PRISTINA, 27.10.2020 – The Association of Journalists of Kosovo (AJK) in partnership with the Kosovo Foundation for Open Society (KFOS), today, on October 27th, published the research “The Impact Of Covid-19 Pandemic On The Economic Situation Of Journalists, Cameramen, and Photojournalists”.

The report is conducted by researcher Lirika Demiri and focuses on the dismissal and reduction of journalists’ salaries, the impact of the Emergency Package on the media sector, and the physical and mental well-being of the media workers during the period of COVID 19 pandemic.

The Executive Director of the Association of Journalists of Kosovo, Getoarbë Mulliqi Bojaj, expressed her gratitude on behalf of AJK for the participation of the panelists, media, as well as for the support provided by KFOS during the pandemic, which was very important for the community of journalists, first by providing the protective equipment, as well as with the support of this research which highlights the situation of journalists, cameramen, and photojournalists in times of pandemic.

“This report aims to reveal the economic situation, i.e. the impact that the Covid 19 pandemic has had on the economic situation of journalists, cameramen, and photojournalists. The first cooperation with KFOS was at the very beginning of the pandemic when we asked for their help to provide protective equipment for our members: journalists, cameramen, and photojournalists, who were on the front line facing the unknown” said Mulliqi Bojaj.

In the meantime the researcher of the report, Lirika Demiri, presented to the audience the findings of the report.

“The report is a result of the research that was conducted from June 2020 until the end of September 2020. We conducted an online survey of about 120 media workers – journalists, cameramen, and photojournalists, and received their answers that mainly had to do with the impact of the pandemic on the economic situation of media workers, as well as changing the dynamics and difficulties encountered during pandemic reporting. In addition to the survey we have conducted interviews with various journalists and professionals in the field of media “, said Demiri.

Journalists Jehona Zhitia and Bujar Vitija were also part of the discussion panel.

Journalist Zhitia outlined some of the challenges the journalists faced when reporting on the Covid 19 pandemic.

“We started this challenge without knowing what awaits us along the way. Despite the long experience, you may have in the media, we are young and it has not occurred to us to report on any similar health situation. Although the doctors themselves were very unfamiliar with what would happen in the coming days, this became even more difficult perhaps for us as journalists, on how we report and what we would say at the beginning… I consider it as a challenge also for the journalists, however, we managed to do our job “, she said, among other things.

While Vitija spoke about the role of media and journalists in managing the pandemic.

“The role of the media has been very important. Journalists have never hesitated to do their job more responsibly in combating fake news. About 30% of Kosovars did not believe in the existence of Covid 19 and this has greatly hampered the management of the pandemic by the institutions. The media and journalists have played an important role in overturning this poll”, said among others Vitija.

You can find the whole report in Albanian and English language on this link.

PODGORICA, 27.10.2020. – Montenegrin journalists played an important role and made a great contribution to the overall response of the society to the outbreak of the Covid-19 virus, but their labor rights and working conditions were further endangered during the pandemic, it was assessed at the Ombudsman’s meeting with representatives of the Trade Union of Media of Montenegro (TUMM).
The President and Vice President of TUMM, Mariana Camović Veličković and Danijel Čelecki, as well as the associate Dražen Đurašković presented the work and plans of that organization, and the possibilities of future joint activities with the Ombudsman institution were discussed.
At the meeting with the Protector of Human Rights and Freedoms of Montenegro, Siniša Bjeković, the impact of the current epidemiological situation on the work of media employees was discussed and it was stated that the corona virus further degraded their position.
Camović Veličković pointed out that the state aid to the media during the epidemic was significant, but that it is not known how it affected the position of the employees.
“I am afraid that, despite the help, the situation has not improved. Media workers still have low salaries, they are overworked, their overtime work is not valued,” she said, stating that often basic protective equipment is not provided for journalists.
Protector Bjeković reiterated the position that the institution highly appreciates and emphasizes the role of the media in strengthening its position in society as well as the promotion of its work and bringing the responsibilities closer to citizens.
“We often act ex officio, precisely on the basis of information from the media, which was especially important in the first wave of the pandemic. When almost everything stopped, it was the journalists who, through their reporting, contributed to shedding light on numerous aspects of the social response to the pandemic, especially in the area of ​​human rights and freedoms”, Bjeković said.
The TUMM expressed concern over the unresolved cases of attacks on journalists and announced active monitoring of the current change in the systematization of jobs in the Radio Television of Montenegro.
It was jointly assessed that it is necessary to maintain and intensify cooperation between the TUMM and the Protector’s institution, and thus contribute to the improvement of the human rights situation in the field of media.
Protector Bjeković expressed full support for the promotion of media freedoms and freedom of expression, while reminding of the need to strengthen self-regulation and consistent respect for the rules of the profession.
The recently adopted Law on Media, the need to provide continuous training for journalists and the fight against fake news were also discussed.

The protection of journalistic sources is one of the fundamental rights on which journalism is based, as well as the freedom of the media in all democratic societies. This right is based on the premise that journalists must protect their sources in order to prevent possible sanctions, and ultimately jeopardize the position of their source in society. This principle is woven into the legislations of every democratic state. There is no freedom of the media without this principle, because otherwise journalists would never be able to detect manipulations in the political and social order of the state.

International law

The protection of journalistic sources is well recognized in international law. In particular, this standard has been recognized by the United Nations, the Council of Europe and the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, and the African Union and the Organization of American States. The European Court of Human Rights has determined that this is an important segment of freedom of expression, and a significant number of countries recognize and protect this right in their legislation. Nearly 100 countries have adopted special legal protections for journalistic sources, either in laws or in constitutions, according to the European Federation of Journalists. According to their sources, countries these protections are absolute in at least 20 countries.

Many countries also recognize the protection of sources in judicial practice as a customary right or as part of the constitutional right to freedom of speech. There are few countries where journalists have been required to disclose their sources of information.

In many countries, the authorities most often use the mechanism of the protection of national security, which can violate the fundamental rights of journalists. The European Federation of Journalists emphasizes that modern communication technologies have become a danger to the protection of journalistic sources.

Bosnia and Herzegovina and protection of information sources

Bosnia and Herzegovina, as a democratic state, and a member of the Council of Europe and the United Nations, is committed to a large number of conventions concerning fundamental human rights. When it comes to the protection of sources of information, it exists in the Law on Protection against Defamation, which is valid in both entities of BiH and the Brčko District.

Article 9 of the Law on Protection against Defamation of the FBiH states: (1) “A journalist, and any other natural person regularly or professionally engaged in the journalistic activity of seeking, receiving or imparting information to the public, who has obtained information from a confidential source has the right not to disclose the identity of that source. This right includes the right not to disclose any document or fact which may reveal the identity of the source particularly any oral, written, audio, visual or electronic material. Under no circumstances shall the right not to disclose the identity of a confidential source be limited in proceedings under this Law.”  (2) “The right not to disclose the identity of a confidential source is extended to any other natural person involved in proceedings under this Law who, as a result of his or her professional relationship with a journalist or other person referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article, acquires knowledge of the identity of a confidential source of information.”

Article 10 of the Act on Protection against Defamation of the RS states: (1) “A journalist, and any other natural person regularly or professionally engaged in the journalistic activity of seeking, receiving or imparting information to the public, who has obtained information from a confidential source is not obliged to disclose the identity of that source. This right includes the right not to disclose any material which may reveal the identity of the source including, but not limited to, any oral, written, audio, visual or electronic material. Under no circumstances shall the right not to disclose the identity of a confidential source be limited in proceedings under this Act.” (2) “The right not to disclose the identity of a confidential source is extended to any other natural person involved in proceedings under this Act who, as a result of his or her professional relationship with a journalist or other person referred to in subsection 1. of this Article, acquires knowledge of the identity of a confidential source of information.”

The Criminal Procedure Code of BiH states in Article 82, paragraph 1 “The following persons shall not be heard as witnesses: a) A person who by his statement would violate the duty of keeping state, military or official secrets until the competent body releases him from that duty; b) A defense attorney of the suspect or accused with respect to the facts that became known to him in his capacity as a defense attorney; c) A person who by his statement would violate the duty of keeping professional secrets, including the religious confessor, professional journalists for the purpose of protecting the information source, attorneys-at-law, notary, physician, midwife and others, unless he was released from that duty by a special regulation or statement of the person who benefits from the secret being kept”.

In addition to these laws, the BiH Press and Online Media Code of the Press Council in BiH, a self-regulatory body for print and online media, lists the protection of information sources as a principle of journalistic ethics. Article 13 of this Code states: “Whenever possible, journalists should rely on open, identified sources of information. These sources are to be preferred to anonymous sources, whose honesty and accuracy cannot be judged by the public. Journalists have an obligation to protect the identity of those who provide information in confidence, whether or not they explicitly request confidentiality. ”

In a conversation with Azra Maslo, Head of the Sector for Program Content and Complaints in the Communications Regulatory Agency of BiH (RAK), she told us that RAK is responsible for the implementation of the Law on Communications and bylaws adopted on the basis of this law, which is being used to regulate the principles of broadcast content. In this sense, the aim of regulation is exclusively to protect the public interest in terms of limiting the provision of harmful or inappropriate program content.

“In the field of journalistic reporting, the protection of the public interest is reflected in the implementation of the principles of fairness and impartiality, and mechanisms that guarantee that reporting does not violate the rights of others, such as enabling the right to reply and protecting privacy,” says Maslo and adds that “media service providers are completely free to create and edit their content.”

In accordance with the legal competencies, RAK follows the established practice and standards of European countries in the field of professional standards of journalistic reporting, which includes the protection of sources of information. This right is the sole responsibility of the journalistic profession and journalists, ie codes of ethics. Very often in the program contents of licensees, especially in informative programs with the publication of various information, it is stated that the information comes from “informed”, “reliable”, “confidential” sources.

“According to international standards, including domestic regulations that deal with this issue in a certain way, such as the Law on Protection against Defamation of FBiH and RS, journalists certainly have the right to protect sources of information, while in the context of regulation, as mentioned earlier, it is assessed whether the licensee ensured the accuracy of the information, fairness, impartiality and balance of the broadcast content “, concludes Maslo.

Mehmed Halilović, for the IMEP.ba platform, comments on the extent to which the Law on Defamation in BiH restricts freedom of expression and whether it represents a quality legal solution. He says that the laws on protection against defamation at the entity levels and in the Brčko District are based on the highest international standards, and are based on the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and on the standards established by the European Court.

“These laws have established an almost ideal balance between promoting the right to freedom of expression and the right to protection of the reputation and dignity of every person. It should be noted that they even emphasize that “the law should be interpreted in such a way that the application of its provisions largely ensures the principle of freedom of expression.” Of course, these laws contain other benefits for journalists and media such as protection of the right to freedom of opinion, the right not to disclose confidential sources, etc, but also certain restrictions on freedom of expression which protect the rights to reputation and dignity of others. These restrictions are also in line with the fundamental principles of the European Convention and with the standards of European Court judgments. ”

According to BiH criminal law, the standards of journalistic ethics contained in the Journalism Code, as well as international documents of the Council of Europe, the OSCE and the European Federation of Journalists, all journalists and editors have the right to protection of sources of information. Lawyer Nusmir Huskić explains that in addition to the laws and standards listed, we can refer to the Article 10 of the European Convention on Freedom of Expression, which states that everyone has the right to freedom of expression, which includes freedom of opinion and freedom of receiving and transmitting information, without interference from public authorities.

“The exercise of these freedoms may also be subject to formalities, restrictions, penalties for reasons of public interest or security.”

However, Huskić emphasizes that the right of journalists to protect sources of information is a privilege, because when journalists investigate irregularities and draw public attention to them, they serve public goals and interests, and this right cannot be taken away or limited by third parties. .

“This is a logical sequence, because in the event that journalists have to disclose their sources, the question is whether these sources would agree to cooperate again,” says Huskić, adding that in which situation it is justified to ask journalists to disclose sources of information.

“An attempt to reveal the source of information to journalists would be justified only if it is in the public interest to find out the source of the information. In all other cases, any way of disclosing sources of information by third parties (primarily those who are disadvantaged by the knowledge of certain information, or incriminated), intimidating journalists or their sources of information is a violation of standards of protection of information sources, which is again in the highest part of the obligations of the judiciary to prevent, which is not possible without the cooperation of journalists and judicial institutions. ”

Journalist and editor of the Capital.ba portal Siniša Vukelić believes that the rights to protection of information sources have been violated in BiH. “But only from the point of view of additional pressure from investigative and judicial institutions.”

Vukelić emphasizes that “good journalists always protect their sources well, even if the price to pay is being imprisoned. Our sources need to know this and be sure of it. Pressure on journalists to reveal this will never bear fruit for journalists with a good reputation, but it will arouse suspicion among potential sources or whistleblowers and thus jeopardize the possibility of some information of public interest being published. ”

In 2019, journalist Azra Omerović (Žurnal.info) and journalist / editor Avdo Avdić (Istraga.ba) were questioned by the Prosecutor’s Office of BiH for their investigative stories, published on the Žurnal.info portal. In an interview with DW, Avdić said that BiH institutions “are starting to investigate me and my colleagues by searching for our sources, searching for those people who provide us with information on crime within BiH institutions.” He explains that his colleague Azra Omerović had to go to the Prosecutor’s Office of BiH when she wrote the story about diplomas, but also that he had to answer questions about his sources when he published the case of SOA (Security Intelligence Agency of the Republic of Croatia) concerning the activities of Croatian intelligence officers in BiH.

“Every time we publish something, the institutions invite us to tell them who our sources are and where our information comes from. They never check our findings or publications “, says Avdić, adding that “the Law on Criminal Procedure of BiH “prescribes decisively that a journalist cannot be questioned for the purpose of revealing the source of information. Yet, despite these clear legal provisions, judicial institutions are questioning us. ”

Protection of information sources in the best interest of the public

The source of information, the journalist, the editor, the owner is a relationship in which trust in journalistic work is crucial. Everyone, from the first to the last in that chain, works in the interest of the public, writes professor Sandra Bašić-Hrvatin.

“There are situations in which a journalist has certain information but cannot confirm the whole story. Like a puzzle game in which a couple of pieces are missing to complete a picture.” In her text, she adds that “journalists sometimes find themselves in a situation where the key information they can use to prove their story is offered by someone who, out of fear for his life or existence, asks the journalist to protect him/her as a source of information.”

The journalist must then check the credibility of the source of the information, what motives and possible benefits it has. Editors, legal teams and owners must be consulted. Then, if the information is in the public interest, the journalist will publish it and promise anonymity and protection to the source. Bašić-Hrvatin adds in her text that the relationship between journalists and sources is not a legal relationship.

“There is no document with their signatures and the signatures of witnesses. This relationship is more than that, it is the heart and soul of investigative journalism. A journalist who has promised to protect his source will never and at no cost violate that agreement. The moment he violates it, he is no longer a journalist.”

Numerous journalistic stories that covered tragic events, abuse of power, corruption, lies and fraud would never have seen the daylight without anonymous sources and whistleblowers. The public would never know what happens within the government if journalists did not work in the public interest. Professor Bašić-Hrvatin concludes that states must carefully consider what laws they accept regarding the protection of information, and that an investigative journalist does not have the authority of the police and the court.

“Punishing a journalist who published information in the public interest and consistently protects the anonymity of his source of information is like punishing the police because they cannot catch a criminal. There are situations in which a journalist will not give protection to a source of information if that information relates to crimes with serious consequences. But they will also not forward that information to the police because the journalist is not a police associate”, said Bašić-Hrvatin.

Why do journalistic sources need to be protected?

In order to function as “watchdogs of democracy”, as established by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), journalists must rely on the protection of journalistic sources. Some of these sources are official and well known, others confidential and secret. The protection of secret sources is crucial, because it is the “foundation of media freedom”, emphasize the European Federation of Journalists (EFJ).

They further add that the biggest consequence of forcing journalists to disclose their sources is the impact they will have on their ability to obtain information later from the same sources, for fear of being disclosed. Other sources will not believe them, and the reputation of the independent journalist will collapse, and he will become a journalist working in the interest of the government.

The EFJ recommendations add that journalists must avoid facing situations where they may be required to disclose their sources or other information they have gathered. Then the only remaining sources of information could be official, under the supervision of political, economic or judicial authorities.

The most serious consequence that can result from a lack of source protection is the physical vulnerability of journalists. Many journalists work in areas of extreme danger, such as war zones, or investigate dangerous criminal activities.

If a journalist is considered an informant or a government spy or a future witness in a court hearing, this may result in the journalist becoming their target. Therefore, in 2007 the Council of Europe recommended that journalists shall not be required to submit notes, photographs, audio and video recordings in crisis situations in order to ensure their safety.

Democratic systems (do not) violate the protection of journalistic sources

Lawyer Huskić emphasizes that, unless it is a matter of public interest for which journalists could and should disclose their sources of information, in all other cases journalists are not obliged to disclose their sources.

“Given that one of the basic conditions of freedom of the press is the protection of journalistic sources, and without free media a democratic society cannot survive, the protection of journalists from any pressures regarding the disclosure of sources of information (as long as information does not harm the public interest and society) should be well known right by all journalists, on the basis of which they could avoid any pressure. Because, in the end, by knowing their rights, journalists will succeed and protect their work and the very purpose of their vocation, but we repeat, much easier and more efficiently only when the judiciary has the same goal as journalists. ”

Vukelić believes that journalists must invest more in education about safe means and ways of communicating with sources.

“It is important that they educate their sources about that. Journalists should not share the identity of the source with their colleagues in the newsroom. Meetings with sources must be carefully planned. It is important to know that a request to disclose a source is illegal, except in a few very exceptional cases based on a court decision.”

Numerous defamation lawsuits against journalists and the media

The helpline for journalists, which operates within the Association of BH Journalists, has data on 289 active defamation lawsuits against journalists and media from BiH that have been initiated in the last five years. In 2019 alone, 21 new lawsuits were filed. In the Bosnian-Herzegovinian judiciary, there is no single register of lawsuits against journalists and the media, which is why the exact number of lawsuits filed by state officials against the media is unknown.

According to the register of the Helpline for Journalists, politicians and directors of public companies and institutions are leading in filing lawsuits against journalists and the media, and recently there has been an increasing number of judicial office holders among prosecutors.

The monitoring conducted by the Helpline for Journalists showed that “judges are more biased towards parties in proceedings conducted in smaller cities and in municipal courts”. Also, the monitoring found that judges, compared to previous years, are more familiar with the rights of journalists as a group of professionals.

Sarajevo, October 19, 2020 – Relationship of the media from Bosnia and Herzegovina in dealing with the past is largely determined by politics and a number of media in the post-war period have become an instrument for spreading hate speech and relativizing war crimes – it was said during the workshop “Media coverage of war heritage, war crimes trials and reconciliation processes in Bosnia and Herzegovina “which started today in Trebević, organized by the BH Journalists Association.

The two-day interprofessional workshop is intended for media professionals, representatives of judicial institutions and the police, and is implemented within the project of the Council of Europe – Freedom of Expression and Freedom of the Media in Bosnia and Herzegovina (JUFREX). Project Manager of the Council of Europe Office in BiH Vanja Ibrahimbegović Tihak pointed out that the main goal of the project is to ensure consistent application of the European Convention on Human Rights and application of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights in domestic courts when it comes to freedom of expression:

“We are cooperating with CRA ​​as well as with our media partners, BH Journalists and the Press Council. The dialogue we are developing between the representatives of the judiciary and the media community in BiH is the basic product of this cooperation and we are especially proud of this segment of our work, all with the aim of strengthening media freedom and freedom of expression in BiH. “

The President of the BH Journalists Association, Marko Divković, said in his introductory address that when it comes to the media and judicial community, there is a lot of misunderstanding between the two professions.

– Journalists often experience inconveniences and disputes from judicial institutions and that is why we want to discuss it and try to find solutions on how to overcome this, because in the end we both have the same goal: to publish the truth – said Divković.

The media in BiH move in a triangle between memories, oblivion and denial – that is, exactly the matrix that politics has created, in the opinion of political analyst Tanja Topic.

– That memory can be selective and the critical attitude towards the past, above all towards one’s own dark side of the role in the war, is missing. The question is how much we would have done in that area at all if we did not have a stronghold and support from international organizations and the international community – said Topic.

Speaking about the media constructions of memory, Tanja Topic said that it cannot be reduced only to traditional media, but also to film, theater, as well as to the attitudes that are published on social networks.

– In the Republika Srpska, there was a long silence about the genocide in Srebrenica, and then a film about Scorpions was published and the citizens were confronted with that image in public for the first time. Then there was a political turn and there was a relativization of genocide, with the media taking on the role of relativizing and even justifying crimes as “preventive action.” The largest mass grave after the Second World War, Tomašica, is also an example of a conspiracy of silence in the media. Only a few media in the RS reported about it – said Topic.

She added that many media outlets in our society have become a means of spreading hate speech.

If a journalist glorifies genocide or war crimes, it is a criminal act, says Ara Ghazaryan, a Council of Europe expert.

– When you call legally qualified genocide a “massacre”, of course it relativizes what the court-proven facts are. What happened in the 90s was a challenge for the media and journalists, but now there is a new dimension to it all. The question is whether it is enough to adhere only to ethical norms in journalism, or whether the application of the law should be strengthened when it comes to hate speech. In my opinion, it is necessary to re-evaluate the law on the ban of hate speech and strengthen the criminal law, as well as to introduce certain ethical forms – Ghazaryan stressed.

Vlado Adamovic, a lawyer and former judge of the Court of BiH, and Denis Dzidic, editor-in-chief of BIRN BiH, spoke about how the media report on criminal proceedings and war crimes trials and whether they do so in the interests of the public and the families of the victims. According to Adamovic, journalists should not work on behalf of the victim, nor on behalf of the accused. Just like no court.

– A journalist works in the interest of the public and the right of the public is to be truthfully informed. Just as the court adheres to principles and must be independent and impartial. There is no compassionate judgment, nor judgment with empathy, because then it is not judgment. In that sense, journalists are very similar to judges – Adamovic emphasized.

He added that war crimes trials are among the most complex cases, especially with the introduction of the so-called command responsibility, which is completely contrary to our law.

– As the HJPC made shortcomings in the selection of judges who try war crimes, there was also a confusion among journalists because it is no longer known who the journalist really is. Without order, there is no serious work, so journalists’ associations must have a unified attitude towards their profession and monitoring war crimes trials. It must be known who is the journalist who can enter the courtroom and report from these trials – said Adamović.

BIRN BiH editor Denis Dzidic says war crimes prosecution is one of the four pillars of transitional justice and is essentially the only mechanism that BiH has so far more or less systematically implemented.

– One day, all these media reports from the trials could serve as a potential basis for the establishment of a commission for establishing the facts and for reconciliation, which will be crucial considering that all war crimes can never be prosecuted – said Dzidic.

According to him, BIRN journalists covering these trials must have certain knowledge and experience, and the principle is that everything must be based on facts.

– In general, it is very difficult financially for most media to provide a journalist who will follow a court process from the beginning to the end, considering that trials in certain cases last for several years. Another problem is that for many journalists and media, these trials are generally not interesting and it is very difficult to make them receptive to readers. Unfortunately, journalism students at colleges do not learn at all about how to report from courtrooms, not even basic things about legal proceedings and that is also a big problem – says Džidić.

He also spoke about the closure of judicial institutions to the media, which has been intensifying in recent years. One of the problems is the decision of the Prosecution not to publish the content of the indictments anymore, and without the available indictments, the journalist cannot report professionally from the trial, says Dzidic. Access to information is often denied to journalists, especially when it comes to the Prosecutor’s Office of BiH, which most often responds to all media inquiries with the sentence: “No comment.”

The editor of the Bljesak.info portal, Berislav Jurič, says that although journalists should be impartial, especially when covering war crimes trials, this is not the case here.

– Unfortunately, it turns out that you are not a journalist if you do not side with someone. The big problem in all spheres of society, including journalism, is that you have incompetent persons. You have young journalists who have never entered a courtroom, let alone know how to report from a trial. On the other hand, the media are burdened with a lot of things, including the role in reconciliation, facing the past and the like, and it is not the media that can reconcile society – said Jurič.

Among the main goals of the workshop organized by BH Journalists are to achieve a better understanding of professional and ethical standards and obligations of journalists in reporting on war heritage, war crimes trials, media contribution to the process of dealing with the past, reconciliation and building a tolerant society, as well as better cooperation between media and judicial institutions that must be based on BiH criminal law, the public’s right to information, and the protection of the dignity and rights of victims, their families and witnesses.

PRISTINA, 20.10.2020 – The Association of Journalists of Kosovo (AJK), in partnership with the United Nations agencies in Kosovo (UNKT), under the coordination of the UN Development Coordinator’s Office, Ulrika Richardson, today held the 15^th edition of the best annual journalism awards aimed to eradicate the poverty.

Nora Xhuzi and the cameraman Edon Gërbani of Radio Television of Kosovo, were awarded for the “Best short video story” by the Head of the UN Women Office in Kosovo, Vlora Tuzi Nushi.

The prize for the “Best Short Video Story” was also given to the journalist Angjelka Çup from the portal “Graçanicaonline”. She was awarded by Larissa Bruun, vice Head of the UNICEF Office in Kosovo.

The award for the “Best Written Story” was given to Koha Ditore’s journalist Rexhep Maloku by Maria Suokko, Head of the UNDP Office in Kosovo.

For the category of “Best Television Documentary”, was awarded the journalist Valdete Osmani from Radio Television of Kosovo, and the award was given by Visare Mujko Nimani, Head of the UNFPA Office in Kosovo.

The “Best Photo Prize” was awarded to Valdrin Fetahu from the portal “Gazeta Objektiv”, an award which was given by Blerim Azizi, Coordinator of the UN Volenteers Office in Kosovo.

In addition to the awards ceremony, the participants were also addressed by the President of the Association of Journalists of Kosovo, Gentiana Begolli Pustina and the United Nations Development Coordinator, Ulrika Richardson.

The president of AJK, Begolli Pustina, during her speech said that the pandemic paralyzed many things this year, the economy, production, social life, but that was not the case with the work of journalists. According to her, our colleagues, apart from being on the front-line reporting from overcrowded hospitals, did not for a moment neglect reporting for those who barely survive poverty.

“These are not just stories of individual cases, but strong messages about the urgent need for the state to prove that they care about this category. Perhaps, with a few euros in their pockets themselves, many journalists covered the real story of Kosovo, the one that not all of us see up close. Their voice would be silent and we would not hear it even today, without the extraordinary commitment of our colleagues from all ethnicities living in Kosovo”, she declared.

While, in her speech, Ulirika Richardson – United Nations Development Coordinator, emphasized the importance of discussing poverty, as for the first time in 20 years, the poverty rate will increase because of the COVID 19 pandemic.

“We are here today to celebrate the work you journalists do, emphasizing the ones who report on poverty … It is very important to discuss, hear and see stories about poverty. This draws our attention, because it proves to us how difficult it is to fight poverty, since as we saw, you cannot feed the family with two euros a day. The COVID 19 pandemic has exposed the vulnerable side of our society and especially our social services, so it is very important to talk about it, because if we do not talk about it we risk to forget the people whom live in poverty and the reasons why they live in poverty”, said Richardson.

At the end of the ceremony, Begolli Pustina, congratulated the colleagues for the awards they won and at the same time on behalf of AJK and the community of journalists, cameramen and photojournalists, expressed the heartfelt gratitude to the United Nations agencies in Kosovo led by Ulirika Richardson, which for 15 years in a row stood by journalists, not only in defending their freedoms and rights, but also in encouraging and rewarding their work.

Today’s event was held in honor of the International Day for the Eradication of Poverty on October 17th, which was designated by United Nations Resolution adopted on December 2nd, 1992 by the UN General Assembly.