Home Blog Page 361

Predsednik EFJ: Saslušaćemo obe sukobljene strane

0
Print

BEOGRAD, 11.01.2018. – Poseta predstavnika Evropske federacija novinara Srbiji i sastanci sa predstavnicima vlasti i novinarskih udruženja u vezi sa medijskim slobodama, izazvali su oštru polemiku u javnosti, koju je pokrenula savetnica predsednika Srbije Suzana Vasiljević. Ona je protestovala što predsednik EFJ Mogens Bliher Bjeregord nije tražio sastanak sa predsednikom Aleksandrom Vučićem i što će se u Srbiji susreti samo sa predstavnicima NUNS-a.

Nakon oštrog pisma upućenog Bjeregordu, predsednik EFJ je rekao da bi se rado susreo sa Vučićem tokom naredne sedmice, kada delegacija EFJ bude u Srbiji.

Upitan da li je će do susreta doći zbog pisma koje mu je Vasiljevićeva poslala, predsednik EFJ je za Danas odgovorio da nije bitno ko je kome prvi pisao, te da se raduje susretima sa zvaničnicima i novinarima u Srbiji.

– Kao i uvek u našim misijama, pokrenutih kako bismo se upoznali sa realnom medijskom situacijom, planirali smo da se sastanemo sa zvaničnicima, i uvek sam srećan kada uspemo da to učinimo na najvišem nivou. Organizacija takvih susreta je uvek teška i predstavlja “slagalicu”, uključujući gomilu mejlova, pisama i procedura, a ne vidim zbog čega je značajno ko je prvi poslao pismo – ističe Bjeregord za Danas. On dodaje da je najvažnije da se tokom posete saslušaju sve strane.

– Ovo je zajednička misija koja uključuje tri međunarodne organizacije i naše srpske članice, ali i gomilu zahteva za razgovore i sastanke. Stoga, ne bi bilo pošteno da u ovoj fazi govorimo o krajnjem ishodu, već će to biti učinjeno u Beogradu, na kraju misije – naglašava Bjeregord.

Savetnica predsednika Suzana Vasiljević je u pismu Bjeregordu navela da je Vučić “glavna meta većine kritika” koje dolaze iz Evropske federacije novinara i upitala zar ne bi bilo pošteno da njihovi predstavnici lično kažu Vučiću zašto smatraju njegov odnos prema medijima problematičnim i pruže mu priliku da iznese svoje viđenje situacije i svoje argumente. Ona je podsetila da je predsednik EFJ nedavno ocenio Srbiju kao najgori primer kršenja medijskih sloboda na Balkanu i izrazila negodovanje što će se članovi evropske misije sastati samo sa predstavnicima NUNS-a, a ne i sa predstavnicima drugih medijskih organizacija u Srbiji “ukoliko im je cilj da otkriju prave činjenice o situaciji u ovoj zemlji”.

Nezavisno udruženje novinara Srbije odbacilo je juče optužbe savetnice predsednika Srbije Suzane Vasiljević o namernom izostavljaju sastanka predstavnika EFJ sa predsednikom Aleksandrom Vučićem.

“NUNS ukazuje da je EFJ, planirajući posetu i sastanke sa predstavnicima državnih institucija imao u vidu njihova ustavna i zakonska ovlašćenja, i da je zato poziv za razgovore upućen premijeru, ministru za kulturu i informisanje, ministru pravosuđa i ministru policije. Reč je o predstavnicima Vlade, odnosno izvršne vlasti u čijoj su neposrednoj ingerenciji ključna pitanja slobode medija i bezbednosti novinara i drugih medijskih radnika u Srbiji”, navodi se u saopštenju NUNS-a i dodaje da je pravo predsednika Srbije da traži sastanak sa predstavnicima međunarodnih organizacija koje brinu o medijskim slobodama, “ali to nikako ne treba da bude povod za napad na novinarsko udruženje i EFJ”.

Suzana Vasiljević je odbacila optužbe NUNS-a navodeći da nije protivzakonito da se predsednik EFJ sastane sa predsednikom Srbije.

– Nije protivzakonito, a kulturno je i odgovorno sastati se sa čovekom koji je na meti njihovih skoro svakodnevnih napada, a koji je i slučajno predsednik države u koju su pozvali Evropsku federaciju novinara. Ukoliko je namera NUNS-a da EFJ zaista utvrdi činjenično stanje u Srbiji, osnovni red je da čuju i drugu stranu. Drugo je pitanje da li NUNS želi da se čuje druga strana i da li uopšte želi da predstavnicima EFJ pokaže da u Srbiji postoji i drugo mišljenje – navela je Vasiljević.

Vasiljević: Čega se NUNS plaši?

“Čega se to NUNS plaši i o kojim zakonskim i ustavnim ovlašćenjima govore? Da li se pozivaju na isti onaj ustav po kome su 15. juna 2011. godine pozvali tadašnjeg predsednika Republike Srbije da otvori Skupštinu Evropske federacije novinara i da govori o medijskim slobodama i njihovom kršenju?”, pita Suzana Vasiljević.

Mission of leading organizations for protection of media freedom in Croatia again

0

ZAGREB, 11.01.2018. – Mission of representatives of South East Europe Media Organization (SEEMO), European Federation of Journalists (EFJ), Reporters without Borders (RSF), European Center for Media Freedom (ECPMF), European Broadcasting Union (EBU) and Association of European Journalists (AEJ) is coming to Croatia on January 15 for the 2nd time because of attacks and pressures on journalists as well as of disturbing situation in Croatian media.

The Mission visited Croatia for the first time in June 2016 and issued its report „Croatia: Media Freedom in Turbulent Times“.

Croatia is the only member of EU that has been visited by international professional mission for the second time in less than two years due to discouraging media freedom and pressure on journalists. After its first visit the Mission in June 2016 issued a comprehensive report stating many problems. It pointed out that the authorities did not do enough to stop political pressures on media and to clearly condemn attacks against journalists.

Unfortunately, the situation has not become better. On the contrary, according to all reports of relevant organizations dealing with media freedom and working conditions of journalists for 2017 situation in Croatia has deteriorated and our country, along with Romania, has been trailing behind all European countries. That is the reason for the Mission to visit Croatia on January 15 and 16, 2018.

Meetings with journalists, publishers, media organizations and representatives of politicians,
including the President and the Prime Minister have been planned.

Mission members are as follows: Oliver Vujović, SEEMO, head of the Mission, Marijana Camović, EFJ, Pauline Adès-Mével, RSF, Sophie Albers Ben Chamo, ECPMF, Boris Bergant, EBU and Otmar Lahodynsky, AEJ.

Press Conference is planned for January 16, 2018 at 14:30, Journalist Building, Zagreb and the Mission report will be published later.

Condemning the act of police in Prijedor and the Ministry of Interior Affairs of RS : exterminating journalists from Slovenia to trial

0

PRIJEDOR, 11.01.2018. –  The Steering Committee of BH journalists’ Association considers the examining of Slovenian journalists by the police in the Police Station Prijedor that took place on Wednesday, 10 January unacceptable and characterized this procedure as violation of Freedom of Expression. It is particularly worrying that the arrest and questioning followed after police officers legitimized Slovenian colleagues and found that they were journalists on the job.

In this context, the Steering Committee of BH Journalists reminds the police structures in Prijedor and the relevant authorities of The Ministry of Interior Affairs of RS that the OSCE Police Guideline in  Dealing with the Media explicitly state that ”  Police cannot be involved or cannot punish journalists during their performing of tasks”, and in particular emphasizes that ” Journalists have right to take photos, to record, make notes, observe, make interviews and/or make reports without asking for promotion of government or police.”

The unreasonable and uncivilized act of the police in Prijedor is also a violation of the right on free, safe and undisturbed work of journalists. This right is protected by the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Constitution of the Republika Srpska, as well as numerous domestic laws and international declarations, and equally applies to Bosnian-Herzegovinian journalists as well as journalists from other countries that record and work in the territory of BiH.

Therefore, the Steering Committee of BHJA demands from The Ministry of Interior Affairs of Republika Srpska to to inform the public in Bosnia and Herzegovina why and by whose order the Prijedor police officers violated the media freedom and rights of journalists from Slovenia and to publicly apologize to this journalists.

We remind, that the journalists Irena Joveva  and Miha Orešnik were taken to the Police Station in Prijedor while filming an investigational journalists’ story about Dijana Đuđić, a BiH citizen from Prijedor, who is apparently borrowed 450,000 Euros to Janez Janša, president of the Social Democratic Union of Slovenia.

Minus to the Government, if it does not save RTCG from DPS

0

PODGORICA, 10.01.2018 – The government should take steps to maintain RTCG editorial freedom or its democratic credibility will decrease, said U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Hoyt Brian Yee. During his talk with “Vijesti”, he said that taking political control over the Public Service could be a step backward on Montenegro’s Euro-Atlantic path.

“We are concerned that the Parliament has jeopardized the editorial independence of the Public Service with changes in its governing body, RTCG Council – the action which seems to have political motivation to limit the freedom of the media. The Government should urgently take steps to underline RTCG editorial freedom or the Government’s democratic credibility will decrease, which would be a step backward on the Euro-Atlantic path of Montenegro. More importantly, Montenegrin public could lose confidence in the Public Service whose duty is to provide independent and objective reporting to citizens”, said Yee when asked to comment on notices of the opposition, NGOs, and media that DPS is openly attempting to take over political control over RTCG.

  • Experts- officials are talking about “re-engaging” the United States in the Western Balkans. What will the U.S. do in 2018 to prevent the region from slipping further into the deterioration of democracy, human rights, and the rule of law?

At least for the last quarter of the century, the U.S. is an active and important partner of the Western Balkans and we intend to continue that. Our primary goal during the mandates of several different U.S. administrations was to work with our partners to strengthen democratic institutions and implement the reforms necessary for Euro-Atlantic integration. This remains our priority.We are particularly committed to support strengthening of the rule of law, fight against corruption, and ensuring that governments are transparent and accountable. We will also continue to support strong independent voices, including journalists, non-governmental organizations, and other civil society members, who strive to build societies that are free, inclusive and prosperous.

  • What will Washington do to prevent other players, such as Russia, China or Turkey, from making, sometimes damaging, influence on the Western Balkans, filling thus the vacuum, which was created, according to some interpretations, while Brussels, and especially Washington, dealt with themselves?

Far from ignoring the Balkans, the United States and the EU have actually intensified their support to the security, stability and economic development of the region. Montenegro’s accession to NATO, democratic transfer of power and renewed commitment to reforms in Macedonia, further steps of Serbia and Montenegro towards the European Union and judicial reforms in Albania are just some of the examples of successful cooperation between the Balkans, the EU, America and other related states in 2017.Nevertheless, in 2018 the governments in the region can and should make progress more rapidly, including setting aside politicization and use the advantages of the assistance and opportunities provided by international partners.

We believe that the future of the region lies in the West, but transparent, legal investments and assistance from other parts of the world can, as well, assist the Balkans achieve their goal of European and Euro-Atlantic integration. At the same time, governments have to resist the false friendship of some foreign actors who ignore international law or oppose the Western orientation of the Balkans. Russia, for example, has shown its readiness to interfere in elections, undermining the key institutions of the West, such as NATO and the EU, using energy supplies as a political weapon, and weakening confidence in democracy and the free market. We will continue to help our partners to strengthen the resilience to such malignant impacts, including the strengthening of police and judicial institutions, the fight against energy supply and the promotion of sustainable economic growth and Euro-Atlantic integration.

  • You recently had said that it was shameful that Balkan political leaders, despite their undemocratic behavior, were welcomed in many European capitals, as if they weren’t doing anything wrong. Whom did you specifically have in mind?

My comment did not relate to anyone in particular. It is about the need to keep the undemocratic or corrupt Balkan leaders responsible. One of the methods is the way we welcome or do not welcome such leaders in our capitals. Politicians who are corrupt, who oppose the rule of law and the international community, encourage instability and tensions should not be given the opportunity to legitimize their undemocratic behavior through meetings and photographing with senior officials in European metropolises.

  • In the Atlantic Council report “The Balkans Forward: A New US Strategy for the Region”, the authors warn of the so-called “Big Men” that are actively hindering the reforms, and they mention several leaders, including Milo Đukanović. You recently said that the partnership between the West and the Balkan leaders should be a two-way street, and that they are expected to fulfill their obligations. Do you think that these leaders deliberately do that to remain in power, and what can Washington do if they continue to do that?

I refer you to the Atlantic Council for a comment on the report. My statement referred to the kind of partnership that the United States wants with the Western Balkans. We will fulfill our obligations toward governments, whether it concerns assistance, technical advice or political support, and we expect those governments and leaders to fulfill their obligations, for example to implement reforms or respect the rule of law. We will work with those officials who adhere to the rule of law and share our commitment to democratic and economic development. Leaders, of course, are firstly and foremost responsible to the ones who elect them, who are free to choose a new one.

  • What do you think about Đukanović’s recent comments in which he has labeled independent media as a “media mafia”?

All political leaders have the responsibility to respect the freedom of the media, which is one of the pillars of democracy. The United States is joining the European Union in emphasizing the need for Montenegro to show significant progress in protecting journalists and maintaining media freedom. Freedom of media enables a forum for all society members, and not just those having power. Political leaders have the responsibility to ensure that the government properly investigates physical attacks on journalists. On the other hand, the media is obliged to report independently and responsibly.

  • There was a collapse of the opposition boycott of the Parliament and 21 opposition MPs returned to it. Is this a good step towards the solution of the crisis, despite the high tensions and insults at all sessions up to now? What should the rest of the opposition do?

During the past year, we encouraged politicians from different sides to jointly work in the Parliament, where they can represent the best interests of the citizens of Montenegro. The message remains the same. Elected representatives of citizens cannot fulfill their duties if they stay aside and only selectively engage in discussions or if they focus on spreading instability. Citizens throughout the Balkans want their leaders to solve problems, not just to complain and accuse each other. Montenegro faces very important challenges. It is necessary that all of its elected officials participate fully in the political process, present their voters and work for the common good of their country.

  • There is an ongoing trial for alleged attempted coup in Montenegro. Political and public opinion is divided about whether something really happened or not, and to what extent, if at all, Montenegro was at risk. Based on the evidence which the U.S. helped investigate and what you know, what do you think about that event and the trial that followed?

The trial is still ongoing, but the evidences presented so far clearly indicate the interference of Russia and the brazen attempt to disrupt the independent electoral process in Montenegro. Continuous dissemination of disinformation and propaganda campaign aspire to discredit public confidence in the special prosecution and judiciary. Probably RT, Sputnik and state-sponsored trolls will continue these activities in 2018. We call on responsible independent media to inform the public about it and help citizens to differentiate facts from fiction.

Credibility of elections remains a priority

  • Would it be good or bad for Montenegro if Đukanović runs for president?

Who will or will not participate in the elections is not an issue for the United States. That is a decision that politicians, parties and voters should make. We are interested in the credibility of the election process, whether the campaigns are fair, transparent, and meet international standards. Can anyone run for elections on the basis of his/her own merits? Are Montenegrin citizens free to vote for candidates of their choice? Do institutions provide a forum where citizens’ voices will be heard during free and fair elections? We are not speaking about individuals here but about rules, norms, and institutions that represent a strong democracy.

The authorities and the opposition have to find a way to jointly solve problems

  • What should the Montenegrin authorities, the opposition, civil society and the media do in 2018 in order to solve political crisis which goes on lasts since 2016 elections?

The current political situation hampers Montenegro’s progress towards European integration, supported by the vast majority of Montenegrin citizens. All those who are interested in the political and economic well-being of Montenegro should do what they can to solve the political stalemate, in accordance with the Constitution and European standards. In every democracy it is normal for parties to have disagreements. However, it is high time that the ruling and opposition parties find a way to work together to solve some of the urgent challenges facing the country, including how to strengthen the economy and convince young Montenegrin citizens not to leave the country. Journalists and civil society should assist in informing the public about the most important issues and current events, and serve as controllers of abuse of power. Citizens should clearly communicate to their elected leaders that they want results and functional democracy, and not empty posing and stagnation.

Protests and riots are possible if promised improvements are not achieved

  • In its Preventive Engagement Report, the Council on Foreign Relations’ identifies the Balkans as one of the 30 potential “hot spots” in the world, warning on possible political riots and extremist violence in the region, even re-drawing some borders. How real are these threats in the region?

The region faces serious challenges – external and internal threats that, if left unanswered, can cause serious consequences for the aspirations of the Western Balkan countries. Fragile institutions, poor rule of law and lack of media freedom provide endemic corruption, discourage foreign investment, and force citizens to emigrate into more stable and prosperous countries. Protests and riots can also occur if governments fail to meet the promised improvements in governance and living standards. Poor economic conditions also open up paths for potentially destabilizing things such as violent extremists, organized crime, and states with malignant influences. The United States will continue to provide funding and technical assistance to help governments in the Balkans counteract these threats and harmful actors who want to weaken institutions, undermine reforms and prevent progress of the region.

IJAS: Vucic’s advisor tries to discredit the mission of the EFJ delegation

0

BELGRADE, 10.01.2018. – The Independent Journalists’ Association of Serbia rejects accusations by Suzana Vasiljevic, adviser to the Serbian President, about deliberately leaving out a meeting of representatives of the European Federation of Journalists (EFJ) with President Aleksandar Vucic.  In a letter sent to EFJ President Mogens Blicher Bjerregard yesterday, Vasiljevic expressed a protest because EFJ did not request a meeting with the President Aleksandar Vucic during the upcoming visit to Belgrade on the occasion of the state of media freedom in Serbia.

IJAS indicates that the EFJ, planning a visit and meetings with representatives of state institutions, took into account their constitutional and legal authority, and that is why the call for conversations was addressed to the Prime Minister, the Minister of Culture and Information, the Minister of Justice and the Minister of Interior. These are representatives of the Government, i.e. the executive authorities in whose direct jurisdiction are issues of media freedom and security of journalists and other media professionals in Serbia.

The right of the Serbian President is to seek a meeting with representatives of international organisations that are concerned about the media freedom, but this should not be a reason for the attack on the journalist association and the EFJ.  IJAS advocates consistent functioning of the rule of law and the EFJ approach in planning this visit has been fully acceptable to us.

OPEN LETTER BY ALEKSANDAR VUCIC MEDIA ADVISOR TO EUROPEAN FEDERATION OF JOURNALISTS

0

BELGRADE, 10.01.2018. – On January, 9th 2018 Suzana Vasiljevic, media advisor in the cabinet of the President of the Republic of Serbia sent a public letter to Mr. Blicher Bjerregard stating her views about the upcoming fact-finding mission. Vasiljevic urged EJF/IPI/SEEMO delegation to meet Aleksandar Vucic, president of Serbia. We report the letter in full.

Dear Mr. Blicher Bjerregård, dear Miss Schroeder, Miss Vasic Nikolic, Mr. Radomirovic, Miss Mogerini, Mr. Hahn, dear colleagues,

As announced earlier last year, the EFJ is sending its highly publicized  “fact-finding mission” to Serbia this January. As far as I understand, EFJ requested a meeting with the Prime Minister of Serbia, Ana Brnabic. However, they did not ask to meet with the President of the Republic of Serbia, Aleksandar Vucic, who is the chief target of most of their criticism.

Bearing in mind that I sent a letter to EFJ and Mr. Bjeregard, two months ago, commenting on his statement to Radio Free Europe, (“Speaking to the Radio Free Europe, the EFJ President Mogens Blicher Bjerregård evaluated Serbia as currently the worst example of violations of media freedom in the Balkans, noting that the constant pressure on the media coming from the authorities in the Western Balkans has been highlighted repeatedly by EU Enlargement Commissioner Johannes Hahn”…) I hope you will agree that the spirit of fairness would have required EFJ to also request a meeting with the president. Particularly since EFJ claims he is trying to shut down all independent media.

Isn’t it only fair that EFJ representatives tell him, in-person, why they consider his attitude to the media problematic? And to give him a chance to express his views and state his arguments on this matter?

I am puzzled as to why they did not request to meet the President of Serbia. Am I to conclude that EFJ mission is not a fact-finding one? Is their mission, in fact, the same as the NUNS mission? Is EFJ coming to promote the political agenda of a group that calls itself an “independent“ media association?

What could possibly have motivated EFJ to boycott the single individual that they and NUNS routinely blame for everything that goes wrong in Serbia? I fail to understand the logic. How could meeting with the president possibly interfere with their „mission“?

Regardless of their motivation, this decision strikes me as unprofessional, at best.

I am addressing this letter to all EU representatives, the same ones EFJ and NUNS contacted when they made their claim that there is no media freedom in Serbia. I am also copying foreign media representatives in Serbia, to use freely in their coverage of EFJ mission.

A fact-finding mission is usually undertaken to correct bias, whereas EFJ selection (or omission) of interlocutors seems to indicate a desire to confirm pre-existing prejudices. I am very disappointed in their approach because I was hoping that they would wish to meet not only NUNS, but also representatives of other media organizations in Serbia, if their aim is to find real facts about the situation in this country. Obviously, I was wrong. It is rather a “NUNS facts confirming mission” which is also fine, but then it should be made clear, not misleading the public about the real goal of the mission.

Kind regards,

Suzana Vasiljevic
media advisor
cabinet of the President of the Republic of Serbia

Постолоски: Потребни се услови за слобода на изразување

0

СКОПЈЕ, 10.01.2018 – Со новинарот Јован Постолоски разговаравме за слободата на изразување и медиумската слобода. За ЦИВИЛ Медиа Постолоски изјави дека за слобода е потребен простор без стеги и притисоци за да можеме да го кажеме сето она што имаме.

ЦИВИЛ Медиа: Што подразбирате по слобода на изразувањето, медиумски слободи и активизам?

Постолоски: Слободата претставува можност кој било да е на власт или да ја има моќта, да можеш да застанеш спроти него и да го кажеш тоа што го имаш, да посочиш на тоа што го прави погрешно, да може да го направи подобро. Тоа подразбира, за почеток да не си поставуваш самиот на себе стеги и да не ги прифаќаш наметнатите без разлика дали се политичката или бизнис сферата.  Тоа подразбира да создадеме услови да го кажеме слободно тоа што го имаме.

ЦИВИЛ Медиа: Дали се соочувате со притисоци од политичките и бизнис центрите на моќта и како се справувате со нив?

Постолоски: Па добро можеме да го ставиме затворањето на телевизија А1 како притисок. Сега со постоењето на порталите има поголема слобода и нема многу можност за такви притисоци бидејќи е помала зависноста од нив, па не можам да се пожалам на некакви притисоци , но мора самите да се изборите.

ЦИВИЛ Медиа: Кои се вашите препораки, како да се одбранат слободата на изразувањето, медиумските слободи и активизмот?

Постолоски: Имаме примери со телевизии што беа приклонети кон претходната власт, а сега полека се приклонуваат кон новата. Оттука извира проблемот. И од сопствениците, но и од новинарите, од кои на крај сѐ зависи, дали самите тие ќе го прифатат тоа, дали ќе се спротивстават, дали ќе слугуваат на некого…

NUNS: Vučićeva savetnica pokušava da diskredituje misiju delegecije EFJ

0

BEOGRAD, 10.01.2017. – Nezavisno udruženje novinara Srbije odbacuje optužbe savetnice predsednika Srbije Suzane Vasiljević o namernom izostavljaju sastanka predstavnika Evropske federacije novinara (EFJ) sa predsednikom Aleksandrom Vučićem. U pismu koje je juče Vasiljevićeva dostavila predsedniku EFJ Mogensu Bliheru Bjeregordu izražava se protest što ta organizacije nije zatražila sastanak s predsednikom Aleksandrom Vučićem tokom predstojeće posete Beogradu povodom stanja medijskih sloboda u Srbiji.

NUNS ukazuje da je EFJ, planirajući posetu i sastanke sa predstavnicima državnih institucija imao u vidu njihova ustavna i zakonska ovlašćenja, i da je zato poziv za razgovore upućen premijeru, ministru za kulturu i informisanje, ministru pravosuđa i ministru policije. Reč je o predstavnicima Vlade, odnosno izvršne vlasti u čijoj su neposrednoj ingerenciji ključna pitanja slobode medija i bezbednosti novinara i drugih medijskih radnika u Srbiji.

Pravo je predsednika Srbije da traži sastanak sa predstavnicima medjunarodnih organizacija koje brinu o medijskim slobodama, ali to nikako ne treba da bude povod za napad na novinarsko udružnje i EFJ. NUNS se zalaže za dosledno funkcionisanje pravne države i pristup koji EFJ u planiranju posete ima nam je u potpunosti prihvatljiv. 

Izvršni odbor NUNS-a 

IFJ: In 2017, 81 journalists were killed while preforming professional duty

0

SARAJEVO, 09.01.2017.-The world’s largest journalist organization, the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ), said that at least 81 journalists were killed during the business this year, and that violence and harassment of media personnel reached new heights.

The International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) says 81 journalists and media staff were killed in targeted killings, car bomb attacks and crossfire incidents around the world during 2017.

Another 250 were jailed.

The number of dead, as of December 29, is the smallest in the decade and decreased from 93 in 2016.

The largest number was killed in Mexico, and it was quite damaged in the war zones of Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria.

Of the eight murdered journalists, two were killed in European democracies – Kim Vol in Denmark, in the inventor’s submarine on which he wrote, and Maltese research journalist Dafne Karuana Galicia, who was blown away with a bomb set in a car.

The IFJ warns that “an unprecedented number of journalists has been imprisoned, forced to flee, that self censorship is widespread and that it is impracticable to kill, harass, attack and threaten independent journalism at the epidemic level.”

The report states that only about 160 journalists were closed in Turkey, which is two-thirds of the total number in the world.

Concerns have also been expressed in regard to India where, allegedly, attacks on journalists are motivated by violent populism.