SARAJEVO, 26.12.2018.-When we want to focus on certain issue or topic, some thesis or discussion, we often quote great philosophers, writers or intellectual historical figures. Although I rarely do this, maybe this time I shall make an exception and shortly shape myself as one of the above mentioned “quotes” for the beginning.
Ludwig von Mises in his “Almighty State”’ in 1944 said:” “It is vain to fight totalitarianism by adopting totalitarian methods. Freedom can only be won by men unconditionally committed to the principles of freedom. The first requisite for a better social order is the return to unrestricted freedom of thought and speech.” Or François-Marie Arouet Voltaire: ”I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”
BiH is indeed a divided society where everyone has his/her own truth about the past, her/his own understanding of present time and future visions. Right to freedom of expression is no exception to this, despite the fact that freedom of expression is guaranteed by Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Despite Voltaire’s opinion and statement, we unfortunately often limit each other’s right to freedom of expression.
Our development is mutating – we need more time
Today, we aspire developed democracies and we freely, without boundaries, express ourselves, as this process is not easy to accomplish all the time, because we sometimes get lost on the way and our development process is mutating, making us thus look like confused adolescents, or rather teenagers, as we could no longer consider ourselves as little and young, being far away from big ones. Still, the current approach is completely different comparing to what it was in the period from 194 to 1945, but also different from the period between 1945 till the ’90s.
Back then; this issue was truly considered a taboo, regardless of how some people look at this. We may consider ourselves privileged to some extent since we openly talk about this subject. What does actually freedom of expression mean and can it be limited? Are we allowed and entitled to impose self – censorship or demand punishing or fining those that also use freedom of expression? Can we ask for bans or request the prohibition of mutual, rough, sharp, joint argument-based, often straight and insulting, but also public discussions launched by journalists and authors with different opinions and views?
Do we, in this liberty of ours, require ban or prevention of pluralism as specific idea market; can we demand interdict of freedom of public opinion expression amongst those with different views? Shall we, in our desire and eagerness for democracy and our selfish exclusivity of rights to our own opinion only, eventually become an anti-pod of our own and personal ideas? Shall we evoke new terror upon others? Are we going to forget that conflicts between political and literary sides entered our history, with Antun Gustav Matoš on one hand, and Gjalski, Marjanović, Hranilović, Begović, Ujević, and Kovačić on the other hand?
Can you imagine that great Tin Ujevic, in his “Death of Julius Caesar”, refers to Matos as to “long – time and eternal odious”, “original monkey”, “unique crow”, “plagiarist of Barrès and Baudelaire”? Ma- to on the other hand returned by calling this Vrgorac bohemian poet with “crystal cube of brightness”, similar names, comparing him with”the dog sitting along the road and barking at every single person passing that way”.
Krleza also criticized poetry by Aleksa Santic, even by writing in necrologies form, and he was also mocking other poets, including Ducic and many others. Matvejevic unscrupulously mocked Aralica, Stankovic and even Pesorda, who decided to press charges against Matvejevic for defamation and he won. The dilemma is present even today and these controversies and polemic sometimes appeared rough, exceeding all standards of polemic discourse and sometimes they seemed slightly easier. All in all, polemic remained an ongoing process even if its content offended or insulted others.
But really, we should realize that this is how things appear today because we still have – freedom of expression at our disposal.
Limiting freedom of expression, but also limiting the right to professional work
“Vucko”, a 1984 Sarajevo Winter Olympic Games mascot, proved disastrous for Elma Kazagic, editor and host of “Mreza”, an FTV political magazine. For those willing to know and find out about the background of this case and without wider explanations, they should watch “Mreza” magazine TV political magazine, broadcasted on 13 February 2018 and everything should eventually become clear to them. After this particular date, nothing was the same for Elma anymore. Only two years before this date, Elma was awarded with “Journalist of the Year” award, due to editing, hosting and reports from “Mreza”.
What can we say about the fact that the Center for Investigative reporting (original CIN) had been waiting for months for the information that should have been provided by public institutions? However, this was not some kind of a joke – accusations followed one another, pursuant to the Law on Free Access to Information, so the official authorities, from the same public institutions, “blow hot and cold” and accordingly began to provide information literally on the same day upon request.
What would you say about the thesis that this topic, regarding the issue of the process of renaming certain street names in Mostar, primarily renaming the present street names with the names of very suspicious historical figures from infamous, Ustasha WWII period, represented nothing but the political will by the leading political parties in Mostar, as this specific and sensitive topic cannot even be a subject to professional writing; instead of accepting facts rather than accepting “the only politically biased” solution? What would you say about the fact that a female journalist was banned from entering the RS Assembly facilities?
During the press conference, the questions she had asked were not answered; instead she “dared” to ask any question about such issues! Individuals and governing authorities referring to themselves as to democratic, and those that imposed these on – liberties, could be instead referred to as pure idiots. Just as Gerhard Oberschilich, an Austrian journalist referred to Haider, Austrian Liberal Party leader after his Nazi – based breakdown, European Court of Human Rights set this journalist free, concluding that journalist can express journalists’ critics directed to a public figure. Those, more liberate media house, could conclude that the European Court agreed that Heider was an idiot.
Unfortunately, journalists are capable of misusing freedom of expression
Do you remember “freedom of expression by tripping over” by Petra Laszlo, a female Hungarian reporter? During the report making about the stampede of misfortunate and poor refugees, she coldly tripped over a man who was holding a child in his arms at the time. She also kicked a young Syrian girl. Petra defended herself in court by stating that she had to “defend herself”, but still, she was finally found guilty and was sentenced for three year probation period. Monisha Rajesh, ”The Guardian” female journalists expressed her own opinion and views (along with many others) regarding the victory of Donald Trump and these views, posted on her Twitter profile, seemed very radical. She wrote that “it was time to assassin Trump”.
She was accordingly fired, and her profiles on Twitter and Facebook were de-activated, although she was not sent to court for the open invitation for murder. Hague Tribunal verdict to six Croatian political and military leaders showed and confirmed how keen we were, as far as the use of hate speech was concerned, and the fact that many journalists were neither immune to hate speech use nor could have been considered an exception to this, rather wide occurrence of sudden hate speech appearance. The left wingers criticized “Ustasha” biased followers celebrating that “he died miserably form the drinking flask liquid”, while right-wingers replied and responded by insulting “dirty Muslims, so-called Bosnian Mujahedeen followers etc”. They both called each other fascists and perhaps this was the closest to the truth.
Instead of a Conclusion
Is freedom of expression in BiH, the way BiH is shaped now, limited? The answer is yes. Can we express ourselves freely; determine our expression without fear and work in order to minimize these limitations and boundaries? Yes, we can. Can this, to some extent, display a sign of democracy; a democracy that we failed to see, prior to independent, modern, sovereign and the free state of BiH? Yes, it can.
Should we persist and insist on the continuous development of ourselves in the first place, and then followed by the society which we live in? Always. Just like Ivo Andric once said: ”All Drina Rivers in the world are curved. We shall not have time to align them and make them flow right. We shall never stop aligning them”.
This text is a part of E-Bulletin–the third edition of the special serial of BHJ online bulletin implemented as part of the following project: Reinforcing Judicial Expertise on Freedom of Expression and the Media in South-East Europe (JUFREX).
