The Croatian Journalists’ Association (CJA) strongly condemns the remarks made by the Deputy Mayor of Split, Bojan Ivošević, who on Monday accused the Dalmatinski portal and journalist Živana Šušak Živković of ‘doing dirty work’ for his political competition. The reason for Ivošević’s remarks was an article that problematized the changes to the regulations on the use of city ‘personnel’ apartments and the fact that this move will indirectly affect the status of his father, also a user of a city apartment.

The Croatian Journalists’ Association believes that the mentioned article was written entirely in accordance with professional standards – in fact, it implies that the changes to the regulations at this time primarily benefited another individual, a doctor who owns a house and thus did not fit the previous criteria for the allocation and use of city properties.

This fact is clearly stated in the allegedly controversial article’s headline. With his remarks, Deputy Mayor Bojan Ivošević accuses journalists and media professionals of doing their job professionally, without reason or cause, subjecting them to additional public criticism and disdain, which we consider unacceptable behavior for a public official.

We consider the paranoid constructions about alleged journalistic ‘dirty work’ for political competition completely unfounded, inappropriate, and unworthy of the position held by Ivošević.

Croatian Journalists’ Association, Branch of the Split-Dalmatia County
President: Damir Petranović

The European Media Freedom Act should ensure the independence and plurality of media, transparency of ownership, and regulation of advertising, particularly respecting editorial charters and editorial autonomy, it was stated on Monday at a panel organized by the Office of the European Parliament in Croatia.

The Head of the Media Sector at the Ministry of Culture and Media, Nives Zvonarić, reminded that the European Commission presented the proposal for the European Media Freedom Act in September 2022, and the European Parliament and member states are now working on their response, or their positions. It is expected that the process will be completed in Parliament in September, after which negotiations with the Council of Europe on the final version can begin, Zvonarić emphasized.

“It is important for us that this Act is equally fair for all types of media and that there are no exceptions based on revenue or the size of the media, and we will advocate for stronger criteria for state advertising,” said Zvonarić, adding that this Act can be strengthened through our legislation and has the full support of the Ministry of Culture and Media.

Hrvoje Zovko, President of the Croatian Journalists’ Association (CJA), said he hopes that the expected European Media Freedom Act will protect professional and critical journalism, but also pointed out the need to respect existing editorial charters of Croatian media, which are often dead letter.

“The worst example is the case of Rijeka’s Novi list. The state has been silent about it for years, and the head of that newspaper has been acting editor-in-chief for years, like an endless day. We will demand that the privileged VAT rate of five percent be revoked from certain publishers,” said the president of the CJA, adding that state funding of the media is also problematic, with no clear criteria.

Maja Sever, President of the European Federation of Journalists (EFJ) and the Trade Union of Croatian Journalists’ (TUCJ), as the moderator of the panel, emphasized the need to protect journalists and editorial autonomy, stating that the European Media Freedom Act is a “solid, robust act” with strong mechanisms to preserve journalism as a public good.

Lawyer specialized in media law, Vesna Alaburić, spoke about the various measures and mechanisms provided by the new European act, stating that there is a significant gap between theory and practice in Croatian media when it comes to editorial independence.

Source: Hina and CJA

The allocation of national broadcasting frequencies in Serbia highlights the lack of transparency and pluralism in the sector. Frequencies are only awarded to government-friendly media. Concerns have been expressed by both the European Commission and the European Parliament

The issue of the public allocation of national broadcasting frequencies in Serbia seems to have come to a public halt, after a few important developments in the past months that have shown how contentious this issue is and exposed the weaknesses of the institutional framework of Serbia.

The usual suspects receive (again) the national TV frequencies

The whole dispute started on 29 July 2022 when Serbia’s Electronic Media Regulatory Body (REM) awarded the four national broadcasting frequencies  for a period of eight years to the same four televisions (Happy, Pink, B92 and Prva) that had previously received them. The allocation occurred in spite of the numerous shortcomings  in the performance of these televisions, including at least 12,000 violations of the advertising act in the previous years and of the fact that several reports for hate speech and violence were filed against them.  The award decision started a public outcry and attracted severe criticism by local  and international stakeholders  since these televisions are all known to be supportive of the SNS, the Serbian Progressive Party, currently in power in Serbia. National and international press freedom organisations considered the process of allocation of the frequencies to be in violation  of the principle of pluralism of the public broadcasting organisations and of the principles on the allocation of licences.  Few days later, the REM announced that a fifth national frequency  would be allocated and that the whole process would be over by the end of the autumn.

The EU progress report

The whole issue was extensively covered by the EU in its 2022 progress report  which highlighted how the REM had awarded the four national frequencies to the same broadcasters as in the previous eight years in spite of the fact that all of them had received warnings by the REM due to violations of their legal obligations. The EU reiterated the need to respect the principle of media pluralism and transparency in the process of allocating the frequencies. Moreover, in the progress report the EU quoted the ODIHR final report on the April 2022 elections in Serbia. In its final report the ODIHR noticed that the REM remained passive in overseeing the conduct of Serbian media during the recent electoral campaign.  ODIHR also remarked  that national public broadcasters provided “extensive uncritical news coverage  to public officials who were also candidates” while “private TV channels with a national coverage […] allocated some 90% of coverage in news programmes to the president and government officials portraying them generally positively”.  In other words, the REM had failed in its role of ensuring the correct application of the rules regulating the electoral campaign on the public broadcasters.

The saga of the fifth frequency begins

The public tender  for the fifth national frequency was launched in August 2022 with a deadline set for the 11 October for the submission of bids. Four televisions eventually applied  , amongst them TV Nova S which produces a number of successful programmes and is known for its critical stance towards the government.

According to Nova S,  the deadline for the REM to decide on the applications was 30 days  and it expired on the 26 November  , however on 29 November the chairperson of the REM herself denied  that there was any deadline for the awarding of frequencies and that the decision would be brought during one of the next sessions, without making any firm commitments.

Darkness in Serbia

The applicants and those following the process were worried that the whole procedure was just an excuse to buy time and eventually avoid awarding the frequencies. This led to a significant protest of the televisions belonging to the operator United Group, N1 and TV Nova S. On 6 December, the two TVs stopped their broadcasting and for the whole day they broadcasted a black screen  displaying the text “Darkness in Serbia without free media”. The protest had a large impact and its timing coincided with the summit EU – Western Balkans. President Vucic himself was forced to comment on it during the summit itself criticising the TVs and stating that they were protesting more in their own interest than in that of the public. The protest of the TVs was later followed by another organised within the National Parliament by the members of the opposition  who showed their support for the two televisions and displayed the same message as the two TVs did.

REM goes on strike

While the protest of the TVs did not explicitly refer to the issue of the fifth frequency in Serbia, the message was nevertheless clear and the reaction of the REM was immediate. The REM suspended their work on 9 December via an urgent phone session  . Later on that month the chairwoman of the REM informed the Parliamentary Committee on Culture and Information that the REM had gone on strike because of the “violent coordinated pressure” that they were receiving from opposition groups and in particular because of the pressure from the United group. Debates followed whether such a strike was legal or not, but the result was that time was passing and once more the decision on the allocation of the fifth frequency was delayed. The strike eventually ended on 21 December 2022 after the REM received the support  of the parliamentary committee as well as that of the Minister of Information and Telecommunications.

The saga continues….

The end of the strike was not the end of the saga. Two days after the end of the strike the president of the REM itself announced publicly that the REM will not allocate the fifth national frequency  while there is a pending court dispute with one of the applicants. The reference was to TV Nova S, which on 20 December had started a court case for administrative silence against the REM  because the deadline to award the frequency had passed and no decision was brought. While the court case had been initiated to urge the REM to complete the procedure, the REM referred to it as a reason to continue postponing the decision on the allocation of the fifth frequency, even if the case can last years. The chairperson of the REM, Ms. Olivera Zekic, in fact stated  that the court procedure “will last as long as it lasts. We can’t interfere in the work of judicial bodies. Was anybody forcing them (Nova S) to take us to court? No, I only regret that because of them, also other interested TVs will have to wait”. The paradox is that the lawsuit against the administrative silence is now being used by the REM to continue their silence and has become the main excuse to delay solving the issue. A similar complaint  raised with the Ombudsman’s Office did not produce any results.

To date, there is no end in sight to this issue, even if eight months have passed since the call for the fifth frequency was launched and the deadline expired more than 5 months ago. The fact that the issue was raised both by the European Commission in October and most recently, in April 2023, by the  Foreign Affairs Committee  of the European Parliament  did not unblock the situation. Indeed when commenting on such a report, the chairperson of the REM while rejecting the criticism  of the European Parliament clearly stated that the REM has no legal obligation to issue the fifth frequency and that four national frequencies are even too much for the Serbian market. The latest statement seems to confirm what many suspected at the beginning: that the fifth national frequency will never be allocated or that it will be allocated when it is too late and it becomes meaningless. 

In our most recent legal analysis, ARTICLE 19 reviews the suggested amendments to the Criminal Code of Republika Srpska on re-introducing criminal penalties for defamation, insult, and other similar provisions. This change to the criminal code is a step back in protecting freedom of expression and will undeniably have a chilling effect on public debate. ARTICLE 19 calls for full withdrawal of these proposals.

Republika Srpska, a constituent entity of Bosnia and Herzegovina, has historically dealt with defamation, insult, and similar offences through civil law. On 23 March, the National Assembly of Republika Srpska voted in favour of amendments to the criminal code that re-introduce criminal penalties for defamation. The new provisions are vague, impose high fines up to 64 times the average monthly salary, and, in certain cases, imprisonment, and would impact the criminal records of anyone found guilty.

Any restriction on expression must fulfil the three conditions: it must be provided by accessible and precise law, it must pursue a legitimate aim, and it must be necessary and proportionate, not intruding more than is needed to achieve the intended legitimate aim. While protection of reputation is a legitimate aim and may justify restrictions of certain expressions in line with international standards, criminalising defamation is never necessary or proportionate and any law to that effect is, in and of itself, a violation of the right to freedom of expression.

Furthermore, the new legislation is not specific or clear enough to allow citizens to regulate their conduct according to the law. Article 208a punishes ‘insult’ with a high fine and criminal penalties but does not define ‘insult’, leaving room for arbitrary application and intensifying the chilling effect that comes with criminalisation. The same article also does not distinguish between statements of fact (that may be verified in court) or statements of opinion that bear no burden of proof, leaving a clear path to penalise anyone who expresses opinions perceived as offensive or insulting, which is contrary to the existing human rights standards and the practice of the European Court of Human Rights.

We urge Republika Srpska legislators to eliminate these provisions in their entirety and ensure any defamation, insult, or privacy law is in line with international human rights standards. As they currently stand, the new provisions will stifle journalism, public debate, and civil discourse that is essential to society.

Read the full analysis here.

The Croatian Journalists’ Association appeals to all media, including editors, journalists, and reporters, to adhere to the Code of Ethics of Croatian Journalists, as well as universal journalistic ethical principles when reporting on tragic events such as those recently in Serbia. Publishing details of tragic events, unverified information, and particularly distressing personal testimonies of eyewitnesses, even when they voluntarily wish to share them, can be dangerous. We reiterate that publishing the names and surnames of minors is a violation of children’s rights.

We also request that all colleagues reporting on the mentioned events contact us if they need psychological support.

Article of the Code of Ethics clearly states: “Special attention, caution, and responsibility are required when reporting on suicides, accidents, personal tragedies, illnesses, deaths, and violent acts. The journalist should avoid interviewing and depicting individuals directly or indirectly affected by these events, except when there is an exceptional public interest. In such cases, the journalist is obliged to consider the honor, reputation, and dignity of the individuals being reported on.”

Article 20 clearly stipulates: “A journalist must not disclose the identity of a child or minor involved in cases of sexual abuse or any other form of violence or criminal offense, whether the child or minor is a witness, victim, suspect, or defendant. Media reports on such cases must not enable the identification of the child or minor. The identity of the child or minor may only be disclosed exceptionally, when it is in the public interest and does not endanger the welfare of the child or minor, and with the consent of the parent or guardian of the child or minor, or when state bodies request it for the welfare of the child.” Any sensationalism and clickbaiting in such tragedies, which have irreversibly destroyed the lives of numerous families, are not in the public interest and are not in line with the principles of journalistic profession.

Instead of media saturation with horrors that we are witnessing these days, which can potentially evoke negative reactions, CJA calls for responsible and professional reporting.

For the Executive Board,

Hrvoje Zovko, President of CJA

Dragutin Hedl, Vice President of CJA

Chiara Bilić, Vice President of CJA

The participants of the conference of the European Federation of Journalists joined the marathon of solidarity with Belarusian colleagues, which was launched by the Belarusian Association of Journalists and the Lithuanian Union of Journalists in Vilnius.

We recall that the campaign started on May 3 in Vilnius. BAJ called on journalistic and human rights organizations of the world, well-known public figures to join the action.

“The authorities of Belarus continue their brutal attack on journalists and the media, effectively putting independent journalism within the country on the verge of destruction,” the BAJ statement says.

As of the morning of May 3, 2023, 33 representatives of the Belarusian independent media are in prisons and detention facilities in Belarus.

The president of the European Federation of Journalists Maja Sever also joined the action.

You can print portraits of your imprisoned colleagues, take pictures with them in educational places in your city (not in Belarus) and post them on social media with the tags #СвабодуЖурналістам and # BecauseTheJournalist, and also send them to us [email protected].

#СвабодуЖурналістам
#BecauseTheJournalist