|
——––––—————————————––—————————————————————
The
work of the media in the year 2000 has been affected by physical
violence against journalists and by abusive lawsuits initiated by
public figures. The rule according to which public figures and
politicians do not enjoy the same level of protection against
criticism as private individuals is generally ignored. The reverse
situation prevails in numerous OSCE states.
In
Austria, since the fall of 1999, there has been a general
tendency toward more restricted judicial interpretation of the freedom
of expression in contrast to increased protection of the rights of
individuals who claim to be victims of libel or defamation.
Especially. Jörg Haider, the former leader of the Freedom Party (FPÖ,
now part of the ruling coalition), has been filing defamation cases
against journalists, political scientists and media journals critical
of his policies, with some success.
On
11 May 2000, Professor Anton Pelinka, a leading political scientist
and member of the Austrian Helsinki Committee, was found guilty of
having "defamed" Jörg Haider. Pelinka was fined in
the amount of 60,000 Austrian Schillings (U.S.$4,500) in a suit that
was originally brought by Haider’s lawyer Dieter Böhmdorfer,
who has since become Austrian Minister of Justice in the coalition
government. The basis for the conviction was Professor Pelinka’s
statement to Italian television station RAI, in which he said that
in his career, Haider had repeatedly made statements which amount to
trivializing National Socialism. Pelinka appealed the sentence. In
another pending case, Professor Pelinka is sued by Jorg Haider for
an inteview broadcasted on CNN. The court will most likely rule on
the case on 24 October.
Jörg
Haider has also sued other people for similar statements. On 18 July
2000, the journal Profil and the Socialist Youth Association
were already sentenced. Other journalists are awaiting trial.
In
Azerbaijan, at least 11 journalists were beaten, most of them
by police officers, and at least 20 lawsuits were brought against the
media in 1999. Many journalists face imprisonment. The situation is
especially critical these days for journalists and Editors-in-Chief of
independent and opposition newspapers, as there is extreme tension
during the current pre-electoral campaign period.
In
2000, due to the parliamentary elections and the upcoming presidential
elections in Kyrgyzstan, independent and opposition media
outlets have also faced increasing harassment.
In
March 2000, Kyrgyz authorities threatened journalist Zamira Sydykova,
editor-in-chief of Res Publica, with arrest for allegedly
"destabilizing the social order." The paper ceased
publication in late March after being fined 200,000 soms (about
U.S.$1,000) for insulting the honor and dignity of Mr.Kyrypkulov,
president of the Kyrgyzstan’s National Television and Radio
Corporation. The paper had accused him of restricting media freedom.
In
Russia, several environmentalists and scientists have been
imprisoned, facing espionage, "disclosure of state secrets"
and other charges for publications and statements. Some have been
hindered from leaving Russia. The Federal Security Service (FSB) has
played a central, highly questionable role in the investigations
leading to such abuses.
Igor
Sutyagin, a scientist and an arms control expert, was arrested in
October 1999 in the Kaluga region. He has been in detention for one
year while "high treason" charges are under investigation.
According to information available to the IHF, Sutgyagin never had
access to state secrets, and all his work and cooperation with
foreign nationals were carried out in the open. Only material
accessible to the public was used. Institutions such as the
USA/Canada Institute in Moscow and North American Universities were
also involved in his work. There is very little evidence of any kind
of wrongdoing, let alone the very serious charge of high treason.
The fact that the investigators so far have not been able to build
up a case is not a valid reason to submit a person to the inhuman
treatment he suffers in the detention facility.
Freedom
of expression is severely limited in Uzbekistan. A recent case
deserves particular attention, as it illustrate the scope of the
repression going on in the country:
Mr.
K. Sattarov, a 30-year-old father of three young children, was
convicted last July to 9 years imprisonment after ‘5 leaflets’
of a religious nature and ‘6 filled forms and 11 empty forms from
the UN Human Rights Committee were found in his possession. The mere
possession of these forms from the UN was mentioned in the court
decision as a crime to be punished. The IHF addressed a letter to UN
Commissioner on human rights, Mary Robinson, asking for her
intervention. We colleagues are unaware of any step that may have
been undertaken by the Human rights Commissioner in this regard, and
neither are our Uzbek colleagues.
In
the entity of Republika Srpska (RS), several journalists
reported receiving anonymous threats by letter in connection with
politically-sensitive articles they had written. Also, Perica Vucinic,
editor and Zeljko Cvijanovic, reporter for Banja Luka-based Reporter
magazine were charged on the basis of the Yugoslav Criminal Code for
writing articles critical of the Milosevic regime at the end of 1999.
The Helsinki Committee in Republika Srpska condemned these actions,
noting that Bosnia-Herzegovina and the FRY did not recognize each
other, and that there is no agreement on bilateral judicial
cooperation that would make it possible to bring the charges and hold
a hearing of case in the courts of Republika Srpska.
In
Serbia during the last few weeks there were some positive signs,
like the release of journalist Miroslav Filipovic. But since the power
of the newly elected Yugoslav president does not reach to the level of
Serbia, major problems remain unsolved. These include the University
Act of 1998, and the Public Information Law with its repressive policy
against the non-governmental print media, including draconian fines
and the closure of TV stations.
In
January 2000, after Turkey's candidacy to the EU was approved,
the State Minister Responsible for Human Rights announced a list of
"short term aims," which included easing restrictions on
free expression. Nothing, however, was done so far. There is still no
open discussion about issues such as the role of religion, ethnicity,
and the military in the political constitution.
The
newly elected Turkish president Ahmet Necdet Sezer called for greater
freedom in the public debate at several occasions. Still, various
articles of the Turkish penal code are used to inhibit free debate.
The most commonly used is article 312. Convictions under that article
lead to bans on participation in politics or civil society. Although a
number of convictions under article 312 have already been found to
contravene article 10 of the European Convention, members of the
Turkish judiciary and politicians still publicly voice their
opposition to a reform of the penal code.
Positive
developments in the field of freedom of expression are perceived in Croatia.
Independent observers agree that one of the greatest values of the
January elections has been the new democratic atmosphere in Croatia
and its impact on the media. Inter alia, several charges
against journalists have been dropped. A positive message was sent by
the new President, Stjepan Mesic, who declared: "Be free, do not
seek new masters, abolish self censorship." First steps like
television programs with positive messages on possible reconciliation
and mutual co-operation between Croats and Serbs at the local level
have been undertaken. The IHF considers that such initiatives make an
important contribution to the fight against hate speech in the
Balkans.
On
behalf of all Helsinki Committees, the IHF would like to take this
opportunity to thank Mr. Freimut Duve, OSCE Representative on media
Freedoms for his work in his field.
Thank
you for your attention.
|
