19 Sep 19 | Index in the Press
Jodie Ginsberg, chief executive of Index on Censorship, said that it was deeply disturbing that Shamsie had been stripped of the honour “for her personal opinions.
“An award meant to recognise a writer for ‘outstanding literary contributions to the promotion of understanding between peoples’ has been withdrawn because the writer personally supports a non-violent movement that is intended to focus attention on respect for universal human rights,” said Ginsberg.
“Increasingly we are seeing fiction writers being policed for their political opinions and books cancelled as a result. The result will be the very opposite of what the prize organisers seek to achieve: a narrowing of voices and therefore fewer opportunities to promote understanding between people.”
Read the full article.
18 Sep 19 | Index in the Press
Nathan Gill MEP comments the situation with freedom of speech in Ukraine and the particular case of a meeting of the President prior to the Court of Appeal of Kyiv ruled decision against 112 Ukraine TV channel, which may bring to deprivation of their broadcasting license. Read the full article.
18 Sep 19 | Index in the Press
A well-known British organization Index on Censorship published its July report on Press freedom in Ukraine, in which stated on violations against some journalists and media. The report also mentioned the attack on 112 Ukraine TV channel.
The Index on Censorship notes that “Channel 112 has come under pressure from nationalist groups since it was purchased last year by Taras Kozak, a close ally of controversial Ukrainian politician Viktor Medvedchuk, often criticised for his pro-Russian views and ties to Russian president Vladimir Putin.” Another channel Kozak also owns, NewsOne, was also attacked by the radicals in July. They interfered with the work of the journalists, burned flares and threw cracker at the building of the channel.
Read the full article
18 Sep 19 | Campaigns -- Featured, Media Freedom, Statements, Turkey Statements
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]Item 4: General Debate
42nd Session of the UN Human Rights Council
Joint Statement delivered by ARTICLE 19 on behalf of a group of civil society organisations
Delivered by Lucy Bye
Mr. President,
It is now over three years since the Turkish Government intensified its repressive crackdown against oppositional and dissenting voices in the country. This ongoing freedom of expression crisis demands the Council’s urgent attention.
Although the State of Emergency was lifted in July 2018, the sweeping emergency decrees that enabled the government to pursue its unprecedented crackdown against the media and civil society have now effectively been absorbed into the ordinary legal framework.
Since the 2016 coup attempt, at least 180 media outlets have been forcibly closed. Over 220,000 websites have been blocked. At least 132 journalists and media workers are behind bars, and hundreds more have been prosecuted as terrorists, solely for their journalistic work, in the absence of any credible or even individualised evidence.
The rule of law is being systematically dismantled. Trials are increasingly Kafkaesque as the executive’s grip on the judiciary has continued to tighten. Journalists Ahmet and Mehmet Altan and Nazli Ilicak were initially forced to defend themselves against charges that they sent ‘subliminal messages’ in support of the coup attempt. Civil society activists and media workers have faced prosecution simply for allegedly downloading the secure communications app ‘Bylock’. In recent months, the government has even sought to rewrite history, charging 16 leading civil society figures who participated in the peaceful 2013 Gezi Park protests with attempting to overthrow the government. Osman Kavala is in his 24th month of pre-trial detention, in a flagrant violation of his fair trial rights.
Last week, whilst the convictions of six of his Cumhuriyet colleagues were overturned, Ahmet Şik was served new, unfounded charges including propaganda for a terrorist group and “insulting the Turkish state” that may see him sentenced to 30 years in prison. This judicial harassment follows a violent attack against Şik by police on 20 August, during a protest in front of an Istanbul Court against the dismissal of three opposition mayors in three cities in the South East. No one has yet been held accountable.
We call on all States at this Council to use their voice and urge Turkey to change course, and take immediate steps to restore the rule of law, and end its assault on media freedom and civic space.
I thank you, Mr. President.
ARTICLE 19
Cartoonists Rights Network International
Committee to Protect Journalists
European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
Index on Censorship
OBC Transeuropa
European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
PEN America
PEN International
Norwegian PEN
English PEN
Danish PEN
German PEN[/vc_column_text][vc_basic_grid post_type=”post” max_items=”4″ element_width=”6″ grid_id=”vc_gid:1568807394411-de70b9f5-94df-5″ taxonomies=”6534″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
18 Sep 19 | Campaigns -- Featured, Media Freedom, Statements
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]To: Marija Pejčinović Burić
Secretary-General
Council of Europe
Dear Secretary-General,
On behalf of the undersigned organisations, we warmly congratulate you on your appointment as the new Secretary-General of the Council of Europe. We are motivated by our experience and understanding of the worsening of the environment for journalists and free expression across Europe to ask you to make sure that your commitment to democracy, the rule of law and human rights will be reflected in enhanced efforts for the effective protection of freedom of expression, press freedom and the safety of journalists, backed up by robust measures and strong and consistent statements and actions by yourself as Secretary-General.
Media freedom and media pluralism must be given a clear and consistent priority across the Council of Europe area, as they enable the public to make informed choices about their government and society, and are thus prerequisites for the full enjoyment of all other rights.
Renewed and determined efforts to achieve Member States’ compliance with the Council of Europe’s conventions, recommendations and other texts, as well as the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) are vital in these times of rising threats against journalists and press freedom throughout Europe. The environment for media freedom has worsened significantly, as was documented in the Annual Report published by the partner organisations of the Council of Europe Platform for the Protection of Journalism and Safety of Journalists. We see extremely worrying developments in Azerbaijan, Poland, Hungary, Italy, Turkey, Russia and elsewhere.
Regarding the Platform for the Protection of Journalism and Safety of Journalists, we urge you to provide all necessary means and support available to ensure that Member States respond concretely to alerts, intensify the dialogue and follow-up moves to provide redress, and to do everything possible to gain the active cooperation of those Member States which have failed to reply to alerts that highlight shortcomings or abuses on the part of state authorities. We ask you to establish a monthly exchange at the level of the Committee of Ministers to allow for a meaningful discussion on the progress of Member States in dealing with the alerts and persistent and serious threats to media freedom and the safety of journalists and other media actors.
In view of the well-documented increase in attacks on the media and backsliding in some states’ fulfilment of their commitments, we request you to prioritise actions and policies to implement Recommendation CM/Rec(2016)4 of the Committee of Ministers on the protection of journalism and safety of journalists and other media actors – including specific measures to comply with Council of Europe standards on Protection; Prevention of attacks; and Prosecution of crimes against journalists.
We hope that the concerns and recommendations outlined in the Platform partners’ latest report will be given priority by the Secretariat under your leadership, and through the projects and activities foreseen in the bi-annual Council of Europe programme and budget. To address these concerns, we request you to make available the resources and support needed to give it greater visibility, recognition and impact – both internally and externally to the Council of Europe.
We are convinced that strong and concerted political action from Member States and the Council of Europe is now essential. We request your energetic support against the ongoing impunity for attacks including murders of journalists within Europe, and against widespread attempts to adopt severely restrictive legislation on media regulation, defamation, anti-terrorism that are increasingly used to criminalise journalists.
Anti-media rhetoric is creating a toxic atmosphere for journalists amongst the general public and must be countered. The spread of online disinformation intensifies this effect. We welcome the recent PACE resolution on the rule of law in Malta, which points to the urgent need for effective actions against the politicisation of state institutions, media capture by political forces, and a climate of impunity related to attacks against members of the media.
We call on you to provide your full political support, and necessary resources, to ensure the successful implementation of Recommendation CM/Rec(2016)4, as is specified in the 2018 Steering Committee on Media and Information Society (CDMSI) strategy 2018. It is especially important to us that robust and frank debate on the subject of implementation (including securing firm commitments to national action plans) takes place at the Conference of Ministers responsible for media and information society in Cyprus in May 2020, with the full participation of civil society to pave the way for meaningful actions to reverse the recent negative trends.
We call on you to use your influence on Member States to reform their domestic laws and practices so that they comply with their obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights and CM Recommendation (2016)4, and do everything in your power to improve the safety of journalists through the establishment of effective safeguards.
We thank Thorbjørn Jagland for his efforts in the past years and we are happy to continue to support the Council of Europe with our research and our international networks.
We request a meeting with you soon to discuss these matters in person and to share our knowledge and experience with you as you begin your term of office.
We look forward to your positive response.
Yours sincerely,
Lutz Kinkel, Managing Director, European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
Sarah Clarke, Head of Europe and Central Asia, ARTICLE 19
William Horsley, Special Representative for Media Freedom, Association of European Journalists (AEJ)
Gulnoza Said, Europe and Central Asia program coordinator, Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ)
Daniel Gorman, Director, English PEN
Ricardo Gutiérrez, General Secretary, European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
Leon Willems, Director of Policy and Programmes, Free Press Unlimited (FPU)
Ralf Nestmeyer, Vice-President, German PEN
Bertrand Pecquerie, CEO, Global Editors Network (GEN)
Annie Game, Executive Director, IFEX
Joy Hyvarinen, Head of Advocacy, Index on Censorship
Anthony Bellanger, General Secretary, International Federation of Journalists (IFJ)
Ravi R. Prasad, Director of Advocacy, International Press Institute (IPI)
Ides Debruyne, Managing Director, Journalismfund.eu vzw
Hege Newth, Secretary General, Norwegian PEN
Chiara Sighele, Programme Director, Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT/CCI)
Alberto Spampinato, Director, Ossigeno per l’informazione
Aaliya Ahmed, International Programmes Director, PEN International
Christophe Deloire, Secretary General, Reporters without Borders (RSF)
Oliver Vujovic, Secretary General, South East Europe Media Organisation (SEEMO)
Clothilde Redfern, Director, The Rory Peck Trust
Andrew Heslop, Director, World Association of News Publishers (WAN-IFRA)[/vc_column_text][vc_basic_grid post_type=”post” max_items=”4″ element_width=”6″ grid_id=”vc_gid:1568796322393-650d0cd0-526d-5″ taxonomies=”6534″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
18 Sep 19 | Belarus, Monitoring and Advocating Coverage, News and features
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]On the surface, Belarus is one of the quieter places for journalists – one rarely hears about gruesome violations, physical assaults or murders of media workers in this post-Soviet country. But a lack of horror stories does not mean there is a liberal policy towards the media. In 2017, Belarus scored 83 points out of 100 (100 indicating the least free) in the Freedom of the Press rating compiled by Freedom House, and in 2018 it was ranked 153rd out of 180 countries in the World Press Freedom Index by Reporters Without Borders.
In a country where most media outlets are state-owned, one of the most common ways of interfering with journalism is the legislation banning foreign media workers and outlets from reporting without state accreditation – Article 22.9 of the Administrative Code. In 2018, the Belarusian Association of Journalists (BAJ) recorded 118 fines imposed on freelance journalists collaborating with foreign media without accreditation, totalling €43,000.
No outlet faced the consequences of this policy like Belsat TV.[/vc_column_text][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/4″][vc_icon icon_fontawesome=”fa fa-times” color=”black” background_style=”rounded” size=”xl” align=”right”][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”3/4″][vc_column_text]Index on Censorship’s Monitoring and Advocating for Media Freedom project documents, analyses, and publicises threats, limitations and violations related to media freedom in Azerbaijan, Belarus, Russia, Turkey and Ukraine, in order to identify opportunities for advancing media freedom in these countries. The project collects, analyses and publicises limitations, threats and violations that affect journalists as they do their jobs. Its staff also advocate for greater press freedom in these countries and raises alerts at the international level.
The project builds on Index on Censorship’s 4.5 years monitoring media freedom in 43 European countries, as part of Mapping Media Freedom platform.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_column_text]
The curious case of Belsat TV
“In the spring of 2017, Belsat TV contributors have been repeatedly arrested, tried and heavily fined for covering the protests. The total amount of fines reached $9,000. In addition, our journalists spent more than 30 days in prison,” states the channel’s website.
The tensions between the office of Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko and the Poland-based, Belarus-centred Belsat TV date back to its founding in 2007. Lukashenko had called it a “stupid, uncongenial and unfriendly project” even before it launched. The independent media outlet is sponsored by the Polish government, and is owned by public broadcasting corporation Telewizja Polska.
As the channel’s website outlines: “Its original content is prepared by more than 100 associates from all over Belarus supported by around 80 editors, managers and technicians in Warsaw.”
The “associates” in question are independently-minded Belarusian journalists whose work is hindered by the restrictive state legislation. Belsat TV is not accredited or recognised in the country, and neither are any of its correspondents and stringers. The Belarusian Ministry of Foreign Affairs has repeatedly declined to accredit the outlet, prompting its journalists to do partisan work. The state punishes them with repeated fines, with no limit on how many times a single journalist can be punished.
“The definition of accreditation in Article 1(1) of the Law on Mass Media is as follows: ‘The confirmation of the right of a mass medium’s journalists to cover events organised by state bodies, political parties, other public associations, other legal persons as well as other events taking place in the territory of the Republic of Belarus and outside it’,” said BAJ law expert Volha Siakhovich.
In practice, she explains, the law blocks freelance journalists and independent media outlets from covering the activities of the government and makes accreditation a requisite for a career in journalism. Although refusing accreditation does not equal a total ban on a journalist’s professional activities, it creates obstacles for accessing information. This discriminatory structure is especially acute for freelance journalists and those who work for independent media outlets.
“Article 35(4) of the Law on Mass Media prohibits the activities of foreign journalists in Belarus without accreditation of the Foreign Ministry,” she said. “As Belarusian authorities are unable to control foreign media, they aim to control Belarusian citizens contributing to them. Their aim is to punish and intimidate in order to show that they are under their control at any given time.
“Under Article 22.9, the courts can rule that journalistic activity without accreditation equals ‘illegal production and/or distribution of media content’. The reason for prosecuting journalists for this offence is not the content of their work but that they were published through foreign media.”
And she added: “[When] freelancers are gathering information while filming or interviewing people, they can be detained and accused under Article 22.9. Police officers file reports against freelance journalists and send them to the court. In such cases, the usual evidence is the testimony of the police officers who detained the journalists, and of the people interviewed by the journalists. Then the judges sentence the accused to pay a fine. It’s not unusual if the fine exceeds an average monthly wage in the country [which is about €400].”[/vc_column_text][vc_column_text]
Case studies
Here are some of the incidents recorded by Index on Censorship between February and July 2019.
Ales Lyauchuk and Milana Kharytonava
On 31 May, a judge in the Maskouski district of Brest fined journalists Ales Lyauchuk and Milana Kharytonava for “illegal production and distribution of media content”. They were contributing to Belsat TV, covering the ongoing protests against the construction and launch of the iPower battery plant in the city. They were tried in absentia, and learned about the fines only upon returning from their holiday. They had to pay 1,020 Belarusian rubles each (about $1,000 in total).
This wasn’t the first time Lyauchuk and Kharytonava got fined this year. On 21 March, a judge fined them 2,250 Belarusian rubles (about $1,100). The pair had been repeatedly spotted covering protests against the same factory near Brest and interviewing local people, and the trial was based on reports filed by police.
“The materials of the case did not include information about the exact time of our being in the square, no names of people whom we had interviewed; there were no witnesses but, still, we have got a fine of 2,550 rubles,” Lyauchuk told his colleagues at Belsat TV.
On 18 April, the journalists were fined 1,275 Belarusian rubles (about $600) each, also for co-operating with Belsat TV without accreditation. The story they filmed was about the forgotten village of Veluyn, cut off from Brest by a lack of roads and public transportation.
In all, they were fined six times in 2018.
On 15 May, the trial of independent journalists Alena Shabunia and Viachaslau Lazarau took place in Navapolatsk. A judge found both journalists guilty of “illegal production and distribution of media content” under Article 22.9 and fined them 637.5 Belarusian rubles (over $300) each. The case was built around a video of an accident at the Polimir Navapolatsk plant that was broadcast on Belsat TV – the team interviewed worker Andrei Shvilpo, who saved his colleagues but was later convicted of causing harm to production.
Viktar Stukau, head of the Polatsk-Navapolatsk BAJ branch, told online outlet Charter27: “What these journalists did was the usual work of journalists. Moreover, according to our constitution, any person can create such materials, since everyone has a camera in a pocket, and can send them to social networks or to some mass media, Belarusian or foreign. How is it possible to prohibit this?”
On 30 April, Andrei Tolchyn, a Homel-based freelance journalist, was taken to court in connection with four unpaid fines. He was informed that his bank account had been frozen and he would have 10 days to pay the fines to regain access. The hefty fines for “illegal production of media content” came as a result of his unaccredited work for Belsat. The fines totalled 3,200 Belarusian rubles ($1,523). Tolchyn’s account was unblocked after he paid the fines but, in May, he filed a complaint with the UN Human Rights Committee.
Tolchyn used to work with Konstantin Zhukovsky, producing video stories and publishing them on YouTube. Their content was used by a variety of media outlets, including Belsat, so the courts applied Article 22.9 and the journalists were hit with mounting fines. As a result, Zhukovsky and his family left the country in January this year.
On 15 April, a freelance journalist from Hlybokaye, Zmitser Lupach, stood trial in the Sharkaushchyna district court for contributing to Belsat TV without accreditation. A judge imposed a fine of 892.5 Belarusian rubles (about $440) over a news story about the economic situation and low salaries in the district. This was the second time Lupach was fined in a month: on 11 April, the same court fined him 1,020 Belarusian rubles ($485).
He was tried under Article 22.9 (illegal production and/or distribution of media content) and Article 23.34 (violation of the procedure for organising or conducting mass events).
In the first case, the journalist was punished for his report aired on Belsat TV; in the second, for raising a white-red-white flag during Freedom Day, the anniversary of the Belarusian People’s Republic.
Lupach was also tried on 21 February for a story aired on Belsat TV about the monument erected in honour of the Komsomol in Hlybokaye. A judge fined him 892.5 Belarusian rubles (around $430). The previous year, Lupach was in court nine times on the same charges.
On 11 April, a judge in the Leninski district court of Mahiliou fined freelance journalist Alina Skrabunova 1,275 Belarusian rubles ($600). She was found guilty of “participation in the illegal production of media content”, as her video about the opening of an inclusive cafe operated by wheelchair-users had been broadcast on Belsat TV. The police documentation contained the wrong date for the alleged violation and a different charge. However, Skrabunova lost the case.
On 15 March, the Vitsebsk district court found journalist Vitaly Skryl guilty of illegal production and distribution of media content under Article 22.9. He was fined 637.5 Belarusian rubles (about $300) for his video on the closure of an enterprise which was broadcast on Belsat TV. Skryl told Radio Raciyja that he wasn’t surprised by the fine as he’d been fined on a similar charge the year before, for covering the unemployment situation in Orshy.
On 1 February, Ales Kirkevich and Ales Dzianisau were fined 765 Belarusian rubles (about $370) each in the Leninski district court of Hrodna. The charge followed their story titled Historians Exploring the Ancient Hrodna Cellars which was broadcast on Belsat TV. Both journalists were charged with Article 22.9 offences.
However, journalists collaborating with Belsat TV weren’t the only ones who got fined. Bloggers and freelance reporters whose work appeared in foreign or unaccredited media outlets met the same fate.
On 12 April, freelance journalist Yauhen Skrabets was fined 765 Belarusian rubles ($364) in Brest for “production of information content for a foreign media outlet that was not accredited in the Republic of Belarus”.
His article, entitled Activists and Independent Journalists Not Allowed Into the Press Conference at the I-Power Plant, had appeared on the website of Belarusian Radio Racyja, which is based in Poland. Like Belsat, the radio station had been previously denied accreditation by the Belarusian Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
Just a day before, the Leninski district court of Brest reviewed another case against the journalist on similar charges. The police report stated that he “interviewed without accreditation, thus violating the rights and obligations of a foreign media journalist”. As a result, a judge fined him 765 Belarusian rubles ($364). Skrabets insists that he never sent the article in question to Radio Racyja.
The judge assigned to the case, Aliaksandr Semianchuk, also handled the criminal case of the blogger Siarhei Piatrukhin, accused under Part 2 of Article 188 (“Slander”) and Part 2 of Article 189 (“Insult”) of the Criminal Code on 18 April. The criminal case was opened after a request by a police officer over a video on the blogger’s YouTube channel, Narodnyj Reportior, where people accused police officers of violence.
Piatrukhin was fined 9,180 Belarusian rubles ($4,590) and told to pay damages to the four police officers. The bill totalled $8,840, to be paid within a month, and the judge ordered him to pay the legal fees. The blogger also made a written undertaking not to leave the country, and his property was seized until his dues were paid.
But Piatrukhin remained defiant.
“I’m confident that if there wasn’t this case, there would be another one. They are demonstrating that, if they want, they would do anything,” he told Radio Svoboda. “To make me shut up they should at least shoot me. Whatever they do, they can’t hurt me any more. If they exile me, they’d make me a martyr, a star, draw attention to me. Look at how I live – I don’t have a car or anything. So they can go you-know-where with this fine and the compensation to the policemen. I’m not going to pay anything. Let them do whatever they want. Let them ban me from travelling abroad, I don’t care. This is my country, and I’ve never planned to leave it.”
Piatrukhin’s fundraising campaign, which he later launched on the MolaMola website in order to pay the fines, was suspended by the service provider on 5 May. It explained in a letter that “such activity could be seen as an attempt to evade criminal prosecution” and that it didn’t comply with the current Belarusian legislation. He was able to withdraw the money collected up until that date.
On 12 February, a judge in the Biaroza district court fined blogger Aliaksandr Kabanau 510 Belarusian rubles ($245) for failing to comply with the ruling of the Brest Economic Court. He was found guilty of damaging the reputation of a battery plant being built near Brest in his video published on YouTube. The court decided that Kabanau must remove the video – Lead Will End Up with Brest – from the platform, and publish an apology letter written on his behalf by the battery plant management. Kabanau refused to apologise, and the video has not been removed.[/vc_column_text][vc_column_text]
Andrei Bastunets, head of BAJ
The persecution of freelance journalists collaborating with foreign media began in 2014. This was not due to a change in legislation, but the police and the courts began to apply Article 22.9 in order to fine journalists for “illegal production and/or distribution of media products”.
The most difficult period was 2018, when the persecution intensified sharply. Before this, journalists of various foreign publications were fined. This year, it was only Belsat and Radio Rasyja.
Since the beginning of 2019, 38 fines have been imposed. The most recent penalty was on 31 May but, since then, the application of Article 22.9 has been suspended. Perhaps this is because Belarus is hosting the European Games and there are approaching elections. Usually, temporary “liberalisation” occurs before elections in the hope of a more favourable assessment by the international community. The degree of pressure on journalists is, in principle, determined by the political situation in the country.
By penalising freelance journalists for collaborating with foreign media, Belarus violates its international obligations – in particular, Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The Belarusian Association of Journalists is in favour of lifting the ban on the activities of foreign journalists without accreditation.[/vc_column_text][vc_column_text]
Blocked Access
The second most common category of press freedom violation in Belarus this year is blocked access, as recorded by the Monitoring Media Freedom project. Cases range from denying accreditation for political events to journalists being detained prior to mass protests.
In Brest, blogger Aliaksandr Kabanau was detained by riot police in February as he left fellow blogger Siarhei Piatrukhin’s apartment.
The detention occurred just before the start of one of the weekly protests against the construction of a battery factory near Brest that have been taking place every Sunday for a year. Kabanau was released soon after the protest ended.
On 26 May, Piatrukhin was detained by Brest police on a flimsy pretext shortly before the start of an ecological protest. He was held for an hour.
On 9 July, police detained Belsat TV journalist Ihar Kuley and camera crew Syarhei Kavaliou and Maksim Harchanok, who were filming an episode of the programme Belsat Near You at the local market in Hantsavichy, in the Brest region. Officers told them to go to the police station, claiming they were not allowed to film there, and forced them to turn off their cameras. After the police got explanations, the journalists were released.
No journalists were allowed at the meeting held between Anatol Lis, the head of the Brest regional government, and environmental protesters on 12 June, despite the fact that three independent journalists had been included in the list of participants. Audio recording and photography during the meeting were banned.
The management of the iPower battery plant held a press conference on 11 June, but did not allow the majority of independent media representatives and bloggers regularly covering the protests and events connected with this plant to enter.
On 7 June, a Brestskaya Gazeta journalist was told she could not enter a new court building after its inauguration, citing her lack of accreditation.
The foreign ministry officer told Hrodna journalist Victar Parfionenka in a telephone conversation on 14 May that he had again been denied accreditation.
Parfionenka has been contributing to Radio Racyja for 10 years. Every year he appeals to the Belarusian Ministry of Foreign Affairs for accreditation as a foreign correspondent and always gets rejected.
On 18 April, journalists for news website TUT.BY,news agency BelaPAN, newspaper Belorusy I Rynok and European Radio for Belarus were denied accreditation to cover the annual address by Alexander Lukashenko to the National Assembly the following day.
This was despite two of them – BelaPAN’s Tattyana Karavenkova and Zmitser Lukashuk, special correspondent for European Radio for Belarus – having permanent accreditation in the parliament.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_custom_heading text=”Monitoring and Advocating for Media Freedom” font_container=”tag:h3|text_align:left” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/4″][vc_icon icon_fontawesome=”fa fa-times” color=”black” background_style=”rounded” size=”xl” align=”right”][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”3/4″][vc_column_text]Index on Censorship’s Monitoring and Advocating for Media Freedom project documents, analyses, and publicises threats, limitations and violations related to media freedom in Azerbaijan, Belarus, Russia, Turkey and Ukraine, in order to identify possible opportunities for advancing media freedom in these countries.
The project collects, analyses and publicises limitations, threats and violations that affect journalists as they do their job, and advocates for greater press freedom in these countries and raises alerts at the international level.
The project builds on Index on Censorship’s 4.5 years monitoring media freedom in 43 European countries, as part of Mapping Media Freedom platform.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][three_column_post title=”Incidents by month: Belarus” full_width_heading=”true” category_id=”34498″][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_custom_heading text=”Press Freedom Violations in Azerbaijan” font_container=”tag:h3|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_column_text]
Number and types of incidents recorded between 1 February and 31 August 2019
Incidents can be in more than one category.
[/vc_column_text][vc_row_inner css=”.vc_custom_1558428123542{background-color: #f4f4f4 !important;}”][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
0
Death/Killing
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
1
Physical Assault/Injury
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
10
Arrest/Detention/Interrogation
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
16
Criminal Charges/Fines/Sentences
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
1
Intimidation
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
20
Blocked Access
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_row_inner css=”.vc_custom_1558428157046{background-color: #f4f4f4 !important;}”][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
5
Attack to Property
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
0
Subpoena/Court Order/Lawsuits
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
5
Legal Measures/Legislation
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
2
Offine Harassment
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
2
Online Harassment
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
0
DDoS/Hacking/Doxing
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_row_inner css=”.vc_custom_1558428169374{background-color: #f4f4f4 !important;}”][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
2
Censorship
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
46
Total
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_separator][vc_column_text]
Source of the incidents recorded between 1 February and 31 August 2019
[/vc_column_text][vc_row_inner css=”.vc_custom_1558428178637{background-color: #f4f4f4 !important;}”][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
1
Employer/Publisher/Colleague(s)
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
26
Police/State Security
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
0
Private Security
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
14
Court/Judicial
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
15
Government official(s)/State Agency/Political Party
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
1
Corporation
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_row_inner css=”.vc_custom_1558428186205{background-color: #f4f4f4 !important;}”][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
2
Known private individual(s)
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
0
Another Media Outlet
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
0
Criminal Organisation
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
0
Unknown
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][/vc_column][/vc_row]
17 Sep 19 | Turkey, Turkey Incident Reports
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
Index on Censorship’s Monitoring and Advocating for Media Freedom project tracks press freedom violations in five countries: Azerbaijan, Belarus, Russia, Turkey and Ukraine. Learn more.
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_custom_heading text=”18 Incidents” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_column_text]
BirGün journalists to stand trial for news coverage
30 August 2019 – Four journalists from BirGün daily — İbrahim Aydın, Barış İnce, Can Uğur and Bülent Yılmaz — were charged with “aiding a terrorist organization without being its member” in a new indictment. The accusation stems from the journalists’ reporting about posts from before the year 2016 by the Twitter account that used the pseudonym “Fuat Avni,” Bianet reported.
The 16-page indictment was recently accepted by the 32nd High Criminal Court of Istanbul, which will be overseeing the case. The indictment claims that the newspaper’s reporting about “Fuat Avni” helped “Fethullahist Terrorist Organization (FETÖ/PDY)” in their attempts to manipulate public opinion.
Link(s):
http://bianet.org/bianet/ifade-ozgurlugu/212463-birgun-gazetesine-algi-operasyonu-davasi
https://ahvalnews.com/turkish-journalism/turkish-journalists-face-legal-action-years-old-reports-tweets-whistleblower
Categories: Criminal Charges / Fines / Sentences
Source of violation: Court / Judicial
UPDATE: Journalist Mehmet Baransu ordered to remain behind bars at end of 21st hearing
Mehmet Baransu
29 August 2019 – The trial of former executives of the shuttered Taraf daily and reporter Mehmet Baransu for allegedly publishing a secret military document called the “Egemen Operation Plan” resumed on 27 August 2019 at the 13th High Criminal Court of Istanbul, P24 reported.
Baransu, the only jailed defendant in the case, who was brought to the courtroom from the Silivri Prison accompanied by gendarmerie, continued presenting his defense statement on the first day of the hearing, which was planned to continue for three days.
Taraf’s former executives Ahmet Altan, Yasemin Çongar and Yıldıray Oğur were not in attendance because they are exempt from personal appearance in court. The hearing scheduled for 28 August did not take place because the court failed to send a summons to the Silivri Prison for Baransu to be brought to the courthouse.
Baransu continued making his defense statement on the third day of the hearing on 29 August. In its interim ruling at the end of that hearing, the court ordered the continuation of Mehmet Baransu’s detention on remand on the grounds of “the nature and type of the alleged crime” and because he “has still not completed his defense statement.” The court set 10-11-12 December 2019 as the dates for the next hearing.
Link(s):
https://twitter.com/P24DavaTakip/status/1166239774442700800?s=20
Categories: Criminal Charges / Fines / Sentences
Source of violation: Court / Judicial
DHA reporter Ümit Uzun briefly detained
29 August 2019 – Ümit Uzun, a reporter for Demirören News Agency (DHA), was taken into custody in Istanbul as he was covering a news story for the agency.
Uzun was arrested and handcuffed behind his back as he was interviewing the owner of a store in the Gaziosmanpaşa district, where a car crashed into. The grounds for Uzun’s arrest was “disrupting the scene of the accident.” Uzun was released after interrogation. After being released, the journalist filed a complaint with the Public Prosecutor’s Office about the officers who arrested him.
Link(s):
https://tele1.com.tr/dha-muhabirine-ters-kelepce-ile-gozaltina-alindi-80231/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dpH1hElhuI
http://bianet.org/english/human-rights/212451-journalist-handcuffed-behind-the-back-during-news-follow-up
Categories: Criminal Charges / Fines / Sentences
Source of violation: Court / Judicial
Local reporter injured by gunshot in Turkey’s Balıkesir
29 August 2019 – A local reporter in Turkey’s western town of Balıkesir was wounded by a gunshot on his foot fired by two unidentified assailants in front of his home in the early hours of 29 August.
Levent Uysal, who was the owner and publisher of the local newspaper Balıkesir Yenigün which recently closed down due to economic reasons, was taken to the hospital following the attack.
Uysal said the assault occurred around 1 a.m. at night. Two unidentified people wearing helmets approached him to ask for an address and fired six gunshots before taking off on motorcycles, he said.
The journalist said the police had obtained footage showing the assailants performing surveillance nearby his house a few days ahead of the attack. He added that he thought the attack was organized. “I’m not involved in any vendettas or inheritance dispute. I’ve recently made reports that disturbed and disfavored some [individuals],” he told local media according to DW Turkish. “I think that [the assailants] were instigated by them,” he said requesting from officials a thorough investigation into the case.
Uysal explained his reports were looking to shed light on the favors granted by high officials of the Balıkesir Metropolitan Municipality to their relatives as well as the establishment of new cliques in local institutions. “Questioning and monitoring those who work to serve the public is my task. If [my reports] contain errors or slanders I am ready to be held accountable of it,” he said. No trial or criminal investigation was launched for his reporting so far, Uysal said.
He also said he had to stop printing his newspaper and added that it was impossible for local media to survive without the support of local institutions.
The attack against Uysal came after a wave of attacks targeting journalists, including local reporters, during a heated local elections campaign. The attack was condemned by Balıkesir Journalists’ Association, Reporters Without Borders and the OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media.
Link(s):
https://www.dw.com/tr/gazeteci-uysal-haberlerim-nedeniyle-sald%C4%B1r%C4%B1ya-u%C4%9Frad%C4%B1m/a-50264071
https://www.tv100.com/balikesirde-levent-uysala-silahli-saldiri-haber-467190
https://www.haberturk.com/balikesir-haberleri/71443855-gazeteci-uysala-silahli-saldiri
Categories: Physical Assault / Injury
Source of violation: Unknown
UPDATE: Journalists arrested in Mardin released after police interrogation
26 August 2019 – Mezopotamya news agency (MA) reporters Ahmet Kanbal and Mehmet Şah Oruç, JinNews reporter Rojda Aydın and journalists Nurcan Yalçın and Halime Parlak, who were arrested in Mardin on 20 August 2019, were released late on 26 August after giving their statements at the Mardin Police Department, Mezoptamya news agency reported.
All five journalists were arrested as they were covering demonstrations in Mardin in protest of the government’s recent removal of the mayors of Mardin, Diyarbakır and Van from office. They were held in custody for six days before being released. During police interrogation, all five were asked what they were doing on the scene of the protests. Oruç said after they were released that they were handcuffed behind their back while they were being arrested. The journalists also said in a statement that they were subjected to strip searches at the police department.
Reporter Yelda Özbek, who was arrested the same day in Diyarbakır, was released from custody on 21 August. The detention period of the five journalists under arrest in Mardin was extended for four more days on 23 August.
Link(s):
http://mezopotamyaajansi20.com/tum-haberler/content/view/67136?page=4
https://www.dw.com/tr/adil-demircinin-yurt-d%C4%B1%C5%9F%C4%B1-yasa%C4%9F%C4%B1-kald%C4%B1r%C4%B1ld%C4%B1/a-49218483
https://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/adil-demirci-darf-offenbar-die-tuerkei-verlassen-a-1272830.html
Categories: Arrest / Detention / Interrogation
Source of violation: Police / State security
UPDATE: Journalists arrested in Diyarbakır released after seven days in custody
26 August 2019 – Tümen Anlı, the press and media relations officer for the Democratic Society Congress (DTK), and Vedat Dağ, the press relations officer for the Diyarbakır branch of People’s Democratic Party (HDP) were released under judicial control measures by a court on 26 August after spending seven days in custody. They were both arrested as part of operations on the heels of the government’s removal of the mayors of Diyarbakır, Mardin and Van from office late on 18 August.
Dağ said all 16 questions he was asked during his interrogation at the police department were about why he attended press statements by the HDP. Ziyan Karahan, an editor for the Mezopotamya news agency who was arrested as part of the same operation, was released on 22 August. Anlı and Dağ’s custody period was extended until 26 August.
Link(s):
http://mezopotamyaajansi20.com/tum-haberler/content/view/67503
Categories: Arrest / Detention / Interrogation
Source of violation: Police / State security
Evrensel writer Ayşegül Tözeren released kept three days in custody
23 August 2019 – Ayşegül Tözeren, a medical doctor, writer, literary critic and a columnist for Evrensel daily, was taken into custody on 20 August 2019 during a midnight police raid on her Istanbul home.
The raid was conducted on the grounds of an anonymous “tip-off,” daily Evrensel reported. Tözeren was barred from seeing her lawyer during the first 24-hour period of her detention.
After having been held in custody for three days, Tözeren was brought to the Istanbul Courthouse on 23 August. The prosecutor investigating her file referred her to court for release under judicial control measures, without taking her statement. The 4th Istanbul Criminal Judgeship of Peace ruled to release Tözeren under an international travel ban. The court minutes showed that Tözeren is a suspect in an ongoing investigation launched for “membership in a terrorist organization.”
Link(s):
https://www.evrensel.net/haber/385154/yazarimiz-edebiyatci-aysegul-tozeren-gozaltina-alindi
https://medyascope.tv/2019/08/20/edebiyatci-aysegul-tozeren-gozaltina-alindi/
https://www.dw.com/tr/ay%C5%9Feg%C3%BCl-t%C3%B6zeren-serbest-b%C4%B1rak%C4%B1ld%C4%B1/a-50140785
Categories: Arrest / Detention / Interrogation
Source of violation: Police / State security
Two journalists briefly arrested in relation with protests, charged by court
23 August 2019 – Taylan Özgür Öztaş, a reporter for Özgür Gelecek newspaper, was arrested on 22 August 2019 in a midnight police raid on his home in Istanbul, P24 reported. He was arrested based on the claim that he took part in a demonstration on 20 August in Kadıköy in protest of the government-appointed trustees of Diyarbakır, Mardin and Van.
Another Istanbul-based journalist, Tunahan Turhan, a reporter for the Etkin news agency (ETHA), was also taken into custody in Istanbul on 22 August. Turhan was detained following a criminal record check by the police in Kadıköy. The reporter was in Kadıköy to cover a demonstration by the HDP’s local branch in protest of the removal of Diyarbakır, Mardin and Van mayors from office.
Both Öztaş and Turhan were brought to the Anatolian Courthouse on Istanbul’s Asian side on 23 August. There, they first gave their statements to a prosecutor, who referred both journalists to a court for release. The court released both journalists under judicial control measures.
Link(s):
https://tele1.com.tr/istanbulda-ev-baskinlari-ozgur-gelecek-muhabiri-taylan-oztasin-aralarinda-bulundugu-8-kisi-gozaltina-alindi-78226/
https://ilerihaber.org/icerik/besiktasta-kadinlarin-kayyumlara-karsi-yaptigi-eyleme-polis-saldirdi-102486.html
https://gazetekarinca.com/2019/08/istanbulda-ev-baskinlarinda-gozaltina-alinanlar-serbest/
Categories: Physical Assault / Injury
Source of violation: Police / State security
Local journalist Sami Harunlar assaulted in Mersin
23 August 2019 – Mersin-based journalist Sami Harunlar, the owner of the local newspaper Barış (Peace), was attacked by armed assailants near his home in Tarsus, Demirören News Agency reported.
The 58-year-old journalist was injured in the assault carried out by two unidentified men. Harunlar was hospitalized following the incident. Police has launched an investigation into the attack.
Link(s):
http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/gundem/tarsusta-gazeteciye-silahli-saldiri-41310153
https://www.mersinportal.com/tarsus/mersinde-gazeteci-sami-harunlara-silahli-saldiri-h51517.html
http://gazetekarinca.com/2019/08/mersinde-gazeteci-sami-harunlara-silahli-saldiri/
Categories: Physical Assault / Injury
Source of violation: Unknown
Journalist and video activist Oktay İnce briefly detained in İzmir
22 August 2019 – Oktay İnce, a member of the video activist collective Seyri Sokak, was taken into custody on 22 August in Izmir, online news website Gazete Duvar reported. He was arrested along with 26 lawyers from the Izmir Bar Association as he was covering the lawyers’ press statement protesting the removal of Mardin, Diyarbakır and Van mayors from office.
İnce was taken to the Izmir Police Department. He was released the same day after giving his giving his statement at the police department.
Link(s):
https://www.gazeteduvar.com.tr/gundem/2019/08/22/kayyim-protestosunda-26-avukata-gozalti/
https://www.evrensel.net/haber/386132/izmirde-hdpli-vekillerin-kayyum-eylemi-yine-engellendi
https://www.birgun.net/haber/izmir-deki-kayyum-eylemine-polis-saldirisi-26-avukat-gozaltina-alindi-265843
Categories: Arrest / Detention / Interrogation
Source of violation: Court / Judicial
Six journalists arrested while covering protests against government
20 August 2019 – Six journalists were arrested on 20 Auguıst 2019 in Mardin and Diyarbakır as they were covering public demonstrations in both cities in protest of the government’s recent removal of the mayors of Mardin, Diyarbakır and Van from office.
Mezopotamya news agency (MA) reporters Ahmet Kanbal and Mehmet Şah Oruç, Jinnews reporter Rojda Aydın and journalists Nurcan Yalçın and Halime Parlak were arrested in Mardin while reporter Yelda Özbek was arrested in Diyarbakır.
Police dispersed the crowds who gathered in front of Diyarbakır and Mardin municipalities. The reporters were arrested as they were taking pictures of the protesting crowds.
Link(s):
https://www.bbc.com/turkce/live/haberler-turkiye-49381649
https://www.evrensel.net/haber/385164/diyarbakir-mardin-van-istanbul-ve-ankarada-kayyum-eylemlerine-polis-saldirdi
https://www.gazetefersude.net/kayyum-protestolari-mardin-ve-diyarbakirda-6-gazeteci-gozaltina-alindi-70762/
Categories: Arrest / Detention / Interrogation
Source of violation: Court / Judicial
Four journalists arrested in Diyarbakır during police operations
19 August 2019 – Four journalists were taken into custody o9 in Diyarbakır as part of sweeping operations across several cities. The operations followed immediately on the heels of the removal of Diyarbakır, Mardin and Van mayors from office late on 18 August by the government, which appointed trustees to run these three cities.
The Mezopotamya news agency (MA) reported on Monday that Ziyan Karahan, an editor for the agency’s Kurdish edition, was arrested during a raid on her home in Diyarbakır as part of the operations. MA said Karahan was brought to the Diyarbakır Police Department’s anti-terror branch. The grounds for Karahan’s arrest were not immediately disclosed.
Turkish Journalists Union (TGS) Diyarbakır representative Mahmut Oral told P24 that journalist Tümen Anlı, the press and media relations officer for the Democratic Society Congress (DTK), Vedat Dağ, the press relations officer for the Diyarbakır branch of People’s Democratic Party (HDP), and Özgür Ülke, the press relations officer for the local Bismil Municipality, were also taken into custody during Monday’s raids.
The four journalists were among a total of 418 individuals, who also included local HDP politicians and municipal employees, arrested as part of the operations that took place in the early hours of Monday.
Link(s):
http://gazetekarinca.com/2019/08/diyarbakirda-gazeteci-ziyan-karahan-gozaltina-alindi/
https://nupel.net/mezopotamya-editoru-karahan-gozaltina-alindi-41244h.html
Categories: Arrest / Detention / Interrogation
Source of violation: Court / Judicial
Journalist Ergin Çağlar kept four days in custody
20 August 2019 – Journalist Ergin Çağlar, a Mersin-based reporter for Mezopotamya news agency, was arrested on 16 August 2019 at the Mersin Courthouse where he had gone to give his statement as part of an ongoing criminal investigation against him. He was released under judicial control measures by a Mersin court on 20 August after spending four days in custody, Mezopotamya news agency reported.
Çağlar’s apartment in Mersin was raided on 14 August as part of an investigation by the Mersin Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office, which had also issued an arrest warrant for the journalist.
Çağlar was brought to the Mersin Police Department for interrogation after being arrested at the Mersin Courthouse. The journalist is charged with “membership in a terrorist group” and a confidentiality order was in place concerning the investigation.
Link(s):
https://www.evrensel.net/haber/384862/gazeteci-ergin-caglar-serbest-birakildi-2
http://bianet.org/bianet/diger/211932-gazeteci-ergin-caglar-serbest-birakildi
https://gazetekarinca.com/2019/08/gazeteci-ergin-caglar-serbest-birakildi/
Categories: Arrest / Detention / Interrogation
Source of violation: Court / Judicial
PİRHA reporter briefly arrested in Ankara
9 August 2019 – Cebrail Arslan, a reporter for the Pir News Agency (PİRHA) was arrested on 8 August 2019 along with five other people during a raid on his home in Ankara, online news website Gazete Karınca reported.
Arslan and the five other people were released one day after giving their statement. News reports said the six people were questioned in relation to their involvement in protests, called “White Flag,” against the military operations and curfews in civilian areas of the Southeast in 2016,
Link(s):
https://gazetekarinca.com/2019/08/pirha-muhabiri-cebrail-arslan-serbest-birakildi/
https://www.pirha.net/ajans-calisanimiz-cebrail-arslan-gozaltina-alindi-183437.html/08/08/2019/
Categories: Arrest / Detention / Interrogation
Source of violation: Police / State security
UPDATE: Journalist İdris Yılmaz’s trial adjourned
8 August 2019 – A court in the eastern province of Van ruled to keep imprisoned journalist İdris Yılmaz in pre-trial detention, online news website Artı Gerçek reported. The hearing was the first one after two separate cases where he is charged with “membership of a terrorist organization” were merged.
Yılmaz was previously sentenced to 6 years and 3 months in prison but his sentence was overturned by an appellate court, which ordered re-trial. This case was then merged with another ongoing one in which Yılmaz is again charged with “membership of a terrorist organization.” Yılmaz attended the court hearing via court video-conferencing system from a prison in Elazığ further west, where he is held since his arrest.
The court ruled for Yılmaz’s continued pre-trial detention at the end of the hearing and adjourned the trial until 27 September.
Link(s):
https://www.artigercek.com/haberler/gazeteci-yilmaz-pkk-uyeliginden-ceza-aldi-karar-bylock-olarak-cikti
https://www.gazetefersude.net/tutuklu-gazeteci-idris-yilmaz-kuskusuz-tarih-ozgur-kalemlerin-karanliklari-aydinlatmak-ugruna-surdurdukleri-mucadeleyi-yazacaktir-69477/
https://twitter.com/ArtiTV_/status/1159821875486367744?s=20
Categories: Criminal Charges / Fines / Sentences
Source of violation: Court / Judicial
Court blocks access to 135 web sources, including Gazete Fersude and ETHA
7 August 2019 – The Ankara 3rd Criminal Judgeship of Peace has ruled for access to a total of 136 websites, web pages and social media accounts.
Among the websites blocked by the decision are those of news portal Gazete Fersude and Etkin News Agency (ETHA). The website geziyisavunuyoruz.org, which follows the trial of Osman Kavala and 15 others facing the charge of “attempting the overthrow the government” for their involvement in the Gezi protests, is also among those that were blocked for allegedly violating Turkey’s Internet law.
The ruling dated 16 July 2019 was rendered in response to a complaint submitted on the same day by the Gendarmerie Command which claimed that the mentioned sites violated Article 8/A of the Law No. 5651, which covers online publication and cyber-crimes.
The law allows judges to order removal of content or block access on one or more of the following grounds: to protect the right of life or security of life and property, to protect national security and public order, to prevent the commission of a crime, or to protect public health.
The ruling to block access to ETHA’s website etha10.com.tr, geziyisavunuyoruz.org and Gazete Fersude’s website gazetefersude.com was implemented following the decision of the Ankara 3rd Criminal Judgeship of Peace. Among the 136 Internet sources that the court ordered banned are websites and social media accounts including numerous Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, Youtube and Pinterest pages.
Details pertaining to the court decision that were obtained by bianet’s lawyer later revealed that bianet.org was erroneously included in the list of URLs to be blocked, although decision remains in effect for 135 other web addresses. Court documents obtained on 7 August by lawyer Meriç Eyüboğlu showed that the complainant Gendarmerie Command had applied to the Ankara 3rd Criminal Judgeship of Peace on 17 July, stating that bianet.org was erroneously included in the list and requesting that the court decision be revised accordingly. The court, in response, issued a decision saying the order to block access to bianet.org was removed while the decision remains valid for the remaining 135 web URLs.
Link(s):
https://bianet.org/1/19/211456-bianet-in-engellenmesi-karari-sehven-135-adres-hala-yasakli
https://www.independentturkish.com/node/59601/medya/jandarma-bianet%E2%80%99-engellenmesi-karar%C4%B1n%C4%B1-%E2%80%98sehven%E2%80%99-talep-etmi%C5%9F
http://gazetekarinca.com/2019/08/135-adres-hala-yasakli-bianetin-engellenmesi-karari-sehven-alinmis/
Categories: Censorship
Source of violation: Court / Judicial
Regulation bringing online broadcasting under TV watchdog’s control goes into effect
1 August 2019 – A regulation that gives Turkey’s radio and television watchdog RTÜK tha authority to supervise content streamed online formally went into effect upon its publication in the Official Gazette.
The regulation, which raised concerns over possible censorship, makes it mandatory for online media content providers to obtain broadcasting licenses and permits from RTÜK, in return for significant sums. It also allows RTÜK to supervise content provided by them and introduce sanctions in case of non-compliance with broadcasting principles.
Streaming platforms like Netflix, local streaming platforms PuhuTV and BluTV will now be subject to RTÜK supervision and potential fines or loss of their license.
In addition to subscription services like Netflix, free online news outlets will also be subject to the same measures. Providers will be required to pay TL 10,000 (around $ 1,800) to get a license to provide radio services while TV and subscription-based service providers will need to pay TL 100,000 (around $ 18,000).
Yaman Akdeniz, a law professor and a cyber rights specialist, said access to the Netflix platform or to news outlets broadcasting from abroad could be blocked. Akdeniz also commented that media outlets such as Turkish services of the BBC or Deutsche Welle, which have emerged as sources of news not subject to government control over the past years, were possible intended targets of the regulation.
Kerem Altıparmak, a human rights lawyer, said the move was the “biggest step in Turkish censorship history” and said all outlets producing opposition news would be affected. “Everyone who produces alternative news and broadcasts will be impacted by this regulation,” Altıparmak wrote on Twitter. “Every news report that can be against the government will be taken under control.”
Link(s):
http://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2019/08/20190801-5.htm
https://www.dw.com/tr/internet-televizyonlar%C4%B1na-rt%C3%BCk-denetimi-geldi/a-49841223
https://www.bbc.com/turkce/haberler-turkiye-49193378
https://bianet.org/1/13/211163-internetten-yayinlar-rtuk-denetimine-alindi
Categories: Legal Measures
Source of violation: Government / State Agency / Public official(s) / Political party
Online news websites T24 and Diken face terrorism investigation
1 August 2019 – The Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office launched an investigation against a group of media outlets, including independent news websites T24 and Diken, on the charge of “supporting a terrorist group without being its member.” Both websites are under scrutiny for reporting on Twitter posts of an anonymous account called “Fuat Avni” nearly five years ago.
T24 reported that the investigation was subject to a confidentiality order and that it was not clear what media outlets other than T24 and Diken were involved. It said editors and executives of T24 who worked there in 2014-2016 were summoned by the Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office to give statements as part of the investigation.
Those summoned were asked questions on why they reported on “Fuat Avni” tweets, who prepared the reports and whether they had received any instructions to report on the tweets.
The account under the “Fuat Avni” nickname, which has since been deactivated, shared alleged inside information on secret dealings of then Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and other government members.
Link(s):
https://t24.com.tr/haber/t-24-ve-diken-in-de-aralarinda-bulundugu-bir-grup-siteye-fuat-avni-tweetlerini-neden-haber-yaptiniz-sorusturmasi,833117
https://www.independentturkish.com/node/57451/haber/t24-ve-dikene-fuat-avni-tweetlerini-haberle%C5%9Ftirdi%C4%9Fi-i%C3%A7in-fet%C3%B6-soru%C5%9Fturmas%C4%B1
https://www.birgun.net/haber/t24-ve-diken-e-fuat-avni-sorusturmasi-263707
Categories: Criminal Charges / Fines / Sentences
Source of violation: Court / Judicial[/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:1568735643507-01eb7ae9-5ff4-2″ taxonomies=”35195″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
17 Sep 19 | Campaigns -- Featured, Northern Ireland, Statements
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]Index on Censorship condemns Ian Paisely MP’s attack on News Letter journalist Sam McBride and calls on parliamentarians to uphold and support the tenets of media freedom.
“Everyone has the right to disagree with a journalist’s analysis, but attacks on a journalist’s character and on their family are completely unacceptable”, said Jessica Ní Mhainín, policy research and advocacy officer at Index on Censorship. “Elected representatives like Mr Paisely, should know that such attacks can undermine media freedom, which is essential to our democracy.”
“We have filed an alert with the Council of Europe’s Platform to promote the protection of journalism. We call on all public representatives to support in the creation of a safe and enabling environment for journalists to work without fear of attacks, intimidation or interference.”[/vc_column_text][vc_basic_grid post_type=”post” max_items=”4″ element_width=”6″ grid_id=”vc_gid:1568729859706-eab009cf-e0c8-6″ taxonomies=”6534″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
17 Sep 19 | Magazine, News and features, Volume 48.03 Autumn 2019
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_video link=”https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ewRjZoRtu0Y&list=PLlUhPA3TuB56RH9Ly-mqvPHDVBHZ42gyL&index=3&t=0s”][vc_column_text]
Borders – not so great for free speech, but not so bad for music it turns out. This is the theme of our latest playlist, which ties in with the autumn 2019 Index on Censorship magazine. The magazine looks at how borders stop the flow of information, movement and speech, whether you be a South Korean wanting to be in touch with your loved ones in the north or an artist being denied a visa to perform in the UK. And we highlight how this trend is getting worse, specifically how border officials are demanding access to individuals’ social media accounts at frontiers around the world.
Enjoy the below songs. Just remember to be vigilant when crossing state lines. In fact for tips on how to keep your personal information just that – personal – click here.
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
British-Sri Lankan rapper M.I.A has made a name for herself exploring the trials of life as a refugee through her music. The Sri Lankan government previously accused M.I.A of being a liar, while her song Paper Planes is inspired by her difficulties obtaining a visa to work in the USA, a problem Jan Fox highlights in her article. Despite her own trials she has stayed vigilant and continues to use her voice to call for political change.
“Every move you make, every step you take, I’ll be watching you,” sings Sting in the 1983 classic by English rock band The Police. His lyrics bare a striking resemblance to the theme of this issue, in which we reveal the extent to which border forces are snooping into your own personal information and data. Ela Stapley gives advice on what you can do to keep your information safe when crossing borders.
Australian electronic rock band Icehouse take you to a border crossing in their hit song from their album Measure for Measure. Against edgy beats and a dreamy synth, lead singer Iva Davies talks about walls standing still and freedom fading away, specifically at the border. It’s musical escapism on many levels.
Also known as Coming to America, this song written and performed by the legendary musician Neil Diamond in 1980 presents a positive depiction of immigrating to the USA. Flash forward to the USA of 2019 and Diamond might struggle to muster as much optimism. The increasing difficulties people face when trying to enter the USA are detailed in Mexican-based journalist Stephen Woodman’s article for the magazine.
Elton John tries to break down barriers – cultural, sexual – in this 1981 single. His lyrics have many connotations, with some alluding to his identity as a homosexual man and having to build a wall around his heart “to keep the pain away”. Unfortunately this is still the case for many LGBT people, who are having to hide their sexuality when crossing borders, something Mark Frary highlights in magazine piece “Hiding your true self”.
This signature song from The Doors illuminates the beauty of breaking on through to the other side. What that other side is has never been clarified, although given the drug references throughout the song it is probably safe to assume this is about psychedelic experiences. Drug references aside, the song’s lines about a country with “arms that chained us” and “eyes that lied” have universal implications that reverberate throughout the current issue.
A track that captures the tensions of 1969, when the war in Vietnam was intensifying and the threat of nuclear devastation from the Soviet Union painted a bleak future for the world. The desire to seek shelter is no less relevant today than it was when the Stones wrote this song. And it’s still inspiring art, as Irene Caselli shows in her article on artists trying to tell the stories of migrants in the Mediterranean.
It’s exactly what you think the song is about: a big two-fingered salute to the system. The politically charged lyrics express how the government gets to decide what is acceptable and what is not, just like some governments do today within a country and at its borders. Turkish contributing editor Kaya Genç reports on how travellers to Turkey are being restricted in what they can take into the country and what they can read. Wikipedia? Forget about it.
In this haunting track from Snow Patrol, lead vocalist Gary Lightbody and featured artist Martha Wainwright sing about being miles from their loved one and the pain that comes with such separation. It’s a feeling that is all too familiar for those in South Korea who have had their relationships and families torn apart by the North and South border, and who can face prison if they try to get in touch with them, as Steven Borowiec reports.
This choice is less about the song than the singer. Mozambique-musician Wazimbo is one of many artists who have had their UK visas denied this year. He was forced to pull out of an appearance at Peter Gabriel’s Womad Festival back in July as a result. Charlotte Bailey discusses Wazimbo in the magazine as she looks at how UK border policy is forcing artists to stop visiting the country, and how the UK’s cultural scene is losing out as a result.
[/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:1568990225205-426f193c-fdf1-1″ taxonomies=”7819″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
17 Sep 19 | Artistic Freedom, News and features
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
When Dave Connis worked in his local library in Tennessee, contentious books would frequently disappear. They would, he told Index, just “never come back” and instead be “lost” to the world.
Connis’ experience of books being censored is one of the main inspirations behind his forthcoming novel. Now an author of the young adult book The Temptation of Adam and a contributor to the YA anthology Welcome Home, his latest novel follows a girl who goes to a private school in Tennessee, which bans 50+ books, from Clockwork Orange to Captain Underpants. In protest, she decides to launch an underground library in her locker.
Suggested Reading will be released this September as part of Banned Books Week, a global campaign for readers of all ages who want to celebrate their freedom to read.
Connis is not alone in his experience of books being stolen or removed from the public domain. Last year, the American Library Association reported that Jay Asher’s Thirteen Reasons Why had been banned in multiple school districts because it discusses suicide; The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian by Sherman Alexie was consistently challenged because it addresses poverty, alcoholism and sexuality; and the classic The Kite Runner by Khaled Hosseini was banned because it references sexual violence and was thought to promote terrorism. There were 483 books challenged or banned in total in the USA in 2018 alone.
Connis’ latest book was also influenced by a question posed by a teenager on Yahoo Answers, which asked if it was wrong to run a banned books library in her locker.
“Most questions about censorship of books aren’t actually questions about censorship of books,” Connis told Index, explaining how it is more about questioning the motives of society as a whole, and how we approach controversial ideas, often wanting to reject the ideas of those who do not think like ourselves.
“We need to approach these sorts of censorship questions framed in our modern context. And I think that question is not about the book, but how do we keep people from hurting people?”
Connis believes that, when we ask this question instead, we are lead to a more productive discussion. “How do we ethically shape what someone believes to include that all humans have value, worth, and dignity so that these beliefs will define their actions? ”
Connis believes one of the reasons censorship arises is because humans don’t learn from the mistakes of their past and are constantly defining what is right and wrong on their own terms. “This problem and lack of acceptance towards those who we deem different to us might only grow with globalisation.
“As long as justice is applied without mercy, and as long as people are forced to believe something they don’t really believe, I think we will be constantly fighting about who should or shouldn’t do what, or say what.”
Being open to new ideas is key, said Connis. “I think this is where personal seeking of knowledge, expanding our minds and challenging ourselves becomes so crucial.”[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_custom_heading text=”Banned Books Week / 22-28 Sept 2019″ use_theme_fonts=”yes” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.bannedbooksweek.org.uk%2F|||”][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/4″][vc_single_image image=”103109″ img_size=”full” onclick=”custom_link” link=”https://www.bannedbooksweek.org.uk/”][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”3/4″][vc_column_text]
Banned Books Week UK is a nationwide campaign for radical readers and rebellious readers of all ages celebrate the freedom to read. Between 22 – 28 September 2019, bookshops, libraries, schools, literary festivals and publishers will be hosting events and making noise about some of the most sordid, subversive, sensational and taboo-busting books around.
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][/vc_column][/vc_row]
16 Sep 19 | Bahrain Letters, Bahrain Statements, Campaigns -- Featured, Statements
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]13 September 2019
H.E. Ali bin Mohammed Al-Rumaihi
Minister of Information Affairs
Email: [email protected]
LETTER TO THE MINISTER OF INFORMATION AFFAIRS
Dear Minister Ali bin Mohammed Al-Rumaih,
We, the undersigned, write to you regarding the case of human rights defender Nabeel Rajab and ask you to consider the request of Mr Rajab’s lawyers to suspend his current sentence.
Mr Rajab is currently serving a five-year sentence related to tweets criticising alleged torture at Jau prison and the actions of the Saudi-led military coalition in Yemen’s civil war.
In recent months, Mr Rajab’s legal team has appealed to the courts to suspend the sentence against him or to convert it to a custodial sentence, or a form of community service, but all their efforts were rejected. A hearing requesting that the Court overturn previous decisions to uphold the sentence will take place on 17 September 2019.
We strongly urge you to support this request for the sentences to be suspended. In particular, we are concerned that Mr Rajab is not being treated according to international standards for prisoners. Mr Rajab is currently being held in a cell in Jau Prison with nine other prisoners who were convicted for prostitution offences. This is contrary to Rule 11c of the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (Nelson Mandela Rules) which states: “The different categories of prisoners shall be kept in separate institutions or parts of institutions taking account of their sex, age, criminal record, the legal reason for their detention and the necessities of their treatment.”
Mr Rajab is a highly regarded human rights defender. He is the President of the Bahrain Center for Human Rights (BCHR), Founding Director of GCHR, Deputy Secretary General of FIDH and a member of the Human Rights Watch Middle East and North Africa Advisory Committee.
His case has been raised repeatedly by the international community. In 2018, the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention called for Mr Rajab’s release and said the convictions were unlawful and violated his freedom of expression. Earlier this month, UK parliamentarians said the UK should be willing to use sanctions against countries that violate international standards on media freedom.
Given this, we urge you to suspend Mr Rajab’s sentence.
Yours sincerely,
Index on Censorship
English PEN
Gulf Center for Human Rights (GCHR)
IFEX
Bahrain Center for Human Rights (BCHR)
Article 19
Americans for Democracy & Human Rights in Bahrain (ADHRB)
European Center for Democracy & Human Rights (ECDHR)
Bahrain Institute for Rights and Democracy (BIRD)
[/vc_column_text][vc_basic_grid post_type=”post” max_items=”4″ element_width=”6″ grid_id=”vc_gid:1568641734656-2808385d-80c1-5″ taxonomies=”3368″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
16 Sep 19 | News and features, Volume 48.03 Autumn 2019
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
Arthur Miller, American playwright (Photo: U.S. Department of State / Wikipedia)
It is always necessary to ask how old a writer is who is reporting his impressions of a social phenomenon. Like the varying depth of a lens, the mind bends the light passing through it quite differently according to its age. When I first experienced Prague in the late 60s, the Russians had only just entered with their armies; writers (almost all of them self-proclaimed Marxists if not Party members) were still unsure of their fate under the new occupation, and when some 30 or 40 of them gathered in the office of Listy to ‘interview’ me, I could smell the apprehension among them. And indeed, many would soon be fleeing abroad, some would be jailed, and others would never again be permitted to publish in their native language. Incredibly, that was almost a decade ago.
But since the first major blow to the equanimity of my mind was the victory of Nazism, first in Germany and later in the rest of Europe, the images I have of repression are inevitably cast in fascist forms. In those times the communist was always the tortured victim, and the Red Army stood as the hope of man, the deliverer. So to put it quite simply, although correctly, I think, the occupation of Czechoslovakia was the physical proof that Marxism was but one more self-delusionery attempt to avoid facing the real nature of power, the primitive corruption by power of those who possess it. In a word, Marxism has turned out to be a form of sentimentalism toward human nature, and this has its funny side. After all, it was initially a probe into the most painful wounds of the capitalist presumptions, it was scientific and analytical.
What the Russians have done in Czechoslovakia is, in effect, to prove in a western cultural environment that what they have called socialism simply cannot tolerate even the most nominal independent scrutiny, let alone an opposition. The critical intelligence itself is not to be borne, and in the birthplace of Kafka and of the absurd in its subtlest expression absurdity emanates from the Russian occupation like some sort of gas which makes one both laugh and cry. Shortly after returning home from my first visit to Prague mentioned above, I happened to meet a Soviet political scientist at a high-level conference where he was a participant representing his country and I was invited to speak at one session to present my views of the impediments to better cultural relations between the two nations. Still depressed by my Czech experience, I naturally brought up the invasion of the country as a likely cause for American distrust of the Soviets, as well as the United States aggression in Vietnam from the same detente viewpoint.
That had been in the morning; in the evening at a party for all the conference participants, half of them Americans, I found myself facing this above-mentioned Soviet whose anger was unconcealed. ‘It is amazing,’ he said, ‘that you – especially you as a Jew – should attack our action in Czechoslovakia.’ Normally quite alert to almost any reverberations of the Jewish presence in the political life of our time, I found myself in a state of unaccustomed and total confusion at this remark, and I asked the man to explain the connection. ‘But obviously,’ he said (and his face had gone quite red and he was quite furious now) ‘we have gone in there to protect them from the West German fascists.’
I admit that I was struck dumb. Imagine! The marching of all the Warsaw Pact armies in order to protect the few Jews left in Czechoslovakia! It is rare that one really comes face to face with such fantasy so profoundly believed by a person of intelligence. In the face of this kind of expression all culture seems to crack and collapse; there is no longer a frame of reference.
In fact, the closest thing to it that I could recall were my not infrequent arguments with intelligent supporters or apologists for our Vietnamese invasion. But at this point the analogy ends, for it was always possible during the Vietnam war for Americans opposed to it to make their views heard, and, indeed, it was the widespread opposition to the war which finally made it impossible for President Johnson to continue in office. It certainly was not a simple matter to oppose the war in any significant way, and the civilian casualties of protest were by no means few, and some – like the students at the Kent State College protest – paid with their lives. But what one might call the unofficial underground reality, the version of morals and national interest held by those not in power, was ultimately expressed and able to prevail sufficiently to alter high policy. Even so, it was the longest war ever fought by Americans.
[/vc_column_text][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/4″][vc_icon icon_fontawesome=”fa fa-quote-left” color=”custom” size=”xl” align=”right” custom_color=”#dd3333″][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”3/4″][vc_column_text]
The sin of power is to not only distort reality but to convince people that the false is true, and that what is happening is only an invention of enemies
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_column_text]
Any discussion of the American rationales regarding Vietnam must finally confront something which is uncongenial to both Marxist and anti-Marxist viewpoints, and it is the inevitable pressure, by those holding political power, to distort and falsify the structures of reality. The Marxist, by philosophical conviction, and the bourgeois American politician, by practical witness, both believe at bottom that reality is quite simply the arena into which determined men can enter and reshape just about every kind of relationship in it. The conception of an objective reality which is the summing up of all historical circumstances, as well as the idea of human beings as containers or vessels by which that historical experience defends itself and expresses itself through common sense and unconscious drives, are notions which at best are merely temporary nuisances, incidental obstructions to the wished for remodelling of human nature and the improvements of society which power exists in order to set in place.
The sin of power is to not only distort reality but to convince people that the false is true, and that what is happening is only an invention of enemies. Obviously, the Soviets and their friends in Czechoslovakia are by no means the only ones guilty of this sin, but in other places, especially in the West, it is possible yet for witnesses to reality to come forth and testify to the truth. In Czechoslovakia the whole field is pre-empted by the power itself.
Thus a great many people outside, and among them a great many artists, have felt a deep connection with Czechoslovakia – but precisely because there has been a fear in the West over many generations that the simple right to reply to power is a tenuous thing and is always on the verge of being snipped like a nerve. I have, myself, sat at dinner with a Czech writer and his family in his own home and looked out and seen police sitting in their cars down below, in effect warning my friend that our ‘meeting’ was being observed. I have seen reports in Czech newspapers that a certain writer had emigrated to the West and was no longer willing to live in his own country, when the very same man was sitting across a living-room coffee table from me. And I have also been lied about in America by both private and public liars, by the press and the government, but a road – sometimes merely a narrow path – always remained open before my mind, the belief that I might sensibly attempt to influence people to see what was real and so at least to resist the victory of untruth.
I know what it is to be denied the right to travel outside my country, having been denied my passport for some five years by our Department of State. And I know a little about the inviting temptation to simply get out at any cost, to quit my country in disgust and disillusion, as no small number of people did in the McCarthy 50s and as a long line of Czechs and Slovaks have in these recent years. I also know the empty feeling in the belly at the prospect of trying to learn another nation’s secret language, its gestures and body communications without which a writer is only half-seeing and half-hearing. More important, I know the conflict between recognising the indifference of the people and finally conceding that the salt has indeed lost its savour and that the only sensible attitude toward any people is cynicism.
So that those who have chosen to remain as writers on their native soil despite remorseless pressure to emigrate are, perhaps no less than their oppressors, rather strange and anachronistic figures in this time. After all, it is by no means a heroic epoch now; we in the West as well as in the East understand perfectly well that the political and military spheres – where ‘heroics’ were called for in the past – are now merely expressions of the unmerciful industrial-technological base. As for the very notion of patriotism, it falters before the perfectly obvious interdependence of the nations, as well as the universal prospect of mass obliteration by the atom bomb, the instrument which has doomed us, so to speak, to this lengthy peace between the great powers.
That a group of intellectuals should persist in creating a national literature on their own ground is out of tune with our adaptational proficiency which has flowed from these developments. It is hard anymore to remember whether one is living in Rome or New York, London or Strasbourg, so homogenised has western life become. The persistence of these people may be an inspiration to some but a nuisance to others, and not only inside the oppressing apparatus but in the West as well. For these so-called dissidents are apparently upholding values at a time when the first order of business would seem to be the accretion of capital for technological investment.
It need hardly be said that by no means everybody in the West is in favour of human rights, and western support for eastern dissidents has more hypocritical self-satisfaction in it than one wants to think too much about. Nevertheless, if one has learned anything at all in the past 40 or so years, it is that to struggle for these rights (and without them the accretion of capital is simply the construction of a more modern prison) one has to struggle for them wherever the need arises.
That this struggle also has to take place in socialist systems suggests to me that the fundamental procedure which is creating violations of these rights transcends social systems – a thought anathematic to Marxists but possibly true nevertheless. What may be in place now is precisely a need to erect a new capital structure, be it in Latin America or the Far East or underdeveloped parts of Europe, and just as in the 19th century in America and England it is a process which always breeds injustice and the flaunting of human spiritual demands because it essentially is the sweating of increasing amounts of production and wealth from a labour force surrounded, in effect, by police. The complaining or reforming voice in that era was not exactly encouraged in the United States or England; by corrupting the press and buying whole legislatures, capitalists effectively controlled their opposition, and the struggle of the trade union movement was often waged against firing rifles.
There is of course a difference now, many differences. At least they are supposed to be differences, particularly that the armed force is in the hands of a state calling itself socialist and progressive and scientific, no less pridefully than the 19th-century capitalisms boasted by their Christian ideology and their devotion to the human dimension of political life as announced by the American Bill of Rights and the French Revolution. But the real difference now is the incomparably deeper and more widespread conviction that man’s fate is not ‘realistically’ that of the regimented slave. It may be that despite everything, and totally unannounced and unheralded, a healthy scepticism toward the powerful has at last become second nature to the great mass of people almost everywhere. It may be that history, now, is on the side of those who hopelessly hope and cling to their native ground to claim it for their language and ideals.
The oddest request I ever heard in Czechoslovakia – or anywhere else – was to do what I could to help writers publish their works – but not in French, German or English, the normal desire of sequestered writers cut off from the outside. No, these Czech writers were desperate to see their works in Czech! Somehow this speaks of something far more profound than ‘dissidence’ or any political quantification. There is something like love in it, and in this sense it is a prophetic yearning and demand.
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column width=”1/3″][vc_custom_heading text=”Border forces: How barriers to free thought got tough” font_container=”tag:h3|text_align:left” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.indexoncensorship.org%2Fnewsite02may%2F2019%2F06%2Fmagazine-judged-how-governments-use-power-to-undermine-justice-and-freedom%2F|||”][vc_column_text]The autumn 2019 Index on Censorship magazine looks how governments are using borders to restrict free speech and the flow of ideas[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][vc_column width=”1/3″][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner][vc_single_image image=”108826″ img_size=”full” onclick=”custom_link” link=”https://www.indexoncensorship.org/newsite02may/2019/06/magazine-judged-how-governments-use-power-to-undermine-justice-and-freedom/”][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][/vc_column][vc_column width=”1/3″][vc_custom_heading text=”Subscribe” font_container=”tag:h3|text_align:left”][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner][vc_column_text]In print, online. In your mailbox, on your iPad.
Subscription options from £18 or just £1.49 in the App Store for a digital issue.
Every subscriber helps support Index on Censorship’s projects around the world.
SUBSCRIBE NOW[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][/vc_column][/vc_row]
