Recent public statements by the Mayor of Vlora, Brunilda Mersini, made during a public event with the University of Vlora, raise implications for freedom of expression, media freedom, and the safety of journalists in Albania.
In her remarks, the Mayor stated:
“We have uncontrolled social networks. Today there are individuals on social media who open pages and do not have a NIPT; they are not registered with the tax authorities; they are created for specific purposes and have a negative impact on society and on businesses. We have an institutional duty to jointly influence the media law so that these actors on social networks are registered as entities, whether for-profit or non-profit, but registered within the territory of Albania. My question is whether online portals should be subjected to scrutiny, and how they operate in relation to organised crime.”
The concerns expressed by the Mayor relate to legitimate issues. However, these acts (extortion, blackmail, or other unlawful activities) are already criminalised under existing legislation and fall within the competence of law enforcement and the judiciary. Framing social media and online portals primarily through a law-and-order lens, and proposing broad regulatory solutions through media legislation, raises important questions about proportionality, necessity, and compliance with European standards on freedom of expression, particularly where the core challenge lies in the effective implementation of existing laws rather than the introduction of new, far-reaching restrictions.
Mandatory registration of social media actors with tax identification numbers, and the extension of media legislation to online expression, risk conflating criminal behaviour with legitimate journalism, civic criticism, and public-interest reporting. Under European human rights standards, media laws are designed to protect journalistic activity and media pluralism, not to regulate individual online expression or impose blanket registration requirements.
It is also important to distinguish clearly between social media platforms and users, on the one hand, and online media outlets (portals), on the other. Conflating these distinct actors risks regulatory overreach, as measures designed for professional media cannot be automatically applied to individual users or informal online expression without undermining freedom of expression and media pluralism.
In addition, references to subjecting online portals to scrutiny in relation to organised crime, without clear criteria or case-by-case assessment, risk stigmatising media actors and online platforms as inherently suspect. European standards require that any investigation into criminal activity be targeted, evidence-based, and carried out under judicial oversight, rather than through generalised monitoring or profiling of media and digital actors.
Such approaches also risk creating a chilling effect on journalists, whistleblowers, and citizens who rely on digital platforms to report on issues of public interest, particularly at the local level. Anonymity and pseudonymity are recognised safeguards for free expression, especially where power imbalances, economic pressure, or intimidation are present.
Additionally, the framing of the issue in a video report broadcast by local television 6+1, which used the derogatory label “fejsbukistët gjobaxhinj” (“Facebook extortionists”), raises further concerns. Such language risks stigmatizing broad categories of online actors and contributes to a narrative that puts one segment of the media ecosystem against another. When media outlets adopt generalized or pejorative terminology to describe online expression or digital actors, this can undermine professional standards, fuel hostility toward journalists and content creators, and blur the line between legitimate criticism and criminal behaviour.
As Albania advances in its EU accession process, media freedom and journalists’ safety remain core benchmarks under the “fundamentals” cluster. Addressing criminal abuse online is both necessary and legitimate, but it requires precise legal tools and proportional enforcement, rather than broad measures that could undermine freedom of expression and an enabling environment for independent journalism.