Click on the dots for more information on the incidents.
Each week, Index on Censorship’s Mapping Media Freedom project verifies threats, violations and limitations faced by the media throughout the European Union and neighbouring countries. Here are five recent reports that give us cause for concern.
21 June, 2016 – Freelance journalist Kastus Zhukouski and cameraperson Alyaksei Atroshchankau who work for Poland-based Belsat TV, were detained in the town of Loyeu, in Homel region, Belsat channel reported.
The two media workers were filming a local brick factory for a story about poor economic conditions in Belarus.
“The police came, and brutally detained me and my colleague Alyaksei. We were taken to the police department, to the control room. They seized the equipment from our hands, broke it. I was knocked down to the floor, handcuffed, a man pressed a knee against my head. He called himself Deputy Chief Henadz Madzharski”, Kastus Zhukouski told BelaPAN.
The journalist also said he had high blood pressure. An ambulance was called and he was given an injection.
Zhukouski and Atroshchankau spent six hours at the police station. No police documents were drawn up despite threats to do so, the channel reported. It is unclear if the journalists have been charged with anything.
Szukouski and Atroshchankau filed requests to the Investigative Committee of the Republic of Belarus asking them to investigate actions of the police.
20 June, 2016 – Belgian justice minister Koen Geens announced his intention to double the length of a prison sentencing for divulging confidential information, in cases where professional confidentially is breached, newspaper La Libre Belgique reported.
According to the Belgium General Association of Journalists, the move is meant to include it amongst the category of offenses which allow specific investigative methods such as phone-tapping or electronic tracing.
A second proposed law is also worrying journalists, which would enable the intelligence service to scrape the protection of a professional journalist if he/she is not considered a real journalist.
Gaspard Glanz, from independent website Taranis News, which covers clashes that take place during protests closely, and Alexis Kraland, were detained by police forces.
Ganz tweeted about the conditions, writing: “There’s 12 of us in total in the van. It’s 40 degrees. No water, no air”.
On Periscope, the people in the truck can be seen saying why they were arrested, generally because they were wearing protective material meant to protect them against tear gas.
22 June, 2016 – A new anti-terrorism law has come into effect on 22 June after it was ratified by the Polish President Andrzej Duda, wiadomosci.gazeta.pl. The law was successfully passed by two parliamentary chambers of the Sejm earlier this month.
The law gives Poland’s intelligence agency, the ABW (Agencja Bezpieczeństwa Wewnętrznego), the right to “order the blocking or demand that the electronic open source service administrator block access to information data”, thereby giving the agency the right to shut down online media outlets, including websites and television programmes, Kulisy24 reported.
Websites can be blocked for up to five days prior to obtaining permission by higher prosecution authorities, and up to 30 days if permission is granted, with the option to renew it for up to three months.
Authorisation for a temporary access ban can also now be granted by the minister of justice. The legislation does not grant power to the source administrator to appeal against such a decision.
Lawyer and expert on surveillance legislation, Prior Waglowski, told the website money.pl: “Blocking…has to occur under judicial supervision… which is not given here. These propositions are taken out of the blue”. He underlined that the definition of terrorism provided is very loose and is up to the discretion by effectively two persons.
Watchdog website Kulisy24criticised the legislation, writing that it is not known how blocking will be executed and that the ABW is not obliged to publish its blocking order.
The Polish NGO Fundacja Panoptykon started a petition against the law in late April and collected just short of 8,690 signatures by 20 June. Together with the NGO e-Państwo, it also published a protest letter addressed to the Polish president, which was shared by a number of media and NGOs, including the Helsinki Foundation of Human Rights.
In a developing incident reported to Mapping Media Freedom on 18 May 2016 Turkish judicial authorities have opened an investigation against five journalists and trade unionists for participating in a solidarity campaign with the Kurdish daily newspaper Özgür Gündem.
The journalists include Ertugrul Mavioglu, Faruk Eren, Ayse Düzkan, Mustafa Sönmez and Melda Onur.
The Co-Editorship-in-Chief campaign was launched by Özgür Gündem daily on 3 May, 2016 for World Press Freedom Day (#WPFD) where up to 16 journalists participated.
Requests have been filed for the journalists and trade unionists to testify for articles that are being considered “terrorist propaganda” and an “incitement to crime” which were published whilst they participated in the solidarity campaign.
“This is another dark day for media freedom in Turkey,” said Johann Bihr, the head of RSF’s Eastern Europe and Central Asia desk. “Erol Önderoglu has fought tirelessly to defend persecuted journalists for the past 20 years. He is a leader in this field because of his honesty and integrity, which are recognised the world over. It says a lot about the decline in media freedom in Turkey that he is now also being targeted.”
UPDATE: On 25 May, 2016 – Journalist Erol Önderoglu has been added to list of journalists being investigated for “terrorist propaganda” for participating in the solidarity campaign with Özgür Gündem, The European Federation of Journalists (EFJ) reports. EFJ demands that all criminal charges be dropped against him and the other journalists involved in this campaign.
UPDATE: 20 June, 2016 – A prosecutor has issued a warrant for the pre-trial arrest of ad interim editor-in-chief Özgür Gündem Şebnem Korur Fincancı, Bianet journalist and RSF representative Erol Önderoğlu and author Ahmet Nesin.
Belarus Free Theatre have been using their creative and subversive art to protest the dictatorial rule of Aleksandr Lukashenko for over a decade.
Facing pressure from authorities since their inception, the theatre company nonetheless thrived underground, performing in apartments, basements and forests despite continued arrests and brutal interrogations. In 2011, while on tour, they were told they were unable to return home. Refusing to be silenced, the group set up headquarters in London and continued to direct projects in Belarus. In 2016 the group was shortlisted for Index on Censorship’s Freedom of Expression Arts Award.
Why is it important to mount Burning Doors at this time?
Koliada: Freedom of expression in that geopolitical knot where we come from and where more than 200 million people live under severe pressures of authoritarian and dictatorial regimes. If we do not talk and alert people living in western, democratic countries to our stories, their countries will be infiltrated in different forms, initially unnoticeably, by people manipulating the authorities who say it’s all in the name of the law.
Where did the idea come from?
Koliada: The idea behind Burning Doors is at the heart of Belarus Free Theatre. Close your eyes, just for a moment, and imagine that a theatre company based here in the UK could be prohibited to perform shows by Mark Ravenhill and Sarah Kane, and needs to perform underground. Even operating underground, the actors and managers could be arrested by MI5, riot police or the Met, and audience members threatened and told that they could lose their jobs and education.
(Our audience is a very young one and, of course, they are not scared of the secret services, so what would happen in those cases is that their parents would be threatened with professional retribution.)
I’ll continue and ask you to imagine that all of it has happened and continues to happen to a UK based-theatre company, one that is known and performs across the world, and yet can only exist because its founding members are exiled from their homeland and they now have political asylum in the UK. This has been our story for the past 11 years.
It’s in our blood to feel all the symptoms of dictatorship. Last year when we mounted Staging A Revolution: I’m with Banned which brought international attention to banned artists in Belarus, Ukraine (Ukrainian artists who spoke out against the Russian military invasion of Ukraine and are now prohibited in Russia), and Russia, it was the first time anyone had mounted an artistic solidarity event with Eastern Europe since the collapse of the Soviet Union.
Around the same time that the Festival took place, filmmaker Oleg Sentsov and contemporary artist Petr Pavlensky were arrested. Masha Alekhina, a member of Pussy Riot who served two years in jail, got in contact with us and suggested we work together. We knew we had to do it. We were intrigued by the artistic possibilities of working with a real witness talking about her own personal experiences and bringing her into our Minsk-based ensemble of actors, the most talented and bravest in the world. We wanted to connect Masha’s story to those of other persecuted contemporary actors and through a prism of their personal stories to speak openly about the hypocrisy of politicians and to inspire our audiences to reflect on the reality that we as human beings need to stand up together against repressive regimes. It’s important for us to reemphasise that we are not heroes, we are not victims, we are contemporary artists.
Does BFT think that building cross-border alliances with artists will have an impact on the threats to freedom of expression?
Koliada: Any cross-borders alliances of artists expands audiences. It transforms all of us into a movement. Why do dictators put contemporary artists into jails? Because they want to show with a single example that it’s dangerous to resist systems through the arts. They become scared when we stand up together against them. It’s very simple in thought and action but this is what makes them go into panic mode. Ai Wei Wei was under a house arrest when he created the visual icon for our campaign, Staging A Revolution: I’m with Banned. More than 600,000 people across the world saw it online, and people from more than 37 countries supported our campaign. This kind of collective action makes dictators feel sick and it’s then that they start to make the mistakes that lead to their collapse.
It’s unprecedented for us as a theatre company making work for more than eleven years under dictatorship to collaborate with a woman who served a two-year term in a Russian jail. Within days of announcing this collaboration to the media in the UK, it spread across the world. Even this level of coverage is terrifying to people like Putin or Lukashenko because it demonstrates the tidal wave of support for non-violent resistance by creating art. Art is more powerful than political rhetoric. When Mick Jagger, Tom Stoppard and Vaclav Havel made a video supporting the people of Belarus, we were arrested by the KGB. They knew that it was instigated and created by members of BFT. We understood then that the support of artists across the world was more terrifying to them than statements from politicians.
I think it’s time for all of us to make steps forward and to start to act together with artists, human rights defenders, politicians and journalists, because dictators are scared of a strong mutual position.
How has BFT’s mission evolved since being founded a decade ago?
Koliada: From the very beginning we were only interested in people. Human life is the most interesting subject matter for us. We started with our own personal taboos, then society’s taboos, then moved onto a global dimension. The only thing that is unchanging is our fundamental interest in people. When we perform in different continents across the world, people tell us that they find our work so powerful because they always find themselves within us. And likewise, we find ourselves in our audiences.
How else can people support BFT and Burning Doors?
Koliada: Information is the key. If people know what we do, why and how, we have the chance to continue to exist. People knowing of our existence and our work helps on many different levels including our financial sustainability. Last week, President Obama extended sanctions in Belarus stating that Belarus is “an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security of the United States of America and its foreign affairs”. Yet at the same time, the EU is playing a badly orchestrated geopolitical rebranding game to try to convince people that “Belarus is normal”. It’s not. It has been a dictatorship in Europe for 22 years, political opponents have been murdered and their bodies never found. Those who perpetrated those crimes are still in power. Even this week, there is a trial underway against Eduard Palchis, who is a blogger and journalist. It seems that Belarus might have seized another political prisoner if human rights organisations across the world do not intervene.
And for BFT more specifically, this month we launched our first-ever Kickstarter campaign. We need to raise £20,000 in the month of June to bring our tireless, extraordinarily brave troupe of actors to the UK to work with them on our new work, Burning Doors. Every pound will help us get there. Please consider finding out more and supporting us today.
April 2016 was the busiest month for Index on Censorship’s Mapping Media Freedom since the project began in May 2014, with a total of 87 violations against the media recorded. While MMF records violations from over 40 countries, the majority (55%) of last month’s violations came from just five countries.
These hotspots for attacks on the media will come as no surprise to anyone following the project in recent months.
In another instance, on 30 April, Hamza Aktan, news director of private Istanbul-based IMC TV, was arrested by anti-terror police. Aktan was escorted to the police station where he was interrogated for 12 hours and then released. The editor is being accused of spreading propaganda for a terrorist organisation and trying to build public opinion abroad against interests of Turkey for four public tweets.
UPDATE: Government-seized Zaman and Cihan forced to close
Index on Censorship’s latest quarterly report includes a case study on an Istanbul court appointing a group of trustees to take over the management of Zaman newspaper. Since the report, it has been announced that Zaman and Cihan News Agency, also government-seized, are to be permanently closed on 15 May. The decision comes the day after the European Commission recommendation of granting Turkey visa-free travel to the EU.
Russia: Big business throws its weight around
As the Panama Papers showed in April, investigative journalism is essential if misconduct and abuse by big business are to come to light. This makes a recent trend in Russia all the more worrying.
A total of 12 reports were filed in Russia last month, three of which related to journalists investigating business. On 12 April, when covering truckers protesting against the “illegal” actions of Omega, journalist Anton Siliverstov’s phone was stolen by Evgeni Rutkovski the director of the transport company. When he asked Rutkovski to comment on the protest, Siliverstov was forced from the office. The journalist said he would record the incident on his phone, at which point Rutkovski snatched the journalist’s device, refused to give it back and called security. Siliverstov hasn’t seen the phone since.
The month ened with state oil company Rosneft filing a judicial complaint against BiznessPress for an article which, the firm said, is “false and represents baseless fantasies of journalists or their so-called sources”.
Ukraine: TV journalists in the firing line
Ukraine continues to be unsafe for many media workers, with nine reports submitted to the project in April. Violations included five cases of intimidation, two attacks to property and several physical assaults. On 1 April, unidentified assailants set a local TV studio on fire with molotov cocktails. Studio equipment and furniture were destroyed. No one was injured.
Journalism is not a crime, but you’d be excused for thinking otherwise when observing recent events in Belarus. Seven reports were filed for Belarus last month, including two criminal charges resulting in fines, three arrests, and one journalist interrogated for doing his job.
Zhukouski has been fined seven times this year alone.
Macedonia: Anti-government protests turn sour
Six reports were submitted from Macedonia during April. The most worrying instances involved attacks to property (2) and a physical assault, leading to an injury.
April saw a wave of anti-government protests with thousands marching, mainly peacefully, through the capital city of Skopje. On 13 April four photographers and one journalist were injured by police during the anti-government demonstration. Two TV journalists were also injured by demonstrators on the day. On 14 April the offices of the Slobodna Makedonija radio station were pelted with stones by some anti-government demonstrators, causing the windows to break and other material damages.
Mapping Media Freedom Quarterly Report Index on Censorship has released its report for the first quarter of 2016 covering 1 January and 31 March 2016. During this time: Four journalists were killed; 43 incidents of physical assault were confirmed; and there were 87 verified reports of intimidation, which includes psychological abuse, sexual harassment, trolling/cyberbullying and defamation. Media professionals were detained in 27 incidents; 37 criminal charges and civil lawsuits were filed; and media professionals were blocked from covering a story in 62 verified incidents.
“Conflict in Turkey and eastern Ukraine along with the misuse of a broad range of legislation — from limiting public broadcasters to prosecuting journalists as terrorists — have had a negative effect on press freedom across the continent,” Hannah Machlin, Mapping Media Freedom project officer, said.
Andrei Bastunets, chairperson of the Belarusian Association of Journalists (Belarusian Association of Journalists)
Belarusian authorities were busy in 2015: the government introduced new laws aimed at restricting media outlets and distributors; freelance journalists contributing to foreign media outlets found themselves facing prosecution; and websites publishing material that “may harm the national interests of the Republic of Belarus” were extrajudicially blocked.
President Aleksandr Lukashenko may have won his fifth consecutive election on 11 October, but this also raised concerns. Observers noted the electoral process failed to meet certain international standards, including equal media access for candidates, highlighting the pressure media workers find themselves under to comply with tightening government control.
Andrei Bastunets, chairperson of the Belarusian Association of Journalists, spoke to Mapping Media Freedom Volha Siakhovich about the country’s freedom of expression climate.
Volha Siakhovich: How would you describe the situation with media freedom in Belarus in 2015?
Andrei Bastunets: Press freedom has never been easy in Belarus. The country has been ranked 157th out in 180 countries in the World Press Freedom Index by Reporters Without Borders for some years, which is the worst position among all European countries. We can also see the deterioration of the situation with press freedom and freedom of expression as a whole at the systemic level, with the further tightening of the legal framework for activities of the media set forth by new amendments to the Law on Mass Media came into force from the beginning of 2015. They had been adopted by the Belarusian parliament unexpectedly in December 2014 without any public discussion.
Why were the amendments made?
Andrei Bastunets: The Belarusian authorities are always in keeping with the trend of stifling freedom of speech through legal restrictions. The current authorities’ actions against the media are related to the 2015 presidential election campaign and economic crises in Belarus. These circumstances have provoked the tightening of state control over the media field. It affected traditional media, the web and the distribution of print outlets. Before the election, all media had been subjected to more strict limitations.
What problems are associated with state control over the distribution of media?
Andrei Bastunets: In accordance with new legal provisions all media outlets distributors (except for editorial boards) have been obliged to submit to the ministry of information the required information for their incorporation into the State Register until 1 July 2015. Any non-registered distributors’ activity is considered illegal. The ministry of information has various penalty tools that can be applied in relation to media distributors, including the banning of their activity. The distributors are now in fact forced to monitor the content of the distributed media under threat of sanctions. That may lead to the hidden censorship.
Several independent outlets that used to sell the major part of their print-runs through different trade companies and entrepreneurs have faced a reduction in sales since a significant part of press distributors have not agreed to apply to the ministry of information of Belarus for a special permit. At the same time, the “Belposhta” and “Sayuzdruk — state-owned monopolist press distributors — continue to discriminate against Belarusian independent media refusing to co-operate with them.
What negative consequences have followed the changes to the legal regulation regarding the web?
Andrei Bastunets: There is an active interference by the ministry of information of Belarus into the web, which has remained the freest segment in the Belarusian media space. According to the adopted amendments to the Law on Mass Media and provisions of presidential decree No.6 of 28 December 2014 On Urgent Actions to Counteract Illegal Drug Trafficking, which came into force at the beginning of 2015, the ministry of information was authorised to block access to websites extrajudicially for publishing information prohibited by law. It particularly includes the information, which ‘may harm the national interests of the Republic of Belarus’. Now owners of websites are obliged to monitor their web contents including comments of users.
Any state agency can contribute to the formation of a “black list” of websites. It is enough to inform the ministry of information that, in its opinion, a website violates the law. It is important to note that the process has been completely removed from the judicial sphere and has been assigned to the state agencies and the ministry of information. A procedure for judicial review of such decisions is not provided.
Not only are websites to be blocked, but blogs as well. It is a mechanism of a manifestly repressive character and it does not agree with the principles of freedom of expression. In addition, this mechanism is in the hands of the authorities who do not respect these basic principles. Now it is clear that there are no possibilities to appeal against their decisions in fact besides applications to the authorities themselves.
On 18 June 2015, the ministry of information used its power and blocked access to the website KYKY.org. As it was stated in the ministerial report, some KYKY online publications “contained derogatory statements concerning the Belarusian Victory Day public holiday, as well as the citizens of the country who celebrated it, thus… calling in question the significance of this event for the state and distorting the historical truth about the Great Patriotic War”. The editorial staff had to remove all publications that the ministerial officers disliked in order to get back online.
What were the main restrictions to media freedom facing Belarusian journalists last year?
Andrei Bastunets: We witnessed intensified persecution of freelance journalists contributing for foreign media, detentions of journalists by police, interference of the ministry of information in the work of media and the blocking of access to information for journalists. The situation remained highly unfavorable, and the intensification of pressure on journalists and media was recorded during in the course of the presidential election in Belarus in October 2015.
Although no new criminal cases were brought against journalist in 2015, Belarusian journalist Aliaksandr Alesin remains a suspect in an espionage case which has been going on since 25 November 2014, when he was first detained. Alesin is a military expert and a columnist of the weekly Belarusians and Market. At first, the journalist was charged with treason and co-operation with foreign secret services or intelligence agencies. The charge of treason was withdrawn and he was freed, but he still stands accused of co-operation with foreign intelligence services.
In your opinion, why do the Belarusian authorities chase freelancers co-operating with foreign media?
Andrei Bastunets: Prosecution of freelance journalists cooperating with foreign media started in 2014 was continuing in 2015. During 2015, Belarusian freelance journalists have been fined 28 times under Art. 22.9 of the Code of Administrative Offences for “illegal making and distributing mass media productions”. As before, the authorities repressed the independent media workers for the mere fact of publication of their pieces in foreign media. I believe, this is explained by the desire of the Belarusian authorities to restrict the influence of foreign media as the important independent sources of information in the conditions of the lack of independent audiovisual media in Belarus. All the fined freelance journalists worked for foreign radios or TV channels broadcasting for Belarus in Belarusian of Russian languages. As the Belarusian authorities are not able to control these media, they aim to control Belarusian citizens contributing to them.
The prosecution of freelance journalists dramatically intensified at the beginning of summer 2015. At the beginning of August 2015, after the president’s promise to look into the problem during his interview to journalists of independent media, initiating such cases was stopped. However, there were no legal guarantees that the situation would not repeat after the presidential election. And in December policemen in the Gomel region drew up three reports for cooperation with foreign media. Now we are expecting that the reports will be sent to the court.
What are the current main challenges with the Belarusian Association of Journalists?
Andrei Bastunets: As always, the challenges of Belarusian Association of Journalists are the protection of journalistic freedom and free speech values through interaction with state bodies, legal assistance and international advocacy.
