01 Nov 23 | Europe and Central Asia, News and features
Index on Censorship continues to have serious concerns about the EU plans for political advertising rules and the chilling effect on freedom of expression. Our CEO, Ruth Anderson, has written to the Presidents of the Council of the European Union, the European Commission and the European Parliament to urge a pause and a rethink ahead of the 2024 Elections.
Senor Pedro Sanchez MP, President, Council of the European Union
Ursula von der Leyen, President, European Commission
Roberta Metsola MEP, President of the European Parliament
Monday, 30th October 2023
Dear Presidents,
A free and fair election is the cornerstone of a vibrant and functioning democracy. It is a right we all defend and it is what sets us apart from tyrants and demagogues.
With the continuing advancement of digital campaigning and with more citizens consuming their news via digital platforms, it is entirely understandable that the European Union would seek to safeguard future elections with new protections.
However any changes have to be considered through the prism of the shared fundamental right of freedom of expression. More than half of the citizens of the world now live in regimes where that freedom is constantly under threat. Like free and fair elections, the right to freedom of expression is something we must all cherish and defend.
Index on Censorship, as a leading global advocate group for freedom of expression, continues to have serious concerns about the chilling effect that the proposed European Political Advertising regulations could have on freedom of expression.
Whether it is journalists, civil society campaigners or politicians – it remains our position that each will see their freedom of expression curtailed as a result of your proposals.
Our analysis is still that the system of flagging is open to abuse, the scope of the proposals would capture and silence too many voices seeking to share their lawful opinions and the requirements placed on large digital platforms to examine and remove content places too great a responsibility in the hands of unaccountable organisations and opaque algorithms.
I do not doubt for one second the sincerity with which the European Union has approached the task of safeguarding elections from foreign interference. However, it is clear from the continuing tone of the debate and the stalemate that exists during the trialogues that consensus is still far away.
The worst decision that the European Union could now make is to rush through contentious rules ahead of the June elections. The European Union elections are the second biggest exercise of democratic rights in the world – it would be a disaster to impose new rules so close to these elections when those rules do not command a broad consent from participants.
The complex nature of current events rightly commands attention from the EU and represents a more immediate demand on time and resources.
Index on Censorship would urge the EU to take a moment and pause, in order to consider how best to safeguard both the right to a free and fair election alongside the right to freedom of expression. Do not be forced by time to rush into force, rules which have yet been agreed or tested. To do so now would be a dereliction of our collective duty to protect our basic rights.
Index on Censorship remains ready to help the European Union navigate the complex nature of freedom of expression and I hope we can continue to work together to safeguard our hard-won – but fragile – freedoms.
Yours sincerely,
Ruth Anderson
CEO, Index on Censorship.
17 Jul 18 | Azerbaijan, Azerbaijan Statements, Campaigns -- Featured, Statements
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]Index on Censorship welcomes a European Parliament recommendation for the EU to ensure that Azerbaijan frees its political prisoners before the negotiations on a new deal between the EU and Azerbaijan are concluded. The recommendation mentions the jailed investigative journalist Afgan Mukhtarli as being among the “most emblematic cases”.
The talks on the new agreement that will govern relations between the EU and Azerbaijan were launched in 2017 and could be concluded in 2019. Azerbaijan has an extremely poor track record on human rights, as highlighted in a 2017 analysis by the European Parliament.
The European Parliament’s current recommendation calls on the EU to ensure that the deepening of relations with Azerbaijan is made conditional on upholding and respecting democracy, the rule of law, good governance, human rights and fundamental freedoms. It calls on the EU to underline the importance of a free and independent media and to ensure strengthened EU support, both political and financial, for a free and pluralistic press in Azerbaijan.
Joy Hyvarinen, head of advocacy at Index on Censorship, said: “We urge the EU to take a strong stand on media freedom and human rights in its talks on a new agreement with Azerbaijan. This is an opportunity for the EU to demonstrate global leadership and to promote fundamental European values. Freeing political prisoners such as investigative journalist Afgan Mukhtarli should be a priority.”[/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:1531833660337-cb577e58-d3f0-4″ taxonomies=”7145″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
16 Apr 18 | Campaigns -- Featured, Media Freedom, media freedom featured, Statements
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
Daphne Caruana Galizia, the Maltese investigative journalist who was assassinated in October 2017, had numerous lawsuits pending at the time of her murder.
Around the world, big business and corrupt politicians are using threats of legal action to silence journalists and other critics — including NGOs and activists.
Usually this starts with a letter threatening expensive proceedings unless online articles are rewritten or removed altogether, and demanding an agreement not to publish anything similar in the future. The letters often tell the recipient that they cannot even report the fact that they have received the letter.
This process is known as a SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation). SLAPPs are designed to intimidate and silence critics by burdening defendants with huge legal costs. The purpose of SLAPPs is not to win the case. They are vexatious and are designed to eat up time and resources. They are a way to harass and intimidate journalists and others and dissuade them from reporting.
SLAPP suits are a particular problem for independent media outlets and other small organisations. They are financially draining and can take years to process. Faced with the threat of a lengthy litigation battle and expensive legal fees, many who receive SLAPPs are simply forced into silence.
Don’t let them silence you
Index believes that by encouraging journalists and media outlets to talk more openly about these threats, we can begin to put an end to the use of these vexatious lawsuits that threaten democracy.
We support an initiative by members of the European Parliament for a new directive to tackle SLAPPs.
We also know that getting such changes takes time. But it can be done. In the United States, 34 states have enacted laws to combat SLAPPs. California, which adopted its anti-SLAPP legislation in 2009, enables defendants to sue the original plaintiff for malicious prosecution or abuse of process.
In 2015 Canada passed the Protection of Public Participation Act, which aimed to implement a fast-track review process to identify and end vexatious lawsuits.
In the meantime, there are some steps that all journalists can take to help put an end to this practice.
1. Know you are not alone
Journalists from Albania to Japan have received such letters. In Malta, for example, The Shift News website received a letter late last year from law firm Henley and Partners demanding an article be removed. Henley and Partners also stated that the letter was not to be made public.
Daphne Caruana Galizia, the Maltese investigative journalist who was assassinated in October 2017, had numerous lawsuits pending at the time of her murder. She was being sued by Pilatus Bank, a Maltese-based financial institution she frequently criticised. The lawsuit was filed in the USA and dropped following the killing.
Other Maltese media groups, faced with legal threats, have complied with Pilatus Bank’s requests, and deleted and amended articles in their online archives. Pilatus denies any wrongdoing.
In the UK, Appleby, the firm associated with the Paradise Papers, is threatening legal action against the Guardian and the BBC, demanding they disclose any of the six million Appleby documents that informed their reporting and seeking damages for the disclosure of what it says are confidential legal documents.
2. Tell others if you receive a letter
Speak to someone you trust. This could be a colleague at your place of work, your local union or a representative from a nonprofit organisation working in your country or region. Nonprofit organisations and others working in the field of journalist safety include:
Article 19
Committee to Protect Journalists
European Centre for Press and Media Freedom
European Federation of Journalists
International Press Institute
Index on Censorship
Reporters Without Borders
SEEMO
A major fear when receiving a SLAPP letter from a large law firm can be a sinking feeling that you might indeed have something wrong with your story. This casts a long shadow of self-doubt and can prevent journalists even from discussing the letters with each other within the same newsroom.
If you receive these legal threats, discuss them with journalists from other publications who are working on similar stories. This is often the only way to find out that the subject of your investigations is trying to shut down the public discussion systematically. “Discovering that pattern is not only a story in itself, but critically important in helping journalists work together to defend themselves,” says investigative reporter Matthew Caruana Galizia.
3. Report it
If you work in one of the countries covered by the project, you should report such threats to the Index on Censorship Mapping Media Freedom platform, which documents threats to media freedom. Index works with other organisations to raise the worst cases with the Council of Europe so that the council can raise cases directly with the governments concerned.
When you document these threats on Mapping Media Freedom, you help to show that they exist and are a problem for journalists and the public, who are robbed of their right to know. Once we have that documentary evidence, we can push harder for a change in legislation. We believe that the number of threats would speak for themselves, if everyone in the countries we cover reported them.
4. Know your rights
Get expert legal advice but remember that not all lawyers are the same. There are lawyers who are experienced in dealing with SLAPPs. For example, the European Centre for Press and Media Freedom has a legal team that can advise on SLAPP lawsuits and Doughty Street Chambers has an International Media Defence Panel who regularly assist journalists and NGOs faced with these kinds of threats.
Have you received a SLAPP letter? Let us know. Spreading the word about this cases is important in tackling the problem. The more we can document the extent of this issue, the easier it will be to address it. Please let us know by contacting Joy Hyvarinen, Head of Advocacy, at [email protected]. [/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_basic_grid post_type=”post” max_items=”12″ style=”load-more” items_per_page=”4″ element_width=”6″ grid_id=”vc_gid:1523875014232-cb75410f-355e-4″ taxonomies=”8996″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
20 Sep 17 | Greece, News and features
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
The European Parliament is accused of censoring a series of political cartoons from Greece which were due to appear in an upcoming exhibition later this month.
The exhibition, organised by an MEP from Greece and an MEP from France, aimed to present political and humorous sketches created by cartoonists from the two countries and published in the press on the occasion of the 60th Anniversary of the Rome Treaty. However, Catherine Bearder, a British Liberal Democrat MEP from southeast England, who is responsible for the cultural and artistic events sponsored by other members, decided to remove 12 out of 28 cartoons, all created by Greek cartoonists, claiming that the artwork contained “controversial content”.
Index on Censorship approached Bearder for comment but at the time of writing she had not replied.
According to the regulation of the European Parliament, all cultural events and exhibitions have to be checked so that “under no circumstances be offensive or of an inflammatory nature or contradictory to the values” of the EU.
The Greek MEP, Stelios Kouloglou denounced the “unprecedented” form of censorship by the European Parliament. “The content of the censored cartoons did not insult the values of the European Union in any way,” Kouloglou said in a press conference in Strasbourg on Tuesday, 12 September.
The 12 cartoons are critical of the EU and focus mainly on the way the EU – and especially Germany – dealt with the Greek crisis. One of the censored cartoons features the starting line for a race, with Germany in a Porsche sports car, Italy, Spain and France in old cars and Greece in a chariot being pulled by a pensioner.
Breader presented the upcoming German election as another reason to discard the 12 cartoons, although the exhibition is scheduled to take place after the election.
“The right for artistic creation and freedom of expression are part of the European Union’s fundamental values. This arbitrary decision violates them” Kouloglou remarked in a letter of complaint addressed to the president of the European Parliament, Antonio Tajani.
The Journalists’ Union of the Athens Daily Newspapers also denounced the incident of censorship asking for the intervention of the European and International Federation of Journalists.
Credit: Stelios Kouloglou, MEP[/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:1505898132982-6897be5b-fada-1″ taxonomies=”5768, 1888″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
