Borka Rudić, general secretary of the BH Journalists Association (BHJA), speaks about the pressure on all those who think freely, who, since the passing of the “law on foreign agents”, which criminalizes defamation, are threatened with fines of up to 3,000 euros and on the basis of which 45 reports have been filed in a few months.

Since defamation became a criminal offense in Republika Srpska four and a half months ago, 44 reports have been filed for that offense and one for “exposing personal and family circumstances”. Among the defendants are 32 citizens and five journalists, so we can already talk about legal pressure on all free-thinking people, says Borka Rudić, general secretary of the BHJA, in an interview with Cenzolovka. The journalist and professor of philosophy and sociology says that in practice this means – “a priori censorship” in order to avoid criminal prosecution for “defamation”.

She says that the law “on the special register and publicity of the work of non-profit organizations”, which is colloquially called the “law on foreign agents”, is part of the “package” of political measures initiated by the President of Republika Srpska Milorad Dodik.

In 2023, the BHJA registered 87 cases of violations of media freedom and safety of journalists. Only 10 were solved.

Cenzolovka: From August 2023, after the decision of the Assembly of the Republic of Srpska, defamation is a criminal offense, for which a fine of around 3,000 euros can be obtained. Journalists and non-governmental organizations say the aim of this law is to limit open and critical debate on topics of public interest. You pointed out that five defamation cases have been filed against journalists since then. What kind of cases are we talking about?

Rudić: We still don’t have information about who is behind the large number of criminal charges in the Republika Srpska or who has been sued, because the district prosecutor’s offices have not shared that information with us. For now, we know the number of applications – 45, of which 44 are for defamation and one application for “presenting personal and family circumstances”. Most of the defendants are citizens – 32, followed by five journalists, two politicians and five unknown persons.

We only received summary data from the District Prosecutor’s Office in Banja Luka, so I don’t know how many journalists, civil society activists or people from other professions there are.

If you’re going to write about the enrichment of a son whose mother is in public office, or research public works involving the president’s godfather, you need to think ahead about how you’re going to do it without facing criminal charges.

None of these criminal charges have yet been confirmed or indicted. In general, this is a really large number of criminal charges in four and a half months. We can already talk about legal pressure on all free-thinking people – from citizens, who are currently the most affected by criminal proceedings because of their expressed opinions, to journalists and civil society activists. The outlines of the legal framework and institutional mechanisms for silencing any criticism, limiting public debate on topics of concern to citizens and violating the right to freedom of speech are clearly visible.

Now anyone can file a criminal complaint, for political, personal and even the most down-to-earth malicious reasons. The Prosecutor’s Office will have to receive that application, process it and spend human and material resources for something that is unthinkable in a democratic world – and that is conducting criminal proceedings because of someone’s opinion, criticism, media text, comment or invasion of privacy for the sake of public interest.

Cezolovka: What consequences do defamation lawsuits have on journalism? But also on citizens’ access to information of public importance?

Rudić: Although the application of the law is still only at the level of criminal charges, the law shows negative consequences and the destruction of the profession, which is immanent in criticism of public officials, questioning the way they perform public functions and investigating possible abuse of public powers for personal interests.

For example, if you intend to write about the son whose mother is in public office getting rich, or getting private companies owned by the director of a public hospital, or researching public works in which the president’s godfather is involved, you must think in advance how you will write about these topics, and don’t face criminal charges. It is a priori censorship or self-censorship in order to avoid criminal prosecution! It’s really not easy to work under such circumstances.

Here, I do not want to underestimate the common sense and professional competence of the holders of judicial positions, nor do I doubt that in the spirit of the law, the Constitution and the practice of the European Court of Human Rights, they will evaluate and then reject or accept criminal defamation complaints. However, it will not be easy for them, given the broad provisions of the law and the motives behind its adoption.

Those motives are, unequivocally, the decades-long frustration with the media of the current president of the RS and his final attempt to limit, if not completely stop, the work of a number of free media and journalists in the Republic of Srpska, but also in the whole of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

In Sarajevo Canton, there is a proposal to punish “fake news”, which would allegedly include large fines for citizens and legal entities, including the media

Cenzolovka: Numerous media outlets in the RS are registered as non-governmental organizations. What will be the consequences of the adoption of this law for them?

Rudić: This law is also part of the “package” of political measures initiated by the President of Republika Srpska through the misuse of public institutions of legislative and executive power. There are no legal gaps to speak of the need to pass a special law on the control of the work of NGOs or the creation of their register.

The Republika Srpska, like other parts of the country, has clear legal regulations in the area of NGO registration, tax payment, doing business through banks, submitting annual financial reports, respecting the rights of employees, reporting personal income of citizens and paying taxes, etc.

The aforementioned laws allow everyone from different sectors and public institutions to check what NGOs are doing, even on a daily basis. So, it is clear that this law is being passed for the purpose of the targeted suppression of freedoms within the civil sector, and to stop the work of human rights NGOs and the media.

Again, common sense was defeated by the unreasonable power of the presidential position and Milorad Dodik’s obsession with a number of media and NGOs in the RS, whose work the president would ban as soon as tomorrow.

DIPLOMATIC TRADE IN BIH WILL SWALLOW MEDIA FREEDOMS AND HUMAN RIGHTS

Cenzolovka: Do the European Union and other international organizations understand the consequences of such a law?

Rudić: I am not enthusiastic about their principles and efficiency. On the contrary! They are (as) publicly opposed to rigid interventions in the legal framework for media and civil society because media freedom is one of the 14 priorities for EU integration.

On the other hand, “diplomatic trade” has been established here with the ruling structures in both BH entities and at the level of state institutions. That trade, I’m afraid, will swallow media freedoms and human rights, and that for “little money”.

Here is an illustrative example: last year, a new Law on Free Access to Information was adopted at the state level. Previously, the draft law was negatively evaluated by the EU and the BH Ombudsman Institution, since it contained solutions that reduce the rights defined in the old law. The civil sector sent as many as 200 comments and amendments, but the Ministry of Justice of Bosnia and Herzegovina did not accept any of them!

Nevertheless, the law was adopted without any changes to the draft as part of the “package of European laws” that BiH must accept on the way to EU integration. And with the consent of the EU in Bosnia and Herzegovina. I am afraid that this will be the case with all the laws that are rapidly being passed in different parts of the country with the political slogan “the European path of BiH has no alternative”! And what will happen with media freedom and human rights…

Cenzolovka: There is a proposal in Sarajevo Canton to punish “fake news”, which would allegedly include large fines for citizens and legal entities, including the media. There are fears that this regulation, if adopted, would cause a chain reaction. What is problematic about this regulation?

Rudić: The fundamental problem is that this law declares the Internet a “public place” as if it were a public space – that is, a physical, clearly limited public space within which violations take place and are sanctioned. Also, it is very difficult, even completely impossible at the level of one canton to solve the problem with fake news, hate speech or serious security threats in the practically unlimited online sphere, which is also desired by this law.

The problem is that the police are given great powers and measures to limit freedom of expression, without providing for the assessment of public interest, as well as the implementation of reasonable measures and balance in any type of restriction of the right to freedom of expression and opinion.

We can talk about legal pressure on all free-thinking people – from citizens, who are currently the most affected by criminal proceedings because of their expressed opinions, to journalists and civil society activists.

And finally, it is also problematic that the state of BiH has criminal legislation that treats many of the issues listed in the draft of this misdemeanor law.

Of course, the possibility of “spillover” of the same or similar legal solutions to other cantons is no less dangerous.

Some have already done it before, such as the Una-Sana Canton, and there were similar initiatives in the Parliament of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina. I was a member of the working group that discussed the draft law in several sessions, we disagreed on many issues. Now the proposer of the law is on the move – the Sarajevo Canton Government, and later the Assembly.

I sincerely hope that the law will not be submitted to the parliamentary procedures before all articles that include the media and social networks, as well as misdemeanor measures and procedures against hate speech and fake news are omitted from it.

ONLY ONE IN FOUR ATTACKERS OF JOURNALISTS WERE PUNISHED

Cenzolovka: Safejournalists recorded an increased number of attacks on journalists in Bosnia and Herzegovina. In particular, there were attacks in Banja Luka due to the LGBT parade in Mostar, when the owner of Hercegovina.info Marija Ćosić had all her car tires punctured twice, as well as the attack in Brčko on the owner of the Times.ba portal, Mirza Dervišević. How do these attacks affect the work of journalists?

Rudić: In the helpline for journalists, we registered 87 different cases of violations of media freedom and safety of journalists during 2023, which is 10.12 percent more than in 2022. The largest number (21) refers to political pressure, verbal threats (17), six are physical attacks, seven death threats, eight hate speech, etc.

The problem is the high level of impunity and the slowness in the investigation of attacks, including the cases you mentioned. Only 10 cases reported in 2023 were resolved in that year before the courts or other competent institutions. In general, among journalists and the media, there is a great distrust in the work of the judiciary, since the success rate in punishing those who attack journalists is only 25.4 percent.

This is unacceptable, and we in BH journalists are talking about the inaccessibility of justice for journalists. This has a discouraging effect on all journalists and the media, especially younger colleagues. If we add to this a large number of criminal charges in Republika Srpska, then we are truly witnessing a deliberate and brutal suppression of media freedom and freedom of speech in BiH. And that in front of the eyes of the European institutions in Bosnia and Herzegovina and after the country received candidate status.

Source: Cenzolovka, BH novinari

In one of the largest media companies in Croatia – HANZA MEDIA – negotiations on the Collective Agreement have begun. The Trade Union of Croatian Journalists (TUCJ) and the Trade Union of Graphic and Media Workers are advocating for improvements in material and labor conditions. At the negotiating meeting of the employer and union negotiating committees at HANZA MEDIA, held on February 20, 2024, the union negotiating committee proposed a negotiation protocol and welcomed the strengthening of social dialogue as an important step for protecting labor and professional rights in this media company, but also as a positive indicator of changes in the media sector, SNH stated.

In all European Union member states, as stipulated by the European Directive on Adequate European Wages, 80 percent of workers should be covered by collective agreements, with each country required to adopt an action plan to meet this quota. The actual situation is far from this goal, as in 19 out of the 27 countries, this is not the case. Among the countries where the coverage of workers by collective agreements is lower than this threshold is Croatia, where collective agreements cover about 55 percent of workers. In the media sector, this statistic is even worse, as new collective agreements are being negotiated in public media services, while there is still a lack of a positive environment for quality social dialogue in private media. By emphasizing the priority of strengthening job protection through collective agreements for the EU, collective bargaining has become a politically stable and inclusive element of economic development.

A collective agreement is a legal document agreed upon between the employer and the union. It regulates issues related to employment relationships – working hours, duration of daily, weekly, and annual leave, salary levels, and salary supplements, as well as issues related to employment such as health and safety protection at work, organization of workers’ meetings, protection of union representatives, etc. Unlike the Work Rules, which the employer unilaterally adopts and can change despite opposition from worker representatives in a very short time, workers through collective bargaining via unions have the right to equal dialogue.

The start of negotiations at HANZA MEDIA is an indicator of changes in the media sector, the strengthening of quality and constructive social dialogue, and we believe it is just the beginning of better protection of the labor and professional rights of journalists and media workers in Croatia.

The European Federation of Journalists (EFJ) and International Federation of Journalists (IFJ)  reiterate their call for justice for the murder, six years ago, of investigative reporter Ján Kuciak and his fiancee Martina Kušnírová.

Ján Kuciak and Martina Kušnírová were shot and killed at their home on 21 February 2018. Kuciak had regularly reported on cases of corruption for online news website Aktuality.sk. His investigative reporting included articles on alleged tax fraud committed by prominent members of the business community, with suggested links to SMER party as well as organised crime groups.

Six years on, Kuciak’s and Kušnírová’s families are still struggling for justice.

The hitmen who committed the murder have been brought to justice and sentenced to long prison terms. However, the alleged mastermind of the murder, businessman Marian Kočner, continues to evade justice.

“This culture of impunity and the lack of concrete measures to re-establish a genuine system of press freedom in Slovakia are the result of criminal behaviour by the government in power, which is characterised by hostile rhetoric from senior politicians, often at the root of despicable smear campaigns,” said EFJ President Maja Sever. “This must stop!”

We demand Slovak authorities to take action to protect journalists and the right of citizens to access information:

• it is time to put an end to impunity for the murderers of journalists;
• it is time to demand that politicians respect journalists;
• it is time to guarantee the independence of the management of public television RTVS and to set up a stable and independent funding for public service media;
• it is time to adopt rules for the fair and transparent distribution of state advertising;
• it is time to adopt a law prohibiting politicians from owning media;
• it is time to decriminalize defamation.

Much remains to be done to establish a regime of genuine press freedom in Slovakia.

Source: EFJ

Dealing with organised crime and risking your life, needing police protection just to be able to do your job and live your everyday life. Jelena Jovanović, journalist from the Montenegrin newspaper Vijesti, explains what it is like to live under police protection

For over two years Jelena Jovanović, a journalist for the newspaper Vijesti in Podgorica, has lived under police protection: she gets up in the morning, goes about her day and goes to sleep in the evening accompanied by the officers in charge of protecting her. Jovanović has been dealing with issues related to organised crime for years and, due to her work, she is exposed almost daily to risks that threaten her safety. Highlighting the dangers faced by those investigating corruption and organised crime go far beyond “the usual”, Jovanović explains that when a journalist comes into possession of compromising information, on politicians or on prominent members of the criminal underworld, they begin to be perceived as a threat to the interests of powerful groups and individuals involved in criminal and corrupt activities.

“From that moment – and I have experienced many throughout my career – there is no longer anything ordinary or spontaneous. As I get closer to the truth, the threats become more and more concrete and the ‘benevolent advice’ to give up leaves room for attempts to intimidate me. In recent years, it has happened several times that they also tried to stop my investigations with hateful messages on social media and attempts to criminalise and discredit my work. These situations, in my opinion, are real turning points in which the journalist, subjected to unbearable pressure, finds themselves at a crossroads: give up or continue to risk their life to uncover the truth”.

How much has your private and professional life changed since you received police protection?

My life has changed significantly since I was first assigned an escort towards the end of 2018. Fortunately, that first experience did not last long, unlike the current one that began in August 2021.

I have been forced to change my habits, to give up travel and often concerts, theatre performances, sporting events, mountain walks… In simple words, for almost two and a half years now I have not been able to freely go about my daily life, because for me those places are no longer safe. This says a lot about the changes that have occurred in my private and professional life.

Do you believe that the security services have taken all the necessary measures to protect you from those who put your life in danger?

The very fact that I am here talking to you answers your question. However, I am aware that no institution in the world can guarantee absolute protection to anyone. This is even more true for Montenegro, where dozens of police officials had close links with the criminal groups on which my investigations were focused.

For me it was devastating to read the transcripts of messages exchanged through the Sky application, where some senior police officers, whom I had previously consulted, forwarded my questions to the leaders of some criminal groups, reached an agreement with them on the answers to give me and promised that they would ‘explain’ certain things to me. In that context, ‘explain’ could have several meanings, but it certainly could not mean anything good. That experience, however, made me reflect, making me even more convinced that, in a society like the Montenegrin one, keeping quiet and keeping aloof is more dangerous than speaking openly about anomalies that we witness.

Does living under protection make it more difficult for you to do journalism?

It is a significant obstacle. Some sources refuse to meet me because they do not trust the police and fear that the officers tasked with protecting my physical safety are actually here to take note of my encounters. However, the work I do every day shows that somehow I manage to move forward.

How safe can journalists feel in Montenegro?

It is completely inappropriate to talk about the safety of journalists in a country where, twenty years after the murder of  Duško Jovanović, the instigators have still not been identified, where we do not know who brutally attacked Mladen Stojović and Tufik Softić, who shot Olivera Lakić, who placed a bomb under the windows of Mihailo Jovović’s office, then chief editor of the newspaper Vijesti… In a country where clarity has never been reached on a number of attacks on journalists and assets owned by the media – a country deeply divided, so much so that even the media landscape is polarised – those who do journalism respecting the ethical rules of the profession almost daily end up in the crosshairs of various obscure structures and individuals linked to them. Instead, those who, unfortunately, continue to ridicule our beautiful profession in their articles and reports – which are anything but the search for the truth – feel safer than morally upright journalists. However, I believe that their conscience – assuming they have it – is much more tormented, because they too know that the truth is like water – sooner or later it finds its way.

Do you feel protected by living under police protection?

The police officers who are tasked with protecting me are well-trained professionals who I fully trust and I am infinitely grateful to always have them by my side. However, no one in the world can feel completely safe, and not even me. But I’m not afraid, and for me this is much more important than the feeling of safety or insecurity. Helping me overcome my fears are my family, friends and colleagues, but also all those good people who support my work.

Source: OBCT

In front of the Journalists’ House in Zagreb, the Croatian Journalists’ Association (CJA) and the Trade Union of Croatian Journalists (TUCJ) held a gathering expressing opposition to the extradition and solidarity with Julian Assange as his hearing took place at the Royal Court of Justice in London regarding the extradition case initiated by the United States against the founder of WikiLeaks.

“The idea behind this global action is that the potential extradition of Julian Assange is a warning message to all journalists, citizens, the public, and the freedom of our work. We want to send a message of support and oppose the extradition, which we consider a direct attack on press freedom,” said TUCJ President Maja Sever at the gathering.

Branko Mijić, a member of the executive board of the CJA, emphasized that the potential extradition of Assange is a political persecution that will determine the fate of the journalistic profession.

– What has Julian Assange done to become the number one enemy of the most powerful world power, which planned his abduction and murder, and now wants to “slow motion” liquidate him in one of its dungeons? Was it his stance that no government has the right to conceal crimes or commit them in our name, or was it his fatal belief in truth as the supreme power belonging to every individual? Yes, Assange took on powerful abusers, and all these years he had insufficient and feeble assistance from us, his colleagues. Only the bravest and the best among us knew that without a free Assange, the existence of free media would no longer be possible. If Assange is declared guilty, it will mean the death of investigative journalism. And that should serve the purpose of controlling power in democracies, not be treated as espionage and a threat to national security, as in autocracies, said Mijić, adding that Assange is not a robber, not a criminal deserving lifelong imprisonment, but a fighter for a transparent state without secrets.

– Therefore, we must ask why his persecution and trial, his human rights and his freedom, his sacrifice are not on the front pages and headlines of the so-called Western liberal mainstream media? Just because the gulag where he has been imprisoned for five years is not in the Arctic Circle of northeastern Siberia but in southeast London, in the residence of His Majesty for the accommodation of terrorists, serial killers, rapists, and pedophiles? And now, as all free-thinking people of the world raise their voices like us and say “Free Assange, free him now!”, now that with this symbolic act we globally declare the best in this profession an honorary member of the Croatian Journalists’ Association, haughty remarks are heard from professional circles: “Assange is not a journalist”! Even if he is not by profession, Julian Assange is the greatest journalist and editor of the 21st century by his mission! Because, if it weren’t so, the WikiLeaks team of five would not have succeeded in publishing more secret information than all the world’s journalism combined, nor would they have kneeled behind their release begging The New York Times, The Guardian, Der Spiegel, El Pais, and Le Monde, whose readers declared him Person of the Year by online voting, just like Time magazine did in 2010, said Mijić, emphasizing that what Assange will be remembered for in this profession can be called scientific journalism, journalism that must be verifiable.

– And is there anything better than original documents, first-hand reports, recorded videos, dispatched cables that will confirm every conclusion, every thought, every fact you publish? No one has ever denied the editor and journalist Julian Assange; the truth of his journalism is one hundred percent, so there has never been a need for correction or apology for what WikiLeaks has published! And those who continue to systematically slander Assange to divert attention from the crimes he has uncovered, those who “redirect the discussion from the content of the documents containing evidence of crimes, corruption, and abuse of power to the one who disclosed the documents and thus allegedly endangered national, or, worse, Western security”, those “who equate democracy with the ruling regime” have successfully retired as journalists, giving up not only their own but also media freedoms as such, Mijić concluded.

The British judiciary began reviewing Julian Assange’s request on Tuesday seeking to challenge the decision to extradite him to the United States for publishing classified documents, without the presence of the WikiLeaks founder who, according to his lawyer, is ill and does not feel well enough to attend the hearing.

American prosecutors want to try the 52-year-old Assange on 18 counts related to his publication of a vast amount of confidential U.S. military and diplomatic reports via WikiLeaks. They argue that the leaked information endangered their agents’ lives and that there is no justification for such action. In the event of a lawsuit against Assange, he faces 175 years in prison for violating the 1917 Espionage Act.

Assange’s numerous supporters consider him a hero of resistance to the establishment and a journalist criminally persecuted for revealing atrocities and alleged war crimes committed by the U.S.

The Digital Services Act, aimed at curbing the spread of illegal content online and creating a safe online environment for all, will start applying to all internet intermediaries in the EU from Saturday.

The Digital Services Act has already been applied since the end of August 2023 to 19 very large online platforms and search engines that have an average of more than 45 million monthly users.

Three other platforms designated as very large online platforms in December 2023 must fulfill the strictest obligations of the Digital Services Act by the end of April.

“Starting tomorrow, the Digital Services Act will apply to all internet platforms accessed by users in the EU. Users, member states, and platforms can now use tools from the Digital Services Act to shape a safer and more transparent internet,” said Executive Vice President of the Commission Margrethe Vestager.

“Tomorrow marks a new era. A safer online space, transparency and accountability, better protection against illegal content, and empowerment of users,” said Commissioner for the Internal Market Thierry Breton.

Platforms not designated as very large online platforms or very large online search engines will be under the supervision, at the member state level, of an independent regulatory body acting as a national coordinator for digital services (DSC).

National coordinators will be responsible for ensuring that these platforms operate in accordance with the rules. DSCs will monitor and enforce the Digital Services Act for platforms established in their country.

The Digital Services Act imposes greater transparency in content moderation and sets rules to end opaque and deceptive practices on the internet. These provisions apply to all hosting service providers, online marketplaces, and platforms operating in the EU.

Together with the Digital Markets Act, the Digital Services Act represents a milestone in internet regulation. These two laws aim to create safer online environments, establish clear responsibilities for platforms such as online marketplaces and social media, and address current challenges in the digital environment, including illegal products, hate speech, and misinformation, as well as transparent delivery and control of data.

The Safety of Journalists Toolbox presents national instruments and initiatives from across the OSCE region and makes them accessible to interested stakeholders. It is a practical instrument to showcase existing measures on the safety of journalists from across the entire OSCE region and thereby encourage further action. The Toolbox is the result of the work carried out in the framework of the OSCE RFoM project on the Safety of Journalists | OSCE and builds upon longstanding OSCE commitments. It provides an accessible and user-friendly set of tools to guide not only participating States, but also media outlets, journalists and civil society on how to implement relevant OSCE commitments and possibly develop National Action Plans on the Safety of Journalists.

With the adoption of OSCE Ministerial Council Decision 3/18 on the Safety of Journalists in 2018, the participating States committed to bringing their laws, policies and practices pertaining to media freedom fully in compliance with their international obligations and OSCE commitments and to promoting an environment for journalists where they can perform their work independently and without undue interference. The national instruments and initiatives included in this Toolbox take stock of existing policies and measures in OSCE participating States to promote and ensure the safety of journalists, with a forward-looking approach, taking into consideration possible improvements and existing gaps.

The Toolbox will be updated on a regular basis to include new developments and measures adopted by OSCE participating States related to journalists’ safety. The RFoM Office is planning different activities to make the Toolbox known to relevant stakeholders, including the media, journalists and state authorities (incl. police, judiciary, prosecution, etc.) across the OSCE region. This will be done inter alia in partnership with the field operations and their networks, as well as with other key partners of the OSCE RFoM, such as UNESCO, Council of Europe and other international or regional organizations and civil society.

The Toolbox

Source: EFJ