Tag Archive for: European Union

Regional Declaration of Press Councils in South East Europe

/in

Sarajevo, 17 November 2021

Signing of the Decalaration of the Regional Press Councils of South-East Europe and Turkey

Signing of the Declaration of the Regional Press Councils of South-East Europe and Turkey

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

We, the representatives of Press and Media Councils from South East Europe and Turkey,

Recognizing the role of journalism in producing and disseminating public interest information, especially in times of crisis, and emphasizing the overriding importance of this role remaining free from capture or distorting influence;

Reminding the critical role played by media self-regulation in fostering media freedom through ensuring enforcement of journalistic ethical standards, helping minimize state intervention in the field of media freedom, and serving to decrease judicial action against the media;

Highlighting the importance of public trust in media and the challenges of maintaining media professionalism in an environment where new forms of media are constantly evolving;

Recalling the endeavour of press and media councils to adapt their codes of ethics to the new digital media ecosystem providing journalists with specific guidelines on how to work in this environment;

Alarmed by the dire financial situation of press and media councils causing existential threats to the independence and sustainability of these bodies;

Deploring ongoing threats to the safety of journalists in the region and alarmed by the resurgence of political threats to media independence, such as the abuse of State resources, including advertising, efforts by political figures to capture media, withdrawal of accreditation from journalists, harsh attacks which aim to stigmatise and discredit the media, and the targeting of the media through the abuse of judicial proceedings;

Stressing the potential threats of government’s attempts to regulate online media in particular the potential impact on the role of media self-regulation and thereby the existence of press and media councils;

Acknowledging that a lack of transparency of media ownership can promote the undue concentration of media ownership and thereby limit media diversity,

Mindful of the new opportunities that social media platforms offer to journalists to disseminate their work, yet also noting that platforms are not neutral but have assumed an active curatorial or editorial role, including through the use of algorithmic systems, in the dissemination of content produced by media and other actors;

Alarmed by the growing number of malicious actors targeting and attacking independent media on social media platforms to reduce or prevent their distribution and outreach on these platforms;

Troubled by the increasing number of complaints received by press and media councils regarding the proliferation, amplification, and promotion of potentially online harmful content, including disinformation and hate speech;

Noting the variety of new media actors online performing journalistic work and the importance of cooperation among them in pursuit of journalism as a public good;

Highlighting the urgency of equipping citizens with media and information literacy skills to enable them to navigate the evolving information landscape notably by the capacity to distinguish reliable from unreliable information and support professional journalism;

 

We, therefore, call on media professionals of the region to:

ABIDE by media professional standards and codes of ethics developed by press and media councils and other media actors and ensure that they are aware and sufficiently trained on professional standards;

ENSURE visibility of adherence to the system of media self-regulation and thereby supporting citizens in distinguishing media outlets committed to the system of media self-regulation from those outside of the system and in informing them about the existence of a free of charge complaint mechanism when there is a potential breach of media professional standards;

ENSURE the transparency of their ownership and to support media and journalists’ organizations in their efforts for improving the working conditions of all media workers thereby contributing to restoring trust in media;

CONTRIBUTE to the financing of the press and media councils to ensure the independence of media self-regulation and sustainability;

 

We, therefore, call on public authorities and institutions to:

PROMOTE media pluralism and safeguard the sustainability of journalism through support to media linked to ensuring compliance of media with professional standards or abidance to media self-regulation;

PROMOTE media and information literacy in formal and informal education;

ENSURE that representatives of press and media councils are consulted and engaged in all initiatives related or pertaining to media (self)-regulation online and offline;

REFRAIN from undue regulation of the digital media environment and not in line with international standards related to freedom of expression;

 

We, therefore, call on internet platforms to:

COOPERATE with media self-regulation and civil society organizations at the local level in order to safeguard and enhance guarantees for the full exercise of the right to information and freedom of expression, both online and offline;

COLLABORATE with media and press councils to install a dialogue and develop appropriate actions to mitigate online harmful content while prioritizing information of public interest on internet platforms;

PROVIDE opportunities to members of media and press councils for specific appeal mechanisms and inquiries related to their journalistic content being taken down on social media platforms;

ASSIGN dedicated local representatives available for interaction with media and press councils;

ENSURE that the local contexts – in particular related to political aspects and online harmful content – are taken into consideration in content moderation, both in taking down, downranking, and increasing visibility, of journalistic content online, by increasing the level of human moderators adequately trained on sensitive local political, cultural, ethnic, and socio-economic aspects.

 

 

 

Internationals “kill” Rama’s package of online media in Parliament

/in

* from Aleksandra Bogdani, BIRN

Representatives of the EU, the OSCE, the Council of Europe and the United Nations unanimously criticized the violation of freedom of expression through draft laws on online media control, and called on lawmakers to take a step back.

International institutions invited in the round of consultations on the “anti-defamation package” unanimously on Monday criticized the Rama government’s draft laws on regulating online media at the Law Commission.

Representatives of European Union, OSCE, Council of Europe and United Nations Commissioner for Human Rights voiced concerns over the violation of media freedom in Albania and called on lawmakers to take a step back with the proposed bills.

Scheduled to take place initially at 10am, the meeting with representatives of international organizations was postponed for two and a half hours and started again late, as Socialist MPs were present at Prime Minister Edi Rama’s marathon presentation of which he called “special anti-PKK packages”.

Upon arriving at the chamber, the Law Commission Chairman Ulsi Manja spoke of the drafts as “improved” and “agreed with the vast majority of internationals and especially the OSCE”, a claim that heavily stonewalled with the opinions expressed from representatives of these organizations.

Deputy Head of the EU Delegation to Tirana, Monika Bylaite, said at the beginning of her speech that the Commission had submitted its comments twice in February and June and hinted that not all concerns about freedom of expression were taken into account.

“The Commission proposes less agressive approaches, such as the media self-regulation. European and international standards on freedom of expression are key in this process and I urge the commission to fully take them into account, ”said Bylaite, who added that the EU shares concerns that the increase of AMA’s competences affects freedom of expression.

Irina Radu, head of the OSCE’s Media Office, initially disputed the statements of the majority of the MPs that the drafts had been agreed with the OSCE, adding that despite some improvements there were still concerns.

“Our office in Vienna has helped and hired experts on this legislation at the request of the Albanian prime minister from the beginning, but it is not the same as saying that the OSCE approved these draft laws,” said Radu at the roundtable.

“We are concerned that the AMA is heavily present in the law. We would like the issues to be settled in the court and in no way by AMA. We notice that the fines have been reduced, but they are still disproportionate,” she added.

In a diversive attempt, the legal package rapporteur Klotilda Bushka underestimated the criticism of EU and OSCE representatives in Tirana, claiming that the opinions of the Vienna Office for Media Freedom and the European Commission in Brussels were taken into account.

Klotilda Bushka and Vasilika Hysi, The 2 Albanian co-relators of the socalled "Anti-defamation" package | Photo : BIRN

Bushka and Hysi, the 2 Albanian co-relators of the socalled “Anti-defamation” package | Photo : BIRN

“The last legal opinion from Vienna came in October and all their comments were reflected in the draft prepared on 12 November 2019. I thank the EU and OSCE experts for their expertise,” Bushka said.

“We have a long process, almost a year of consulting so much. It is time to be concrete and start discussing the articles in detail, ”she suggested.

Along the same lines, co-rapporteur Vasilika Hysi asked for concrete opinions from representatives of the Council of Europe on how hate speech, child protection, xenophobia or homophobia can be restricted – which according to her are commonly found in portals.

Vice/Chairman of the EU Delegation in Tirana, Monika Bylaite and the Expert of te Council of Europe, Dierde Kevin - Photo - BIRN

Vice/Chairman of the EU Delegation in Tirana, Monika Bylaite and the Expert of te Council of Europe, Dierde Kevin – Photo – BIRN

But Council of Europe expert Deirdre Kevin attacked the essence of the purpose of the bills, not considering the article-by-article discussion to be useful. In an exhaustive analysis, Kevin said the government’s draft laws run counter to a series of Council of Europe recommendations and resolutions promoting self-regulation in the media.

“Looking at both versions, the purpose of these amendments is almost the same, despite minor changes referred to by the OSCE. So we can briefly discuss changes to the essence and purpose of the law, which puts online publications in a statutory regulation regime that is considered normal for audiovisual media and licensed entities only,” said Deirdre Kevin, considering the government’s proposal unusual.

“… the essence of the purpose of the law is again problematic and does not meet the standards of freedom of expression,” she said, stressing that the standard is self-regulation and addressing complaints through the media council.

The Council of Europe expert also dismissed the government’s claims that the bills address disinformation and hate speech, adding that they are more focused on defamation claims.”

In the multitude of issues that make this process complex, it is difficult to imagine how the Regulatory Authority could respond within 72 hours to any particular complaint because the court notes that there are different levels of protection for people and politicians are less protected against criticism. There are also demands to separate facts from judgments and opinions, ”she stressed.

Kevin asked if the bill also included newspaper websites, and following the “No” response from reporters, deepened her criticism on the grounds that the draft was both discriminatory and unfair.

In the face of the mishmash created by the version changes, expert Kevin’s only suggestion to lawmakers was to “take a step back and consider restarting work, as this kind of regulation is not in line with Council of Europe standards and any European practices that can be identified ”.

Even UN representative Fjoralba Shkodra, who read a comment prepared by the Commissioner for Human Rights, did not spare criticism of the draft laws.

“The fines are very high and this measure could lead in the opposite direction, to silence journalists and investigative media,” Shkodra told the Commission.“

The issue of rights must be resolved under the jurisdiction of the courts. The issue of fake news and disinformation needs to be resolved in promoting and strengthening the quality of the media and not by banning freedom of expression, ”she added.

In addition to unspared criticism, discussions at the Law Commission highlighted also some paradoxes. AMA Chairman Gentian Sala noted contradictions between the statements of international organizations, also adding that the AMA Board had made its position public. In a November 18 statement, most bodily members opposed changes to the AMA organic law.

Parliamentary Comission of Laws and Human Rights | Foto - BIRN

Parliamentary Comission of Laws and Human Rights | Photo – BIRN

While the head of the Law Commission, Ulsi Manja, considered the criticisms as “different points of view” and he also called on AMA Chairman and international organizations, to submit the comments on the legal changes in writing.

Deputy Head of the EU Delegation, Monika Bylaite, once again reinforced the approach taken by the four organizations present at the roundtable.

“The four organizations here said the same thing, that the approach should be easier. We are for a self-regulatory approach, ”Bylaite said.

MP Ralf Gjoni who asked for a speech on behalf of the opposition, asked if the bill also regulates ERTV, the prime minister’s own straming tv on Facebook, and, while expressing his support for the regulation, criticized the fact that such an initiative comes to Parliament from Prime Minister Rama.

“The owner of ERTV and the owner of the Socialist Party brings legal initiative to the media in Parliament. While MPs are given this spoon-filled mess by the Council of Ministers or the Prime Minister and they are told to vote it, ”Gjoni said, adding that the bills should not be voted without 100% agreement with the internationals.

* This English version is a rough translation from the Albanian version

Copyright: Reporter.al

Statement on the Draft Law on Media

/in

The Civil Society Organizations call upon the government of Albania to withdraw the two draft laws proposed to Parliament and showcased in public as the “Anti-Defamation Package”. We also call upon the Parliament of Albania that, in case that the government doesn’t withdraw the bills, to dismiss themwithout delays.

The importance that the freedom of expression has in a democratic society is reflected by the ample protection given to it in international law, both at global and in regional level, including in Article 19 of the The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, on the article 19 of the International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights, the article 19 of the American Convention on Human Rights and as well, the article 10 of the European Convention on Human rights.

The First Amendment of the United States Constitution, approved about 230 years ago (in 14 December 1791) prevents the government from making laws which regulate an establishment of religion, prohibit the free exercise of religion, or abridge the freedom of speech, the freedom of the press, the right to peaceably assemble, or the right to petition the government for redress of grievances.

Signatory organizations note that the two draft-laws of the anti-defamation package provide for the Albanian Media Authority and Albanian Communication and Postal Authority, quasi-tribunal competences, of sanctioning nature against media outlets, while these bodies, although independent by definition in the law, provide no functional guarantees to operate independently in practice, as should are the courts.

Albania has enough laws to regulate cases when media violate the rights of others and in this context there are precedents judged in our courts.

The need to have self-regulation of the media and NO legal regulation of it, is a matter of special importance in countries in transition to democracy, as it is our country, where often media is connected with known interests of the businesses or political parties. Self-regulation is the combination of standards imposed by ethical codes of conduct for the media, which are necessary to support freedom of expression and to enable that this conduct is monitored and held accountable. Self-regulation preserves the independence of the media and protects it from the partisan interventions of the government.

The signatories call upon international bodies, (such as OSCE, EU or Council of Europe), which presence in Albania contributes to the rule of law and human rights, to take a clear and public stance regarding these two draft laws, as initiatives that violate freedom of expression.

List of signatories:

BIRN Albania

Civil Rights Defenders

Citizens Channel

Faktoje

Instituti Shqiptari Medias

InstitutiShqiptariShkencave

Këshilli Shqiptar i Medias

Komiteti shqiptar i Helsinkit

Lidhja e Gazetarëve të Shqipërisë

Qendra Res Publica

Qendra Shqiptare MediaLook

Qendra Shqiptare për Gazetari Cilësore

Shoqata e Gazetarëve Profesionistë të Shqipërisë

Unioni i Gazetarëve Shqiptarë

University of Elbasan: Is it the time for the “Order of Journalism”?

/in

Unlike many other universities that AMC has visited during the universities’ tour where most students aspire to a future in communication or PR positions, at the Univ. A. Xhuvani in elbasan, most of them dreamed of journalism.

Prof. Mark Marku with students of Journalism in the Uni. “A. Xhuvani” of Elbasan

The students were well aware of the ethical problems that the media present in the country and presented their concerns during the debate. They expressed the need to regulate the lack of ethics in the country, although they were well aware that this could not be done through state regulation. According to Mr. Mark, if it were necessary to choose between a quality but state-controlled journalism and a non-quality but free journalism, the scales should skew the latter.

Jornalists S. Shameti (center) and A. Lela (right) during the visit in the “A. Xhuvani” University of Elbasan

One of the ideas hinted by the students was to create an institution similar to the Journalist Order (as it is in Italy) which would be able to “certify” journalists employed in the media to guarantee their ethics. Although the journalist Lela considered it necessary to have a qualitative hierarchy in journalism, Mr. Cukali argued that this would affect the freedom of anyone who does not have a certificate to engage in journalism, or even in the form of citizen journalism.

Jornalists S. Shameti debating with the students of “A. Xhuvani” University

Students and professors of the University asked AMC to raise the standards of journalism of today, but in the end the overriding idea was that the public, who through their “clickings” is the ultimate “certifier” of the media quality, was of primary importance.

If the audience prefers to click on the journalism of “spectacle” and abusive media, it will create space for this journalism to flourish. The more illiterate the media audience is, the more the unethical media will thrive.

Albania: Government should withdraw “anti-defamation” legislative package introducing state regulation of online media outlets!

/in

On 3 July the Albanian Government’s Council of Ministers approved a series of amendments known as the “anti-defamation package” which include amendments to law Nr.97/2013 “On Audio Visual Media in the Republic of Albania and law Nr.9918 “On Electronic Communications in the Republic of Albania.” The legislative package is a cosmetic review of highly-criticised amendments submitted in December 2018.
26 July 2019
Our organisations raised our grave concerns with the proposed legislation during our June 2019 meeting with Prime Minister Edi Rama, urging that the amendments be brought into line with international standards. However the revised amendments of 3 July continue to fall far short of OSCE, Council of Europe and international best practice. The OSCE and local journalists and civil society have repeatedly raised their serious concerns that this package would be detrimental to freedom of expression online. We join Albanian civil society and independent media in calling on the Government of Albania to withdraw these two bills and call on parliament not to approve them.
Amendments to law Nr.97/2013 “On Audio Visual Media in the Republic of Albania
The draft laws approved by the Albanian government would empower a state administrative body to regulate the content of online media outlets. These draft laws seek to impose a regime of administrative control on online media through the Audio Visual Media Authority (AMA), a measure which is unprecedented in democratic states. Article 11/2 states that “the scope of work of the Complaints Council is to oversee the provisions of this law, the Code and regulations approved by AMA, particularly related to the respect of dignity and fundamental human rights.” The AMA is an institution whose board members are nominated and dismissed on the discretion of political parties. Through the Complaints Council that is part of AMA, the draft laws seek to replace a model of self-regulation of online media restrict the role of courts.
The changes proposed in the law Nr.97/2013 “On Audio Visual Media in the Republic of Albania,” indirectly impose the registration of the ‘provider of media services’ as a precondition to receive ‘fiscal benefits and other benefits of the kind.’ This draft law gives the Complaints Council the power to oblige electronic publications service providers to publish an apology, remove content or insert a pop-up notice in cases of violations of provisions on dignity and privacy. The obligation imposed on online media outlets to protect the ‘dignity and privacy’ of citizens is overly broad and vaguely defined.
We are concerned that it could empower the Complaint Council to become a censorship body, by ordering the removal of online media content on an almost discretionary manner and without a court order. An administrative body, such as AMA, cannot and should not shoulder competencies to review defamation, which should be adjudicated by the courts through criminal and civil procedure.
The draft law also empowers the Complaints Council to impose administrative fines that vary from 100,000 lek to 1 million lek (from €820 to €8200), which have to be paid before the legal review is exhausted. These administrative fines do not differentiate between private citizens and national broadcasters, raising concerns about proportionality.
Law Nr.9918 “On Electronic Communications in the Republic of Albania”
Amendments proposed to the law Nr.9918 “On electronic Communications in the Republic of Albania,” open the way for superimposed regulation of online media, not only from AMA but also from the Authority of Postal and Electronic Communications (AKEP). Changes proposed to article 137 of this law, expose ‘providers of electronic communications’, which do not abide by AKEP rulings/orders that relate to the acts and decisions of the Complaints Council of AMA, or any other body with legal competences in this field, to fines up to 100 million lek (€820,000).
Both proposed draft laws go against international best practices that aim at the self-regulation of online media and not its regulation by the state, through administrative censorship bodies. These draft bills also have not been drafted through a transparent procedure in consultation with all interested stakeholders, a concern we raised in a meeting with Prime Minister Edi Rama during our press freedom mission in June 2019.
We call on the Government of Albania to withdraw these two bills and call on parliament not to approve them, on account of the objections raised by journalists, civil society and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). Instead of seeking further administrative regulations on defamation, the government should seek its complete decriminalization, as suggested by best international practices. We urge the government of Albania to ensure that a meaningful consultation process with journalists and civil society is undertaken with the next draft of the amendments.
ARTICLE 19
European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
Reporters Sans Frontières/ Reporters Without Borders (RSF)
South East Europe Media Organisation (SEEMO)

REACTION: The new draft-law on media, worse than the previous one!

/in

The Albanian Media Council reacts with concern about the new draft-law on media, the so-called “defamation package”, passed by the Government on July 3rd, 2019, which is expected to be submitted for approval to the Parliament soon.

First, the draft-law, being completely a new draft, has not been offered for any consultation or round-table with the stakeholders, which goes against the law for the public consultation.

Second, this draft-law breaks the principle of self-regulation of media ethics in Europe. This draft-law puts the resolution of ethical issues in the hands of an administrative body, namely AMA (Audiovisual Media Authority), whose Board in turn is chosen by political parties, therefore violating the European principle on media freedom.

Third, the draft-law gives the authority to sanction the media to an office within AMA, namely Council of Complaints Office. But,

a) AMA, does not have the proper capacity to operate this duty. AMA is already failing to perform its own duties (such as collecting payments from television operators) so it cannot cope with tough and complicated tasks such as controling, judging and sanctioning the ethical violations.

b) AMA does not provide any guarantee that the employees of the Council of Complaints Office have the integrity, the independence and the right qualifications required to conduct a judgement on ethical violations.

Fourth, this draft-law puts the right to judge on topics of freedom of expression to an Administrative Body. This right should only lay in the jurisdiction of the Albanian Courts. The judgment about where the freedom of expression ends and where the other rights start, such as the right to privacy or the right to protect the honor and dignity of a person, cannot be left on the hands of an Administrative Body such as the Office of the Appeals Council AMA. This is only in the competence of the Albanian Courts that possess all the instruments to judge and decide on these cases.

Fifth, the law has a lot of technical problems on itself, starting from the formulation, the tight deadlines set for reaction, the high sanctions and the imposition of fixed sanctions which are unconstitutional.

Sixth, this draft is politically made on bad faith, because it contains principles that it supposedly seeks to respect, but through formulations it violates them, indeed. High sanctions, tight deadlines, and AMA’s lack of warranty for an independent judgment will induce  self-censorship among media and journalists.

Therefore, the Alabanian Media Council requires that the Government urgently withdraws this draft law*.

Also, the AMC invites international organizations, the OSCE, the Council of Europe and the European Union to exert the necessary pressure not to pass this law because of the violation of the media and the freedom of self-censorship.

A joint declaration in block  of a group of Media stakeholders and organizations will be available soon.

* We came of late to the alert of another attempt to impose extraordinarily fines from the ammendments made to the Law of AKEP, adjacent to the AMA draft-law. That draft passed unnoticed, and merits a detailed analyses and rejection.