31 Jul 2019 | Azerbaijan, Monitoring and Advocating Coverage, News
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_single_image image=”108305″ img_size=”full” add_caption=”yes”][vc_column_text]The morning of 9 April did not promise to be out of the ordinary for Sevinc Osmanqizi, an Azerbaijani journalist based in the suburbs of Washington DC. She started her morning routine by making a fresh pot of coffee and readying her two sons for school. Prior to starting the daily broadcasts of her YouTube-based OsmanqiziTV channel, she checked her messages, which included links sent by friends to a broadcast that had aired a few days earlier on the recently-launched Real TV in Azerbaijan.
The host of the broadcast was all too familiar to Osmanqizi. It was her former colleague Mirshahin Aghayev, known to the TV-viewing public by only his first name. She saw her picture on the studio background monitors, and then heard her own voice. “It was a complete shock,” she said, describing her emotions. “This [was broadcast on] national TV, so why is my voice there, why am I hearing my personal conversation?”
The 9 April 2019 broadcast replayed a series of private voice messages Osmanqizi had exchanged with a media colleague who is in exile in Germany. “My first question was ‘how did they get ahold of it?’ The conversation took place more than a month prior. I was trying to remember the details. I couldn’t remember what platform I had used [to communicate]. This was one of many conversations that I’d had, it was personal,” she said. Some time later, she still seems disturbed by the incident. “I was asking myself, ‘if they have this conversation, what else do they have?’”
As Osmanqizi watched the rest of the broadcast, she grew more anxious. “It contained direct hints that they had more. They ran ads saying so.” In the next two weeks, the situation worsened, she said.
The channel that Aghayev operates, where he hosts his TV show, began airing information she said she had never shared on social media, including photos. Aghayev ominously promised his audience that they would see “much more.” In subsequent broadcasts, Aghayev revealed a series of intimate emails between Osmanqizi and a US-based man who Aghayev claimed was working for US intelligence services. He also insinuated that Osmanqizi herself was on the payroll of US special services, and threatened to air intimate photos and videos of her.
“I began to understand this is not a one-man operation, there is definitely official involvement,” Osmanquizi said, implying the involvement of the government of Azerbaijan.
“I immediately got very worried about her, and about another person she had a conversation with, after the broadcasts,” said Gulnoza Said, a senior researcher with the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), a New York-based media freedom watchdog. “I was outraged because any conversation that two people have should remain private, and should never be used as state propaganda or to harass a journalist. And that’s exactly what we dealt with in Sevinc Osmanqizi’s case,” she said.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]Been there, seen that
Said and others’ concerns were not unfounded. Although Aghayev and his TV channel have scaled back their threats to air intimate photos, videos, and her remaining correspondence, these were not empty threats. Sonia Zilberman, South Caspian Energy and Environment Program Director at Crude Accountability, an environmental and human rights organisation in Washington DC, said that alarming parallels came to mind when she heard about the threats against Osmanqizi.
“This isn’t the first time. The case with Khadija Ismayilova was even more excruciating,” she said, referencing the 2012 case in which the Azerbaijani government had been widely criticised for airing intimate footage that had been obtained through illegal surveillance of another Azerbaijani female journalist. Ismayilova’s reporting on government corruption involving the country’s “first family” became sufficiently problematic that the authorities resorted to blackmail. Ismayilova was filmed at a private residence with a male companion, and was blackmailed with stills of video footage from a camera installed in a ceiling light. She was warned to stop her journalist investigations, and when she refused and disclosed the attempted blackmail, the video footage was leaked online.
“Talking at a human level, the amount of pressure that the Azerbaijani journalists face is enormous. Not only inside the country, but as we are seeing right now, outside the country as well,” Zilberman said. “Their personal lives are being infiltrated, they are constantly under pressure.” At the same time, she added, the pressure shows how far the Azerbaijani government is willing to go, and how dirty it is prepared to play.
Said agreed. “Khadija Ismayilova’s case was the first thing that came to my mind when I spoke to Sevinc. Also, I recall many other cases when women were harassed or extorted, or attempted to be extorted, by similar means.”
Whereas Khadija Ismayilova was illegally surveilled and recorded inside Azerbaijan, Osmanqizi’s data was collected while she resided in the United States. This is a cause for some additional concern, according to Said. “We have known for some time, and have heard allegations that the Azerbaijani authorities practice surveillance of journalists and opposition members in the country,” she said. “The case with Osmanqizi [showed] that they may go as far as to target Azerbaijanis with critical views living outside the country. This is very concerning.”
The similarity between Ismayilova’s case and the threats against Osmanqizi were not lost on other journalists. A number of media and journalism organisations issued statements condemning the actions of the Azerbaijani authorities. Both Said’s and Zilberman’s organisations have issued statements in support of Osmanqizi, and Deutsche Welle and others tweeted their support. One Free Press Coalition included her name in the 10 “Most Urgent” Threats to Press Freedom Around the World.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]“We are everything they are not”
The Azerbaijani authorities have been pouring millions, if not billions, of US dollars into “reputation laundering” to improve its standing in the west. Said noted that Azerbaijani authorities employed different tools, such as hiring respectable PR firms in Washington and some European capitals, and allegedly bribing some parliament members in Europe. “People like Sevinc Osmanqizi, or other journalists who live abroad and try to show to the world the real face of the Azerbaijani authorities, defeats the whole [set of] policies of the Azerbaijani authorities in creating their positive image,” she said, adding that the government perceives critical voices living outside the country as enemies they want to silence.
Osmanqizi’s YouTube channel airs daily broadcasts and call-in shows in Azerbaijani, and offers biting criticism of the government of Ilham Aliyev, the president of Azerbaijan, who is often chastised by international governments and organisations for his anti-democratic policies and imprisonment of journalists. She offers opinions not available on the government-controlled Azerbaijani media. She provides airtime to opposition figures and dissidents to whom other Azerbaijani television has been hostile for many years.
Osmanqizi is not alone.
Hebib Muntezir was nominated for a 2016 Freedom of Expression Award for his work at Meydan TV.
“Since there are no normal conditions for free and independent media to function inside the country, and the local media are under control of the government and oligarchs, no one can directly criticise the authorities. So, in the last few years, many journalists and bloggers have left the country because of the persecution and pressure against them and their families. They started to create new media abroad, so they could continue their professional work. That is why these types of exiled Azerbaijani media have been mushrooming,” said Habib Muntezir, member of the board of the Berlin-based MeydanTV YouTube channel.
Osmanqizi said she “simply cannot” broadcast from within Azerbaijan. “I would be arrested the next day. That’s a clear cut case.”
What unites nearly all YouTube-based channels broadcasting from abroad is their stance in opposition to the current Aliyev government. “You can only show one side of the story. You cannot be impartial. In order to be impartial, you would have to cover all sides of the story. But if [the officials] refuse to talk to you, your platform becomes partial and lopsided. They label you ‘opposition,’ ‘activist’ media. But, as a journalist, you might be forced into this category against your wish,” he explains, saying that even independent experts on non-political matters are afraid to speak to independent exiled media sources for fear of persecution.
These channels form a diverse tapestry of voices, and vary in audience size, length of establishment, frequency of broadcasts, and most importantly, level of professionalism. Some are headed by professional journalists like Osmanqizi, a veteran alumna of the first independent TV channel ANS, where she had for years worked side by side with Aghayev, the host of broadcasts attempting to intimidate her. After leaving ANS, she worked for the BBC in London. Her channel has around 120,000 subscribers, impressive for a country the size of Azerbaijan.
Other channels, launched by people who lack journalistic experience or education, are often merely outlets for their operators to voice criticism of the government in the form of crude and insulting insinuations and rants. Some of these have impressive audiences, as well, as people look to them as the outlet for voicing their own pent up anger and frustration.
“Nowadays in the Azerbaijani media, there are very few professional journalists. Many were originally activists, people with courage, and they gain experience on the job. Lack of formal training leads to mistakes that violate media ethics, and some unprofessional action. Pressure and fear of persecution by the government are lowering the quality of the Azerbaijani media,” Muntezir said, noting the impact of an unfree society on both sides of the camera or microphone.
“If the environment were free, if people didn’t freeze with fear whenever they saw a microphone, if citizens were not afraid to speak to media, if the government, president, and ministers talked to the free media, we would not live in a blockade state,” Muntezir said.
According to Osmanqizi, when it comes to attacks on exiled media, “the government is losing the competition” for the hearts and minds of the public. “We are everything they are not,” she said. “What they are lacking is the truth, the reality. People see themselves in our programs, they recognise their problems, which is not the case with government-sponsored TV programs. That is why they tune into our channel.”
In her view, the choice between traditional and online media is really a choice between information and disinformation, and the latter is very easy to identify, she said. “You cannot fool anyone and make them believe that Real TV or [state broadcaster] AzTV is real news. People only watch them when they lose their remote control,” Osmanqizi adds, laughing.
The new internet-based TV channels offer the chance for the people to express their own opinions, and to hear the voices of average citizens they identify with. “They participate,” she explains. “Unfortunately, this is not something that can be done from inside Azerbaijan.”
Viewers are calling from inside the country for better journalism, and sometimes their support for the hosts of foreign-based channels speaking truth to power may cost them their freedom. Osmanqizi said this fate befell her viewer, Elzamin Salayev, after he recorded a video appeal condemning Aghayev’s campaign against her. According to Osmanqizi, he was given a fifteen day prison sentence for condemning Aghayev and questioning his morals for threatening to broadcast her intimate footage.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]Camera… Lights… Attack!
There is very little doubt in the mind of Osmanqizi and others interviewed for this article as to where the orders for the attacks on journalists originate. “I have absolutely no doubt that they’re coming from the highest political leadership of Azerbaijan,” Osmanqizi said.
It is common knowledge in Azerbaijan as to who stands behind attacks appearing in the Azerbaijani media. Both Osmanqizi and Muntezir point to Ali Hasanov, an aide to the president on political and social affairs, as the architect of the attacks. “The order to attack is coming from Ali Hasanov and his group. I call the people who plan these attacks the presidential apparatus trolls,” Muntezir said, referencing Hasanov’s office as part of the president’s executive office. “The [TV] channels are being directly ordered what to broadcast. XazarTV is owned by Hasanov’s son, Shamkhal Hasanov. SpaceTV is owned by Sevil Aliyeva, the sister of the president.” The channels, he argued, are completely subservient to the authorities.
Osmanqizi agrees. “Hasanov has been the president’s media adviser for 23 years. He was Heydar Aliyev’s advisor, and now he is Ilham Aliyev’s advisor.” Heydar Aliyev, the nation’s former president, passed the helm to his son Ilham.
Earlier this year, Mirshahin Aghayev, the journalist from Real TV who threatened Osmanqizi, received a medal from the state security ministry (MTN) commemorating the 100th anniversary of “State Security and Foreign Intelligence Services.” The medal was awarded by Ilham Aliyev’s presidential decree and presented to Aghayev by MTN’s head of public affairs, Arif Babayev, during a ceremony at the TV station. In footage of the event broadcast on Real TV, Babayev calls Aghayev “someone we love very much.” Osmanqizi was dismayed that a journalist would be awarded such a medal by the intelligence service, and more so, that the ceremony would be proudly broadcast. She also wondered about Aghayev’s accomplishments that merited such an unusual recognition. “What has he done for them?” she asks. “Have you heard of any such thing in another country?”
Aghayev has been a prominent journalist in Azerbaijan since the early 1990s. He began his career at ANS TV, the first independent media source in the country after the fall of the Soviet Union. He gained popularity with daring broadcasts that blurred the line between news reporting and opinion. In a country where there was no alternative to rigid state-controlled TV news, his reporting was a breath of fresh air, revitalising the media environment.
A degree of criticism was tolerated by the senior Aliyev’s regime, and ANS was allowed certain journalistic liberties. The government invariably pointed to ANS when defending itself against domestic and foreign critics who accused it of persecuting journalists. However, the Azerbaijani government’s toleration of ANS ended on 29 July 2016 when the station’s licence was revoked after ANS broadcast an interview with Fethullah Gülen, an exiled Turkish cleric based in the United States who Turkey was attempting to extradite.
“ANS was shut down because it broadcasted reports that were not in line with presidential apparatus policy,” said Muntezir. “The condition to return ANS’s licence was that it would begin working under the direct supervision of Hasanov, and not broadcast a single sentence without the presidential apparatus’s approval nor stray from its dictates,” he said.
Prior to and during the controversy around ANS, Aghayev benefited from his stardom by teaching journalism. He was regarded as an institution.
He re-emerged from relative obscurity in March 2018, when the government granted a licence to a new broadcaster, Real TV. Aghayev took the helm at Real TV, and since then has been attacking and using insults and his signature word play and intentional slips of the tongue to smear anyone who dares to disagree with or criticise the authorities. Both Osmanqizi and Muntezir say that the motivation for allowing Aghayev back on the air and installing him at the helm of a new TV channel was the government’s need to counteract exiled media and critics of the regime who were outside its legal reach.
“[Before being allowed back on TV] Mirsahin [Aghayev] was made to promise that he would go on air every week and attack not only the opposition, but also those who think differently from the government. Otherwise, he could not return to TV. And he does so, every week,” said Muntezir. He added that Aghayev’s recently-launched Real TV was issued a new broadcast licence.
On 7 April, Aghayev made one of the most notorious appeals in the history of his editorial broadcasting. Using word play and double negatives, he called for treating opposition members “as if they did not have the Azerbaijani identity card,” meaning non-citizens with no rights. “If we did not live in a democratic country, I would call on emergency medical personnel not to treat them, bus drivers not to allow them to board buses, bread sellers not to sell them bread. But we live in a democratic society,” he said on the air. Media experts and lawyers in Azerbaijan have debated whether these words rise to the level of hate speech, and quite a few of them agreed, in interviews, that it did. So do many members of the opposition.
On April 21, Aghayev issued an ultimatum to Osmanqizi on his TV broadcast demanding that she stop her critical YouTube broadcasts, “or else.” When she refused, she said, “on 28 April my intimate materials were aired.”
In addition to airing private conversations and email correspondence pertaining to Osmanqizi, Aghayev also said that Osmanqizi had asked him to assign her to conduct interviews with local businesses. Imitating her manner of speech and voice inflection, he accused her of seeking to benefit financially from puff pieces that she would air. Aghayev and Osmanqizi had worked together at ANS between 2008 and 2013. He had been her supervisor.
Finally, on 16 July, Aghayev doubled down against the chorus of condemnation, and admitted in a television interview that he is no longer unbiased, something his critics accused him of for quite some time. “Now we have a position. It is impossible to have a position and remain unbiased. Now, we take a side,” he is quoted as saying in an article, promising to be “even more harsh, and give everyone what is due to them.” The irony that was not lost on anyone in the country, judging by numerous public comments on social media, that it was ANS TV that had made him iconic and brought him his following. For years, ANS had started and ended its broadcasts with the slogan, “Reliable, Conscientious, Unbiased.” [/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]Trollin’ trollin’ trollin’/Don’t try to understand them/ Just rope and throw and brand ’em
The government of Azerbaijan not only uses terrestrial broadcasters, such as Aghayev’s Real TV and other television channels that it controls, but also utilises armies of fake accounts to discredit dissident journalists, known as troll factories.
The comments sections of YouTube videos posted to OsmanqiziTV, MeydanTV, and other critical channels are full of comments from people with fake names and accounts. These comments often contain threats, insults, inane arguments or praise for the ruling regime.
But the measures taken by the Azerbaijani government to sideline, marginalise and silence critical voices in exiled media, although impressive, do not appear to be working, according to both Osmanqizi and Muntezir.
“People don’t believe them, definitely,” Muntezir said of the trolls. “It is wrong to say that the people don’t know the truth, and cannot separate fact from fiction. They know the truth very well, and are aware of what is going on in the country. They are aware of the trolls and their work. They know the Azerbaijani government supports them, they know they spread lies.”
According to Muntezir, this troll network is neither professional nor effective. “They open a new profile with no picture, a clean slate. They repeatedly copy and paste the same text, often from presidential speeches. They paste the text under content that is not even political,” he explained, saying that even news stories about football have comments citing Ilham Aliyev’s speeches and heaping praise on the government.
Muntezir said he has a good guess as to the identity of the people behind the troll profiles. “I know it for a fact that they compile reports about their work. It might be a student, or a teacher, or a government employee. Once a week, it is their turn, and they are sat down and made to copy and paste comments. They have to report how many comments they make, and support the data with screenshots. They have dedicated Whatsapp groups,” he said, referencing the smartphone app through which the trolls purportedly communicate and receive their marching orders. “People have repeatedly sent me screenshots of those conversations. They have lists of media sources they are expected to attack. But they burn themselves too fast, they operate unprofessionally,” Muntezir said.
According to Osmanqizi, the effect is exactly the opposite of the goal. She calls it the “boomerang effect.” “We are more popular, and have wider reach. On the other hand, they are not serving their target. They have not proven effective because nowadays, people can differentiate the truth from the lies. People have grown accustomed to the constant attacks accusing us of things we have not done,” she said. “They know it is propaganda. It is a lie machine.”
She said these efforts “only prove that what we are doing is important. The government of Azerbaijan is wasting its resources and money to combat its rivals and critics [because it cannot tolerate criticism].” She calls the attacks on her “the government’s defence mechanism,” because the government does not like being held accountable. “The people understand it’s a matter of accountability,” she said. “[Holding the government accountable] is something media in Azerbaijan should have been doing, but since the free media has been marginalised and destroyed [in the country, the people] appreciate our work.”
Muntezir believes that idea behind troll factories originated in Russia. “Putin started doing this with a higher degree of professionalism. Our [officials] talk about the integration with the west, while copy-pasting all of the disgusting things from Russia at the same time.” He describes the quality of the Azerbaijani trolls as akin to “Chinese-made counterfeits of the original.”
Osmanqizi, no stranger to mass troll attacks on the comments section under her videos, said that the attacks prove the effectiveness of exiled media. “If it was not the case [that exiled media was effective], we would not be targeted… They woke up one day and realised they can no longer influence public opinion. It is being formed beyond their reach and authority. Now they are playing catch-up, and they have not been very creative. They cannot prevent people from watching us. All they can do is smear and harass,” she said.
Crude Accountability’s Zilberman agrees with the ineffectiveness of the government’s tactics. “I think the government is shooting itself in the foot by dishonouring the Azerbaijani women who provide access to information inside their country. In any country, dishonouring somebody personally is really shameful, because the attack is personal, and not professional.”[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
Journalist Ismail Djalilov recalls his recent experience with trolls
[/vc_column_text][vc_column_text]As a former friend and colleague of Mirshahin Aghayev, this was a difficult article for me to write. It took a long time, because in the middle of writing about trolls, I myself have become the target of a wall of faceless, nameless hordes and a mass concerted effort against my online presence. I needed to distance myself from the attacks, and regain my composure, to ensure I could resume working on this article as impartially and honestly as I could.
To make matters worse, much worse, I suspect that I have become the target of attacks not by pro-government trolls, but trolls working for one of the largest opposition parties in Azerbaijan, which declares its adherence to principles of democratic development and freedom.
Following my broadcast of an interview with an opposition group member in which he criticised the leader of a much larger opposition party, I was singled out and barraged by insults, insinuations, and homophobic comments (I am openly gay in a country considered the most homophobic in wider Europe). This was a shocking experience for me, as I myself did not utter a word during the part of the interview about the opposition leader, and considered the comments by my guest to be measured and within ethical norms that did not merit my interruption.
What was shocking and bewildering to me is that these attacks came from the opposition party for which I admitted voting when I lived in Azerbaijan decades ago. I felt betrayed by the very people whose ideals I believed in and whose rights I had been trying to defend, and whose plight I had been trying to publicise in my work.
I understand that in a country with a ruthless regime playing dirty with anyone who dares to dissent, opposition parties must employ some of the government’s tactics in order to protect themselves and survive. If the government employs throngs of trolls to smear the opposition, the opposition must do something similar in order to protect itself. It is understandable that some of the proponents of opposition leaders have taken it upon themselves to engage in smear campaigns and vicious personal attacks against me. They saw me, as the owner of the channel, as ultimately responsible for whatever criticism that was voiced against their beloved leader.
I had time for little other than deleting insults from the comments sections of my videos for two days straight. My Facebook page was shut down numerous times (I lost count after eight suspensions in the span of four days). There were mass complaints against my account for “impersonating someone else.” First, I had to send a picture of my ID showing my personal data. I would regain access. Then, Facebook demanded a picture of me holding the ID. Rinse, repeat.
Once my account was unblocked, I made a passionate, and somewhat angry, appeal to the leader of the party in question. Not mincing words, I told him I had no longer considered him a friend of free press, since he had remained silent in the face of attacks by his party members against a journalist doing his best to do honest work. I called on him to deny that his party employed trolls, like many of his supporters had claimed on my Facebook page and in public comments. I called on his party to reject troll tactics, condemn them, and unequivocally state that trolls are detrimental to civilised public discourse in our country which is under ruthless dictatorial rule.
None of that happened. During an appearance on a YouTube broadcast, his supporters proceeded to call me “an American pig” (I am a United States citizen), and said that “they had lists of those they would hang when they come to power. I was on them.” Strangely, these comments were not blocked or deleted during or in the hours after the broadcast.
Due to the bizarre logic of “enemy of my enemy is my friend,” I found myself defended by pro-government newspapers, Facebook pages and journalists. The very same ones that had, a year earlier, run shaming headlines leaking pictures of my wedding (to another man) and calling me an abomination or far worse. The shame of being defended by regime apologists is the worst thing with which I must now come to terms.
At the time, the party denied any involvement. Officials and supporters alike demanded that I produce screenshots of the comments. Though I had deleted most of them out of sheer embarrassment, I was able to send them the ones I and my friends had saved. There were denials that these commenters had been affiliated with the party in question, but my friends pointed to their profiles, which showed that they were. Then the response was that these accounts had been hijacked by government trolls to attack me. At that point, I stopped following the zigzags of disingenuous denials. However, I have heard privately from friends that a few of the party’s members “have been chided,” and were told not to use slurs regarding sexual orientation. I will take that.
The very nature of trolling means people do not use their real names or pictures most of the time. They do not pose for avatar pictures holding their party IDs in their hands. I cannot name names, but I did what I could. In addition, I know for a fact that I was not the first, nor will I be the last person to be attacked by the trolls affiliated with this particular political party. There have been numerous cases before me, and I believe the public was on my side. I feel I was vindicated. I learned a valuable lesson in the process: speaking truth to power does not entail just the regime; at times, it means even the pro-democracy opposition. This was a shocking and unpleasant discovery that informs the direction of my future work. [/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]The author of this piece, Ismail Djalilov, previously worked with Mirshahin Aghayev at ANS. Djalilov and Sevinc Osmanqizi did not coincide with each other at ANS. He is also host of duzdanisaq (Straight Talk), a YouTube channel broadcasting into Azerbaijan.[/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: Azerbaijan” full_width_heading=”true” category_id=”34499″][/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 30 June 2019
Incidents can be in more than once 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]
0
Physical Assault/Injury
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
13
Arrest/Detention/Interrogation
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
11
Criminal Charges/Fines/Sentences
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
8
Intimidation
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
15
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]
0
Attack to Property
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
3
Subpoena/Court Order/Lawsuits
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
15
Legal Measures/Legislation
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
1
Offine Harassment
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
1
Online Harassment
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
2
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]
4
Censorship
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
31
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 30 June 2019
[/vc_column_text][vc_row_inner css=”.vc_custom_1558428178637{background-color: #f4f4f4 !important;}”][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
0
Employer/Publisher/Colleague(s)
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
24
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]
16
Court/Judicial
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
10
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]
1
Known private individual(s)
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
1
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]
2
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]
25 Jul 2019 | Media Freedom, Monitoring and Advocating Coverage, News, Turkey Reports
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
In Turkey, the government uses national security and terror legislation to censor journalists. Arrests, detentions and trials of media workers are frequent.
Turkey’s freedom of the press was curbed after the attempted military coup in July 2016, when over 150 media outlets were shut down. Many journalists working in Kurdish territory were subject to physical violence and threats, and Rohat Aktaş, a journalist who covered the Kurdish-Turkish conflict in the town of Cizre, was killed.
Physical attacks on media workers have become rare in recent years. However, Index on Censorship’s Monitoring and Advocating Media Freedom project documented seven assaults in Turkey in May, and another one in June 2019. This surge has raised concerns about the continuing pressure on media professionals in the country.
Özgün Özçer is a Turkey researcher for the monitoring project partner organisation Platform for Independent Journalism (P24). He attributes the physical violence to internal divisions within the nationalist and conservative political movements ahead of the second round of the mayoral elections in Istanbul, which took place in late June.[/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][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_custom_heading text=”Yavuz Selim Demirağ assaulted outside his home” font_container=”tag:h3|text_align:left” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_single_image image=”108007″ img_size=”full” add_caption=”yes”][vc_column_text]On 10 May, journalist Yavuz Selim Demirağ, a prominent columnist for the nationalist newspaper Yeniçağ, sustained serious injuries from an assault in front of his house in Ankara.
The attack took place late in the evening, when Demirağ was returning home after hosting a political show on a private TV broadcaster. The assailants, a group of seven men, fled the scene in a car after beating Demirağ with baseball bats.
Demirağ’s relatives took him to the hospital. Six people were arrested during the following week in connection with the attack, but all were released on 13 May after giving their statements to a prosecutor.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_custom_heading text=”İdris Özyol attacked outside local newspaper” font_container=”tag:h3|text_align:left” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_single_image image=”108008″ img_size=”full” add_caption=”yes”][vc_column_text]On 15 May, a group of three unidentified assailants attacked veteran journalist İdris Özyol in the coastal city of Antalya. Özyol was hospitalised following the attack, which took place in the evening in front of the office of the local newspaper, Akdeniz’de Yeni Yüzyıl, where he worked. He suffered injuries to his head and left arm.
Özyol’s assailants were arrested on 17 May. Özyol said that one of his attackers, who he identified as Taner Canatek, was the driver of Talu Bilgili, a prominent local politician from the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP). MHP allied itself with the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) during the general and presidential elections in 2018, and the local elections in March 2019. Özyol claimed that Canatek had worked for an AKP candidate during the local election campaign, and had visited the newspaper’s office with Bilgili, during which they had a heated exchange over a critical article by Özyol. Journalist associations condemned the attack.[/vc_column_text][vc_custom_heading text=”Tuüçe Ünsal and Serkan Çinier attacked at Ankara cemetery” font_container=”tag:h3|text_align:left” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_column_text]On 16 May, the crew of conservative news channel Beyaz TV was attacked in Beypazarı district of Ankara, online news website T24 reported. Reporter Tuüçe Ünsal and cameraman Serkan Çinier were harassed and battered while filming a news story about the rundown state of a local cemetery. There they were assaulted by a group of people, allegedly supporters of the city’s new opposition mayor Mansur Yavaş.
Çinier was taken to the hospital following the attack. At least one of the perpetrators was arrested.
Mansur Yavaş had served as a mayor of a small Turkish town for 10 years before his first run for the Turkish capital’s mayorship in 2014. Beyaz TV is an Ankara-based news channel founded by Osman Gökçek, the son of former Ankara mayor Melih Gökçek.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_custom_heading text=”Ergin Çevik tracked and beaten” font_container=”tag:h3|text_align:left” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_single_image image=”108023″ img_size=”full” add_caption=”yes”][vc_column_text]On 20 May 2019, three people attacked Ergin Çevik, editor-in-chief of Antalya-based news portal Güney Haberci, in Antalya near a restaurant in the Aksu district. They approached Çevik, asked him if he was Ergin Çevik, and, upon confirmation, attacked him. The beating lasted several minutes, after which the attackers fled the scene.
Çevik told Evrensel that the assailants had come to his office before the attack and spoken with his secretary. Their visit was caught on camera, and the police are now working with the footage to identify the attackers. Çevik was reportedly assaulted because of his recent investigation of unearned income in the municipality of Aksu. In the article, Çevik called on the mayor of Aksu, Halil Şahin, who was re-elected on 31 March, to address the allegations.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_custom_heading text=”Hakan Denizli shot in the leg” font_container=”tag:h3|text_align:left” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_single_image image=”108010″ img_size=”full” add_caption=”yes”][vc_column_text]On 24 May, Hakan Denizli, founder of a local newspaper Egemen, was shot outside of his home in the southern province of Adana in front of his 4-year old granddaughter. “I got in the car and the window was open. They came, shot me in the leg and ran away”, Denizli told Arab News. He was immediately hospitalised. The gunman escaped and could not be identified, though the police launched a search.
This is the 29th attack on Denizli throughout his career.
“This brutal attack against Hakan Denizli–the fourth assault on a journalist in two weeks–appears to signal an alarming cycle of violence against critical voices in Turkey,” said CPJ Europe and Central Asia Program Coordinator Gulnoza Said, as quoted on CPJ’s website. “We call on President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan to strongly condemn the attacks and to instruct his law enforcement to bring those responsible to justice and to ensure the safety of journalists”.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_custom_heading text=”Sabahattin Önkibar assaulted” font_container=”tag:h3|text_align:left” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_single_image image=”108011″ img_size=”full” add_caption=”yes”][vc_column_text]On 25 May, Odatv web portal columnist Sabahattin Önkibar was attacked by a group of unknown individuals near his home in Ankara. Three people got out of two cars parked nearby and attacked Önkibar with their fists, daily Odatv reported. Önkibar filed a complaint with the police about the attack. He became the fifth journalist to be targeted in Turkey within two weeks.[/vc_column_text][vc_custom_heading text=”Hasan Ceyhan beaten up by police” font_container=”tag:h3|text_align:left” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_column_text]On 28 May, Hasan Ceyhan, a distributor for the pro-Kurdish newspaper Yeni Yaşam, was beaten by security and police at a metro station in Istanbul, Mezopotamya Agency reported. Ceyhan, who is epileptic, fainted in the metro and was taken out of the train at the central Gayrettepe station. An ambulance was called while he was still unconscious at the station.
Ceyhan told Mezopotamya Agency that the security and police officers at the station checked his bags and saw the copies of the newspaper. They took him to a room inside the station, he said, where one security officer and two police officers beat and insulted him for an hour. They let him go after they forced him to sign a piece of paper stating that he would not file a complaint. Ceyhan said he got a medical report from the hospital and was planning to file a formal complaint to the police. [/vc_column_text][vc_custom_heading text=”Murat Alan attacked leaving mosque” font_container=”tag:h3|text_align:left” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_column_text]On 14 June Murat Alan, news editor of the ultraconservative daily Yeni Akit, was attacked in Gaziosmanpaşa district of Istanbul, Anadolu Agency (AA) reported. Four people armed with baseball bats and knives attacked Alan as he came out of a mosque after Friday Prayers with his 6-year-old son, a family member and his two children.
“I said ‘I have children, I have children with me, don’t do this’”, Alan told AA. As he grappled with the attacker who had a knife, one with a baseball bat started hitting him on the head. The assailants were scared off by the worshippers.
Alan received a head injury as a result of the attack, and was taken to a hospital for treatment. The attackers were caught and detained by the police. A week later, they were released by the court, NTV reported. Prosecutors charged the four men with “actual bodily harm” following a forensics report.
Presidential spokesperson Fahrettin Altun condemned the attack. Alan was under investigation for allegedly “insulting the commanders of Turkish Armed Forces.” [/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_custom_heading text=”“Impossible to talk about democracy in a society where there is no freedom of the press“” font_container=”tag:h3|text_align:left” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_column_text]Turkey Journalists’ Society (TGC) condemned the series of attacks in a statement.
TGC said, “We expect that the impunity imposed on all attacks on newspapers and journalists will not be applied in this case. It is impossible to talk about democracy in a society where there is no freedom of the press. Social peace cannot be achieved in an environment where newspapers and journalists are constantly targeted. Attacks on the press are direct attacks on the public’s right to receive information and learn the truth. We want those responsible to be found and punished as soon as possible”.
A letter signed by 20 international organisations–led by the International Press Institute and Committee to Protect Journalists–following the attacks on Demirağ and Özyol on May 16 called on Erdoğan to condemn the assaults and make sure that the perpetrators are brought to justice, reported Hurriyet Daily News. “Attacks like those against Demirağ and Özyol, if left unpunished, will have a serious chilling effect on the country’s journalists and further strengthen a climate of fear, which seriously hinders Turkey’s credibility as a democracy,” read the letter.
“A brief analysis of these attacks reveals that the frequency of such moves against journalists increase at times when the country passes through politically-troubled straits and is open to provocations. Besides journalists, prominent politicians from different lines become targets of such physical attacks at these times. A lynch attempt attack against Republican People’s Party (CHP) leader Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu by a nationalist crowd during a funeral of a fallen soldier in early April should be interpreted within this frame.
“More striking is the fact that this increase in attacks against dissident journalists comes on the eve of the Istanbul election rerun, which has fuelled political tension once again following the cancellation of March 31 polls for Turkey’s largest metropolis. Although there is no direct link between these mentioned attacks on journalists and Istanbul’s renewed elections, an increase in the tension would further complicate the political climate”.
“Having monitored media freedom issues and impunity towards crime committed against media representatives for 25 years, this is the first time I noticed that a government circle has provoked a hostile climate for journalists, at this extent, kept observing intimidations and violence against ‘recalcitrant’ media representatives”, Erol Önderoğlu, a Turkey Representative for RSF who is facing trial, told Index.
“President Erdogan, the AK Party and the Nationalist Movement Party circles remained silent, although the first attack occurred on May 11, and everybody knew it would be contagious. In fact, the government was complicit in allowing MHP militants to silence criticism coming from nationalist or secular parts of the society. It is not a coincidence, then, that two parliament enquiry demands submitted by Iyi Party (Good Party, born from a division within the MHP) and by the main opposition party CHP aiming to investigate this hostile environment for journalists have both been rejected by AKP and MHP votes. Since May 11, no less (sic) than 10 journalists, columnists and reporters were physically attacked in this post-local-election process. All perpetrators were arrested but released pending trial, except for one case in which four men involved in a gun attack were sent to jail. The question is, how shall we expect to fight against impunity if the government itself is clearly involved in the propagation of violence?”[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_custom_heading text=”Press Freedom Violations in Turkey” font_container=”tag:h2|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_column_text]
Number and types of incidents recorded between 1 February and 30 June 2019
[/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]
5
Physical Assault/Injury
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
7
Arrest/Detention/Interrogation
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
96
Criminal Charges/Fines/Sentences
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
0
Intimidation
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
0
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]
0
Attack to Property
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
3
Subpoena/Court Order/Lawsuits
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
0
Legal Measures/Legislation
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
0
Offine Harassment
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
0
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]
1
Censorship
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
114
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 30 June 2019
[/vc_column_text][vc_row_inner css=”.vc_custom_1558428178637{background-color: #f4f4f4 !important;}”][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
0
Employer/Publisher/Colleague(s)
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
7
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]
95
Court/Judicial
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
2
Government official(s)/State Agency/Political Party
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
2
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]
0
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]
6
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][vc_row][vc_column][three_column_post title=”Monitoring and Advocating for Media Freedom” full_width_heading=”true” category_id=”35195″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
23 Jul 2019 | Media Freedom, Monitoring and Advocating Coverage, News, Ukraine
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_single_image image=”108001″ img_size=”full” add_caption=”yes”][vc_column_text]
The majority of violations in Ukraine catalogued by Index on Censorship’s Monitoring and Advocating for Media Freedom project from 1 February to 30 June 2019 were categorised as physical assaults, attacks to property or blocked access. Most frequently, these actions were taken by agents of the state — whether law enforcement or other governmental structures.
The Monitoring and Advocacy for Media Freedom project has recorded 16 incidents in which journalists have been subjected to physical assaults, and 17 incidents in which journalists has their equipment and property damaged since February 2019, 4 of which are in both categories. The project’s numbers are corroborated by the National Union of Ukrainian Journalists (NSJU), which recorded 36 incidents targeting journalists since 1 January 2019, including physical assaults and attacks on property, as part of their Index of Physical Safety of Ukrainian Journalists.[/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 possible opportunities for advancing media freedom in these countries. These limitations, threats and violations, affect journalists as they do their jobs, so the project’s staff advocate for greater press freedom in these countries and raise international awareness.
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][vc_custom_heading text=”Vadim Komarov murdered” font_container=”tag:h3|text_align:left” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_column_text]The 20 June death of journalist and blogger Vadim Komarov is a severe and frightening example of the violence that Ukrainian journalists encounter in their work. Komarov was attacked with a hammer in the centre of Cherkasy on 4 May. His is the first recorded death of a journalist in Ukraine since the murder of Pavel Sheremet, whose car was blown up in 2016.
Komarov was struck in the head several times by an unidentified individual, in broad daylight, near the town’s busy central market. The assailant then fled. Komarov was found unconscious and bloodied by passers by, who called emergency services. According to the doctors who treated him, Komarov had suffered a grievous open head injury, and slipped into a coma shortly after surgery. He never regained consciousness.
Sergey Tomilenko wrote on Facebook that Komarov’s family and colleagues “don’t feel like there’s (the) necessary attention to this case.” The cause of the murder, said Tomilenko, was Komarov’s journalistic work. “The murder of Vadim Komarov is a crime against all journalists in general,” he wrote. Tomilenko called for solidarity among journalists, because “this topic is important for the survival of a journalist as a profession in Ukraine.”
The police were investigating Komarov’s attack as an “assassination attempt” prior to his death.
Komarov was known for his investigations of corruption among Cherkasy city authorities and the region’s prison system. The journalist had been assaulted in the past: on 7 September 2016, an unknown gunman shot at Komarov in Cherkasy, but the bullet missed him and hit a wall.
The OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media, Harlem Désir, expressed his deep sorrow following Komarov’s death. “I am deeply shocked by the death of Vadim Komarov, who was brutally attacked last month in Cherkasy and suffered from serious head injuries,” Désir said. “I reiterate my call to the Ukrainian authorities to complete the investigation in a vigorous and swift manner. It is regrettable that about one-and-a-half months after the attack, law enforcement has not yet identified the perpetrators nor reported any progress on the investigation. Violence and attacks against journalists are unacceptable and must stop. Impunity would be a victory for those who wanted to silence Komarov and to intimidate the press. All OSCE participating states should take effective and resolute actions to prevent and end impunity for such crimes.” [/vc_column_text][vc_custom_heading text=”Aliya Zamchynska” font_container=”tag:h3|text_align:left” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_column_text]On 20 June, Aliya Zamchynska, a correspondent for online news outlet Dumskaya, was assaulted and threatened by Yury Reznikov, Dumskaya.net reported. Reznikov is the owner of a cable car next Otrada beach in Odessa.
According to Ukrayinska Pravda, local deputies, civil activists and journalists gathered at Otrada beach to remove an illegal fence restricting public access to the beach. The video recorded by Dumskaya shows Reznikov confronting the group armed with a machine gun and threatening them. “I’m not ready to kill for private property, but I’m ready to shoot [you] in the legs,” Reznikov told them. During the episode Reznikov pushed Zamchynska, who fell to the ground and was injured as a result.
Deputy Olexander Sheremet managed to disarm Reznikov, and the police were called to the scene. They discovered that the gun had been loaded.
This is not the first time that Reznikov and his family attacked journalists and activists. In 2012, his daughter assaulted activist Zoya Melnik in front of her child. In 2014, Reznikov pushed a cameraman for Pervyi Gorodskoi TV channel into a swimming pool with his camera. [/vc_column_text][vc_custom_heading text=”Maria Gural and Volodymyr Tsyganov” font_container=”tag:h3|text_align:left” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_column_text]On 13 June, two reporters from online news site Stop Corruption, Maria Gural and Volodymyr Tsyganov, were assaulted in Priluki, Chernihiv region. The attacker was identified as Olexander Chaly. Chaly is deputy head of politician Boris Prikhodko’s election campaign for Ukrainian Verkhovna Rada, the Institute of Mass Information reported.
According to Stop Corruption, the journalists were trying to access an open event where Prikhodko was meeting with members of the public. The crew were investigating alleged voter bribery and wanted to question the politician.
Olexander Chaly first tried to snatch a microphone from Gural, and then began to assault her. Tsyganov tried to protect Gural and was assaulted as well. As a result of the beating, Gural received a concussion, and Tsyganov ended up with scratches and light injuries. The police arrested Chaly and charged him with “threat or violence against a journalist.” [/vc_column_text][vc_custom_heading text=”Vadym Makaryuk” font_container=”tag:h3|text_align:left” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_column_text]
On 7 June, Vadym Makaryuk was physically assaulted during a mass brawl at Barabashovo market in Kharkiv by unknown individuals, Channel 24 reported. Makatyuk is a TV operator for Channel 24 and Visti.News,
A group of unidentified people assaulted the cameraperson as he filmed the altercation at the market. They sprayed tear gas in his eyes, smashed his face, broke his camera and took away his memory card. The clash was between the right-wing National Corps (who are Donbass war veterans) and the merchants of Barabashovo. According to the market administration, their conflict was due to a property dispute.
The journalist was taken to an intensive care unit in a local hospital, where doctors diagnosed a hemorrhagic stroke as a result of a cerebral haemorrhage sustained after the beating.
The police opened a criminal investigation into whether the incident constituted “threats or violence against a journalist”, “obstruction of journalists’ legal activities”, and “robbery”. A court in Kharkiv refused to detain a man involved in the brutal beating, saying that round-the-clock house arrest was sufficient punishment, Interfax-Ukraine reported. The court also sentenced Kozlyuk, a 26-year-old unemployed Kharkiv resident involved in the assault, to one month and 28 days under house arrest. Immediately after the hearing, the suspect’s lawyer said that he would appeal the decision. The prosecutor’s office also announced their intention to appeal.[/vc_column_text][vc_custom_heading text=”Natalia Polishchuk, Maria Petruchyk and Vyacheslav Moroshko” font_container=”tag:h3|text_align:left” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_column_text]On 9 May, customs officers at the Yagodyn border crossing with Poland assaulted Natalia Polishchuk, Maria Petruchyk and Vyacheslav Moroshko, journalists working for Avers TV.
The three journalists were investigating a large shipment of amber, which was alleged to have been smuggled to Poland through the Yagodyn customs station. The reporting crew entered a restaurant where customs agents were attending a party and began asking questions about corruption and the amber smuggling. According to Avers, the officers who were present behaved aggressively and assaulted the journalists. They bruised one journalist’s finger and broke the crew’s camera, 1+1 TV channel reported.
“Two men approached me, they started tugging at me, tore my jacket, hit the cameraperson, hit the camera,” Polishchuk said. Petruchyk reported, “He (my attacker) wrestled my phone out of my hand, used brute force, my hand is damaged, he tore my journalist’s ID off me.” The officers also forcibly took the journalists’ driver’s licenses, car documents and bank cards. A customs officer told one of the journalists he would “bury her”. The journalists managed to film a part of the incident.
The police have opened criminal proceedings on three articles. “It’s about interfering with the professional activities of journalists, robbery and causing intentional light bodily injuries,” Viktor Homol, spokesperson for the National Police in the Volyn region, said. The case is now being investigated by the State Bureau of Investigations.[/vc_column_text][vc_custom_heading text=”Kateryna Kaplyuk and Borys Trotsenko” font_container=”tag:h3|text_align:left” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_column_text]On 6 March, journalist Kateryna Kaplyuk and cameraperson Borys Trotsenko from the investigative TV project Schemes were assaulted in Chabany, a suburb of Kyiv. Schemes’s editor Natalie Sedletska reported the assault on her Facebook page. Sedletska wrote that the journalists had gone to Chabany village council to get information for an investigation on the illegal transfer of public land to private ownership.
The pair were filming at the council’s office, trying to interview the council secretary, when they were assaulted. Their attackers were two deputies of Chabany’s village head, Volodimir Chuprina and Yuri Bondar, as well as Valery Prisyazhny, the head of the public organisation Rozvitok Kyevshiny. In their attempt to prevent journalists from filming, these men injured Trotsenko and broke his camera.
Kaplyuk and Trotsenko called an ambulance. After a medical check-up at a hospital, Trotsenko was diagnosed with a concussion. The journalists filed a complaint with the police, who launched a criminal investigation. [/vc_column_text][vc_custom_heading text=”Lack of “political will“ puts journalists at risk” font_container=”tag:h3|text_align:left” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_column_text]Despite the existence of legislation that aims to protect journalists, the NSJU said that Ukraine is notorious for impunity when crimes against journalists are committed.
Speaking at a conference held by the International Federation of Journalists in October 2018, Sergey Tomilenko, the head of NSJU, said that crimes against journalists had become the norm in Ukraine. He said that every four days there were acts of violence against journalists in the country, from brutal beatings to broken equipment.
In 2017-2018 NSJU recorded 175 physical violations against journalists in Ukraine, including minor acts of aggression and destruction of property.
Artyom Shevchenko, the spokesperson for the Ukrainian Ministry of Interior, reported on 1 March that in 2018, the police opened 258 criminal investigations on interfering with journalistic activity. In January 2019 alone, there were an additional 21 investigations. At the same time, however, only 26 out of the 258 cases related to crimes against media workers were passed on to the court.
“The lack of political will of the country’s leadership to really protect media workers leads to the fact that the attacks are not properly investigated, and those cases which still reach the court do not end with heavy punishment for the attackers”, head of NSJU Sergey Tomilenko told Index on Censorship’s project Monitoring and Advocating for Media Freedom. “Until recently, journalists, particularly investigative journalists, were viewed by officials as threats, and not as an important element of protecting democracy in the country.” Until recently, there has also been a political culture that legitimised humiliating journalists and the media, he added.
Tomilenko said that the NSJU has noticed that ordinary Ukrainians now feel emboldened to physically assault journalists. This is likely due to the toxic attitude toward the press created by government officials, he says. “Over the past year, we have witnessed an active uprising by the authorities–primarily representatives of the President, Petro Poroshenko, and parliamentarians of the political forces close to him–deliberate hostility towards certain journalists and the media, and calls to attack the so-called ‘pro-Russian’ media. This has resulted in the blocking of individual TV channels, the physical attacks on journalists during live broadcasts, parliamentary appeals to stop the broadcasting of individual media, and attempts to adopt draconian laws against the media.”
Tomilenko said that he was hopeful that the hostility toward journalists would abate in the future. “The victory of the new President, Volodymyr Zelensky, who does not use the rhetoric of hostility towards journalists and declares his support of freedom of speech and real political competition in the country, gives (me) hope that the Ukrainian authorities will not be at the forefront of those who reject the rights of journalists and the media.”
The National Union of Journalists of Ukraine has been calling for regular and transparent public reports by law enforcement agencies on the progress of investigations of crimes against journalists. Such reports could be used as a key tool in battling impunity. In addition, the NSJU is recommending special parliamentary hearings on journalists’ physical security and freedom of speech.
“This initiative, which we proposed in July 2017 on the 1st anniversary of the assassination of Pavel Sheremet, is particularly relevant today — when a new murder took place in Ukraine — that of regional journalist Vadim Komarov”, Tomilenko said.
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_custom_heading text=”Press Freedom Violations in Ukraine” font_container=”tag:h2|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_column_text]
Number and types of incidents recorded between 1 February and 30 June 2019
[/vc_column_text][vc_row_inner css=”.vc_custom_1558428123542{background-color: #f4f4f4 !important;}”][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
1
Death/Killing
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
16
Physical Assault/Injury
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
2
Arrest/Detention/Interrogation
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
2
Criminal Charges/Fines/Sentences
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
6
Intimidation
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
8
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]
17
Attack to Property
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
2
Subpoena/Court Order/Lawsuits
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
1
Legal Measures/Legislation
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
1
Offine Harassment
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
1
Online Harassment
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
1
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]
0
Censorship
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
42
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 30 June 2019
[/vc_column_text][vc_row_inner css=”.vc_custom_1558428178637{background-color: #f4f4f4 !important;}”][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
0
Employer/Publisher/Colleague(s)
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
7
Police/State Security
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
2
Private Security
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
3
Court/Judicial
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
10
Government official(s)/State Agency/Political Party
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][vc_column_text]
0
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]
11
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]
14
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][vc_row][vc_column][three_column_post title=”Monitoring and Advocating for Media Freedom” full_width_heading=”true” category_id=”35195″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
4 Jul 2019 | Belarus, Belarus 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_row_inner][vc_column_inner][vc_custom_heading text=”5 Incidents” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_column_text]
Journalists barred from covering roundtable on drug problem
Zmitser Kazakevich and Viachaslau Lazarau
26 June 2019 – Vitsebsk independent journalists Zmitser Kazakevich and Viachaslau Lazarau were not allowed to cover a roundtable discussion between education officials and the parents of individuals convicted of drug offenses.
The journalists were told they could not be present at the event because they were not listed as invitees. Officials turned down a request from the organisers that the press be allowed to attend.
Link: https://baj.by/be/content/vicebskih-zhurnalistau-ne-puscili-na-krugly-stol-pa-prableme-narkotykau
Category: Blocked Access
Source(s) of violation: State Agency
Journalists banned from visiting Brest regional government
12 June 2019 – Media professionals were barred from attending a meeting between Anatol Lis, head of the Brest regional government, and environmental protestors. Three independent journalists had been included in a list of meeting participants. Audio recording and photographing during the meeting were banned.
Link: https://charter97.link/ru/news/2019/6/13/337549/
Category: Blocked Access
Source(s) of violation: State Agency
Independent media workers blocked from attending press conference
11 June 2019 – Management of a controversial battery plant I-Power blocked some independent media representatives and bloggers from attending a press conference. The Brest factory has drawn protests from area residents concerned about its environmental impacts.
Link: https://baj.by/be/content/zhurnalistau-ne-puscili-na-sustrechu-starshyni-bresckaga-ablvykankama-z-praciunikami
Category: Blocked Access
Source(s) of violation: Company
Independent newspaper’s journalist prevented from entering new court building
7 June 2019 – A Brestskaya Gazeta journalist was told she could not enter a new court building after its inauguration citing the lack of accreditation.
Link(s): https://www.b-g.by/news/otkryitie-doma-pravosudiya-v-breste-nachalos-s-torzhestva-spravedlivosti-korrespondenta-bg-vnutr-ne-pustili/
Category: Blocked Access
Source(s) of violation: Public Official
Brest blogger Piatrukhin detained while broadcasting online
2 June 2019 – Blogger Siarhei Piatrukhin was pushed into a car by men in camouflage on the corner of Mayakovski and Savietskaya Streets and taken to the Leninski district police department. The incident happened while he was conducting a live broadcast from a protest march against construction of a battery plant near Brest.
At the police station, a report was filed against Piatrukhin for disorderly conduct and he was jailed pending a trial.
On 3 June 2019, Piatrukhin was brought from the prison to the Leninski district court of Brest. There a judge postponed the hearing until 10 June 2019 and released him.
Update:
10 June 2019 – A judge in the Leninski district court of Brest fined Siarhei Piatrukhin Br765 (about $370) for disorderly conduct (Article 17.1 of the Code of Administrative Offences).
The reason for the ruling was the alleged insult of the deputy head of Leninski district police department of Brest Mikalai Samasiuk. At the trial, Samasiuk explained that the blogger asked Samasiuk, who was on duty at the time, to accept a complaint against an administrative offense “in importunate manner”. Samasiuk considered such behavior of Piatrukhin as unacceptable and called the riot police.
Links:
https://charter97.link/en/news/2019/6/3/336370/
https://charter97.link/en/news/2019/6/4/336484/
https://charter97.link/en/news/2019/6/11/337333/
Category: Detention, Blocked Access, Fines
Source(s) of violation: Police, Court[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_basic_grid post_type=”post” max_items=”4″ element_width=”6″ grid_id=”vc_gid:1562239181704-1669af44-11ae-10″ taxonomies=”8996″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
