Banned drill videos have been reposted to Pornhub (Crack, 2 July 2018)

02 Jul 18 | Index in the Press

In recent news, drill music has been accused of inciting violence, with The Metropolitan Police claiming that they’re responsible for rising levels of knife crime and gang warfare in London. As part of the government crackdown on the genre, in May, YouTube removed over 30 drill videos. The removal came at the behest of Metropolitan police commissioner Cressida Dick. In a statement detailing the motives behind the action, Dick stated: “Drill music is associated with lyrics which are about glamourising serious violence. They describe the stabbings in great detail, joy and excitement.” Read in full.

Project Exile: Turkish editor departs after police raid

02 Jul 18 | Global Journalist, Media Freedom, News and features, Turkey

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]This article is part of Index on Censorship partner Global Journalist’s Project Exile series, which has published interviews with exiled journalists from around the world.[/vc_column_text][vc_single_image image=”101086″ img_size=”full” add_caption=”yes”][vc_column_text]Shortly after Turkish police in riot gear raided the headquarters of Zaman Media Group on 4 March 2016, Sevgi Akarçeşme saw that she had just two choices.

Akarçeşme, the editor-in-chief of Today’s Zaman, the country’s largest English-language daily, could become a pro-government journalist and spend her days publishing articles lauding the increasingly authoritarian regime of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

Or she could flee the country and try to speak out in exile. Less than 48 hours later, Akarcesme was boarding a plane for Brussels to escape impending imprisonment.

“I didn’t want to turn into a pro-government journalist and lost my integrity,” she says in an interview with Global Journalist. “I lost everything else, but not my integrity.”

The government seizure of Zaman Group, a media company sympathetic to the Hizmet opposition movement led by exiled cleric Fetullah Gülen, presaged a far-reaching crackdown on media, civil society and others following a failed coup against Erdogan two months later. In all of 2016, Turkey detained more than 140 journalists and hundreds more lost their jobs, according to a US State Department human rights report. Nearly 4,000 people were indicted for insulting the president, the prime minister or state institutions. According to the Committee to Protect Journalists, Turkey had 73 journalists in prison in December 2017 – the most of any country in the world.

Indeed even as Akarcesme was leaving the country, Erdogan’s administration had already transformed the Turkish edition of Zaman into a pro-government mouthpiece.

Yet even before the storming of Zaman’s offices, Akarçeşme had faced legal pressure from the government. In early 2015, she was put on trial for “insulting”  then-prime minister Ahmet Davutoğlu in a tweet in which she accused Davutoğlu of covering up a corruption scandal involving family members of senior officials.

But it wasn’t until the closure of Zaman in 2016 that it became clear that Erdogan’s government would no longer tolerate independent media. Even after Akarçeşme left for Belgium, the Turkish government continued to take punitive measures against her, raiding her apartment in Istanbul and cancelling her passport. Akarçeşme, now 39, spent more than a year in Belgium before coming to the US in May 2017.

Now living in the US, where she works as a freelance journalist and is looking for a full-time job, she spoke with Global Journalist’s Lily Cusack about her exile.

Global Journalist:  How did you end up leaving Turkey?

Akarçeşme: As you can imagine, it’s a long story because Turkey did not become a dictatorship overnight. So like everything else, it was a process. It was a fast process, but still a process.

It was March 6, 2016 [when] I left Istanbul suddenly. Two days before my departure, the government led by Erdogan seized our newspaper over charges, of course ridiculous charges, of terrorism and terrorist support. And because I was the leading executive of the English daily, Today’s Zaman, I knew that it was a matter of time for them to persecute me as well.

Four months before that, in December 2015, I received a suspended prison [sentence] because of my tweets. Actually, not even my own tweets. It was some comments left under my tweet. The prime minister at the time sued me, and I received suspended imprisonment.

So there was already ongoing oppression, and I knew that Turkey has never had a proud record of freedom in terms of journalism. But it was getting worse and worse, and the government primarily targeted our media group. It was almost evident that it would be a matter of time.

It was a difficult decision to leave your country with only two bags…suddenly, without notifying anyone because you might be stopped at the border. So many people were banned from travelling abroad. So I was nervous about being banned from travelling abroad, but fortunately, I was able to leave. In retrospect, I realise it was the best decision of my life because I would be imprisoned right now, like my colleagues.

GJ: Did you personally receive threats?

Akarçeşme: Over social media, yes I did, just like my colleagues I quit tweeting in Turkish, I only tweet in English from time to time. Any critic could tell you that an army of trolls target and harass you. 

GJ:  How did you reach the conclusion that you had to leave?

Akarçeşme: It was a very sudden decision. In the two days from the police raid [March 4, 2016] until I left, I only talked to [Abdulhamit Bilici], editor-in-chief of the larger media group. He was also dismissed, and he was also at risk. But he did not want to leave immediately. He thought that he needed to stay to support junior level people. But I just thought that in the case of an arrest, I could not stand the conditions of prison in Turkey. I told myself that I had to leave.

So I was very nervous at the airport because I didn’t know whether my passport was cancelled. It was a memorable moment. I just remember walking across customs and passport check and feeling extremely nervous. It was funny because I was only a journalist. I knew that I did nothing wrong, but I knew that wasn’t enough to save me from a possible persecution or prevent my departure. I was relieved [when] we landed in Brussels.

In July, when I left Belgium and was on may to the US, I was taken off the plane because I was told that my passport was not valid. So it actually happened, but fortunately it happened after I left Turkey.

GJ: How did it feel having to leave Turkey so suddenly?

Akarçeşme: It was a terribly uneasy feeling. You kind of become alienated from your own country. The day I decided to leave, I already felt that Turkey was a hopeless case and there was no future for me in Turkey.

Over the last two years, I have been extremely disillusioned [about] my home country and my home society because [people] have been predominantly remaining silent in the face of oppression. They have even been supporting Erdogan.

So I feel that it’s not home anymore, even though I still have loved ones [there]. My heart and mind are still with all these prisoners, especially purge victims, tens of thousands of people, not only journalists, people from all walks of life.

GJ: Do you have any hope of returning?

Akarçeşme: I have no hope. It will not improve. The government has been seizing more and more media outlets every day. There is no free media… except a couple of web-based TV [channels] and newspapers from exile, there’s nothing mainstream left for independent journalism. The whole narrative is being controlled by the government. So unfortunately I’m very pessimistic. I see no way out in the short-run.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column width=”1/2″][vc_video link=”https://youtu.be/tOxGaGKy6fo”][/vc_column][vc_column width=”1/2″][vc_column_text]Index on Censorship partner Global Journalist is a website that features global press freedom and international news stories as well as a weekly radio program that airs on KBIA, mid-Missouri’s NPR affiliate, and partner stations in six other states. The website and radio show are produced jointly by professional staff and student journalists at the University of Missouri’s School of Journalism, the oldest school of journalism in the United States. [/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_custom_heading text=”Don’t lose your voice. Stay informed.” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_separator color=”black”][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/2″][vc_column_text]Index on Censorship is a nonprofit that campaigns for and defends free expression worldwide. We publish work by censored writers and artists, promote debate, and monitor threats to free speech. We believe that everyone should be free to express themselves without fear of harm or persecution – no matter what their views.

Join our mailing list (or follow us on Twitter or Facebook). We’ll send you our weekly newsletter, our monthly events update and periodic updates about our activities defending free speech. We won’t share, sell or transfer your personal information to anyone outside Index.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/2″][gravityform id=”20″ title=”false” description=”false” ajax=”false”][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row full_width=”stretch_row_content”][vc_column][three_column_post title=”Global Journalist / Project Exile” full_width_heading=”true” category_id=”22142″][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Belarus Free Theatre students arrested over LGBTQ+ art installation

29 Jun 18 | Belarus, Campaigns -- Featured, Europe and Central Asia, Statements

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]

Belarus Free Theatre students arrested over LGBTQ+ art installation

Credit: svaboda.org

Three student activists from Belarus Free Theatre’s Studio Fortinbras school, along with Belapan journalist Andrew Shavlygo, were arrested in Minsk on 28 June after the staging of an artistic stunt as part of a new campaign by the theatre in support of LGBTQ+ rights. The students placed rainbow-coloured flower pots at the foot of a statue of a policeman outside the Ministry of Interior to call out homophobia following an official statement by the ministry that claimed “same-sex relationships are fake”.

Those arrested were held overnight without being told why but upon release were fined for “disobeying police”.

“Index on Censorship urges the authorities in Belarus to release the students immediately and safeguard freedom of expression, including the right to protest,” Joy Hyvarinen, head of advocacy at Index, said.

Activists from the Belarus Free Theatre told RFE/RL’s Belarus Service: “We call on police officers to overcome their prejudice and begin to protect the rights of law-abiding LGBT people, who as taxpayers are funding the ministry,” activists from the Belarus Free Theatre told RFE/RL’s Belarus Service.[/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:1530541073259-ac8906a0-d9db-5″ taxonomies=”172″][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Counter-terror plans threaten investigative journalism and research

29 Jun 18 | Campaigns, Campaigns -- Featured, Counter Terrorism, Press Releases

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]

Plans to introduce new counter-terror laws risk stifling legal freedom of expression in the UK and could stop journalists and academics from carrying out much-needed investigations into extremist and other groups with possible prison sentences for investigating stories rising to 15 years.

UK-based free speech campaigners Index on Censorship submitted a paper to the parliamentary committee scrutinising the bill this week, arguing that a number of proposed clauses could discourage journalists from carrying out valuable public interest reports and hamper research.

“The first priority of governments is said to be the security of their peoples. Yet that security is not an end in itself but a means to allow people to live freely. Free expression is vital to living in freedom,” said Index on Censorship magazine editor Rachael Jolley. “We must ensure that government does not — in an attempt to make us more secure — end up making us less free.”

Index has identified a number of potential problems with the bill as proposed. These include:

1. Making it a criminal offence to express an opinion or belief in support of a proscribed organisation and be “reckless” as to whether that would influence others to do so.

As the former Attorney-General Dominic Grieve MP wrote in an edition of Index on Censorship magazine: “If the Irish Taoiseach made a speech about the Easter Rising as a glorious moment in Irish history, and if you have someone who happened to be a member of the Real IRA and it motivated them to go on with some unfinished business, could the Taoiseach be arrested?”  Clearly, this would be absurd. Yet, for a UK citizen, it could be the effect of introducing Clause 1 of this Bill 10 years later. This imposes a test of prophecy not recklessness.

2. Making it an offence to download or stream material likely to be useful to a terrorist if done three times.  

We are concerned that this proposal would have a restrictive effect on researchers, students, academics and journalists, among others, who are researching case studies, making arguments and carrying out interviews. The act of researching information using the internet, or any other method, should not be a criminal act. We propose an amendment to the Bill to provide a clear exemption from the clause’s provisions for those whose purposes in downloading or streaming material are not motivated by terrorist intent.

3. Extension of maximum sentences for collecting and communicating information

Increasing sentences can have a chilling effect on legitimate research. The Terrorism Act 2000, whose maximum sentences this Bill seeks to increase, has already been used to seek to pursue journalists. For example, the Act has been used to prosecute reporters including Newsnight’s Richard Watson for his reporting on Islamists and violent extremism.

“Governments around the world are responding to threats of terrorism and we know that the balance between security and freedom is a hard one to achieve,” said Jolley. “However, we also see how easily laws intended to maintain the conditions of freedom can be used, and abused, to stifle freedom of expression. The current law threatens 10 years in prison; the Bill would extend that to 15. We believe this will have an even greater impact on creating a climate of fear around legitimate research in a free society.”

As the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, Max Hill has said: “Weakening human rights laws will not make us safer. Terrorists cannot take away our freedoms – and we must not do so ourselves.”

For more information, please contact Rachael Jolley: rachael@indexoncensorship.org

Index on Censorship: 0207 963 7262[/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:1530270032640-58ac9c27-8548-5″ taxonomies=”26927, 6995, 7324″][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Maryland shooting: Index condemns the killing of five media workers

29 Jun 18 | Americas, Campaigns, Campaigns -- Featured, Media Freedom, media freedom featured, Statements, United States

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]Index on Censorship condemns the killing of five people at the offices of a local newspaper in Maryland, United States.

A gunman opened fire on staff at the Capital Gazette in Annapolis on Thursday.

“Local journalism is absolutely essential work. Our thoughts are with the staff and families of the Capital Gazette,” said Index on Censorship chief executive Jodie Ginsberg.

On a recent trip to the United States, press freedom groups noted that death threats against journalists had become “part of the norm” for many reporters, both those working at national and local level.

“Violence against journalists is unacceptable,” said Ginsberg. “Journalism plays a vital role in democracy and it must be protected. We are seeing a worrying trend of aggression and violence against reporters in the United States.”[/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:1530269827514-a7fe1933-5473-7″ taxonomies=”3784″][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Index on Censorship submission on the Counter-Terrorism and Border Security Bill 2018

28 Jun 18 | Campaigns, Campaigns -- Featured, Counter Terrorism, Statements

Laws that protect our rights to read, research, debate and argue are too easily removed.  Index is concerned that clauses of the Counter-Terrorism and Border Security bill, now being debated in the UK’s Houses of Parliament, will diminish those rights and freedoms. It submitted this paper to parliament to ask it to consider changes to the proposed bill.

 

Index on Censorship is a London-based campaigning organisation supporting freedom of expression internationally since 1972. Founded to publish writings banned within the Soviet Union and beyond, we publish censored writing from around the world in our quarterly internationally read magazine and monitor and map media freedom in 43 countries. We are globally recognised as a leading authority on freedom of expression. While our focus is international, we have always also covered the UK, and we have concerns about the restrictions on free expression that are implied by the Counter-terrorism and Border Control Bill.

 

  1. We would be pleased to be able to give oral evidence, and Rachael Jolley, editor of the Index on Censorship magazine, would be available, if invited to any of the planned oral evidence sessions.
  2. We shall raise concerns, in particular, about the extension of anti-terrorist legislation to the expression of opinion or belief in Clause 1 of the Bill, and the potential stifling of legitimate journalistic, academic and other research into the opinions, methods and aims of terrorist organisations contained in Clause 3.  We are also alarmed by the potential discouragement of legitimate journalistic inquiry that may result from the extension of already significant sentencing maximums in clause 6 and chapter 2 of the Bill.
  3. The first priority of governments is said to be the security of their peoples.  Yet that security exists not as an end in itself but as a means to enabling peoples to live freely.  Free expression is vital to living in freedom. It creates the space for the exchange of ideas in the arts, literature, religion, academia, politics and science, and is essential for other rights like freedom of conscience. Without free expression, ideas cannot be tested. Without free expression, individuals cannot make informed decisions.  Parliament itself recognises this concept in its claim for itself, on each election, to the privilege of freedom of speech in debate without fear of arrest or hindrance, guaranteed by the Bill of Rights of 1689.
  4. Free expression is also a universal human right enshrined in international law and in UK law. Article 19 of the United Nation’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights, states: “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.”
  5. Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, incorporated into UK law by the Human Rights Act 1998 states: “Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers.” The Prime Minister has spoken of her pride in the heritage of freedom of expression in this country and called it a fundamental British value.  As was noted in the conclusion to the Handyside v United Kingdom case decided by the European Court of Human Rights in 1976: “Freedom of expression…is applicable not only to ‘information’ or ‘ideas’ that are favourably received or regarded as inoffensive or as a matter of indifference, but also to those that offend, shock or disturb the State or any sector of the population”.
  6. It is our contention that Clause 1 of the Bill raises conflicts with those principles by introducing a new offence that outlaws a person who “expresses an opinion or belief”.  No matter how vile, offensive, disagreeable and wrong an opinion or belief may be, we have the Article 10 right “to hold opinions … without interference by public authority”. The Bill seeks to distinguish between holding an opinion (legitimate) and expressing it (illegitimate in the circumstances envisaged in the Bill).  This, we believe is a distinction without a difference, and it potentially crosses the line into the policing of thought. The former DPP Ken MacDonald wrote in Index on Censorship (vol37/3/08): “The mere fact that someone holds an opinion can never be a reason to prosecute. You can think what you like.” But without the right to express a thought or belief, freedom of expression would be meaningless. The right to express an opinion is fundamental. Clause 1 would prove him wrong by creating a reason to prosecute someone simply for expressing an opinion.
  7. Ken MacDonald wrote that our response to terrorism must be to strengthen our liberal institutions, rather than degrade them, a position that Index would echo when considering the amendments to the Terrorism Act 2000 contained within this new Bill.
  8. Clause 1 makes it a criminal offence to express an opinion or belief in support of a proscribed organisation and be reckless as to whether that would influence others to do so.  In the same Index on Censorship magazine on Extremism, the former Attorney-General Dominic Grieve MP wrote: “If the Irish Taoiseach made a speech about the Easter Rising as a glorious moment in Irish history, and if you have someone who happened to be a member of the Real IRA and it motivated them to go on with some unfinished business, could the Taoiseach be arrested?”  That would be absurd. Yet, for a UK citizen, it could be the effect of introducing Clause 1 of this Bill 10 years later.
  9. The new Bill’s explanatory notes make it clear that Clause 1 has been drafted in response to comments by the judges in the appeal of Choudary and Rahman that the existing offences in the Terrorism Act 2000 do not prohibit the holding of an opinion.  The Government appears to have interpreted that as meaning that opinions with which it disagrees should be prohibited and criminalised. Since the Terrorism Act 2000 powers were sufficient to result in prison sentences for Choudary and Rahman without being bolstered by the new and disquieting power proposed in Clause 1, we argue that it is unnecessary as well as alarming, and we propose, in the attached suggested amendments to the Bill, that Clause 1 be left out of it. The proposed Clause (1A) is also clumsily worded – whose expression or belief does 1A(a) apply to? Moreover, how can a two-stage test of recklessness apply to firstly, encouraging another person to secondly, support a proscribed organisation? This imposes a test of prophecy not recklessness.
  10. We are similarly concerned that Clause 3 extends already existing powers further than is tolerable in a free society.  The clause makes it an offence to download or stream material likely to be useful to a terrorist if done three times. Our concern is the potential restrictive and frightening effect on researchers, students, academics and journalists, among others, who are researching case studies, making arguments and carrying out interviews. The act of researching information using the internet, or any other method, should not be a criminal act.  We propose an amendment below to the Bill to provide a clear exemption from the clause’s provisions for those whose purposes in downloading or streaming material are not motivated by terrorist intent. Simply stating that a defence available is not enough. Without this addition, you are creating a climate of self-censorship for researchers and journalists who would fear that their legitimate work would put them at a risk of a significant, expensive and time consuming court case, and would therefore not carry out that work. The media’s capacity to operate should not be unduly restricted. In this regard, as stated in the United Nations’ International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, “The media plays a crucial role in informing the public about acts of terrorism and its capacity to operate should not be unduly restricted. Journalists should not be penalized for carrying out their legitimate activities”.
  11. Finally, we are concerned about the impact on legitimate research and journalistic inquiry of the extension of maximum sentences proposed for various offences in Clause 6 of the Bill, in particular those provisions relating to collection of information and publishing and communicating information (subsections (2) and (3)).   
  12. We support this by noting that the Terrorism Act 2000, whose maximum sentences this Bill seeks to increase, has been used to seek to pursue journalists who have published legitimate stories or to require them to give up their sources.  For example, the 2000 Act was used to prosecute reporters such as Newsnight’s Richard Watson, and the investigative reporter and author Shiv Malik, when reporting on Islamists or violent extremism.
  13. Watson and the BBC spent six months fighting proceedings to oppose what they thought were vague police orders requiring them to produce a wide range of materials. A journalist working for a smaller organisation or as a freelance would have far less support than Watson had, and therefore would have come under pressure to avoid “difficult” stories even when they had a clear public interest, because of the huge financial and personal risk.
  14. Police took Malik to court using Section 38 and 19 of the Terrorism Act, for withholding information that could be relevant to a terrorist investigation. As Malik told Index on Censorship, you “have to raise thousands of pounds and you drag your family through turmoil”. To risk those takes a certain type of strength and determination that many will not have, therefore threatening that as a society will be unable to see important journalism that would be valuable.  The current law threatens 10 years in prison; the Bill would extend that to 15. We believe this may have a negative impact on legitimate inquiry in a free society.
  15. Governments around the world are responding to very real threats of terrorism. Index on Censorship is fully conscious of the effects of terror: journalists have been silenced by murder in many of the countries we map and monitor. We know that the balance between security and freedom is a hard one to achieve.
  16. The legislation many countries use, however, tends to have negative impacts on civil liberties and democracy. We are all too aware of how laws intended to maintain the conditions of freedom can be used, and abused, to stifle freedom of expression, opinion and belief. The UK government should not follow the example of, for one, Turkey, but should instead ensure that security serves to ensure that freedoms for all are upheld.
  17. As the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation Max Hill has said: “Weakening human rights laws will not make us safer. Terrorists cannot take away our freedoms – and we must not do so ourselves.” This is something we should keep at the heart of this debate, and never forget.

 

Our proposed amendments to the Bill are as follows:

Clause 1, page 1, line 5, leave out Clause 1.

Member’s explanatory statement

Leaving out the Clause would prevent the criminalisation of expression of an opinion or belief.

 

Clause 3, page 2, line 15, at end, leave out “.”’, and add – “, provided that the act is intended to provide practical assistance to person who prepares or commits an act of terrorism.”

Member’s explanatory statement

The amendment would avoid the possibility of legitimate researchers, academics, journalists, or others being caught by the offence of downloading or streaming material likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism.

 

Clause 6*, page 3, line 27, delete subsections (2) and (3).

Member’s explanatory statement

The amendment would keep at 10 years’ imprisonment the maximum sentence for offences involving collection of information, and eliciting, publishing or communicating certain types of information.

 

 

*An earlier version mistakenly referred to Clause 5, this was edited on 27/July/2018

Austria: Political change puts pressure on independence of public broadcaster

28 Jun 18 | Austria, Europe and Central Asia, Mapping Media Freedom, Media Freedom, media freedom featured, News and features

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]

ORF managing director Alexander Wrabetz. Credit: Franz Johann Morgenbesser

ORF managing director Alexander Wrabetz. Credit: Franz Johann Morgenbesser

A month prior to his election as head of the Austrian Broadcasting Corporation (ORF) board of trustees in May 2018, Norbert Steger gave an interview to the daily conservative newspaper Salzburger Nachrichten, voicing his concern about the “objectivity” of the broadcaster and announcing his intention to “cut a third of foreign correspondents, should they not report correctly”.

Steger highlighted the coverage of the Hungarian elections as being particularly problematic, criticising the reports of Ernst Gelegs, ORF’s Hungary correspondent who criticised the human rights situation in the country, including the restrictions media freedom, as being “one-sided”. Steger also called for the dismissal of journalists who violate the broadcaster’s guidelines for ORF journalists.

Despite his criticism of the ORF, Steger’s election is hardly surprising given political nature of how positions are assigned: 24 of the board’s 35 members are directly appointed by Austria’s federal and state governments and political parties. An additional six are indirectly appointed by the Federal Chancellor.

When the Social Democratic Party of Austria lost to the populist-conservative Austrian People’s Party (ÖVP) and its far-right coalition partner FPÖ in October 2017, it became clear that Heinz Lederer, former head of the ORF board of trustees and a Social Democrat, would need to make room for a representative of the ruling parties. In the end, the government’s decision was made by Steger, a former FPÖ politician.

Responding to Steger’s comments that journalists cannot be “overly sensitive”, ORF journalist Stefan Kappacher, in his widely-shared acceptance speech for the country’s most prestigious journalism award, said: “As ORF journalists we are grateful to be able to produce independent journalism and we will continue to fight for this independence.”

This independence is in jeopardy. Steger’s election puts ORF managing director Alexander Wrabetz under particular pressure as his position is elected by the board by a simple majority and can vote him out of office with a two-thirds majority. Wrabetz, a Social Democrat and the first person to be elected to this position three times in a row, has survived four national elections. Bernhard Baumgartner, a journalist for the daily newspaper Wiener Zeitung, assumes that the board of trustees will not vote Wrabetz out in order to avoid a public outcry, but rather change the governance structure by law, for example, by replacing the managing director with a management board. According to the weekly magazine Profil, ÖVP and FPÖ agreed that Steger will push for a new ORF law and effectively hand the position over to the ÖVP.

The government plans an extensive reform of ORF. The government programme includes a “re-definition of the mandate of the public media” as well as “structural and financial reforms”, as Index on Censorship reported earlier this year. This also entails the replacement of the ORF public tax, its primary source of financing, which currently guarantees accountability to the public, serving as the most important guarantee of the broadcaster’s ability to maintain its watchdog function in society. “Financing public service broadcasting via the public budget” instead of direct public tax would “set the wrong incentives” and would make the ORF “vulnerable”, Austria’s president Van der Bellen warned. Kappacher predicts even more drastic consequences: “The allocation of political funding would then be based on the reporting behaviour of ORF journalists.”

This concern is widely shared by other journalists and NGOs. Udo Bachmair, a former ORF journalist and president of the Vereinigung für Medienkultur (Association for Media Culture), tells Index on Censorship that he considers the public tax indispensable and that its replacement risks making the ORF completely dependent on the government. “The replacement of objective reporting with conformity as we’ve seen in Hungary and Poland would be a logical consequence,” he says. “The ORF’s political independence is a key element to democracy in Austria. Together with other quality print media, it guarantees independent, high-quality journalism.”

Bachmair adds that as Austria has a particularly high concentration of tabloids, which have been promoting right-wing populist tendencies for many years, “it is even more important that the ORF fulfils its mission to inform the public and hold against the tendency to paint black and white pictures and promote hatred on the internet”.

The recent spate of direct attacks on the ORF and its journalists by representatives of the FPÖ causes ORF journalists to feel under increasing pressure, Bachmair says. “This reminds me of the first ÖVP-FPÖ coalition in Austria between 2000 and 2006, where an increasing number of TV broadcasting journalists complained about attempts of political intervention. However, the scale reached now is unprecedented.”

For now, it is not within the competence of the board of trustees to make management decisions. Wrabetz made this clear in his reaction to Stegers attempt to put the ORF and its foreign correspondents in line as he pushed back on Twitter and announced an extension of Gelegs’ contract, due to this “excellent reports”. Wrabetz also voiced his intention to further strengthen foreign correspondents and to expand by two more offices by 2020.

Steger did not apologise for his statements in the interview but told the left-wing daily newspaper Der Standard that he “misses the full explanation behind his statement”, insinuating that his statement was reported out of context. “It is not acceptable to have privileged, well-paid people [at the ORF] who think that differentiating between reports and opinion does not apply to them,” he said. “ORF foreign correspondents currently produce opinion rather than reports, which I strongly oppose.” It is the ORF managing-director who would need to intervene against “violations of objective reporting”. Wrabetz has not taken appropriate actions, according to Steger.

For now, ORF journalists such as Wrabetz and anchorman Armin Wolf push against these changes as much as possible, but support from the top slowly fades. In their last session in March 2018, the ORF Viewers’ and Listeners’ Council adopted a  resolution. It states: “The ORF Viewers’ and Listeners’ Council strongly rejects the current attacks of a ruling party on public service broadcasting including ORF staff and the intention to abolish the ORF public tax.”

The Council also warned of any attempt to undermine press freedom, naming intimidation attempts against the media and in particular against ORF journalists as an example. On 3 May 2018 however, the Council’s latest elections took place and chancellor Sebastian Kurz replaced the majority of SPÖ members by affiliates of his own party, subjecting another body of the ORF’s top level entirely to the government’s will.

Increasingly, civil society organisations are speaking out against the government’s attempts to weaken the ORF’s independence. Several artists, media experts, publicists and writers founded the platform We, for the ORF. Its self-declared aim is “to fight against the ORF’s political absorption”. As the government’s long-promised media symposium took place on 6 and 7 June 2018, which should serve as the basis for an ORF reform, We, for the ORF organised a protest a day earlier called The Better Media Symposium, which garnered the support of over 40 organisations.

Bachmair, a member of the platform, tells Index: “While the platform’s public appearance in the media is limited, it is an important voice, which it will use to monitor and report on the media developments of the upcoming months. Moreover, the platform will fight for the future independence of the ORF and, in a broader sense, for media freedom and a media landscape characterised by plurality, diversity and critical, high-quality journalism.”[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_raw_html]JTNDaWZyYW1lJTIwd2lkdGglM0QlMjI3MDAlMjIlMjBoZWlnaHQlM0QlMjIzMTUlMjIlMjBzcmMlM0QlMjJodHRwcyUzQSUyRiUyRm1hcHBpbmdtZWRpYWZyZWVkb20udXNoYWhpZGkuaW8lMkZzYXZlZHNlYXJjaGVzJTJGNjklMkZtYXAlMjIlMjBmcmFtZWJvcmRlciUzRCUyMjAlMjIlMjBhbGxvd2Z1bGxzY3JlZW4lM0UlM0MlMkZpZnJhbWUlM0U=[/vc_raw_html][vc_basic_grid post_type=”post” max_items=”4″ element_width=”6″ grid_id=”vc_gid:1530108986023-3bfc44c5-d383-0″ taxonomies=”7592, 6564″][/vc_column][/vc_row]

The actions of the Russian Federation are jeopardising online freedoms everywhere

27 Jun 18 | Campaigns -- Featured, Digital Freedom, Digital Freedom Statements, Russia, Statements

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_single_image image=”100082″ img_size=”full”][vc_column_text]The following statement signed by 52 international organisations was delivered by Article 19 at the UN Human Rights Council on 27 June 2018.[/vc_column_text][vc_column_text]Thank you Mr. President,

The Russian Federation is pursuing policies that are significantly and rapidly encroaching online freedoms affecting not only the rights of people living in Russia but Internet users everywhere. Through the steady adoption of a raft of regressive legislation contravening international standards on freedom of expression, including access to information and the right to privacy, as well as placing unjustified pressure on Internet intermediaries, the Russian Federation is creating a framework, which, if fully implemented, would not only severely limit the free flow of information online but potentially give them access to the personal communication data of anyone, anywhere.

Last month, ARTICLE 19 together with 56 international and Russian human rights, media and Internet freedom organisations condemned the mass Internet disruption caused by the Russian Federation’s attempts to block the Internet messaging service Telegram, which resulted in extensive violations of freedom of expression including access to information. Almost 20 million Internet Protocol (IP) addresses were ordered to be blocked causing an unprecedented level collateral website blocking.

The basis of the authorities’ action was Telegram’s noncompliance with the highly problematic 2016 so-called ‘Yarovaya Law’, justified on the grounds of “countering extremism”, which requires all communications providers and Internet operators to store metadata about their users’ communications activities, to disclose decryption keys at the security services’ request, and to use only encryption methods approved by the Russian government – in practical terms, to create a backdoor for Russia’s security agents to access internet users’ data, traffic, and communications. In July 2018, other articles of the ‘Yarovaya Law’ will come into force requiring companies to store the content of all communications for six months and to make them accessible to the security services without a court order. This would affect the communications of both people in Russia and abroad, violating their right to privacy and creating a further chilling effect to freedom of expression and access to information.  

Such attempts by the Russian authorities to restrict online communications and violate privacy, supposedly for the protection of national security, are neither necessary nor proportionate. The Russian Government must repeal ‘Yarovaya Law’ and refrain from pressuring Internet intermediaries to comply with requests that will violate their users’ rights or face having their services blocked inside the country.

Since 2012, Russia has operated a blacklist of Internet websites and incrementally extended the grounds upon which websites can be blocked, including without a court order. The permanent blocking of several online media outlets and also LinkedIn – are completely unjustified and can only be seen as examples to intimidate others into compliance. Individual Internet users have also been persecuted for online expression or even simply liking or sharing content on social media platforms.

Legislation currently under consideration includes further social media regulation (Proposed Bill № 223849-7) which would among other concerns eradicate the possibility of online anonymity and pressure companies to take down “unverifiable” information; as well as proposed amendments to the Criminal Code (Article 284.2) (Proposed Bill № 464757-7) that would criminalise information leading to ‘international sanctions’, which could be used to prevent the media reporting on public interest matters or NGOs conducting international advocacy. Both pieces of legislation, if adopted, would have a negative impact on the free flow of information and should not be brought into law.

Signed by

  1. ARTICLE 19
  2. Agora International
  3. Access Now
  4. Amnesty International
  5. Asociatia pentru Tehnologie si Internet – ApTI
  6. Associação D3 – Defesa dos Direitos Digitais
  7. Centre for the Development of Democracy and Human Rights
  8. Committee to Protect Journalists
  9. Citizens’ Watch
  10. Civil Rights Defenders
  11. Electronic Frontier Foundation
  12. Electronic Frontier Norway
  13. Electronic Privacy Information Centre (EPIC)
  14. European Federation of Journalists
  15. FIDH – International Federation for Human Rights
  16. Freedom House
  17. Free Word Association
  18. Glasnost Defence Foundation
  19. Human Rights House Foundation
  20. Human Rights Watch
  21. The Independent Historical Society
  22. Index on Censorship
  23. International Media Support
  24. International Partnership for Human Rights
  25. International Youth Human Rights Movement (YHRM)
  26. Internet Protection Society
  27. Kharkiv Human Rights Protection Group
  28. Mass Media Defence Centre
  29. Moscow Helsinki Group
  30. Movement ‘For Human Rights’
  31. Norwegian Helsinki Committee
  32. Open Media
  33. Open Rights Group
  34. OVD-Info
  35. PEN America
  36. PEN International
  37. PEN St Petersburg
  38. People in Need
  39. Press Development Institute-Siberia
  40. Privacy International
  41. Reporters without Borders
  42. RosKomSvoboda
  43. Russia Beyond Bars
  44. Russian Journalists’ and Media Workers’ Union
  45. Russian LGBT Network
  46. Sakharov Center 
  47. SOVA Center
  48. Team 29
  49. Transparency International Russia
  50. Webpublishers Association (Russia)
  51. World Wide Web Foundation
  52. Xnet

 

Background Information

New Legislation

  • On 15 May 2018, Russia’s State Duma approved in the first reading proposed amendments (Proposed Bill № 464757-7) to the Criminal Code (Article 284.2), amendments that would criminalise ‘the provision of recommendations and transfer of information that has lead or might have led to the introduction’ of international sanctions, providing for up to three years’ imprisonment and fines of $8,000.  (see ARTICLE 19, 17 May 2018, Russia: Proposed amendments to Criminal Code threaten media freedom – https://www.article19.org/resources/russia-proposed-amendments-to-criminal-code-threaten-media-freedom/  )
  • On 12 April 2018, a new draft law (Proposed Bill № 223849-7) on social media regulation was adopted in the first reading by the Russian State Duma. The law draws inspiration from the German 2017 NetzDG law and would require social media companies to remove information that violated Russian law (within 24 hours) or face huge fines (up to 50 million RUB). In addition, social media companies would be required to establish representation in Russia and identify their users by their telephone numbers effectively preventing online anonymity (as all phone numbers are registered with the owner’s passport in Russia).
  • Both bills are awaiting their second and third readings in the State Duma.

Yarovaya Law

  • Various requirements of the ‘Yarovaya Law’ are plainly incompatible with international standards on encryption and anonymity as set out in the 2015 report of the UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression report (A/HRC/29/32). The UN Special Rapporteur himself has written to the Russian government raising serious concerns that the ‘Yarovaya Law’ unduly restricts the rights to freedom of expression and privacy online (see http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Opinion/Legislation/RUS_7_2016.pdf )

Telegram Case

  • In October 2017, a magistrate found Telegram guilty of an administrative offense for failing to provide decryption keys to the Russian authorities – which the company states it cannot do due to Telegram’s use of end-to-end encryption. The company was fined 800,000 rubles (approx. 11,000 EUR). Telegram lost an appeal against the administrative charge in March 2018, giving the Russian authorities formal grounds to block Telegram in Russia, under Article 15.4 of the Federal Law “On Information, Information Technologies and Information Protection”.
  • For Russian users, apps such as Telegram and similar services that seek to provide secure communications through the use of encrypted messages are crucial for users’ safety and, inter alia, rights to freedom of expression and privacy. They provide an important source of information on critical issues of politics, economics and social life, free of undue government interference.
  • Between 16-18 April 2018, almost 20 million Internet Protocol (IP) addresses were ordered to be blocked by Russia’s communications regulator, Roskomnadzor, as it tried to restrict access to Telegram. The majority of the blocked addresses are owned by international Internet companies, including Google, Amazon and Microsoft and had a detrimental effect on a wide range of web-based services that have nothing to do with Telegram, including media. For more details see:

Russia: 50+ international and Russian NGOs condemn Telegram block and Russia’s assault on Internet freedom, 15 May 2018 – https://www.article19.org/resources/russia-international-and-russian-ngos-condemn-telegram-block-and-russias-assault-on-freedom-of-expression-online/[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row full_width=”stretch_row_content”][vc_column][three_column_post title=”Digital Freedom” full_width_heading=”true” category_id=”4883″][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Freedom of expression includes right to hold positions of different persuasions

27 Jun 18 | Campaigns -- Featured, Statements

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]Index on Censorship believes that pressuring artists to renounce support for political causes as a prerequisite for being allowed to perform at events, as has been the case at the Ruhrtriennale festival in Germany,  is fundamentally incompatible with artistic freedom and freedom of expression.

Index urges festivals to judge artists on their work and not on their politics.

We also note the political pressure being placed on the director of the festival by the regional government to choose artists with particular political positions. Freedom of expression includes the right to hold political positions of different persuasions.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][three_column_post title=”Statements” full_width_heading=”true” category_id=”6534″][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Nominations open for 2019 Index on Censorship Freedom of Expression Awards Fellowship

27 Jun 18 | Awards, News and features, Press Releases

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_single_image image=”101170″ img_size=”full”][vc_column_text]Index on Censorship opens nominations for the 2019 Freedom of Expression Awards Fellowship

  • Awards Fellowship honours journalists, campaigners, digital activists and artists fighting censorship globally
  • Fellows receive a year-long package of assistance
  • Nominate at indexoncensorship.org/nominations
  • Nominations are open from 26 June to 24 September 2018
  • #IndexAwards2019

Nominations for the Index on Censorship Freedom of Expression Awards Fellowship are open. Now in their 19th year, the awards honour some of the world’s most remarkable free expression heroes.

Previous winners include courageous Honduran investigative journalist Wendy Funes who uncovers corruption and covers the ongoing violations of women’s rights in the country, and anonymous Chinese digital activists GreatFire who have secured significant additional funding since their award, and musician and campaigner Smockey who was supported to rebuild his studio in Burkina Faso after it was burned down in a suspected arson attack.

The Awards Fellowship seeks to support activists at all levels and spans the world. Past winners includeSyrian cartoonist Ali Farzat, Pakistani education campaigner Malala Yousafzai, Saudi investigative journalist Safa Al Ahmad and South African LGBTI photographer Zanele Muholi.

Index invites the general public, civil society organisations, non-profit groups and media organisations to nominate anyone (individuals or organisations) who they believe should be  celebrated and supported in their work tackling censorship worldwide.

We are offering four fellowships, one in each of the following categories:

  • Arts for artists and arts producers whose work challenges repression, injustice and celebrates artistic free expression. This can include but is not limited to: visual artists, musicians, cartoonists, photographers, creative writers, poets or museums, whether solo or collectives.
  • Campaigning for activists and campaigners who have had a marked impact in fighting censorship and promoting free expression.
  • Digital Activism for innovative use of technology to circumvent censorship and enable free and independent exchange of information. This could include new apps, digital tools or software.
  • Journalism for high-impact journalism that exposes censorship and threats to free expression. This can also include bloggers.

As awards fellows, all winners receive 12 months of capacity building, coaching and strategic support. The year commences with a week-long, all-expenses-paid residential in London (April 2019). Over the course of the year, Index works with the fellows to significantly enhance the impact and sustainability of their work.

Jodie Ginsberg, CEO of Index, said: “The Freedom of Expression Awards Fellowship showcases and strengthens the ground-breaking work of groups and individuals to enhance freedom of expression around the world. Awards fellows often have to overcome immense obstacles and face great danger just for the right to express themselves. The Awards help the fellows to achieve their goals.”

“Use your voice by nominating a free expression champion – make sure their voice is heard.”

The 2019 awards shortlist will be announced in December 2018. The fellows will be selected by a high profile panel of judges and announced in London at a gala ceremony in April 2019.

For more information on the awards and fellowship, please contact [email protected] or call +44 (0)207 963 7262[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][three_column_post title=”Explore the Freedom of Expression Awards” full_width_heading=”true” category_id=”8935″][vc_media_grid element_width=”3″ grid_id=”vc_gid:1536853297559-7a614b0f-ccff-3″ include=”100784,99937,99935,99936,99933,99932,99931,99930,99929,99928,99927,99926,99925,99924,99923,99922,99921,99920,99919,99918,99916,99915,99914,99913,99912,99911,99910,99909,99908,99907,99906,99904″][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][awards_fellows years=”2018″][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Freedom of Expression Awards Fellowship

26 Jun 18 | Awards

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_empty_space height=”5px”][vc_custom_heading text=”Freedom of Expression Awards Fellowship” font_container=”tag:h1|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_empty_space height=”5px”][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/2″][vc_column_text]

Winners of the Freedom of Expression Awards Fellowship receive 12 months of capacity building, coaching and strategic support. Through the fellowships, Index seeks to maximise the impact and sustainability of voices at the forefront of pushing back censorship worldwide.

[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/2″][vc_video link=”https://youtu.be/Qv66jpE3kuk” align=”center”][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row full_width=”stretch_row” css=”.vc_custom_1504188991311{background-color: #f2f2f2 !important;}”][vc_column][vc_tta_tabs color=”white” active_section=”1″][vc_tta_section title=”2019 Fellows” tab_id=”1554816605919-419ceeb9-dbd4″][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner][vc_custom_heading text=”2019 Fellows” font_container=”tag:h2|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_column_text]Selected from over 400 public nominations and a shortlist of 15, the 2019 Freedom of Expression Awards Fellows exemplify courage in the face of censorship. Learn more about the fellowship.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/4″][vc_custom_heading text=”Arts” font_container=”tag:h4|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_custom_heading text=”Zehra Doğan” font_container=”tag:h4|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.indexoncensorship.org%2Fnewsite02may%2F2019%2F04%2Farts-fellow-2019%2F|||”][vc_single_image image=”104529″ img_size=”full” onclick=”custom_link” link=”https://www.indexoncensorship.org/newsite02may/2019/04/arts-fellow-2019/”][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/4″][vc_custom_heading text=”Campaigning” font_container=”tag:h4|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_custom_heading text=”CRNI” font_container=”tag:h4|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.indexoncensorship.org%2Fnewsite02may%2F2019%2F04%2Fcampaigning-fellow-2019%2F|||”][vc_single_image image=”104518″ img_size=”full” onclick=”custom_link” link=”https://www.indexoncensorship.org/newsite02may/2019/04/campaigning-fellow-2019/”][vc_column_text]The 2019 Campaigning Award is supported by Mainframe[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/4″][vc_custom_heading text=”Digital Activism” font_container=”tag:h4|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_custom_heading text=”Fundación Karisma” font_container=”tag:h4|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.indexoncensorship.org%2Fnewsite02may%2F2019%2F04%2Fdigital-activism-fellow-2019%2F|||”][vc_single_image image=”104520″ img_size=”full” onclick=”custom_link” link=”https://www.indexoncensorship.org/newsite02may/2019/04/digital-activism-fellow-2019/”][vc_column_text]The 2019 Digital Activism Award is sponsored by Private Internet Access[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/4″][vc_custom_heading text=”Journalism” font_container=”tag:h4|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_custom_heading text=”Mimi Mefo” font_container=”tag:h4|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.indexoncensorship.org%2Fnewsite02may%2F2019%2F04%2Fjournalism-fellow-2019%2F|||”][vc_single_image image=”104523″ img_size=”full” onclick=”custom_link” link=”https://www.indexoncensorship.org/newsite02may/2019/04/journalism-fellow-2019/”][vc_column_text]Sponsored by Daily Mail and General Trust, Daily Mirror, France Medias Monde, News UK, Telegraph Media Group, Society of Editors[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][/vc_tta_section][vc_tta_section title=”2018 Fellows” tab_id=”1501506166658-bae3c112-ebd9″][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner][vc_custom_heading text=”2018 Fellows” font_container=”tag:h2|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_column_text]

Selected from over 400 public nominations and a shortlist of 16, the 2018 Freedom of Expression Awards Fellows exemplify courage in the face of censorship. Learn more about the fellowship.

[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/4″][vc_custom_heading text=”Arts” font_container=”tag:h4|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.indexoncensorship.org%2Fnewsite02may%2F2017%2F04%2Farts-fellow-2017%2F|||”][vc_custom_heading text=”Museum of Dissidence” font_container=”tag:h4|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.indexoncensorship.org%2Fnewsite02may%2F2018%2F04%2Farts-fellow-2018%2F|||”][vc_single_image image=”97994″ img_size=”full” alignment=”center” onclick=”custom_link” link=”https://www.indexoncensorship.org/newsite02may/2018/04/arts-fellow-2018/”][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/4″][vc_custom_heading text=”Campaigning” font_container=”tag:h4|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.indexoncensorship.org%2Fnewsite02may%2F2017%2F04%2Farts-fellow-2017%2F|||”][vc_custom_heading text=”ECRF” font_container=”tag:h4|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.indexoncensorship.org%2Fnewsite02may%2F2018%2F04%2Fcampaigning-fellow-2018%2F|||”][vc_single_image image=”97988″ img_size=”full” alignment=”center” onclick=”custom_link” link=”https://www.indexoncensorship.org/newsite02may/2018/04/campaigning-fellow-2018/”][vc_column_text]The 2018 Campaigning Award is supported by Doughty Street Chambers[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/4″][vc_custom_heading text=”Digital Activism” font_container=”tag:h4|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.indexoncensorship.org%2Fnewsite02may%2F2017%2F04%2Fdigital-activism-2017%2F|||”][vc_custom_heading text=”Habari RDC” font_container=”tag:h4|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.indexoncensorship.org%2Fnewsite02may%2F2018%2F04%2Fdigital-activism-2018%2F|||”][vc_single_image image=”97990″ img_size=”full” alignment=”center” onclick=”custom_link” link=”https://www.indexoncensorship.org/newsite02may/2018/04/digital-activism-2018/”][vc_column_text]The 2018 Digital Activism Award is sponsored by Private Internet Access[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/4″][vc_custom_heading text=”Journalism” font_container=”tag:h4|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.indexoncensorship.org%2Fnewsite02may%2F2017%2F04%2Fjournalism-2017%2F|||”][vc_custom_heading text=”Wendy Funes” font_container=”tag:h4|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.indexoncensorship.org%2Fnewsite02may%2F2018%2F04%2Fjournalism-2018%2F|||”][vc_single_image image=”98000″ img_size=”full” alignment=”center” onclick=”custom_link” link=”https://www.indexoncensorship.org/newsite02may/2018/04/journalism-2018/”][vc_column_text]The 2018 Journalism Award is sponsored by Vice News[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][/vc_tta_section][vc_tta_section title=”2017 Fellows” tab_id=”1524472475785-d2464a89-c53e”][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner][vc_custom_heading text=”2017 Fellows” font_container=”tag:h2|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_column_text]

Selected from over 400 public nominations and a shortlist of 16, the 2017 Freedom of Expression Awards Fellows exemplify courage in the face of censorship. Learn more about the fellowship.

[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/4″][vc_custom_heading text=”Arts” font_container=”tag:h4|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.indexoncensorship.org%2Fnewsite02may%2F2017%2F04%2Farts-fellow-2017%2F|||”][vc_custom_heading text=”Rebel Pepper” font_container=”tag:h4|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.indexoncensorship.org%2Fnewsite02may%2F2017%2F04%2Farts-fellow-2017%2F|||”][vc_single_image image=”94724″ img_size=”full” alignment=”center” onclick=”custom_link” link=”https://www.indexoncensorship.org/newsite02may/2017/04/arts-fellow-2017/”][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/4″][vc_custom_heading text=”Campaigning” font_container=”tag:h4|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.indexoncensorship.org%2Fnewsite02may%2F2017%2F04%2Fcampaigning-fellow-2017%2F|||”][vc_custom_heading text=”Ildar Dadin” font_container=”tag:h4|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.indexoncensorship.org%2Fnewsite02may%2F2017%2F04%2Fcampaigning-fellow-2017%2F|||”][vc_single_image image=”94725″ img_size=”full” alignment=”center” onclick=”custom_link” link=”https://www.indexoncensorship.org/newsite02may/2017/04/campaigning-fellow-2017/”][vc_column_text]The 2017 Campaigning Award is supported by Doughty Street Chambers[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/4″][vc_custom_heading text=”Digital Activism” font_container=”tag:h4|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.indexoncensorship.org%2Fnewsite02may%2F2017%2F04%2Fdigital-activism-2017%2F|||”][vc_custom_heading text=”Turkey Blocks” font_container=”tag:h4|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.indexoncensorship.org%2Fnewsite02may%2F2017%2F04%2Fdigital-activism-2017%2F|||”][vc_single_image image=”94726″ img_size=”full” alignment=”center” onclick=”custom_link” link=”https://www.indexoncensorship.org/newsite02may/2017/04/digital-activism-2017/”][vc_column_text]The 2017 Digital Activism Award is sponsored by Private Internet Access[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/4″][vc_custom_heading text=”Journalism” font_container=”tag:h4|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.indexoncensorship.org%2Fnewsite02may%2F2017%2F04%2Fjournalism-2017%2F|||”][vc_custom_heading text=”Maldives Independent” font_container=”tag:h4|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.indexoncensorship.org%2Fnewsite02may%2F2017%2F04%2Fjournalism-2017%2F|||”][vc_single_image image=”94727″ img_size=”full” alignment=”center” onclick=”custom_link” link=”https://www.indexoncensorship.org/newsite02may/2017/04/journalism-2017/”][vc_column_text]The 2017 Journalism Award is sponsored by CNN[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][/vc_tta_section][vc_tta_section title=”2016 Fellows” tab_id=”1501487515382-d17ff4cd-299e”][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/6″][vc_custom_heading text=”2016 Fellows” font_container=”tag:h3|text_align:left” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/6″][vc_custom_heading text=”Arts | Murad Subay” font_container=”tag:h4|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.indexoncensorship.org%2Fnewsite02may%2F2016%2F11%2Farts-fellow-2016%2F|||”][vc_single_image image=”74790″ img_size=”full” alignment=”center” onclick=”custom_link” link=”https://www.indexoncensorship.org/newsite02may/2016/11/arts-fellow-2016/”][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/6″][vc_custom_heading text=”Campaigning | Bolo Bhi” font_container=”tag:h4|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.indexoncensorship.org%2Fnewsite02may%2F2016%2F03%2Fcampaigning-2016%2F|||”][vc_single_image image=”82685″ img_size=”full” alignment=”center” onclick=”custom_link” link=”https://www.indexoncensorship.org/newsite02may/2016/03/campaigning-2016/”][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/6″][vc_custom_heading text=”Digital Activism | GreatFire” font_container=”tag:h4|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.indexoncensorship.org%2Fnewsite02may%2F2016%2F03%2Fdigital-activism-2016%2F|||”][vc_single_image image=”82689″ img_size=”full” alignment=”center” onclick=”custom_link” link=”https://www.indexoncensorship.org/newsite02may/2016/03/digital-activism-2016/”][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/6″][vc_custom_heading text=”Journalism | Zaina Erhaim” font_container=”tag:h4|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.indexoncensorship.org%2Fnewsite02may%2F2016%2F03%2Fjournalism-2016%2F|||”][vc_single_image image=”82702″ img_size=”full” alignment=”center” onclick=”custom_link” link=”https://www.indexoncensorship.org/newsite02may/2016/03/journalism-2016/”][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/6″][vc_custom_heading text=”Music in Exile | Smockey” font_container=”tag:h4|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.indexoncensorship.org%2Fnewsite02may%2F2016%2F03%2Fmusic-in-exile-2016%2F|||”][vc_single_image image=”81098″ img_size=”full” alignment=”center” onclick=”custom_link” link=”https://www.indexoncensorship.org/newsite02may/2016/03/music-in-exile-2016/”][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][/vc_tta_section][vc_tta_section title=”2015 Fellows” tab_id=”1501487515639-5231aa25-0705″][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/6″][vc_custom_heading text=”2015 Fellows” font_container=”tag:h3|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/6″][vc_custom_heading text=”Arts | El Haqed” font_container=”tag:h4|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.indexoncensorship.org%2Fnewsite02may%2F2015%2F03%2Farts-2015%2F|||”][vc_single_image image=”81111″ img_size=”full” alignment=”center” onclick=”custom_link” link=”https://www.indexoncensorship.org/newsite02may/2015/03/arts-2015/”][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/6″][vc_custom_heading text=”Campaigning | Amran Abdundi” font_container=”tag:h4|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.indexoncensorship.org%2Fnewsite02may%2F2015%2F03%2Fcampaigning-2015%2F|||”][vc_single_image image=”81118″ img_size=”full” alignment=”center” onclick=”custom_link” link=”https://www.indexoncensorship.org/newsite02may/2015/03/campaigning-2015/”][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/6″][vc_custom_heading text=”Digital Activism | Tamás Bodoky” font_container=”tag:h4|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.indexoncensorship.org%2Fnewsite02may%2F2015%2F03%2Fdigital-activism-2015%2F|||”][vc_single_image image=”81126″ img_size=”full” alignment=”center” onclick=”custom_link” link=”https://www.indexoncensorship.org/newsite02may/2015/03/digital-activism-2015/”][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/6″][vc_custom_heading text=”Journalism | Rafael Marques de Morais” font_container=”tag:h4|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.indexoncensorship.org%2Fnewsite02may%2F2015%2F03%2Fjournalism-2015%2F|||”][vc_single_image image=”81131″ img_size=”full” alignment=”center” onclick=”custom_link” link=”https://www.indexoncensorship.org/newsite02may/2015/03/journalism-2015/”][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/6″][vc_custom_heading text=”Journalism | Safa Al Ahmad” font_container=”tag:h4|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.indexoncensorship.org%2Fnewsite02may%2F2015%2F03%2Fjournalism-2015-2%2F|||”][vc_single_image image=”81138″ img_size=”full” alignment=”center” onclick=”custom_link” link=”https://www.indexoncensorship.org/newsite02may/2015/03/journalism-2015-2/”][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][/vc_tta_section][/vc_tta_tabs][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][three_column_post title=”Fellows News” category_id=”16143″][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row equal_height=”yes”][vc_column][vc_empty_space height=”5px”][vc_custom_heading text=”2020 Freedom of Expression Awards Fellowship Timeline” font_container=”tag:h3|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_row_inner equal_height=”yes” el_class=”awards-timeline-grid”][vc_column_inner width=”1/6″][vc_single_image image=”80944″ img_size=”full”][vc_column_text]Coming Soon

NOMINATIONS[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/6″][vc_single_image image=”80945″ img_size=”full”][vc_column_text]DEC 2019

JUDGING PANEL[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/6″][vc_single_image image=”80946″ img_size=”full”][vc_column_text]JAN 2020

SHORTLIST ANNOUNCED[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/6″][vc_single_image image=”80947″ img_size=”full”][vc_column_text]Spring 2020

AWARDS FELLOWSHIP WEEK[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/6″][vc_single_image image=”80948″ img_size=”full”][vc_column_text]Spring 2020

AWARDS GALA[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/6″][vc_single_image image=”80949″ img_size=”full”][vc_column_text]APR 2020 – MAR 2021

AWARDS FELLOWSHIP[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_empty_space][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row full_width=”stretch_row”][vc_column][vc_custom_heading text=”About the Awards Fellowship” font_container=”tag:h3|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_row_inner equal_height=”yes” el_class=”awards-timeline-grid”][vc_column_inner width=”1/6″][vc_single_image image=”94804″ img_size=”full”][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/6″][vc_column_text]One Full Year

Fellows receive 12 months of direct assistance, starting with an all-expenses-paid training week in London in April 2018.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/6″][vc_column_text]Survive

Index helps fellows build key partnerships, troubleshoot and receive expert support in multiple areas including digital security, strategy and communications.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/6″][vc_column_text]Thrive

Fellows work with Index and partners to identify and realise key strategic goals.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/6″][vc_column_text]Amplify

Index promotes news and regional developments through our magazine, website and social media.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/6″][vc_column_text]Network

Fellows become part of a supportive community of free expression champions worldwide.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_custom_heading text=”What we look for in selecting Awards Fellows” font_container=”tag:h3|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_row_inner equal_height=”yes” el_class=”awards-timeline-grid”][vc_column_inner width=”1/6″][vc_single_image image=”94805″ img_size=”full”][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/6″][vc_column_text]Timeliness

A significant contribution within the past 12 months.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/6″][vc_column_text]Resilience

Courage to speak out, persisting in the face of adversity.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/6″][vc_column_text]Innovation

Creative ways of promoting free expression or circumventing censorship.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/6″][vc_column_text]Impact

Evidence of shifting perceptions, influencing public or government opinion, contributing to legislative change.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/6″][vc_column_text]Need

Those cases where the 2018 Awards Fellowship can potentially add the most value.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_custom_heading text=”We award Fellowships in four categories” font_container=”tag:h3|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_row_inner equal_height=”yes” el_class=”text_white”][vc_column_inner width=”1/4″ css=”.vc_custom_1501508115518{background-color: #cb3000 !important;}”][vc_custom_heading text=”Arts” font_container=”tag:h3|text_align:left” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_column_text]for artists and arts producers whose work challenges repression and injustice and celebrates artistic free expression[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/4″ css=”.vc_custom_1501508268476{background-color: #d98c00 !important;}”][vc_custom_heading text=”Campaigning” font_container=”tag:h3|text_align:left” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_column_text]for activists and campaigners who have had a marked impact in fighting censorship and promoting freedom of expression[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/4″ css=”.vc_custom_1501508309950{background-color: #cb3000 !important;}”][vc_custom_heading text=”Digital Activism” font_container=”tag:h3|text_align:left” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_column_text]for innovative uses of technology to circumvent censorship and enable free and independent exchange of information[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/4″ css=”.vc_custom_1501508333043{background-color: #d98c00 !important;}”][vc_custom_heading text=”Journalism” font_container=”tag:h3|text_align:left” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_column_text]for courageous, high-impact and determined journalism that exposes censorship and threats to free expression[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_empty_space height=”15px”][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_separator color=”black”][vc_row_inner equal_height=”yes”][vc_column_inner width=”1/2″][vc_custom_heading text=”Support the Index Awards.” font_container=”tag:p|font_size:28|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.indexoncensorship.org%2Fnewsite02may%2Fsupport-the-freedom-of-expression-awards%2F|||”][vc_column_text]

By donating to the Freedom of Expression Awards you help us support individuals and groups at the forefront of tackling censorship.

Find out more

[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/2″ css=”.vc_custom_1528707303361{background-image: url(https://www.indexoncensorship.org/newsite02may/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/EMK_2426web-1460×490-1.jpg?id=99905) !important;background-position: center !important;background-repeat: no-repeat !important;background-size: cover !important;}”][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_empty_space height=”30px”][vc_separator color=”black”][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row full_width=”stretch_row_content_no_spaces” css=”.vc_custom_1500453384143{margin-top: 20px !important;padding-top: 20px !important;padding-bottom: 20px !important;}”][vc_column][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner][vc_custom_heading text=”SPONSORS” font_container=”tag:h1|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes” css=”.vc_custom_1484567001197{margin-bottom: 30px !important;}”][vc_column_text]

The Freedom of Expression Awards and Fellowship have massive impact. You can help by sponsoring or supporting a fellowship.

Index is grateful to those who are supporting the 2019 Awards Fellowships:

[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_row_inner equal_height=”yes” el_class=”container container980″][vc_column_inner width=”1/2″ offset=”vc_col-xs-6″][vc_single_image image=”80918″ img_size=”full” alignment=”center” onclick=”custom_link” img_link_target=”_blank” link=”https://uk.sagepub.com/”][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/2″ offset=”vc_col-xs-6″][vc_single_image image=”80921″ img_size=”full” alignment=”center” onclick=”custom_link” img_link_target=”_blank” link=”https://www.google.co.uk/about/”][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_row_inner equal_height=”yes” el_class=”container container980″][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″ offset=”vc_col-xs-6″][vc_single_image image=”85983″ img_size=”full” alignment=”center” onclick=”custom_link” link=”https://www.privateinternetaccess.com/”][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″ offset=”vc_col-xs-6″][vc_single_image image=”85977″ img_size=”full” alignment=”center” onclick=”custom_link” link=”http://www.edwardian.com/”][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″ offset=”vc_col-xs-6″][vc_single_image image=”105358″ img_size=”234×234″ alignment=”center” onclick=”custom_link” link=”https://mainframe.com/”][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_row_inner equal_height=”yes” el_class=”container container980″][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″ offset=”vc_col-xs-6″][vc_single_image image=”105536″ img_size=”full” alignment=”center” onclick=”custom_link” img_link_target=”_blank” link=”http://www.vodafone.com/content/index.html#”][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″ offset=”vc_col-xs-6″][vc_single_image image=”105360″ img_size=”234×234″ alignment=”center” onclick=”custom_link” link=”https://www.francemediasmonde.com/”][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″ offset=”vc_col-xs-6″][vc_single_image image=”105359″ img_size=”234×234″ alignment=”center” onclick=”custom_link” link=”https://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/index.html”][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_row_inner equal_height=”yes” el_class=”container container980″][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″ offset=”vc_col-xs-6″][vc_single_image image=”80924″ img_size=”200×200″ alignment=”center” onclick=”custom_link” img_link_target=”_blank” link=”https://psiphon.ca/”][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″ offset=”vc_col-xs-6″][vc_single_image image=”105361″ img_size=”200×200″ alignment=”center” onclick=”custom_link” link=”https://www.telegraph.co.uk/”][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″ offset=”vc_col-xs-6″][vc_single_image image=”105363″ img_size=”200×200″ alignment=”center” onclick=”custom_link” link=”https://www.societyofeditors.org/”][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_row_inner equal_height=”yes” el_class=”container container980″][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″ offset=”vc_col-xs-6″][vc_single_image image=”105365″ img_size=”200×200″ alignment=”center” onclick=”custom_link” link=”https://www.news.co.uk/”][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″ offset=”vc_col-xs-6″][vc_single_image image=”106100″ img_size=”200×200″ alignment=”center” onclick=”custom_link” link=”https://www.mirror.co.uk/”][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″ offset=”vc_col-xs-6″][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_column_text]

If you are interested in sponsorship you can contact [email protected]

[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]