Srpski telegraf, Alo, Informer, Vecernje novosti, Kurir, Blic and Politika received contracts worth at least 108 million dinars (more than 850 000 euros) last year through public procurement, according to IJAS research. According to the latest Report on monitoring compliance with the Serbian Journalists’ Code of Ethics in daily newspapers published last year by the Press Council, these media violated the Code a total of 2,579 times. The Press Council’s Complaints Committee decided 22 times last year whether these media violated the Code.

Publishers of printed and online editions of the aforementioned media, according to the data of the Public Procurement Portal, received contracts worth at least 108 million dinars last year, mainly for advertising of state enterprises and institutions.

Vecernje novosti received the most money through public procurement, a little over 21 million dinars (over 175 000 euros).

The total number of articles by title in which Vecernje Novosti violated the Code of Journalists of Serbia is 328, according to the latest monitoring of the Press Council. The Appeals Commission, during the last year, decided twice on the violation of the Code, once for the printed edition and the portal, and both times it was decided that the Code was violated.

Politika received 17.7 million dinars (around 151 000 euros) through public procurement, but, of all observed media, it violated the Code the least, a total of 38 times, according to monitoring, while the Commission did not receive a single complaint regarding the writing of this media.

Alo received 17.5 million dinars (around 149 000 euros), and it had 581 violations of the Code. The Complaints Committee received four complaints about Alo’s texts and each time it was decided that the Code had been violated.

Blic received 13.6 million dinars (around 116 000 euros). The total number of texts by title in which the Code of Journalists of Serbia was violated was 174, while the Commission made a decision that the printed edition violated the Code once, and the online edition 3 times.

SrpskiTelegraf received 13.4 million dinars (over 114 000 euros), and had the most violations, as many as 658. Since SrpskiTelegraf does not recognize the jurisdiction of the Press Council, the Complaints Commission issued four public warnings for violating the Code, twice for the printed edition and twice for the online edition, i.e. website republika.rs.

Kurir had 288 violations, with a downward trend, as seen in the report. The Complaints Commission has twice ruled that Kurir violated the Code. This media, mainly for advertising in printed and online editions, received contracts worth 12.6 million dinars (over 107 000 euros)  through public procurement.

According to the number of violations of the code, Informer is in third place, right behind Srpski Telegraf and Alo, with 512 violations. The appeals committee mostly decided on the texts published in the Informer and a public reprimand was issued eight times, four each for the print and online editions. Despite that, Informer was awarded 12.5 million dinars (around 106 000 euros) through public procurement.

The amount of money received by the media through public procurement and the number of violations according to the monitoring of the Press Council

source: Flourish

There is no money for media that violate the Code through tenders, but this does not apply to public procurement 

According to the new Law on Public Information and Media, which has been in effect since November 4 last year, projects are evaluated according to the extent to which the activities can contribute to the realization of public interest in the field of public information, but also according to the extent to which the specific media adheres to professional and ethical standards.

This would mean that the authority that allocates the funds must obtain data from the competent bodies (REM for electronic media and the Press Council for printed and online media) that in the year preceding the competition, no measure was imposed due to violation of legal provisions, that is, professional ethical standards.

If the media still violated the law or the Journalists’ Code of Ethics, the severity of the injury and the number of imposed measures are taken into account, as well as the behavior of the media after the imposed measure. These provisions will be defined in detail in the new Rulebook on the co-financing of media content production projects, which is in the process of being drafted by the Ministry of Information and Telecommunications.

However, there is no guarantee that in practice a specific media will be punished by being deprived of funds in media contests. Namely, the old Law also contained a similar provision according to which the commission that decides on the distribution of funds through a competition had to assess to what extent “the participant in the competition provides a greater guarantee of adherence to professional and ethical media standards”.

This meant that the commission had to seek the opinion of the regulatory and self-regulatory body, but in practice their opinion did not influence the decision on the allocation of funds.

When it comes to public procurement, the behavior of the media does not influence the decisions of the authorities that tender them.

When announcing public procurements, the contracting authority selects the bidder based on other, more technical criteria, without going into the essence of what the media deal with: type of media, circulation, i.e. viewership and listening, coverage of the territory, dynamics of exposure, etc.

Although there is no legal obligation to evaluate the decisions of the Press Council, every contracting authority that carries out public procurement procedures should still look at all aspects of the responsible behavior of the bidders to whom it awards contracts and evaluate such behavior through its selection criteria because it disposes of the funds of the citizens of Serbia. Especially if these behaviors are negative in the areas that the media deal with and are the subject of the services that are procured, and it is clear that the decisions of the Press Council speak of hundreds of violations of the code of journalists of Serbia. On the other hand, numerous public procurements are not only related to advertising, but represent other types of services provided by the media, such as writing certain texts whose topics are almost identical to the topics from project co-financing.

Taking into account the above, for the media that violate the Code, there is no fear for those who violate ethics, that they will be deprived of money from the budget.

Institutions that have decided to advertise in the media that violate the Code

In the media that, according to the monitoring of the Press Council, most often violate the code, the following institutions decided to advertise:The Post of Serbia, Radio Television of Serbia, Provincial Secretariat for Regional Development, Interregional Cooperation and Local Self-Government, Municipality of Stara Pazova, Republic Fund for Pension and Disability Insurance, State Lottery of Serbia, Tourist Organization of Serbia, City Administration for Communal Affairs Kragujevac, City Administration for construction land and investments Novi Sad, City of Cacak, City Administration for Property Affairs, Urban Planning, Construction and Legislation Kragujevac, Municipal Administration of Backa Palanka Municipality, Provincial Secretariat for Health, Republic Directorate for Property of the Republic of Serbia, JP EPS, Provincial Secretariat for Education, City Bor City Administration, City of Kikinda, Agency for Licensing Bankruptcy Trustees, City of Niš, Ministry of Economy, Ministry of Culture, JP Srbijašume, Municipal Administration of Vrnjacka Banja Municipality, Administration for Capital Investments of AP Vojvodina, Directorate for Building Land and Construction of Belgrade, Ministry of Construction and Public company funeral services Belgrade.

FakeNews Tragac: Golden Pinocchio for Informer, Silver for Zero Point, and Bronze for Serbian Telegraph

The FakeNews Tragac portal annually awards Gold, Silver and Bronze Pinocchio awards to the media that, according to their records, most often spread false and manipulative news during the previous year.

After six more complex investigations, the FakeNews Tragač team compiled a list of media, and the first on that list is Informer, which earned this media the Golden Pinocchio for the third time. The Zero Point is in second place, and the Srpski telegraf is in third place. During the past year, the FakeNews Tragač editorial office detected misinformation in 83 media outlets, to which should be added a large number of inaccurate content originating from social networks.

The Croatian Journalists’ Association (CJA) is calling on all parliamentary representatives not to accept and reject the “Law of Dangerous Intentions,” which will be protested against on January 31, not only in Zagreb at St. Mark’s Square but simultaneously in Split, in front of the Croatian National Theater, as announced today at the CJA press conference held near the fence at Ćirilometodska Street on St. Mark’s Square.

Dusan Miljuš, President of the Judicial Reporters’ Section of CJA, emphasized that there was no need for amendments to the Criminal Code because existing provisions and regulations already provide solutions and sanctions for those who disclose information. Miljuš added that about ten days ago, he requested a response from the Ministry of Justice regarding which countries have such legal provisions, as they claim.

– However, I did not receive a concrete answer, except for the usual formulation that other countries have it, and they also penalize journalists. This is primarily a law that intimidates not only journalists, and it is a potentially very dangerous practice. If such a Criminal Code is adopted, the work of journalists covering judicial proceedings will be hindered, if not impossible. There are numerous examples of scandals, such as Fimi Media, which would not have been exposed if they were not reported in the newspapers.

CJA President Hrvoje Zovko reiterated that this is an act of aggression against the journalistic profession and public interest.

– I have read these days that some coalition partners of the HDZ did not understand what it was about, and we sent them our comments on the law eight days ago. We hope they will familiarize themselves with what is happening and reject voting for this law of dangerous intentions. CJA has also sent a letter to the Commissioner of the European Commission for Justice informing him of everything that is happening.

Zovko also commented on the green light given by Prime Minister Andrej Plenković and the Government for the appointment of Ivan Turudić as the Chief State Attorney, emphasizing that he is a fervent supporter of “Lex AP,” as the amendments to the Criminal Code have been called in public. In the past, Turudić has also been criticized for his behavior in legal proceedings against journalists.

– We will continue to oppose “Lex AP,” and this protest is not the final act. We call on all colleagues to continue publishing information that is of public interest. CJA will always stand by them and protect their rights in all situations, Zovko emphasized.

Following the Serbian December 17 elections, the Regulatory Body for Electronic Media (REM) published a report on media election campaign coverage, which contained no data on the television stations with national broadcasting licenses. The REM claimed it had none, which was not true, and the Centre for Investigative Journalism of Serbia (CINS) revealed what this data shows.

When the Bureau for Social Research (BIRODI) think-tank requested monitoring results for Pink TV, Happy TV, Prva TV and B92 TV, the REM briefly replied that “it has no other data besides the already published data.”

The Journalists’ Association of Serbia (UNS) said the REM monitored these television stations’ reporting and that this data exists.

The Centre for Investigative Journalism of Serbia (CINS) has had access to the data.

REM Council chief Olivera Zekic told N1 that none of what CINS published is true. “None of the things CINS published and other rushed to pass on is neither true nor in our report because it simply has not been completed. The data is still being reviewed, we are still drafting the report and any attempt to draw something out of it is nothing more than lies and manipulation,” Zekic said.

On Pink TV, the Aleksandar Vucic-Serbia Must Not Stop election ticket got over 18 hours of airtime in the election campaign programming, while all others had a total of around five hours.

The election ticket assembled around the ruling Serbian Progressive Party (SNS) got approximately 20 hours of airtime on Happy TV, followed by the Serbian Radical Party (SRS) with some six hours. A total of 11 hours was shared between all other election participants.

B92 TV devoted over 12 and a half hours to the Aleksandar Vucic-Serbia Must Not Stop ticket, while all other election participants got about three hours. On Prva TV Vucic’s Progressives were given just over eight hours of programming, and all others a little less than five hours.

The huge difference in air time is not the only issue. All these television stations reportedly largely negatively about the opposition, while only positive things were said about the government.

Zoran Gavrilovic of BIRODI told CINS that there is a system that produces inequality, i.e., favors Aleksandar Vucic, whether he is a participant of an election, or is backing an election ticket.

“When you look at the time, the tone and the topics, this is simply Aleksandar Vucic’s propaganda that is broadcast through a system of controlled media,” he said.

The REM report also shows that, in the election campaign on television stations with national frequencies, analysts mostly promoted government activities and criticized the opposition.

Source: N1

Journalists sometimes find themselves in high-risk environments for their physical safety, because of the nature of the assignment or because they are ill-equipped and poorly trained in safety issues. According to a 2022 EFJ survey about the risk perceptions and safety concerns of journalists in Europe, media professionals seriously lack training and awareness while threats and intimidation at work are increasing.

Based on these findings, the ‘Local Cross-Border Investigative Journalism’ (CBLocal) project integrated an important element of journalists’ safety in its grant programme supporting cross-border investigations. Four journalists underwent an online safety course for two weeks with media safety expert David Bevan, security advisor for Al Jazeera and various prominent international journalists.

We spoke to two of the grantees, Carolina Rapezzi, a freelance photojournalist and Daniela Sala from FADA Collective, a collective of independent Italian journalists. We asked them about their perception of safety, where they’ve received advice from in the past and what they thought about the online safety course.

Were you aware of safety issues before taking this course? What kind of support have you received so far?

Carolina: Safety has always been a priority, even before the course and this is thanks to professional colleagues who have been close to me. I consider my colleagues’ support in the field as vital. Editors’ approach can be very supportive or very frustrating when desk needs are too “distant” from the reality on the ground.

Daniela: Yes, even before the course I was aware of safety. The knowledge I got in this field though, was mostly through peers and spontaneous advice and information exchange with other colleagues, therefore to have a space and time to discuss the issue with experts was really valuable. Recently, I was also able to attend an official HEFAT course thanks to a bursary by the Rory Peck Trust.

What did you think of the online safety course? Have you used any of the knowledge and techniques in your daily work?

C: The online course was very useful because it provided manuals with detailed information I can always go back to. I read it again recently before travelling to Israel and West Bank. Even if it’s not always possible to apply all the procedures it’s good to have them in mind and to know the options to those procedures.

D: The online course was yet another valuable opportunity to reflect on the importance of taking safety into account. As freelancers, unfortunately very often our only relationship with media companies and editors are when we pitch and file the stories, and more often than not, editors are not taking responsibility for our safety while reporting on the ground. This is why I believe it is crucial for us to gain as much knowledge as possible on how to prevent and mitigate risks. The course gave me a much better understanding of risk assessment and risk mitigation. The concept of a travel risk assessment was not entirely new to me, but thanks to this course I learned and improved my way of using this important tool. I also gained further knowledge around travel insurance. And in my following reporting to Iraq, I did apply this knowledge.

Still few journalists are trained on safety and those who are do not update their knowledge regularly. The situation is even more precarious for freelance journalists, who must self-fund their training. Did the course make you prioritise your safety more before carrying out an assignment? 

C: The course gave me an in-depth knowledge of how to calculate risks and I always try to prioritise safety. I think safety training should be compulsory for journalists and, in a slightly different form, for editors too as even if they are not on the ground, it’s important that they understand the circumstances we work in. I also think safety courses should be free for all journalists working in certain areas and that the quality of the training should be coherent across companies.

D: To some extent yes. I believe that as journalists we bear a responsibility not only to our own safety but also to the safety of our colleagues and to the local sources and local communities. In this sense, to prioritise safety for me it also means to carry out our assignment doing whatever we can to prevent harm to other people. And to be capable of stepping back if this risk exists and we can not mitigate it. Depending on what kind of assignments and stories journalists work on, I believe that safety training is crucial. I believe trade unions and national associations of journalists should provide such training for free, on a regular basis.

What was your main concern regarding the project you are working on?

C: My biggest concern is the impunity for those targeting our job.

D: Mine is usually arrest/interrogation by State and non-State actors – with the risk of being forced to reveal the identity of local sources. Working mostly as a photographer, I am aware that sometimes my camera can attract further, unwanted attention, by authorities, especially when I am trying to visually document certain things in areas where I might not officially be allowed to. I always make sure to have a detailed knowledge of the area and to always follow the advice of the team members who are local in the area. I also make sure to delete and safely store into encrypted HD all the photos and visual materials that might be problematic – every day and whenever I am travelling. Together with the freelance colleagues from the collective I am part of, FADA, we also always have a back-up group on Signal that the colleagues from the collective use for daily – or if needed more frequent – check-ins, with the reporting team on the ground.

Source: EFJ

The European Federation of Journalists (EFJ) today joined 17 other media freedom and journalist organisations in writing to the EU’s top diplomat, Josep Borrell, the High Representative for the European Union on Foreign and Security Policy, urging him to call for the protection of journalists and respect for the freedom of the press amidst the Israel-Gaza war.

The letter outlines the unprecedented number of journalists who died: the Israel-Gaza war one of the single worst events for the loss of journalistic life in such a short space of time. On 15 January 2024, the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) documented the killings of 96 journalists: 89 Palestinian journalists, four Israeli journalists and three Lebanese journalists.

The unprecedented killing of so many journalists in so brief a period of time “has obvious and profound implications for the ability of the public, including the citizens of the European Union, to be informed about a conflict with local, regional, and global implications,” said the letter. “We are writing to entreat you to act immediately and decisively to promote the conditions for safe and unrestricted reporting on the hostilities.”

The EFJ and our global network have previously called for the targeted and indiscriminate killing of journalists and civilians in Gaza by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) to stop, and stressed that perpetrators must be held fully accountable for any violations of the Geneva Conventions and other international human rights treaties and obligations.

Read the joint letter in full below.

Mr. Josep Borrell Fontelles, High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy/ Vice-President of the Commission

Re: Protecting journalists and press freedom in the Israel-Gaza war

Dear High Representative Borrell,

At least 83 journalists and media workers have been killed in Israel, Gaza, and Lebanon amid hostilities between Israeli forces and Palestinian and Lebanese armed groups since October 7, when Hamas-led fighters carried out horrific attacks and hostage-taking in Israel. The killing of so many journalists in so brief a period of time is unprecedented. It has obvious and profound implications for the ability of the public, including the citizens of the European Union, to be informed about a conflict with local, regional, and global implications. We are writing to entreat you to act immediately and decisively to promote the conditions for safe and unrestricted reporting on the hostilities.

According to the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), more journalists have been killed in the first 10 weeks of the hostilities than have ever been killed in a single country over an entire year. Four journalists were killed in Hamas’ assault on October 7, and at least 75 journalists have been killed since, almost all of them by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), according to CPJ.

There is growing evidence that, in some cases, the IDF may have deliberately targeted these journalists. Credible reports by human rights and media organizations indicate that the IDF strikes in southern Lebanon on October 13 that killed Reuters journalist Issam Abdallah and injured six other journalists from Reuters, Al Jazeera, and Agence France-Presse were unlawful and apparently deliberate.1 The IDF has also acknowledged deliberately targeting a car in which journalists were traveling on January 7, killing two journalists and seriously injuring a third. In at least two other cases, journalists reported receiving threats from Israeli officials and IDF officers before their family members were killed in Gaza. Of course, the targeted or indiscriminate killing of journalists, if committed deliberately or recklessly, is a war crime, and the International Criminal Court has said that it will investigate reports of war crimes committed against journalists in Gaza.

Journalists reporting on the war contend with challenges beyond the ever-present risk of death. These challenges include the refusal of Israel and Egypt to allow international journalists access to Gaza except under Israeli military escort (and even then, with restrictions on reporting),2internet shutdowns that prevent news and testimonies from Gaza from reaching the outside world, arbitrary detention, and harassment and intimidation. In addition, the Israeli government is requiring media outlets in Israel to submit almost any detailed reporting on the war to its “Censorship” office for review, while banning reporting on significant topics of public interest related to the war in Gaza. It has also acted against its domestic press, for example, by threatening to retaliate against the country’s oldest newspaper, Haaretz, for its coverage of the war, and threatening to shut down local bureau offices of foreign news agencies.

The European Union describes its relationship with Israel as “one of the most wide-ranging and deepest relationships that the EU enjoys with any third country in the world”. As such, the European Union will be judged on how this relationship can ensure that all parties to the conflict abide by international law, including the protection of journalists who are civilians and must be able to freely and safely report on every aspect of the conflict. We would therefore urge you to:

• Publicly call on all parties to the armed conflict to respect the right of journalists to report on the hostilities, ensure journalists’ safety, allow all journalists seeking to evacuate from Gaza to do so, abjure the indiscriminate and deliberate killing of journalists, promptly and thoroughly investigate all attacks on journalists, and hold accountable individuals found to be responsible for them.
• Demand that Israel and Egypt provide international journalists with independent access to Gaza, and that Israel cease communication blackouts and take whatever steps are necessary to assure the safety of journalists admitted to Gaza as well as those already working there.
• Demand that Israel allow the passage of personal protective equipment and materials used for newsgathering, such as helmets, flak jackets, phone chargers, eSIM cards, and laptops, to reporters in Gaza and the West Bank.
• Support swift, transparent, and independent investigations into the killing of all journalists and ending the longstanding pattern of impunity in the killings of journalists by the IDF.

Thank you for your attention to these matters.

Signed:

• Access Now
• ARTICLE 19: Global Campaign for Free Expression (ARTICLE 19)
• Association of European Journalists (AEJ)
• Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies (CIHRS)
• Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ)
• DEMAS – Association for Democracy Assistance and Human Rights
• European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
• Free Press Unlimited (FPU)
• Index on Censorship
• International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH)
• International Press Institute (IPI)
• Media Diversity Institute (MDI)
• OBC Transeuropa (OBCT)
• PEN International
• Public Media Alliance (PMA)
• Rory Peck Trust (RPT)
• South East Europe Media Organisation (SEEMO)
• The Daphne Caruana Galizia Foundation

Source: EJF

The Croatian Journalists’ Association will organize a protest on Wednesday, January 31, at 11 a.m. at St. Mark’s Square in Zagreb against the “Law of Dangerous Intentions”, announced at a press conference of the Croatian Journalists’ Association under the title “Stop the Law of Dangerous Intentions” at St. Mark’s Square in response to amendments to the Crominal Code introducing the criminal offense of unauthorized disclosure of the content of investigative or evidentiary actions.

CJA President Hrvoje Zovko called on all citizens to participate in the protest at St. Mark’s Square.

This concerns all of us, and through this protest and all other legitimate means, we will collectively resist and fight against the evident aggression against the journalistic profession. It’s time to say enough and stop the state aggression carried out by Prime Minister Plenković, the government, and coalition partners against public interest, said Zovko, illustrating with the example of Klara Buntić how dangerous and detrimental this law, known as “Lex AP,” is to democracy.

If this law had been in force when Klara Buntić shared her difficult and horrifying story and fate, she would have been targeted by this law. Therefore, this is an attack on all of us; we must stop the enactment of this law. Those who raise their hands for this law in the Parliament will be participants in the state aggression against public interest, Zovko said, adding that all this is happening precisely in the super-election year.

The fact that the proposer made an exception for journalists means nothing because, according to the law, journalists’ phones can be searched, they can be interrogated, and, therefore, systematically harassed. If this law is enacted, we will not stop. We will continue with actions, even if they arrest us, harass us, or whatever they do, Zovko said, adding that CJA will always stand behind journalists and defend the profession.

Ana Raić, the president of CJA’s Internet Journalists Branch, a journalist with a decade of experience covering sensitive events, spoke about the dangers posed by the enactment of this law, reminding that there have never been problems until the initials “AP” appeared in a text message exchange.

I can responsibly say that the problem arose only when these initials appeared. That’s when these criminal provisions started. No one can tell me that we have obstructed criminal proceedings and revealed secrets. It’s a farce that this law aims to protect privacy or prevent the breakthrough of an investigative process, Raić said, adding that journalists will never reveal their sources, which also means they will be harassed for it.
Goran Gazdek, a member of CJA’s Executive Board, emphasized that local media and journalists have faced significant problems before because journalistic sources were targeted.

This law will completely prevent any contact with sources, and media in local communities can be shut down, Gazdek said.

MFRR partner organisations in Europe provide updates to annual EU rule of law monitoring tool: Updates on some of the biggest developments and threats to media freedom and pluralism across European Union Member States throughout 2023 were submitted to the EU Commission’s annual Rule of Law Report by partner organisations of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR).

On 15 January 2024, MFRR consortium partners Free Press Unlimited (FPU), International Press Institute (IPI) and the Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT) filed detailed submissions to the report on the topic of media freedom and pluralism in Hungary, Greece, Italy, Netherlands and the Czech Republic.

The joint and individual submissions provide information of major developments in the media freedom landscapes in each country and assess progress – or lack of progress – made on the EU Commission’s recommendations to each state in the 2023 report. They are based on advocacy and monitoring work carried out by MFRR partners throughout the year.

Key rule of law issues examined in the information submitted included the passing of the recent Sovereignty Protection Act by the government of Victor Orbán in Hungary, for which MFRR partners have called for infringement proceedings from the EU Commission. The submission on Hungary also detailed the major wave of cyber-attacks on critical and independent media outlets in 2023.

Submissions on Greece examined the ongoing state of total impunity for the 2021 murder of crime reporter Giorgos Karaivaz, the widow of whom MFRR partners met in Athens during a press freedom mission to the country in September 2023. The submission also examines a previous case of impunity for the assassination of a journalist and addresses the wider landscape for the safety of journalists in Greece, and efforts by the government to address it. The submission reflects especially on the effectiveness of the government Task Force for the safety of journalists – the establishment of which was a key recommendation in previous reports.

The submission on Italy provides details on several attacks on independent journalism by the far-right coalition government of Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni throughout 2023. Among the indicators identified as deteriorating signals of the rule of law in Italy include a steep increase in vexatious lawsuits filed against the press by leading government ministers; an alarming defamation bill advanced by the ruling coalition which risks producing a chilling effect on press freedom; a bill forbidding transcripts’ publications of pre-trial detention orders, which risks severely restricting court reporting; and escalating political pressure on the public broadcaster RAI.

In the Czech Republic meanwhile, the submission instead detailed positive legal reforms undertaken by the centre-right government of Petr Fiala, including welcome changes which strengthened the system for appointments to the supervisory bodies of the public broadcaster and improved conflicts of interest law that stops politicians from owning media. This latter change forced the former Prime Minister, Andrej Babis, leader of the opposition ANO party, to sell Mafra media, one of the country’s largest media companies. It also sets out the lack of progress in other areas.

In the Netherlands, the submission voiced concern over media pluralism as the Dutch landscape is characterized by a high concentration of foreign media ownership. This became more prevalent with the recent announcement that DPG Media intends to take over RTL Group. Furthermore, the submission also highlighted several threats to press freedom and the safety of journalists, including the recent wiretapping scandal of journalists of de Correspondent by the Public Prosecution Office; transnational repression of both foreign and Dutch journalists; and the rise of SLAPPs and other forms of legal intimidation such as the abusive lawsuit against Het Financieele Dagblad, which MFRR partners deplored. The submission focused on several positive developments too, including increased funding and capacity for the journalist safety initiative Persveilig and the passing of a new law to criminalise doxing.

MFRR partners continue to support the Rule of Law Report as a valuable tool that increases scrutiny of threats to the rule of law and media freedom and empowers civil society and Member State governments to promote and enforce the rule of law in the EU. To strengthen the process further, MFRR partners call for the EU Commission to provide more detailed country-specific recommendations to Member States on all areas of work, including media freedom and pluralism. These should be more targeted and provide concrete reforms and improvements to be undertaken to media regulatory bodies, systems for state support to media, media transparency registers, and the establishment of bodies dedicated to strengthening the protection and security of journalists.

Our organisations remain committed to documenting, reporting and raising awareness about all threats and attacks on media freedom, media pluralism and independent journalism across the bloc on our Mapping Media Freedom platform and look forward to continuing the consortium’s monitoring, advocacy and support work in 2024.

Signed:

Free Press Unlimited (FPU)

International Press Institute (IPI)

OBC Transeuropa 

European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF

European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)

Source: EFJ