29 Apr 19
[vc_row full_width=”stretch_row_content_no_spaces” full_height=”yes” css=”.vc_custom_1556538283972{background-image: url(https://www.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/index-report-2018-legislation-bannerv2.png?id=106464) !important;background-position: center !important;background-repeat: no-repeat !important;background-size: contain !important;}”][vc_column][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_custom_heading text=”Targeting the messenger: Journalists ensnared by national security legislation” font_container=”tag:h1|text_align:left” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_custom_heading text=”As security – rather than protecting rights and freedoms – becomes the top priority of governments worldwide, laws have increasingly been used to obstruct the work of media professionals in the 35 countries that are in or affiliated with the European Union (EU35).” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_column_text]Index on Censorship’s Mapping Media Freedom project, which monitors violations against media professionals in 43 countries, has received 269 reports of cases where national laws in the EU35 have been obstacles to media freedom between 2014 and 2018.
This includes everything from the hundreds of journalists jailed in Turkey following the 2016 failed coup to the seizure of a BBC journalist’s laptop in the United Kingdom, as well as Spain’s Citizens Security Law.
Mapping Media Freedom’s data highlights that the misuse of national security legislation to silence government critics is growing. Of the 269 cases, 67 happened in 2018 and 77 in 2017. There were 81 reports in 2016, 34 in 2015 and only 10 in 2014.
The increase in incidents may be the result of rapidly changing political contexts in individual countries such as Turkey, but it also reflects a continental trend, as incidents have increased in countries including the UK, France, Spain and Germany.
Mapping Media Freedom’s numbers reflect only what has been reported to the platform. We have found that journalists under-report incidents they consider minor, commonplace or part of the job, or where they fear reprisals. In some cases, Mapping Media Freedom correspondents have identified incidents retrospectively as a result of comments on social media or reports appearing only after similar incidents have come to light.
EU governments in particular need to be mindful that loosely-drafted national security laws are often copied by far more restrictive regimes to support their repression of critical media.[/vc_column_text][vc_single_image image=”106465″ img_size=”full”][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/4″][vc_icon icon_fontawesome=”fa fa-file-pdf-o” color=”black” background_style=”rounded” size=”xl” align=”right”][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”3/4″][vc_column_text]
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_custom_heading text=”Anti-terror legislation” font_container=”tag:h3|text_align:left” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_column_text]In light of recent terrorist attacks in Europe, governments have passed stricter counter-terrorism laws. However, the measures have been cynically exploited to criminalise government critics or silence critical media.
Turkey is an egregious case. This phenomenon started small where dismissive official rhetoric was aimed at small segments – such as Kurdish journalists – but over time expanded to extinguish whole newspapers or television networks that espoused critical viewpoints on government policy.
After the 2016 coup attempt, the trend intensified further. Hundreds of journalists have been arrested, dismissed from their jobs or sent to prison under state of emergency decrees and anti-terror laws passed by Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s government.
In one case, in July 2018, three pro-Kurdish newspapers and a television station were closed down by order of an emergency decree. Under the decree, all assets, rights and documents and the debt owed to the shuttered media institutions and associations were transferred to the treasury.
In many cases, critical media companies and dissenting journalists are charged under the anti-terror act for spreading “propaganda for a terrorist organisation”. Many are charged for supporting peace with Kurdish separatists or just for expressing solidarity with others who face government reprisals. For example, in January 2018, five journalists — Ragıp Duran, Hüseyin Aykol, Mehmet Ali Çelebi, Ayşe Düzkan and writer Hüseyin Bektaş — were sent to prison for participating in a solidarity campaign for the shuttered pro-Kurdish Özgür Gündem newspaper.
But the trend toward the criminalisation of journalism that makes governments uncomfortable has spread beyond Turkey.
In 2015, five websites were blocked without judicial oversight in France. The administrative blocking came from the interior ministry on grounds that they “incite or defend terrorism”, under the Terrorism Act.
Even jokes can land journalists in trouble. French police searched the office of community station Radio Canut in Lyon in 2016 and seized the recording of a radio programme after two presenters were accused of “incitement to terrorism”. They had been talking about protests by police officers which had been taking place in France at the time. One of the presenters was put under judicial supervision and forbidden to host the radio programme until he appeared in court.
In Spain, comedian Facu Díaz was taken to court in 2015 for a satirical sketch from his online comedy show. The satirist faced charges under a law that criminalises the “glorification of terrorism” with punishment of up to two years in prison.
Governments are also using terror laws to spy on journalists. In 2014, police in the UK admitted they had used powers under terror legislation to obtain the phone records of Tom Newton Dunn, political editor of The Sun newspaper, to investigate the source of a leak in a political scandal. Police used powers under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act, which circumvents another law that requires police to have approval from a judge to get disclosure of journalistic material. In September 2018, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that the UK’s mass surveillance regime violated human rights.
But the Counter-Terrorism and Border Security Bill – a piece of legislation which critics argue will have a significant negative impact on media freedom in addition to other freedoms – continued its passage through Parliament, and has already been passed by the House of Commons. The final hearing in the House of Lords took place on 15 January 2019. It was sent back to the House for further consideration after some amendments.
The bill would criminalise publishing pictures or video clips of items such as clothes or flags in a way that raises “reasonable suspicion” that the person doing it is a member or supporter of a terrorist organisation. It would also criminalise watching online content that is likely to be helpful to a terrorist. No terrorist intent is required. The offence would carry a prison sentence of up to 15 years.
Parliament’s own human rights watchdog, the Joint Committee on Human Rights, has recommended that the former clause be withdrawn or amended because it “risks a huge swathe of publications being caught, including… journalistic articles”. The government has not accepted the recommendation.
“The bill would introduce wide-ranging new border security powers,” said Joy Hyvarinen, head of advocacy at Index on Censorship. “A journalist could be stopped without any suspicion of wrongdoing. It would be an offence not to answer questions or hand over materials, with no protection for confidential sources.”[/vc_column_text][vc_custom_heading text=”Law enforcement – security measures” font_container=”tag:h3|text_align:left” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_column_text]Measures designed to protect law enforcement officers or increase their powers have also become a threat for journalists.
These measures are sometimes the result of a state of emergency declared in a country. While the state of emergency in Turkey after the 2016 coup attempt is a prime example, the same has happened elsewhere.
In France, measures declared after the 2015 terrorist attacks in Paris were used to ban photographer NnoMan from covering a protest in the city in 2016. The police justified the decree by the young man’s presence “at several demonstrations against police violence or the proposed labour law” which ended up in violent disorders, but failed to mention that NnoMan had a press card.
In other cases, the threat comes from ordinary laws. Spain’s Citizens Security Law punishes public protests in front of government buildings and the “unauthorised use” of images of law enforcement authorities or police.
In 2017, a Spanish police union filed a lawsuit against Mónica Terribas, a journalist for Catalunya Rádio, accusing her of “favouring actions against public order”. The union claimed she urged citizens in Catalonia to report on police movements during the referendum on independence, and that such information could help terrorists, drug dealers and other criminals.
The passing of a similar law has raised eyebrows in Bavaria, where the state parliament granted law enforcement broad new powers to act without “concrete suspicion” in May 2018. The law gives police new powers to access mobile phones, computers and cloud-based data. Law enforcement officers are allowed to amend or delete the information they recover under the legislation.
Provisions also include extending “preventative detention” powers where there is fear of public disorder, under which police can detain people for up to three months – previously two weeks – without prior judicial approval. Under the legislation, detainees can ask judges to review the legality of their detention, but prisoners must bring the cases themselves and have no right to state-provided lawyers for this purpose.[/vc_column_text][vc_custom_heading text=”Official secrets – leaks” font_container=”tag:h3|text_align:left” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_column_text]Official secrets acts are another way in which legislation can obstruct media freedom.
In May 2017, six journalists were called to testify by authorities in the German state of Niedersachsen after the publication of articles that contained leaked information about law enforcement errors made during terror investigations. They were told they would face large fines if they refused to testify. The German Journalists Association called the procedure “intimidation” and “a risk for source protection”.
In the UK, a proposal is being considered that could lead to journalists being jailed for up to 14 years for obtaining leaked official documents. The major overhaul of the Official Secrets Act – to be replaced by an updated Espionage Act – would give courts the power to increase jail terms against journalists receiving official material. The new law, should it get approval, would see documents containing “sensitive information” about the economy fall foul of national security laws for the first time.
Jodie Ginsberg, chief executive of Index on Censorship, said: “It is unthinkable that whistleblowers and those to whom they reveal their information should face jail for leaking and receiving information that is in the public interest.”[/vc_column_text][vc_custom_heading text=”Case studies” font_container=”tag:h3|text_align:left” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_custom_heading text=”Deniz Yücel, Turkey correspondent for Die Welt” font_container=”tag:h3|text_align:left” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_column_text]
Deniz Yücel
The case of Deniz Yücel epitomises how journalism that is critical to the Turkish government, Erdoğan or their associates is being equated with terrorism.
Yücel, a Turkish-German dual national, was working as a correspondent for German newspaper Die Welt when he was taken into police custody on 17 February 2017, and was formally arrested on 27 February 2017.
He is one of hundreds of journalists arrested in Turkey since the 2016 coup attempt on charges of sedition and “spreading propaganda of a terrorist organisation and inciting the public to hatred and hostility” under the Turkish anti-terror act.
“This law is Turkey’s own Sword of Damocles that the state holds on freedom of expression,” said Özgün Özçer, Turkey correspondent for Mapping Media Freedom. “Journalists regularly face investigations when they report on the army’s crimes, the judiciary’s unfair verdicts, state oppression and so forth.
“Ironically, the propaganda charge is also a tool to allow government propaganda to prevail over the truth. It hides what truly happened and discredits reality to protect the state’s own version of the facts – the real propaganda.”
In Yücel’s case, “spreading propaganda for a terrorist organisation” amounted to a report he wrote about the energy minister after the minister’s email account was hacked by a group of activists. Six Turkish journalists were arrested for the same reason, but tried separately.
Yücel was subject to pre-trial detention until February 2018, when he was released. In the same month, his court case began. Prosecutors are seeking up to 18 years in prison.
Yücel returned to Germany after the intervention of Chancellor Angela Merkel and is being tried in absentia.[/vc_column_text][vc_custom_heading text=”Axier López and Spain’s gag law” font_container=”tag:h3|text_align:left” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_column_text]
Axier López
In March 2016, Axier López was fined €601 for posting photographs of police making an arrest.
López, a journalist for Basque country magazine Argia, had posted two photos on Twitter of police arresting a woman who had failed to appear in court.
Under the Citizens Security Law 2015 – which critics call the “gag law” – disseminating photos of police officers “that would endanger their safety or that of protected areas or put the success of an operation at risk” can incur in fines of up to €30,000.
According to the People’s Party, which was in power when the law was passed, the aim of the law is to protect officers on duty, but police associations and even citizens’ associations have used it to target journalists. The legislation was introduced after a wave of anti-austerity protests in the country.
“Several journalists have been sanctioned with heavy administrative fines for taking photos at public demonstrations and events,” said Silvia Nortes, Spain correspondent for Mapping Media Freedom. “Others have even suffered judicial measures against investigative journalism, mainly in political corruption cases.”
Although the fine has since been revoked by a Catalan court, López said the law criminalised journalism, and digital newspaper Diagonal wrote: “This is the first time that a journalist is fined by the gag law.”[/vc_column_text][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/2″][vc_column_text]
About this report
This report is part of a series based on data submitted to Mapping Media Freedom. This report reviewed 269 incidents involving investigative journalists from the 35 countries in or affiliated with the European Union between May 2014 and 30 October 2018.
Mapping Media Freedom identifies threats, violations and limitations faced by media workers in 43 countries — throughout European Union member states, candidates for entry and neighbouring countries. The project is co-funded by the European Commission and managed by Index on Censorship as part of the European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF).
Index on Censorship is a UK-based nonprofit that campaigns against censorship and promotes freedom of expression worldwide. Founded in 1972, Index has published some of the world’s leading writers and artists in its award-winning quarterly magazine, including Nadine Gordimer, Mario Vargas Llosa, Samuel Beckett and Kurt Vonnegut. Index promotes debate, monitors threats to free speech and supports individuals through its annual awards and fellowship program.
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/2″][vc_column_text]
Acknowledgements
AUTHOR Alessio Perrone
EDITING Adam Aiken, Sean Gallagher, Ryan McChrystal with contributions by Jodie Ginsberg, Joy Hyvarinen and Paula Kennedy and Mapping Media Freedom correspondents: João de Almeida Dias Adriana, Borowicz, Valeria Costa-Kostritsky, Ilcho Cvetanoski, Jonas Elvander, Amanda Ferguson, Dominic Hinde, Investigative Reporting Project Italy, Linas Jegelevicius, Juris Kaza, David Kraft, Lazara Marinkovic, Fatjona Mejdini, Mitra Nazar, Silvia Nortes, Platform for Independent Journalism (P24), Katariina Salomaki, Zoltan Sipos, Michaela Terenzani, Pavel Theiner, Helle Tiikmaa, Christina Vasilaki, Lisa
Weinberger
DESIGN Matthew Hasteley
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/4″][vc_single_image image=”106454″ img_size=”full”][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/4″][vc_single_image image=”106452″ img_size=”full”][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/4″][vc_single_image image=”106450″ img_size=”full”][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/4″][vc_single_image image=”106451″ img_size=”full”][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][/vc_column][/vc_row]
29 Mar 19 | Campaigns -- Featured, Magazine, Press Releases, Volume 48.01 Spring 2019, Volume 48.01 Spring 2019 Extras
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_custom_heading text=”97% of editors of local news worry that the powerful are no longer being held to account ” google_fonts=”font_family:Libre%20Baskerville%3Aregular%2Citalic%2C700|font_style:400%20italic%3A400%3Aitalic”][vc_column_text]
Ninety seven per cent of senior journalists and editors working for the UK’s regional newspapers and news sites say they worry that that local newspapers do not have the resources to hold power to account in the way that they did in the past, according to a survey carried out by the Society of Editors and Index on Censorship. And 70% of those respondents surveyed for a special report published in Index on Censorship magazine are worried a lot about this.
The survey, carried out in February 2019 for the spring issue of Index on Censorship magazine, asked for responses from senior journalists and current and former editors working in regional journalism. It was part of work carried out for this magazine to discover the biggest challenges ahead for local journalists and the concerns about declining local journalism has on holding the powerful to account.
The survey found that 50% of editors and journalists are most worried that no one will be doing the difficult stories in future, and 43% that the public’s right to know will disappear. A small number worry most that there will be too much emphasis on light, funny stories.
There are some specific issues that editors worry about, such as covering court cases and council meetings with limited resources.
Twenty editors surveyed say that they feel only half as much local news is getting covered in their area compared with a decade ago, with 15 respondents saying that about 10% less news is getting covered. And 74% say their news outlet covers court cases once a week, and 18% say they hardly ever cover courts.
The special report also includes a YouGov poll commissioned for Index on public attitudes to local journalism. Forty per cent of British adults over the age of 65 think that the public know less about what is happening in areas where local newspapers have closed, according to the poll.
Meanwhile, 26% of over-65s say that local politicians have too much power where local newspapers have closed, compared with only 16% of 18 to 24-year-olds. This is according to YouGov data drawn from a representative sample of 1,840 British adults polled on 21-22 February 2019.
[/vc_column_text][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/4″][vc_icon icon_fontawesome=”fa fa-quote-left” color=”custom” size=”xl” align=”right” custom_color=”#dd3333″][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”3/4″][vc_custom_heading text=”The demise of local reporting undermines all journalism, creating black holes at the moment when understanding the “backcountry” is crucial” font_container=”tag:h3|text_align:left” google_fonts=”font_family:Libre%20Baskerville%3Aregular%2Citalic%2C700|font_style:400%20italic%3A400%3Aitalic”][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_column_text]The Index magazine special report charts the reduction in local news reporting around the world, looking at China, Argentina, Spain, the USA, the UK among other countries.
Index on Censorship editor Rachael Jolley said: “Big ideas are needed. Democracy loses if local news disappears. Sadly, those long-held checks and balances are fracturing, and there are few replacements on the horizon. Proper journalism cannot be replaced by people tweeting their opinions and the occasional photo of a squirrel, no matter how amusing the squirrel might be.”
She added: “If no local reporters are left living and working in these communities, are they really going to care about those places? News will go unreported; stories will not be told; people will not know what has happened in their towns and communities.”
Others interviewed for the magazine on local news included:
Michael Sassi, editor of the Nottingham Post and the Nottingham Live website, who said: “There’s no doubt that local decision-makers aren’t subject to the level of scrutiny they once were.”
Lord Judge, former lord chief justice for England and Wales, said: “As the number of newspapers declines and fewer journalists attend court, particularly in courts outside London and the major cities, and except in high profile cases, the necessary public scrutiny of the judicial process will be steadily eroded,eventually to virtual extinction.”
US historian and author Tim Snyder said: “The policy thing is that government – whether it is the EU or the United States or individual states – has to create the conditions where local media can flourish.”
“A less informed society where news is replaced by public relations, reactive commentary and agenda management by corporations and governments will become dangerously volatile and open to manipulation by special interests. Allan Prosser, editor of the Irish Examiner.
“The demise of local reporting undermines all journalism, creating black holes at the moment when understanding the “backcountry” is crucial. Belgian journalist Jean Paul Marthoz.
The special report “Is this all the local news? What happens if local journalism no longer holds power to account?” is part of the spring issue of Index on Censorship magazine.
Note to editors: Index on Censorship is a quarterly magazine, which was first published in 1972. It has correspondents all over the world and covers freedom of expression issues and censored writing
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
Rachael Jolley is editor of Index on Censorship. She tweets @londoninsider. This article is part of the latest edition of Index on Censorship magazine, with its special report on Is this all the Local News?
Index on Censorship’s spring 2019 issue asks Is this all the local news? What happens if local journalism no longer holds power to account? We explore the repercussions in the issue.
Look out for the new edition in bookshops, and don’t miss our Index on Censorship podcast, with special guests, on iTunes and Soundcloud.
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column width=”1/3″][vc_custom_heading text=”Is this all the Local News?” font_container=”tag:h3|text_align:left” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.indexoncensorship.org%2F2018%2F12%2Fbirth-marriage-death%2F|||”][vc_column_text]The spring 2019 issue of Index on Censorship magazine explores what happens to democracy without local journalism, and how it can survive in the future.
With: Richard Littlejohn, Libby Purves and Tim Snyder[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][vc_column width=”1/3″][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner][vc_single_image image=”105481″ img_size=”full” onclick=”custom_link” link=”https://www.indexoncensorship.org/2018/12/birth-marriage-death/”][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][/vc_column][vc_column width=”1/3″][vc_custom_heading text=”Subscribe” font_container=”tag:h3|text_align:left”][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner][vc_column_text]In print, online. In your mailbox, on your iPad.
Subscription options from £18 or just £1.49 in the App Store for a digital issue.
Every subscriber helps support Index on Censorship’s projects around the world.
SUBSCRIBE NOW[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][/vc_column][/vc_row]
26 Mar 19 | Magazine, Magazine Editions, Volume 48.01 Spring 2019
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_custom_heading text=”With contributions from Richard Littlejohn, Libby Purves, Michal Hvorecký, Karoline Kan, Andrew Morton, Jeffrey Wasserstrom, Rituparna Chatterjee and Julie Posetti”][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
Is this all the local news? The spring 2019 issue of Index on Censorship magazine.
The spring 2019 edition of Index on Censorship looks at local news in the UK and around the world and what happens when local journalism no longer holds power to account.
Our exclusive survey of editors and journalists in the UK shows that 97% are worried that local newspapers don’t have the resources any more to hold power to account. Meanwhile the older population tell us they are worried that the public is less well informed than it used to be. Local news reporting is in trouble all over the world. In the USA Jan Fox looks at the news deserts phenomenon and what it means for a local area to lose its newspaper. Karoline Kan writes from China about how local newspapers, which used to have the freedom to cover crises and hold the government to account, are closing as they come increasingly under Communist Party scrutiny. Veteran English radio journalist Libby Purves tells editor Rachael Jolley that local newspapers in the UK used to give a voice to working-class people and that their demise may have contributed to Brexit. In India Rituparna Chatterjee finds a huge appetite for local news, but discovers, with some notable exceptions, that there is not enough investment to satisfy demand. “Fake news” is on the rise, and journalists are vulnerable to bribery. Meanwhile Mark Frary examines how artificial intelligence is being used to write news stories and asks whether this is helping or hindering journalism. Finally an extract from the dystopian Slovak novel Troll, Michal Hvorecký published in English for the first time imagines an outpouring of state-sponsored hate
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_custom_heading text=”Special Report: Is this all the local news?”][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
The future is robotic by Mark Frary Would journalists have more time to investigate news stories if robots did the easy bits?
Terrorising the truth by Stephen Woodman Journalists on the US border are too intimidated by drug cartels to report what is happening
Switched off by Irene Caselli After years as a political football, Argentinian papers are closing as people turn to the internet for news
News loses by Jan Fox Thousands of US communities have lost their daily papers. What is the cost to their area?
Stripsearch by Martin Rowson On the death of local news
What happens when our local news disappears by Tracey Bagshaw How UK local newspapers are closing and coverage of court proceedings is not happening
Who will do the difficult stories now? by Rachael Jolley British local newspaper editors fear a future where powerful figures are not held to account, plus a poll of public opinion on journalism
“People feel too small to be heard” by Rachael Jolley Columnist Libby Purves tells Index fewer working-class voices are being heard and wonders whether this contributed to Brexit
Fighting for funding by Peter Sands UK newspaper editors talk about the pressures on local newspapers in Britain today
Staying alive by Laura Silvia Battaglia Reporter Sandro Ruotolo reveals how local news reporters in southern Italy are threatened by the Mafia
Dearth of news by Karoline Kan Some local newspapers in China no longer dig into corruption or give a voice to local people as Communist Party scrutiny increases
Remote controller by Dan Nolan What happens when all major media, state and private, is controlled by Hungary’s government and all the front pages start looking the same
Rocky times by Monica O’Shea Local Australian newspapers are merging, closing and losing circulation which leaves scandals unreported
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_custom_heading text=”Global View”][vc_column_text]
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_custom_heading text=”In Focus”][vc_column_text]
Turning off the searchlights by Alessio Perrone The Italian government attempts to restrict coverage of the plight of refugees crossing the Mediterranean
Standing up for freedom Adam Reichardt A look at Gdańsk’s history of protest and liberalism, as the city fights back after the murder of mayor Paweł Adamowicz
After the purge by Samuel Abrahám and Miriam Sherwood This feature asks two writers about lessons for today from their Slovak families’ experiences 50 years ago
Fakebusters strike back by Raymond Joseph How to spot deep fakes, the manipulated videos that are the newest form of “fake news” to hit the internet
Cover up by Charlotte Bailey Kuwaiti writer Layla AlAmmar discusses why 4,000 books were banned in her home country and the possible fate of her first #MeToo novel
Silence speaks volumes by Neema Komba Tanzanian artists and musicians are facing government censorship in a country where 64 new restrictions have just been introduced
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_custom_heading text=”Culture”][vc_column_text]
The year of the troll by Michal Hvorecký This extract from the novel Troll describes a world where the government controls the people by spewing out hate 24 hours a day
Ghost writers by Jeffrey Wasserstrom The author and China expert imagines a fictional futuristic lecture he’s going to give in 2049, the centenary of Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four
Protesting through poetry by Radu Vancu Verses by one of Romania’s most renowned poets draw on his experience of anti-corruption protests in Sibiu
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_custom_heading text=”Column”][vc_column_text]
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_custom_heading text=”Endnote”][vc_column_text]
Press freedom: EU blind spot? By Sally Gimson Many European countries are violating freedom of the press; why is the EU not taking it more seriously?
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column width=”1/3″][vc_custom_heading text=”Subscribe”][vc_column_text]In print, online, in your mailbox, on your iPad.
Subscription options from £18 or just £1.49 in the App Store for a digital issue.
Every subscriber helps support Index on Censorship’s projects around the world.
SUBSCRIBE NOW[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][vc_column width=”1/3″][vc_single_image image=”105481″ img_size=”medium”][/vc_column][vc_column width=”1/3″][vc_custom_heading text=”Listen”][vc_column_text]The spring 2019 magazine podcast, featuring interviews with editor of chinadialogue, Karoline Kan; director of the Society of Editors in the UK Ian Murray and co-founder of the Bishop’s Stortford Independent, Sinead Corr. Index youth board members Arpitha Desai and Melissa Zisingwe also talk about local journalism in India and Zimbabwe
LISTEN HERE[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]
12 Mar 19 | Media Freedom, media freedom featured, News and features, Spain
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
Blanca Pou and Kiko Mestre showing solidarity with journalists in court in December 2018
In March 2017 prominent Mallorca businessman Bartolomé Cursach was arrested on charges including bribery, extortion, making threats, money-laundering, homicide, corruption of minors and possession of firearms.
In July 2018 Palma-based news agency Europa Press Mallorca published details of a secret police report that formed part of the investigation into Cursach’s business affairs. On 11 December, following orders by judge Miguel Florit, National Police officers investigating the leak of the police report seized documents, mobile phones and computers belonging to editors Kiko Mestre of the regional daily Diario de Mallorca, and Blanca Pou of Europa Press.
The action was considered an attack on freedom of the press for not respecting the right of journalists to protect the identity of their sources. Professional secrecy for journalists is recognised by the Spanish Constitution in Article 20.
“Judge Florit seems to have forgotten that journalists have not only the right, but the duty to protect our sources,” said Kiko Mestre. “Otherwise, investigative reporting would not exist.”
The seizure of the journalists’ equipment has given rise to protests among journalists at the regional, national and international levels. As Mestre tells Index on Censorship: “Journalism professionals have come together as never before. This is a one-of-a-kind case in Spain and does not only affects Blanca and me but the essence of journalism.”
On 14 December almost 200 journalists from Mallorca gathered in Palma city in defence of the citizens’ right to information. During the protest, representatives of the Union of Journalists of the Balearic Islands (SPIB) and the Association of Journalists of the Balearic Islands (APIB) read a joint statement describing the judicial action as a “direct attack on the free exercise of journalism”. APIB also published a manifesto on its website, which has been signed by more than 1700 journalists. Ángeles Durán, president of APIB, stressed the importance of journalists defending their rights: ”Journalists must demand compliance with the Constitution and fight for free information, which involves criticism of restrictive laws. All coercive measures towards journalists undermine the right to information.”
Demonstrations were also called in Madrid and Barcelona at the entrance to the Supreme Court and the High Court of Justice under the slogan: “Our professional secrecy, your right to information.”
The Spanish journalists’ federation FAPE, the Platform for the Defence of Freedom of Information PDLI and the Association of Media AMI also condemned the judicial and police action and defended the right to professional secrecy through public statements.
Cursach’s influence on Mallorcan institutions and public powers became apparent at the beginning of the investigation. As Mestre said, Cursach has “always shown interest in controlling the media”. Indeed, it is not the first time Mestre feels under pressure. “I have been the target of a smear campaign with very serious comments on social media. A lawyer hired by Cursach coerced me and published serious accusations on a social media page whose followers are all either charged in the judicial case or employed by Cursach.”
“There are very obscure interests behind,” added Durán. “The situation seems to be the plot of a film with corruption at all levels.”
“The first days after the seizure I feared I could be followed,” admits Pou. “Any judicial process makes you nervous, but if you are not sure it will be a clean process, then you feel more insecure.”
This is not an isolated case of an attack on freedom of the press in Spain. In the last world ranking on press freedom by Reporters Without Borders in April 2018, Spain went down two places, from 29th to 31st, from the year previous. Spain’s profile on Mapping Media Freedom also shows an increase in media freedom violations year-on-year.
Durán said: “We all know of cases at the national level that are quite surprising for a democracy, such as the seizure of the book Fariña. And the Gag Law is a tool of coercion and censorship. In 2015 then minister of Justice Rafael Catalá suggested penalising media that published judicial leaks. Politicians try to silence the press, and now judicial powers are putting freedom of information at risk. We have always been aware of indirect pressures from political powers through subsidies and institutional advertising, but the role that some judges are adopting is alarming.”
Mestre claims their work is being hindered: “There is more and more interference of the judicial power and we are being criminalised. Florit has gone beyond limits that had never been overstepped in the history of Spanish democracy. Instead of prosecuting the perpetrators of the crimes, it is our work what has been questioned.”
As for Pou, journalists’ honesty is being completely sidelined: “No matter how honest the journalist is, sources are unprotected and can be identified.”
Both journalists filed a complaint against judge Florit for perversion of justice, offence against inviolability of the home and against the right to professional secrecy. The significance of the incident is not limited to press freedom in today’s Spain, but in the future. As Pou said: “We want a clear sentence saying this is perversion of justice and cannot be done. Otherwise, other judges may act likewise in the future. The truth ought to be public, no matter what way the judicial path ends.”[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_basic_grid post_type=”post” max_items=”4″ element_width=”6″ grid_id=”vc_gid:1552064184491-2132ed12-1306-9″ taxonomies=”7389, 199″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
