendants. Most cases (17) were examined by the Centru Court. The Ceadîr-Lunga Court examined five cases on protection of honor, dignity and professional reputation, of which four had media outlets as defendants.
Violations of journalists’ rights
The gravest case of limitation of media freedom and violations of journalists’ rights in 2010 was the case of Ernest Vardanyan. On December 16, the supreme court of the self-proclaimed Transnistrian republic sentenced journalist Vardanyan to 15 years in prison in a high-security institution without sequestration of property on the basis of Article 271 of the criminal code on “high treason.” The Transnistrian authorities declared that Vardanyan was not sentenced for his journalistic activities but for collaboration with the Moldovan secret services. Vardanyan was arrested on April 7, 2010 and tried in closed sessions by Transnistrian courts. Further details about Vardanyan’s case can be found in the section “Press Freedom in Transnistria.”
There were additional cases of limitations of journalists’ rights, although fewer than in previous years.
On May 25 a Pro TV team was assaulted by the security officers of the Opera and Ballet Theatre.32 The reporter and the cameraman tried to discuss the refusal of the theatre’s administration to allow a performance organized by the Falun Dafa movement. The organizers had already paid the fee for renting the theatre. In an address to the Minister for Culture, Pro TV requested punishment for the employees who assaulted the TV station’s team.
On June 17 Sergiu Lazar, the judge examining the case of former Chişinău commissar Iacob Gumenita, a case with a high public profile, assaulted journalists who sought access to the courtroom. Without declaring the session closed, the magistrate closed the door. The journalists tried to find out the reason they were refused access to the session; the judge, however, covering his face with a file, stood up at the beginning of the court session, closed the door and hit the camera of a cameraman with his hand.33
31 Other courts gave no reply to the requests for information even two weeks after the expiry of the 15-day legal timeframe for providing a reply. 32 http://www.protv.md/stiri/social/pro-tv-a-solicitat-sanctionarea-angajatilor-care-au-agresat-echipa.html 33 http://www.protv.md/stiri/social/jurnalistii-bruscati-de-judecatorul-lui-iacob-gumenita.html 15
Independent Journalism Center
On June 22, Prime Minister Vlad Filat ordered limitations on journalists’ access to a government session with farmers in which they discussed subsidies. Despite the fact that the media had been invited to the session, the Prime Minister asked the journalists to leave the room in ten minutes and recommended that Chişinău journalists get used to secret government sessions.34
On June 28, the Buiucani District Court acquitted Nicolae Agarici, a policeman from the Scut Regiment accused by prosecutors of robbery and abuse of power. According to the file on the case, on April 8, 2009 the policeman assaulted journalist Oleg Brega behind the government building and beat him and confiscated two video cameras. The prosecutor asked eight years imprisonment for the policeman, but the judge, Ms. Pruteanu, ruled Agarici not guilty.35
On July 7 a journalist and a cameraman from Publika TV news station were assaulted and intimidated by two officers of a private security firm that provided protection for an apartment block in downtown Chişinău.36 According to the source quoted, the journalist (Anastasia Nani) was maltreated by one of the two security officers, both of whom were armed with automatic weapons. The respective officer addressed her in Russian using licentious language. Because the cameraman (Valeriu Isac) was filming the dialogue between the journalist and the officer, the latter brutally forced him to stop filming, claiming that it was private territory. He hit the camera and wrenched the cameraman’s hand. The head of Centru District confirmed for Publika TV that the building was the property of Vlad Plahotniuc, a businessman.
On July 14 the headquarters of Capitala municipal newspaper was robbed. Unknown persons broke the office window and stole some computer parts and a photo camera. The value of the stolen objects was assessed at 35,000 lei.37
On July 28 near the Chişinău Court of Appeals, an employee of the Center for Combating Economic Crimes and Corruption (CCECC) assaulted Jurnal TV journalist Victor Ciobanu while the latter was filming the building. The journalist said that he was preparing a report, but an employee of the CCECC destroyed his camera and confiscated the memory card with images of the assault. Later at the police station, the memory card was returned, but the images in question had been removed. The attacker was brought to trial for a misdemeanor on the basis of Article 78 of the Contravention Code and found guilty of physical assault causing body injuries without damage to health. On the basis of this, he was fined 100 lei.
On November 17, the bodyguard of Interim President Mihail Ghimpu forbade access by an agency’s filming crew to a meeting of the LP. According to the Service of Protection and State Security (SPSS) which investigated the case, “During the investigation it was found that the SPSS employee acted legitimately, according to the provisions of Article 12 of the Law on the Service of Protection and State Security, having the right to limit or forbid access of persons to certain areas and buildings.” At the same time, according to the reply of the SPSS, the investigation showed that, “The officer in question exhibited rather offensive behavior towards journalists, manifested by blocking the cameraman and covering the lens with his hand, and for that the officer mentioned was given a strict reprimand by order of the Director of the Service.”38
On November 26 the bodyguard of Interim President Ghimpu in charge of verifying the credentials of journalists who came to the LP party press conference, forbid the access of the film
34 June 23, 2010, Monitor Media Agency 35 http://www.stireazilei.md/news-4330 36 July 7, 2010, Monitor Media Agency 37 http://httwww.protv.md/stiri/social/jaf-murdar-la-ziarul-primariei-chisinau.html 38 http://omg.md/Content.aspx?id=11905&lang=1 16
Independent Journalism Center crew of the OMEGA Agency to the conference room.39 According to the source quoted, the speaker of the LP said that the party, “…monitored the OMEGA Agency during the electoral campaign” and decided, “…not to allow it access to the press conference for political reasons.”
39 http://www.pcrm.md/main/index_md.php?action=news&id=5751 17
Independent Journalism Center
IV. Press freedom in Transnistria
The year 2010 will remain in the memory of Transnistria as election year.40 In March the people voted for their local representatives. In December they participated in the election for the parliament of the self-proclaimed republic which was to decide on development and on the budget and to renew the legislative framework in the coming five years. In addition to these significant events in the political arena, the Transnistrian leader declared 2010 as the Year of World War II Veterans and Defenders of Transnistria. The media policy of state-owned outlets was mostly based on these “pillars.” As for the non-government media, their information platforms provided the public with more diverse information.
January saw no significant events. Transnistrian journalists participated in the international press club “Format A3” which was held in Chişinău, where participants discussed, among other things, the notion of freedom of speech. The guests of the club—Russian journalists from the state- owned TV station Rossia 1—C. Semin and A. Kondrashov had discussions with participants during which one of them voiced the opinion that, “Freedom is relative; it can come from conscience, from founders, from rivals’ founders. It is an issue of personal choice.” Also, the Russian journalists said that journalism lacks objectivity in its pure form; every article represents the subjective point of view of the reporter. In addition to this event, newspapers and news agencies reminded the public of the active pre-election period for members of local administrations.
In February the registration of candidates for local councils finished, and the electoral councils perceived an increase in the number of persons willing to compete. In some sections, even six persons aspired to one seat. In addition to campaigning, by creating a council of founders of state- owned media outlets, the regional authorities established mechanisms for financial support and for forming the editorial policy of the publications receiving public budget money. This council of founders included equally representatives of the legislative (the supreme soviet) and executive (the president) of the self-proclaimed republic. The ministry of information and telecommunications, however, as an institution of the executive, still has significant influence on state-owned media outlets through mechanisms of financing their activities and distributing labor remuneration.
Local Transnistrian media outlets in March were full of electoral propaganda. Local administration elections took place on March 28 and were attended by 43.36% of voters. Several days prior to the elections, the council of founders appointed the editor-in-chief of the state-owned weekly newspaper Adevarul Nistrean, issued in the Moldovan language in Cyrillic with a circulation of 1400 copies. The person appointed was Vladimir Covali who had held the position of interim editor-in-chief.
On March 30, after many years of silence and virtual inactivity, representatives of the media community of the region assembled at the Congress of the Union of Journalists of Transnistria. There were three candidates for the position of president: editor-in-chief of Za Pridnestrovie newspaper Natalia Vorobieva, interim editor-in-chief of Adevarul Nistrean newspaper Vladimir Covali, and the editor of Novaya gazeta newspaper Andrei Safonov. The majority of votes were given to Natalia Vorobieva. Vladimir Covali withdrew from the contest.
40 Based on information from open sources and discussions with journalists by Elena Kalinichenko, journalist from Transnistria. 18
Independent Journalism Center
The congress had some unpleasant moments related to the fact that it was discovered that only the members of the Union of Journalists had the right to vote and to be elected, i.e., persons who had been working since Soviet times. In attendance, however, were many more journalists, including young ones and famous ones. Many of those who spoke at the congress drew attention to the insufficient training of journalists at the Transnistrian state university. The editor-in-chief and co-founder of Novaya gazeta, Andrei Safonov, voiced the need to analyze the law on mass media and to make new proposals for its modification and also the need for a functional law on access to information. He also drew attention to the need for developing a mechanism for social protection for journalists and suggested that the union should directly participate in this activity. TV reporter Evgheny Zubov expressed his regret at the inaction and lack of personality of the Union of Journalists.
The month of April separated Tansnistrian journalism over the past 10 years into two periods: before April 7 and after it. On April 7 the region’s special services arrested Ernest Vardanyan, Transnistrian journalist, political scientist and international commentator of the Russian news agency Novy Region, under accusations of high treason and espionage for the Republic of Moldova. On April 7 he, his wife Irina, who was on maternity leave, and their two children (6- year-old son and 9-month-old daughter) were returning from a walk. In front of the apartment block where the Vardanyans live, they were surrounded by a large group of armed persons who claimed they were employees of the ministry of state security.
The presence of children did not stop them. Ernest Vardanyan was arrested on the spot and accused of “high treason.” After the arrest, the representatives of special services went to his apartment where they conducted a search, seized all computer equipment, photo, video and audio devices (including household appliances). They also seized the papers and agendas that were in the apartment (both those of Mr. Vardanyan and those of his wife). The trial, held in closed session, extended the arrest to two months. In Article 271 of the criminal code of the self- proclaimed republic, “high treason” provides for the deprivation of liberty for up to 20 years. The leader of the unrecognized republic, Igor Smirnov, said that case details would not be disclosed until the end of the investigation. Details can be found on http://ernestvardanyan.do.am/
The arrested journalist’s mother claims that the family addressed the public organization Union of Transnistrian Journalists with requests for help, but the latter’s response was approximately the following: “Ernest Vardanyan is a nobody for us.” The Union refused to offer any form of support. Ernest Vardanyan’s mother, Tamara Shagoyan, repeatedly addressed the government of Russia and of other countries for help in freeing her son. Civic and professional organizations of journalists from Russia and the Ukraine engaged in defending Vardanyan but without results. After the sentence was passed, Tamara Shagoyan dispatched another address to the leaders of top countries of the world requesting help in freeing her son.
Irina, the wife of the accused, gave a number of interviews to Moldovan media. Vladimir Voronin, ex-president of the Republic of Moldova, assisted her financially. Moldovan Prime Minister Vlad Filat also had a meeting with Irina Vardanyan. Moldovan Vice Prime Minister Victor Osipov declared that he would work to free Vardanyan. So far, however, no declaration has had any effect.
It is possible that after a while Ernest Vardanyan will be pardoned or granted amnesty. At the moment, however, according to Transnistrian lawyers, it is unlikely, because prosecution was based on an article which was overly severe.
On April 26 Maxim Sazonov, the editor-in-chief of the state-owned TV channel Pervy Respublikansky, was dismissed for “professional inadequacy.” The real reason for his dismissal was 19
Independent Journalism Center his disagreement with the administration of the TV station and with the minister for information and telecommunications Vladimir Beleaev over the distribution of unregistered income of the state-owned TV channel which he openly declared. He was supported by 24 employees (about one fifth of all employees of Pervy Respublikansky). Within several weeks of Sazonov’s dismissal, all his supporters wrote “voluntary” resignations under pressure. Because of the region’s lack of recognition, they were afraid to address any international organizations to protect their rights.
On April 30 the first trial on the suit of Tiraspol judge Ms. Obruchkova against Russky Proryv newspaper and www.tiras.ru for libel and insult, in which the plaintiff claimed the amount of 1 million Transnistrian rubles (about USD 100,000) for moral damages, was held. The reason for the action was the article titled “The popular-democratic party PRORYV was denied an examination of the case, or What is the price of Judge Obruchkova?” in which the newspaper raises the question of why Judge Obruchkova denied the action of the Proryv party declaring the elections in one of the polling stations in Tiraspol invalid.
The examination of the case against Russky Proryv and www.tiras.ru continued in May. Due to the peculiarities of Transnistrian legislation and to a skilled defense, the web site was not accused. The newspaper, however, got punished for both of them and because of excessive monetary fines it was forced to close.
Russky Propyv was founded by the non-commercial partnership “International Youth Corporation Proryv” and had been published since January 2007. Initially it was the result of the merger of teams of journalists from three Transnistrian publications: Novy dnestrovsky kurier, Russky Rubej, and the party newspaper Proryv whose ideologist was Dmitry Soin, a well-known controversial politician and at the time a member of the legislative body of the region. The publication had recently been operating under the management of the editorial board whose composition is kept secret. Russky Proryv is the third newspaper in Transnistria to shut down under court pressure. In the past, court sanctions were applied that led to the insolvency and closure of the publications Molodejny Marsh (editor Oleg Elkov) and Dnestrovsky Kurier (editor Sergey Ilchenko). Like Russky Proryv, these publications were considered to be de facto scandal sheets of Dmitry Soin and were not trusted by the public, although formally the politician was not a member of the editorial board or a founder.
Vardanyan’s case continued in May as well. An address appeared on the Internet that was supposedly from the journalist himself stating that he had been pressured to admit his guilt but he asked that his self-denunciation not be believed. For details see http://ernestvardanyan.livejournal.com. Moreover, on the evening of the day when he turned 30, the ministry of state security of the self-proclaimed republic placed a video address on a state- owned TV station with his “confession” which was included in a special program prepared by the special services in which they offered warnings and threats to those who often visit the right bank of the Nistru, who seek health services there or who study at higher education institutions in Chişinău.
Also in May, special well-equipped journalistic offices for the state-owned media were opened on public money in four Transnistrian towns: Tighina, Dubasari, Ribnita and Camenca, and the public organization Union of Transnistria Defenders from Dubasari moved into a separate building and founded its own newspaper, Fakel, and in May published its first issue.
June in Transnistria was marked by the end of the social program of free connection to the Internet for all schools (counting 170 in total) in the region initiated by the Sheriff and Interdnestrcom companies. Also, the companies committed to ensuring the administration of the systems and free servicing of school networks. Also in June the council of founders of the state- 20
Independent Journalism Center owned media outlets appointed Leonid Ivanovich, previously manager of the party newspaper Respublika, to the position of editor-in-chief of the newspaper Pridnestrovie which appears in Russian.
July is vacation month, so media and journalists’ activities slowed down. There was development only in Vardanyan’s case. On July 5 the term of the journalist’s arrest expired. At a court session in Tiraspol on the same day his arrest was extended for another 30 days until August 4. Vardanyan’s lawyer declared that neither he nor the journalist’s wife knew about the session in question.
In August a contest for documentary films, My Transnistria, took place dedicated to the 20th anniversary of Transnistria’s proclamation of independence. The contest was organized by the ministry of information and telecommunications of the self-proclaimed republic. Also, the region’s leader signed an order to establish a state award for workers of broadcasting and print media outlets. On August 17 the first Internet television of Transnistria, Dnestr.tv, (founder Grigory Volovoy) started broadcasting. Also that month, Ernest Vardanyan’s arrest was extended.
The Transnistrian prosecution started publishing its own newspaper Vestnik Procuratury PMR in September. In the same month all TV subscribers began the transition to digital broadcasting. It is planned to complete the transition by the end of 2011.
Hidden electoral campaigning in Transnistrian mass media increased in October. Great interest in parliamentary membership was shown by medium- and large-scale businessmen.
Internet television station Lik TV appeared in Ribnita in November. It is characterized by interactivity as any townsperson can send a personal video to the editorial office and make it available for any one wishing to see it.
In December Obnovlenie Party received the majority of seats in the Transnistrian parliament in elections; on December 16 the supreme court sentenced Ernest Vardanyan to 15 years imprisonment in a high-security institution without sequestration of property for “high treason.” Vardanyan’s relations disagree with this sentence and intend to appeal the case to the ECHR. In addition, as of this month, regional libraries will no longer be able to receive periodical publications as local budgets have no resources for subscriptions.
On December 29 after nearly 13 years on the Transnistrian media market, the first independent newspaper in Transnistria, Novaya gazeta, ceased to be published.
The year 2010 was somewhat critical for Transnistrian journalists. It was clearly “explained” and “demonstrated” what could be done to those who do not want to join the mainstream. Unfortunately, there is less freedom; many people are afraid to speak openly. What happened to Ernest Vardanyan threw Transnistrian society back 10 years.
How interested are Transnistrian media outlets and the local public in political events in Moldova?
Traditionally, the state-owned media outlets of the region position Moldova as a failed state compared with “successfully developing Transnistria.” The failure of the referendum in Moldova in September served as another excuse for the state-owned media of the self-proclaimed republic to show the public, “…how badly the Moldovan people live with a pro-Romanian alliance at the helm of the state.” Non-government media outlets were not involved. If last year Transnistrian
21
Independent Journalism Center
Internet resources mostly repeated material from other sites, in 2010 they started citing their own comments as well as opinions of political experts from both banks of the Nistru.
Regarding coverage of the early parliamentary elections in November, the main government newspaper Pridnestrovie said the following: “Who ‘won’, who was ‘defeated’, is no matter of interest to Transnistrians.” Many Transnistrian media outlets showed traces of pro-Communist sympathy when covering the situation after elections in Moldova.
We should mention the increasing popularity of Internet social forums among the public, particularly http://www.forum.pridnestrovie.org/ as well as the band of comments of the Novy Region News Agency. The people on both banks of the Nistru under nicknames openly express their opinions, discuss problems and news and exchange useful information.
22
Independent Journalism Center
V. Conclusions and predictions for 2011
On the occasion of World Press Freedom Day, Thomas Hammarberg, Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe, issued a statement highlighting the challenges faced by journalism in Europe. “Ownership concentration, closures of newspapers, cutbacks and de-staffed newsrooms coincide with the outpouring of an extraordinary amount of undigested information on the Internet. Media markets are growing fast, but offer a more superficial coverage. A crisis of journalism is rapidly threatening to become a serious problem for democracy in Europe.”41 Arne König, president of the European Federation of Journalists (EFJ), expressed the same concern at the annual EFJ conference: “"A toxic mix of editorial cuts, precarious working conditions and unethical journalism has created a spiral of decline for media and democracy in Europe.”42
These findings are absolutely valid for the media in Moldova as well. Online media boomed in 2010. The speed of presenting information on the Internet is considerably higher than the capacity of broadcasting and print media to cover events. Moldova has no legal provisions regulating the Internet and content on it which is why this type of media has serious advantages compared with traditional media. The only chance for the traditional media to compete with online media is to invest efforts and resources into online versions of their products. On the other hand, promptness does not always imply accuracy. The ratio between promptness and accuracy of information in most cases is inversely proportional: the more rapidly information is delivered, the less probable it is truthful, objective and unaltered. Also, the requirement for speed is a real challenge for investigative journalism which is virtually non-existent in Moldovan media. Under these conditions, it is highly necessary for journalistic organizations to stimulate discussions generating ideas and solutions regarding new challenges in the Moldovan media market.
Although overall the index of press freedom in Moldova improved in 2010, there is a series of problems “handcuffing” it and keeping it subservient, directed and superficial. In 2010 we enjoyed increased independence of the press from politics, but we neglected the economic control installed in the media market.
Predictions for 2011
Carolina Budesco, editor of the online news portal www.azi.md: “It is possible that some ‘older’ media outlets (newspapers and press agencies) might not cope with the multitude of portals and might disappear. TV and radio stations and online portals will strengthen their positions.”
Elena Kalinichenko, a journalist from Transnistria: “Taking into account the existing situation and the trends outlined, the independent print media of Transnistria will be more careful in choosing topics and language to be used which will definitely make them featureless and less interesting. We must not forget that in 2011 Transnistria will face presidential elections, and that the special services will very thoroughly follow journalists’ activities. Unfortunately, non- government print publications will not be able to compete with state-owned ones with regard to pricing policy. Interest for the radio will probably decrease while the position of the TV will remain unchanged. The Internet will receive a boost for development for the reason that Transnistrian legislation does not provide for restrictions on it from the point of view of indirect
41 Changing media landscape creates crisis of journalism in Europe, Thomas Hammarberg, Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe, Strasbourg, May 3, 2010 42 http://europe.ifj.org/en/articles/unions-of-journalists-pledge-fight-back-over-spiral-of-decline-in-european-media 23
Independent Journalism Center censorship and of pressure. All sensitive discussions will move to the Internet, to social forums and multimedia resources.”
V. Sanduleac, director of the local publication Unghiul: “Perspectives for 2011 are good. Bad forecasts for 2010 proved wrong; on the contrary, circulation remained at the same level, and the advertising market shows clear signs of revival. In the first half of 2010 advertising revenues made 60% compared to 2009, by the end of the year the amount was 99% of 2009 revenues. This fact is mostly due to electoral advertising. Newspapers still expect the government to exclude from the Fiscal Code the provision on local taxes on advertising, and if there are some other fiscal benefits as well, the situation will be quite good.”
Liliana Vitu-Esanu, Director of the News Department at Moldova 1: “At present Moldova 1 management work intensely with a group of experts from the Deutshe Welle Academy. We will together develop a new organizational chart for the institution, new job descriptions, new contracts and a new broadcasting schedule. The priority of Moldova 1 for 2011 is organizational restructuring and the development of employees’ professionalism.”
Andrei Bargan, Director of Media TV and Radio Media, Cimislia: “In Moldova the local broadcasting outlets will strengthen their positions due to support projects. Cable TV will gradually collapse, especially in rural areas. They will be unable to hold their positions due to the invasion of digital television by Moldtelecom which pulls optical fiber over all hills and into every village. On-the-air broadcasters will be unable to extend their coverage as new frequencies will be unavailable, and those that are available are usually distributed by the BCC to expand the TV and radio stations from the capital.”
Alina Radu, director of investigative newspaper Ziarul de Garda: “At the beginning of 2011 two media outlets—the hyperactive Omega and Evenimentul Zilei—ceased to produce any material. Several media projects disappeared from Prime. It is a sign that some media outlets to a great extent depend on parties and on political money which only confuses the understanding of the concept of the press for citizens. For Ziarul de Garda, 2011 started as a difficult year. The mail delivery company increased the price for subscriptions and the people became poorer, so the ordinary people will not buy subscriptions to newspapers. We will face other difficulties as well. We do critical journalism and are associated with Communists because we criticize the democrats, but we believe that corruption and violation of human rights cannot be tolerated by either Communist or democratic governments that allow it.”
24