PRISTINA, 27/12/2018 – Failure to enforce the legal framework that guarantees freedom of media and freedom of speech, and failure to punish committed crimes against journalists, are two of the main issues that are inevitable when we talk about the safety environment of journalists in Kosovo. For a more in depth discussion of these issues, you may read bellow the interview with Lawyer Furtuna Sheremeti, specialized on the rights of Media. In addition to discussing about issues that media face in Kosovo, she also talks about cases where institutions have shown an increase in awareness with regards to freedom of media in the country.
We are all witnesses of physical assaults and verbal abuses against journalists in Kosovo. Besides, since 1999 there have been 14 killed and missing journalists, the perpetrators of whom have yet to be held accountable by the justice system. To what level do you think journalists are safe, and how does our justice system treat cases where not only journalist’s work, but their lives as well have been impinged?
When we talk about journalists, but also about any process that has to do with the safety of the people in Kosovo, we must take into account the context in which the conversation takes place and how the system works. Unfortunately, we know that in Kosovo the treatment of cases by justice system leaves much to be desired, particularly the cases related to journalists.
How does impunity of committed violation against journalists effect?
Failing to punish each committed crime sets the entire system on a back foot. This is not only sad, but also dangerous – especially when we talk about journalists- because the courage need for a journalist to uphold their professionalism should be in line with legal system and not against it. As a result, we are at risk that journalist may give up on their subjectivity and courage, which then puts the entire field of journalism at risk. All this is some sort of chain process – where the failure of one part of the system leads to failure of the next.
How do you asses the legal framework responsible for freedom of speech and media, access to public information, protection of sources, and standards of professional reporting? Are there more challenges in implementing such framework, or do think there is also a need for amendments within the current framework?
I have always said and continue to do so, that the key problems that Kosovo faces is not the legal framework as much as on its inadequate implementation. Journalists have sufficient ways on how to use the legal framework for their benefit when it comes to fulfilling both their right as well as obligations
In the end of November 2018, the National Assembly has approved the draft Law on Protection of Whistleblowers. However, only few days before this draft law came into force, two separate requests belonging to two separate cases were submitted demanding for the identity of whistleblowers who had reported on the media about legal and procedural violation occurred in their respective institution. How do you asses the Law in subject, its adoption in the Assembly, and the direct threats towards the whistleblowers?
Whistleblowers have been present in the political scene during this past years as well, and I think that it is a good step forward that more attention has been given towards the improvement of the legal framework in that regard. The habit of adopting new laws, or amending the existing laws, is very present in our society, but I do not think that this is always the best way to address rising issues. For instance, the law in subject is problematic because although it provides for more reporting opportunities for whistleblowers (see public reporting), and theoretically it provides very good opportunities for whistleblowers, it does not take into account the practical issues, and the safety of whistleblowers. According to this law, in some references whistleblowers are similarly sensitive as protected witnesses during penal procedure, as they should be. But I am still of the opinion that a special institution, or special branch within an independent institution, should be established which would deal exclusively with whistleblowers.
How does this law complement the current legal framework related to the field of media in Kosovo?
Theoretically it does complement the legal framework in the field of media, but practically it does not help mush. Unfortunately!
Despite some registered attempts, Kosovo does not have a single general law on media, and most of aspects related to the media are regulated through at least eight other laws. Do think that a legal initiative for a law on media is necessary? How would a single general law on media that would repeal the relevant existing laws contribute to the freedom of media?
Prior to a legal initiative for drafting a law on media, I think that is it more important that medial scene becomes more consolidated from within. At the moment, we have a large number of online media, portal, the scope of which not regulated at all. Of course this is logical knowing that this line of media support self-regulation as opposed to external regulation. However, first and foremost I consider that a consensus on cooperation between medial actors must be reached before we can talk about such a legal initiative. A regulation, whatever that may be, should come from bottom-up and not the other way around.
When we talk about the safety of journalists, besides a list of other factors, journalists’ attitude is surely of significant importance as well. According to your opinion, what opportunities does the current legal framework grant journalists protect their rights and professional work in case they become subject of threats of any kind?
As I said earlier, the legal framework related to the work of journalist should be compatible with the general legal framework and the practices of Kosovo’s justice system. When the justice system is in the state as it currently is, I find it problematic that the idea of a legal framework will serve as an oasis of protection for journalists. Moreover, the legal framework as such can only serve for theoretical protection towards the work of journalists.
Kosovo’s institutions fail to apply their legal obligation to separate documents into publicly opened documents and sensitive documents. Although the Law on Access to Public Documents foresees that public institutions must include a clause whether a particular document is public or contains sensitive information, this is often not found in practice. Journalists continuously face rejection in their submitted requests for public document. How much does this affect the work of journalists, and consequently informing the public?
To be fair, it must be noted that in the recent years institutions have become ever more aware and educated with regards to the process of the access to public documents. Granted, it is still not at satisfactory levels but situation is better that it has been some years ago.
In Kosovo, sensitivity or confidentiality of public documents remains subject to interpretations. How does this effect on journalism and the transparency of public institutions?
What you just mentioned is very problematic issue, not only for journalists, but for everyone. The fact that public institutions continue to interpret in irregular basis what is considered public information and not is rather silly. Especially given that we have a judicial practice that has made this very clear. For instance, the case “BIRN vs Office of Prime Minister” clearly explains the gap between what is public interest and the right to privacy. In my opinion, this misinterpretation of legal framework is being used for personal interests. This is so because the legal framework is not that complicated. In fact is quite simple and straight forward. But, certain institutions benefit out of such misinterpretations.
Journalist: Grese Sermaxhaj