Warning: Undefined array key "label" in /home/jwkxumhx/public_html/newsite02may/wp-content/themes/Divi/includes/builder/class-et-builder-element.php on line 8927 Index on Censorship | A voice for the persecuted Warning: Trying to access array offset on value of type bool in /home/jwkxumhx/public_html/newsite02may/wp-content/plugins/expand-divi/inc/ExpandDiviSetup.php on line 217
Warning: Trying to access array offset on value of type bool in /home/jwkxumhx/public_html/newsite02may/wp-content/plugins/expand-divi/inc/ExpandDiviSetup.php on line 218
Human rights groups are calling for the release of an Egyptian activist arrested after she posted a video criticizing the government for failing to protect women against sexual harassment.
Amal Fathy, an activist focusing on democratization in Egypt, was arrested alongside her husband — Mohamed Lotfy, director of the Egyptian Commission for Rights and Freedoms (ECRF) — early Friday, Amnesty International said. Read in full.
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]Egyptian security forces have targeted one of the last human rights organisations in the country, the Egyptian Commission for Rights and Freedoms, by detaining executive director Mohamed Lotfy with his wife, Amal Fathy, and their two-year-old-son.
Security officers searched their house, their mobile phones were seized and they were denied the right to communicate with a lawyer or family.
ECRF, a 2018 winner of an Index on Censorship Freedom of Expression award, works on documenting cases concerning torture in prisons and enforced disappearance in an increasingly difficult climate in Egypt where independent voices are suppressed and threatened.
Rachael Jolley, editor of Index on Censorship, said: “It is shocking how the lives of people who are working to make public information about torture in Egyptian prisons and other human rights violations are being threatened. Obviously the intention of this action, and others, is to stop the incredibly brave members of staff at this organisation carrying on with their important work. Index calls on governments around the world to put pressure on Egypt to release Amal Fathy and to shine a spotlight on the Egyptian government’s frightening tactics to stop the public knowing what is going on in that country.”
Authoritarian governments are increasing using arrest, detention or threats to family members to stop human rights activists carrying on with their work.
Lotfy and his son have been released, however his wife Amal Fathy remains in detention. Fathy has been ordered detained for a 15 days by the prosecution.
English PEN, Index on Censorship, Reporters Without Borders, Cartoonists Rights Network International (CRNI) and IFEX called for a “Free Turkey Media” protest in London on May 15 to protest a visit by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan.
In their joint call, the organisations noted the government crackdown against journalists and academics in Turkey since the 2016 coup attempt. Read in full.
Portuguese prime minister António Costa. Credit: EPP Group/Flickr
On 15 March, when debating wildfires in Portugal that, such as the ones that killed 114 people in the summer of 2017, Portuguese prime minister António Costa pointed his finger to journalists and said: “One of the biggest problems in our country is the terrible quality of information.”
Despite his criticisms, both in public and in private, Costa’s government has demonstrated a knack of looking towards one particular sector to fill communications roles, and sometimes even more senior positions: the media.
Qualified, underpaid and overwhelmed by the ongoing crisis in the Portuguese media, many journalists have accepted offers to work for the government in exchange for much better salaries and working conditions. “This has serious consequences for journalism,” Carla Baptista, a media expert and professor at the New University of Lisbon, said. “If we look at this as if it were a combat between two sides, it’s pretty obvious whose interests are going to prevail.”
When telling about her passage from journalist to public official, Sara, who requested anonymity, also talks about “two sides” — and is clear which she prefers. “Back when I was a journalist, I saw many people moving to this side. There were people I never thought would do this. But they did and, to everyone’s surprise, they did just fine,” Sara, who has joined a government position after working as journalist for eight years, told Mapping Media Freedom. “This is a bit like suicide. It has a contagious effect when you see other people do it. But in this case, it has a happy ending.”
Sara looks back at her journalism career as an ongoing struggle to balance her professional aspirations with what the national newspaper she wrote for expected from her on a daily basis. “Every day was spent trying to specialise myself in one area, while my superiors thought of this as a childish whim,” she said.
Sara goes back to the day when, after insisting for many weeks, she got an email saying she was given access to the minister responsible for the area she covered for an exclusive interview. However urgent and extraordinary, this didn’t grant Sara any leeway from daily tasks assigned to her in the newsroom. “I still had to be at my desk and publish random news-agency wires and only after that did I get permission to go and interview the minister. Looking back, it’s hard to imagine how a journalist can interview the minister of their responsibility and still publish news-agency wires from 7am.”
Situations like this, coupled with a monthly salary of under €900, led Sara to openly look for a new career. As word got out, she was given a job first at a public institute and later for the government. Both positions focused on the area she covered as a journalist. In her current job, Sara’s salary is two-and-a-half times more than what she was making after nearly a decade in journalism.
Money was also a problem for Inês, who requested anonymity. After spending 12 years working at one title, her newspaper fell behind on wage payments. After three months with no income, she accepted an offer from another publication. However, its slower pace and quieter newsroom, unlike that of her previous newspaper, took away her motivation. That’s when she got an invitation to work for the ministry she dealt with on a daily basis, for double what she earned in her first title and approximately €600 more than what she was making then. She accepted it in a heartbeat.
“I’m working around the exact same topics I wrote about as a journalist, so my experience won’t go to waste” Inês told MMF. “It’s just that I’m on the other side now.”
Looking back at the prime minister’s remarks toward journalists in March, Inês acknowledges that “he shouldn’t have said it” — but strictly from a PR point of view. “Like in every other profession, journalists don’t like criticism. But the truth is that nowadays there is a terrible quality of information and I was a part of it too,” she added.
“The fact that journalists have to write articles all the time keeps them from confirming most things they publish. They end up becoming an echo chamber,” Inês said. “Members of parliament say anything, journalists quote them and don’t even care to fact check.” This, she added, is done by “inexperienced young journalists working at a hallucinating speed and without any guidance”.
Now that she is working on the other side, Inês is very well aware of this reality and admits to taking advantage of it. When asked if her job is made easier by dealing with mostly unseasoned journalists, she quickly replies: “Of course. I was in their shoes not long ago. And while I know that I can say certain things that won’t go through a more experienced journalist, others will accept them right away. Because they can’t afford thinking.”[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]Press freedom violations in Portugal reported to Mapping Media Freedom since 24 May 2018
Before she was murdered by a car bomb last October, there were 47 libel suits outstanding against Daphne Caruana Galizia. Her crime? Three decades of crusading investigative journalism that exposed corruption and political collusion in Malta, her home country. Read full article.
Proposed amendments on the Data Protection Bill would have the power to ratchet up pressure on editors—and make a poor example of the British press, says Rachael Jolley. When Michelle Tolley from Sparham, Norfolk, was infected with Hepatitis C following a blood transfusion while giving birth in 1987, she turned to her local newspaper, the Eastern Daily Press, for help. Read full article.
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_single_image image=”96667″ img_size=”full” alignment=”center”][vc_column_text]Risks, Rights and Reputations is led by Index on Censorship in partnership with What Next? and Cause4.
This vital half-day training for CEOs and chairs of trustees supports arts and cultural organisations to handle difficult subjects and sensitive stories to deliver the best work possible.
Navigating the rights and responsibilities of art that explores socially sensitive work can appear daunting, risky and time-consuming; the prospect of controversy, protest, police intervention and possible closure or cancellation because the work is provocative, or the funder is controversial, can be powerful disincentives. And yet great art has always fuelled controversy, and experimentation and risk-taking are integral to achieving excellent, relevant art.
“In recent years there have been an increasing number of high-profile cases raising ethical and censorship issues around plays, exhibitions and other artworks. Censorship – and self-censorship – can stand in the way of great art. That’s why Arts Council England is committed to supporting those organisations who are taking creative risks. It’s important such organisations are aware of relevant legislation and the excellent guidance that exists as well as, crucially, being supported by colleagues across the sector in similar situations. This programme is an important step in ensuring that our sector can continue to create vital, challenging, and risk-taking work.”— Sir Nick Serota – Chair of Arts Council England
The training will support participants to:
Deepen understanding of the legal and rights framework supporting artistic freedom in the UK
Explore the impact on freedom of expression of BME artists of recent controversies in the arts
Explore the dilemmas thrown up by ethical fundraising
Support organisations to understand when and how to build a relationship with the police in relation to controversial work
We are delighted that Skinder Hundal (CEO of New Art Exchange) and Sukhy Johal, MBE (Chair of New Art Exchange) will be hosting the session and your trainers for the afternoon will be:
Julia Farrington – Freedom of expression specialist from Index on Censorship
Helen Jenkins – Fundraising consultant from Cause4
Diane Morgan – Director Nitrobeat[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
When: Wednesday 27 June 2018, 12:30–5:30pm
Where: Brighton Dome, Church Street, Brighton BN1 1UE
Tickets: £48 – £96 via Eventbrite
17/5/2018: An earlier version of this event listing incorrectly contained information about the Nottingham session.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_single_image image=”89786″ img_size=”full” add_caption=”yes” alignment=”center”][vc_column_text]This event has been rescheduled.
Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan will be visiting the UK for official meetings from 13 – 15 May. Join us for a protest outside the Turkish Embassy in London calling for the release of Turkey’s imprisoned journalists.
Under the state of emergency declared following the failed coup attempt in July 2016, President Erdoğan has overseen an unprecedented crackdown on critical voices in Turkey, including the media. Turkey is now the world’s biggest jailer of professional journalists, and is ranked 157th out of 180 countries in Reporters Without Borders’ 2018 World Press Freedom Index.
In April 2018, President Erdoğan announced snap presidential and parliamentary elections, due to take place on 24 June 2018, nearly 18 months before they were expected and under the ongoing state of emergency. In light of the ongoing crackdown, there are widespread concerns that the public does not have full access to independent information ahead of casting their votes. One leading writer from Turkey has described the decision as “a way of stealing our power”.
With so many of journalists and writers at risk in Turkey, it is essential that we come together to support our imprisoned colleagues.
Join English PEN, Index on Censorship, Reporters Without Borders, and CRNI – Cartoonsts Rights Network to send a strong message to the authorities, both in Turkey and the UK.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
When: Tuesday 15 May 9am-11am
Where: 10 Downing Street, SW1V 2 London (Directions)
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]Press freedom violations in Turkey reported to Mapping Media Freedom since 24 May 2014
Index on Censorship CEO Jodie Ginsberg debated Evan Harris on Sky News on 9 May ahead of the UK’s House of Commons vote on amendments to the Data Protection Bill that would reintroduce into law restrictions on the press that the current government has rightly said it will not implement, namely forcing any publisher who refuses to sign up to a state-approved regulator to pay the legal costs of any data protection case brought against them, even if they win.
Ginsberg spoke in defence of a “free, vibrant, independent and troublesome media” that provides us with the information big business and the corrupt would rather remain concealed.
Index on Censorship is pleased to hear the amendments to the Data Protection Bill are likely not going ahead. This amendment had serious consequences for a free press, a cornerstone of democracy[/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:1526037704389-09ad51e7-e052-6″ taxonomies=”6564″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
Politis journalists protest their gagging: Sotiris Paroutis, Dionisis Dionisiou and Manolis Kalatzis
In January 2018 a Cypriot court issued an injunction forbidding daily newspaper Politis from publishing emails that were hacked from the personal account of a suspended state attorney, Eleni Loizidou, news website newsit.com.cy reported.
Politis had re-published a number of emails Loizidou had sent from a Gmail account that had been made public by a Russian website. The emails suggested that Loizidou, who was formerly head of extradition requests, may have aided Moscow in the extradition cases of Russian nationals.
Loizidou requested an injunction against the newspaper, preventing it from publishing or using content from the hacked personal account she had used to communicate with the Russian judicial services. The ban is valid until the lawsuit against the newspaper is heard or until another court order is issued.
Loizidou has also filed a lawsuit against Politis seeking between €500,000 and €2 million in damages. The suit claims the newspaper violated her right to privacy and the law on the protection of personal data.
Police officers also demanded that Phileleftheros newspaper remove any articles that reported on the Loizidou case.
The head of Cyprus’ Union of Journalists, George Frangos, defended the newspapers and said: “In no case should the letter of the law be above the spirit of the law which is primarily to serve the common good and public interest.”
In February 2018, the Cypriot press reported that the police have been questioning journalists over the leaked emails. The attorney general, in his statements to the Cyprus News Agency on 4 January 2018, said that: “In a written letter dated 1 December 2017, the Prosecutor’s Office of the Russian Federation requested that a criminal investigation is carried out on the interception of electronic data concerning the Russian Public Prosecutor’s Office.”
Five journalists from the newspaper Politis, two journalists from the newspaper Phileleftheros, two journalists from the newspaper Kathimerini, two journalists from the Sigma TV and a journalist from the newspaper Alithia were summoned to question.
The first journalist who was called in was Manolis Kalatzis from Politis. “The investigators informed me of my rights and announced to me that I am suspicious of criminal offences,” Kalatzis told Mapping Media Freedom adding that he was asked to recognise his articles and reveal his sources.
“It was a clear attempt at gagging the press, as there were the civil lawsuits against journalists claiming compensations of millions of euros. At the same time, Loizidou remains in her post and is being audited only for offences punishable by reprimand,” Kalatzis said.
The Cypriot journalists’ union condemned that the questioning of journalists “constitute a hindrance to the freedom of expression and the media freedom”.
“Now, police are summoning journalists one after the other and question them as suspects of violating the law because in their articles they use one or two words or phrases already made public like ‘Dear Vladimir’ or ‘Really missed you’,” Philelftheros’ editor-in-chief, Aristos Michaelides, wrote in a front-page op-ed accusing the police of abusing their power.
“The authorities must stop harassing journalists and treating them as if they are criminals,” said the IFJ General Secretary Anthony Bellanger. “We stand in solidarity with all those seeking to expose the truth.”
OSCE representative on Freedom of the Media Harlem Désir also expressed concern about the court decision in Cyprus as well as the questioning by the police of several journalists of the daily newspapers Politis and Phileleftheros. “It is essential that journalists be free to report on issues of public importance,” Désir said after sending a letter to Foreign Minister Ioannis Kasoulides, referring to media reports about leaked emails between state attorney Eleni Loizidou and Russian officials. Désir also stressed that journalists should not be questioned by the police about their work.
Moreover, on 19 March, six Cypriot MEPs sent a written question to the European Commission, asking whether the Commission is aware that “journalists are being called in for questioning by the police authorities in Cyprus under suspicion of conspiring to commit an offence” and whether it considers that “there may be problems with freedom of the press and the freedom of expression of journalists in Cyprus”.
On the 3 April, Cyprus’ attorney-general decided not to prosecute journalists for the leaked emails. In an announcement from the Legal Service, it is noted inter alia that the decision was taken because it was concluded that the prosecution of journalists is not in the public interest.
It added that the case raised two kinds of public interest — one was safeguarding personal communications and the other was the public’s right to be informed about issues of public interest.
“Weighing the two…and after taking into account the relevant national and European case law, as well as more general legal principles, the attorney-general judged it would not serve the public interest if he launched a criminal prosecution,” the statement said. [/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text][/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:1525771631211-2562d882-930f-2″ taxonomies=”6833″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
In the wake of the recent Cambridge Analytica scandal, few are likely to disagree that we ought to have more protections over the use of our data. The right to privacy is one enshrined in international convention. But it is vital that in striving to ensure we have greater control and oversight over personal information, we do not undermine another fundamental right in the process: that of freedom of expression, and, in particular, media freedom. Read full article.
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]Index on Censorship is pleased to hear the amendments to the Data Protection Bill are likely not going ahead. One of the amendments, which was not voted on, would have left many newspapers having to pay both sides’ costs in a legal dispute – even if the media outlet won. This amendment had serious consequences for a free press, a cornerstone of democracy[/vc_column_text][vc_column_text]On Wednesday, the UK’s House of Commons will vote on the Data Protection Bill: a bill to regulate the way in which personal information is processed.
It is of course critical that we have robust protections over our personal data. Yet, as is so often the case with new laws, Index on Censorship believes we are in grave danger of ushering in one protection only to eliminate another: in this case, the protections afforded to and by a free press.
This is because members of both the House of Lords and Commons have sought to introduce amendments to this bill that would reintroduce into law restrictions on the press that the current government has rightly said it will not implement, namely forcing any publisher who refuses to sign up to a state-approved regulator to pay the legal costs of any data protection case brought against them, even if they win.
Such a measure would, in effect, invite anyone seeking to prevent exposure in the press – including those cases in which exposure, such as the Windrush scandal or MPs expenses, is in the public interest – to threaten legal action to silence a potential publisher. We urge MPs to reject these amendments.
In earlier proposed amendments, any organisation – including non-profit organisations like Index on Censorship – which refused to sign up to a state-approved regulator would have been liable to pay both sides’ costs. The latest amendments on the question of cost-shifting attempts to close that loophole by exempting small publishers but this just makes a mockery of the entire endeavour: either the rules apply to everyone or no one. The ability to hold power to account and expose the corrupt should not be left to one kind of media organisation.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column width=”1/4″][vc_icon icon_fontawesome=”fa fa-times” color=”black” background_style=”rounded” size=”xl” align=”right”][/vc_column][vc_column width=”3/4″][vc_column_text]
Index does not believe any media organisation should be forced to sign up to a regulator – especially one that has state approval, no matter how arm’s length.
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]Of course, there should be protections for those wronged by the press: but the threat of financial penalties on potential public interest journalism is not the way to do it. Far better is to encourage low-cost, easily accessible and swift redress for all.
Index does not believe any media organisation should be forced to sign up to a regulator – especially one that has state approval, no matter how arm’s length.
For the past five decades, we have monitored state interference in news reporting, from authoritarian Chile in the 1970s to North Korea today. With a history of scrutinising government pressure on media, we were never going to join Impress (currently the only state-approved regulator).
A free press is fundamental to democracy. Investigative and campaigning journalists have exposed scandals that have helped save lives: such as the work done by Index on Censorship’s patron, Sir Harold Evans, on the Thalidomide scandal while editor of the Sunday Times.
More recently, work by journalist Carole Cadwalladr at The Observer broke the Cambridge Analytica story wide open, while Amelia Gentleman’s reporting at The Guardian has driven the story on Windrush.
Without an environment in which such journalists are encouraged to report – without the fear that they might face costly court cases even for reporting stories that are true – who will hold the corrupt to account?
“It is easy to dismiss such concerns as the hysterical whinging of the mainstream media,” said Index on Censorship chief executive Jodie Ginsberg. “That would be a huge mistake. A genuinely free press – one in which both independent investigative journalist outfits and mainstream media organisations can operate – benefits everyone.”
We crush media freedom at our peril. The democratic gains being eroded in Turkey, Russia, Poland and Hungary and elsewhere have all been accompanied by a loss of press freedom: a freedom that is hard won but easily lost.
A version of this statement was first published on the Independent website.[/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:1526037891828-b7251ca2-5483-4″ taxonomies=”6534″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
Warning: Attempt to read property "term_id" on null in /home/jwkxumhx/public_html/newsite02may/wp-content/plugins/divi-overlays/divi-overlays.php on line 2979
Warning: Attempt to read property "url" on bool in /home/jwkxumhx/public_html/newsite02may/wp-content/plugins/divi-overlays/divi-overlays.php on line 2990
Warning: Undefined variable $separator_content in /home/jwkxumhx/public_html/newsite02may/wp-content/plugins/exclusive-divi/includes/modules/Divider/Divider.php on line 340
We are currently working hard to ensure that our new website is in perfect working order so we can continue to bring you the latest news, views and content from around the world. You may find that some pages are currently offline or that you are unable to find something that you are looking for. This is only temporary - and we apologise for any convenience this may cause.
Please consider subscribing to our weekly newsletter below, so that you are among the first to hear from our contributors and don't miss anything in future.
Thanks for your understanding.
?
STAY INFORMED.
Be the first to hear from uncensored writers and artists
For over 50 years, Index has published work by censored writers and artists. Subscribe to our email newsletter to get regular updates from our incredible contributors.
Warning: Undefined variable $separator_content in /home/jwkxumhx/public_html/newsite02may/wp-content/plugins/exclusive-divi/includes/modules/Divider/Divider.php on line 340
Be the first to hear from uncensored writers and artists
For over 50 years, Index has published work by censored writers and artists. Subscribe to our email newsletter to get regular updates from our incredible contributors.
?
SUPPORT OUR WORK
Index on Censorship’s work is only possible because of donations from people like you.
Please consider chipping in to help us give a voice to the voiceless:
