List of endorsing organizations The report was written and endorsed by: Jovanka Matic, PhD Research Associate, Institute of Social Sciences, Belgrade [email protected] Association of Independent Electronic Media (ANEM) www.anem.org.rs Independent Journalists' Association of Serbia (NUNS) www.nuns.rs Association of Local Independent Media (Local Press) www.localpress.org.rs Independent Journalists' Association of Vojvodina (NDNV) www.ndnv.org Civil Rights Defenders www.civilrightsdefenders.org This Publication was prepared in cooperation with the Civil Rights Defenders and with financial support from the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida) TABLE OF CONTENTS: Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 4 Known and Unknown Facts aBout Media Sector ............................................................................. 9 1. Protection of the Right to Freedom of Expression and Information ......................................... 11 2. Freedom to Criticise State Officials ................................................................................................ 17 3. Necessity and Proportionality of Restrictions to Freedom of Expression ................................. 19 4. Freedom to Practise Journalism ....................................................................................................... 21 5. Openness of Media to Political Parties ............................................................................................ 23 6. Non-Discrimination of Foreign Journalists ..................................................................................... 26 7. Freedom to Choose Language of Communication ....................................................................... 27 8. Protection of Confidentiality of Information Sources .................................................................. 30 9. Limitation of Exclusive Reporting Rights ........................................................................................ 32 10. Proportionality of Privacy Protection and State Secret ............................................................... 33 11. Protection of Journalist LaBour and Social Rights ......................................................................... 35 12. Journalist Freedom of Trade Union Organising............................................................................. 38 13. Protection of Editorial Policy Independence .................................................................................. 40 14. Protection of Journalist Safety .......................................................................................................... 44 15. Impartiality and Efficiency of Regulatory Authorities ................................................................... 47 16. Equal Access to DistriBution Channels ............................................................................................ 51 17. Freedom of Access to the Internet and Foreign Media ................................................................ 54 18. Prevention of Monopolies and Development of Pluralism ........................................................... 55 19. Neutrality of State SuBsidies ............................................................................................................. 59 20. Independence of PuBlic Service Broadcasters................................................................................ 62 21. Protection of Public Service Broadcasters’ Editorial Autonomy ................................................ 66 22. UndesiraBility of Hidden State Ownership in Media ..................................................................... 68 23. IncompatiBility Between PuBlic Office-Holding and Pursuit of Professional Media Activities 71 24. Openness of Authorities to All Media.............................................................................................. 72 25. Preference for Media Self-Regulation .............................................................................................. 75 26. Compliance with Journalist Code of Conduct ................................................................................ 78 27. Parliament’s Care for Media Freedom Development .................................................................. 80 Sources and notes ............................................................................................................................... 82 SERBIAN MEDIA SCENE VS EUROPEAN STANDARDS Page 3 Introduction One of the key events in the history of democratic development was the cognizance of the importance of free press. Many technological revolutions, which ensued in the following two centuries, were a breeding ground for the new media, and while the most recent digital revolution is unfolding right now, before our very eyes, the freedom of media in its increasingly diverse forms of public communication has preserved the status of an indispensable ingredient of a functional democracy and a crucial issue for the organisation and regulation of any media system. Among experts there is still a dispute over the way in which the freedom of media should be measured, although comparative assessments at the global level have been made for almost four decades (since 1973). The concept of media freedom is widely accepted, but it is defined and interpreted differently in different parts of the world. Even when measuring scales and indicators are the same, they have different specific weight in different political systems and cultural traditions. No one disputes, however, that the assessment of media freedoms, as a sort of public exercise in scrutiny of the issue of importance for the whole society, is necessary and useful. There are several initiatives for formulating a standardised instrument for the measurement of the degree of development of media freedoms. Before compiling its own list of indicators for the assessment of the degree of media development, UNESCO has enumerated 26 such lists. Their own lists of indicators were developed, for example, by Freedom House, Reporters without Borders, IREX (Media Sustainability Index, MSI), World Bank, Committee to Protect Journalists, European Federation of Journalists, Media Institute of Southern Africa, etc. What they all have in common is the understanding of freedom of expression as a foundation for all other democratic freedoms and the conviction that assessments of the circumstances in which media operate are helping pinpoint problematic issues and potential flaws of the media system as well as to define new operational or systemic solutions which will advance free operation of the media. One such list for the assessment of freedom of expression, freedom of information and freedom of media, under the name of “Indicators for Media in a Democracy”, was developed under the auspices of the Council of Europe. In 2008, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe adopted this list (Resolution 1636/2008), and along with it a recommendation (Recommendation 1848/2008), suggesting to member countries – above all the national parliaments – to draw up periodic reports and analyses of the media freedom in their countries on the basis of this list. At the same time, it was recommended to the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe to take into account the list of indicators when assessing media situation in member countries. The list of the Council of Europe “Indicators for Media in a Democracy” features, in fact, 27 principles pertaining to media freedoms, which the Council of Europe has already identified as desirable standards of media practice in earlier resolutions and recommendations of the Parliamentary Assembly or the Committee of Ministers. The Council of Europe itself refers to them as “basic principles”. They are set apart as basic values which, for the purpose of consolidating democratic stability of Europe, should be protected together and individually by each and every one of the 47 Council of Europe member countries – the United Kingdom as much as Russia, Sweden as much as Moldova. Hence, the proposed catalogue of values and principles may be considered the least common denominator of the Council of Europe member countries’ commitment to protect human rights, democracy and the rule of law in the field of public communication, irrespective of differences in tradition, economy, political culture and development of the media system. Criteria of the “developed West” (“Western bias”), hardly applicable in different cultural environments, which is something that is often reproached to other measuring instruments for the assessment of media freedom, have not been incorporated in the list of indicators. Variations in comprehension of the social responsibility of the media, which are always historically and culturally conditioned, are overcome by focusing on the role of media in the creation of conditions for the participation of public in the democratic SERBIAN MEDIA SCENE VS EUROPEAN STANDARDS Page 4 decision-making process – the public should be well-informed and it should be entitled to free debate on diverging opinions. There are neither many references to new multimedia forms of communication – no mention of digital dividend, dangers of ownership concentration between telecommunications operators and traditional media, advantages of regulators’ convergence or citizen journalism. The concepts