Kurdish reporter sentenced to more than 8 years

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_single_image image=”96575″ img_size=”full” add_caption=”yes” alignment=”center”][vc_column_text]This article is also available in Italian from Index partner Osservatorio Balcani e Caucaso – Transeuropa 

Kurdish reporter Nedim Türfent has been sentenced to 8 years and 9 months in prison on charges of “membership of a terrorist organisation,” with the court remaining deaf to substantial evidence of witness torture.

“They said they would show the ‘power of the Turk,’” lawyer Harika Karataş said after Türfent, a Dicle News Agency reporter,  was sentenced on Dec. 15.

Karataş was referring to the story that led Türfent to being harassed and threatened by the authorities in his hometown of Yüksekova, in southeastern Turkey. In the footage Türfent revealed, a commander of special forces can be seen shouting “You will see the power of the Turk” to a group of detainees handcuffed behind their backs and forced to lie facing down on the ground.

“They whitewashed torture. They considered journalism to be a crime,” Karataş said.

Türfent’s case has stirred outrage among many of Turkey’s beleaguered independent journalists, made worse by the fact that 20 witnesses out of the 21 who appeared in court declared that their police testimonies were collected under torture and duress. These revelations turned the small courtroom in the remote eastern city of Hakkâri into a focal point, with press freedom facing another serious test far from the public eye.

Türfent, who had been under detention for more than 19 months before the hearing, was charged with both “membership of a terrorist organization” and “terror propaganda.” Dismissing repeated allegations of torture and ill-treatment, the prosecutor based his case on the witnesses’ initial testimonies to police and sought to convict Türfent for the former crime, which demands a higher sentence.

Still, defense lawyers and Türfent’s colleagues were cautiously optimistic before the fifth and final hearing of the case on Dec. 15. Twenty witnesses rejected the testimonies included in the indictment and only one witness upheld her testimony. The defense also brought credible evidence of contradictions in her testimony – enough to raise doubts about the veracity of her claims. Türfent himself also previously described to the court the death threats he received from the police when he was detained. The defense stressed that there was no evidence beyond reasonable doubt to convict Türfent on charges of “membership”.

However, the panel of judges thought otherwise. Announcing the verdict, the head judge said they had dismissed some of the initial testimonies but decided to retain others, regardless of the confessions that they had been taken under torture and duress. To justify the sentence, the judge referred cases to testimonies of witnesses who were minors during their interrogation and whose testimonies were not taken in the presence of a prosecutor and either a psychologist or pedagogue, as required by the Law on the Protection of Children.

‘A message to all journalists’

“No legal action was taken against the police, despite 20 witnesses confessing to having testified against Türfent under police pressure. One of the witnesses even told the court during the first hearing that police pulled two of his teeth with pliers in order to get a testimony from him,” Fatih Polat, the editor-in-chief of the left-wing daily Evrensel, told Index on Censorship. “Eventually, Türfent was handed a sentence [with terms] arranged by [the police].”    

Polat, who has vocally criticized the case in a bid to draw wider public attention, said the verdict was aimed at intimidating the entire media community. “This verdict is also a message aiming to tell everyone doing journalism in this country: ‘Think carefully before you decide what you report on,’” Polat said.

“If we don’t stand against this unlawful ruling strongly enough today, we shouldn’t be surprised when the same happens to us tomorrow.”

Diyarbakır-based journalist Mahmut Oral, who monitored the trial on behalf of the Journalists’ Union of Turkey (TGS), also said that the case was a symbolic one. “Nedim worked in a difficult region during difficult times,” Oral said, referring to the military siege and curfews in Yüksekova.

Oral noted that the court didn’t act to investigate neither witnesses testimonies of torture nor Türfent’s account of ill-treatment when he was taken under custody. His legal complaints had been dismissed by prosecutors.

“This decision may well be legal for the Turkish justice system, but it is not a conscientious one,” Oral said. “This is why I consider this decision as an attempt to attack the rights of journalism.”

Decision to be appealed

The damage that a conviction would cause to journalism in the region and nationwide was repeatedly emphasised by Türfent himself. Türfent, who made his defense statements in Kurdish, has expressed no regrets about his work.

“I have written more than a thousand reports over seven years,” the young reporter said. “Some may not please the government. But it is not lawful to try to discredit these reports by imprisoning journalists.”

Türfent said he was now considered persona non grata for breaking his report on the special forces commander. “But if had the chance I would write the same report again.”

Türfent’s lawyers will now appeal the ruling at an appeals court outside of Hakkari, in the nearby province of Erzurum. They also plan to apply to the Constitutional Court against Türfent’s “long and unjustified detention”.

In his acclaimed novel A Season in Hakkâri, author Ferit Edgü describes Hakkari as a “mountain-top close to the sky.” The province is well-known for its bitter, inhospitable winter, and this winter now seems to have engulfed all rights and freedoms. “We want justice to wake up from its winter sleep,” Türfent said during his defense at court. Perhaps his wish will be echoed across the country.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_custom_heading text=”Mapping Media Freedom” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_separator color=”black”][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/4″][vc_icon icon_fontawesome=”fa fa-times-circle” color=”black” background_style=”rounded” size=”xl” align=”right”][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”3/4″][vc_column_text]

Index on Censorship monitors press freedom in 42 European countries.

Since 24 May 2014, Mapping Media Freedom’s team of correspondents and partners have recorded and verified more than 3,700 violations against journalists and media outlets.

Index campaigns to protect journalists and media freedom. You can help us by submitting reports to Mapping Media Freedom.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_separator color=”black”][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_custom_heading text=”Don’t lose your voice. Stay informed.” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_separator color=”black”][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/2″][vc_column_text]Index on Censorship is a nonprofit that campaigns for and defends free expression worldwide. We publish work by censored writers and artists, promote debate, and monitor threats to free speech. We believe that everyone should be free to express themselves without fear of harm or persecution – no matter what their views.

Join our mailing list (or follow us on Twitter or Facebook) and we’ll send you our weekly newsletter about our activities defending free speech. We won’t share your personal information with anyone outside Index.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/2″][gravityform id=”20″ title=”false” description=”false” ajax=”false”][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_separator color=”black”][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_basic_grid post_type=”post” max_items=”12″ style=”load-more” items_per_page=”2″ element_width=”12″ grid_id=”vc_gid:1513935154207-dc7c9f88-877b-4″ taxonomies=”8607″][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Jean-Paul Marthoz: Commercial interference in the European media

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_single_image image=”81193″ img_size=”full” alignment=”center”][vc_column_text]Commercial pressures on the media? Anti-establishment critics have a ready-made answer: of course, journalists are hostage to the whims of corporate owners, advertisers and sponsors. Of course, they cannot independently cover issues which these powers consider “inconvenient”. Actually such suspicion is widely shared: In France, according to the 2017 La Croix barometer on media credibility, 58% of public opinion consider that journalists “are not really able to resist pressures from financial interests”.

The issue is not new. In 1944 when he founded the French “newspaper of record”, Le Monde, Hubert Beuve-Méry fought to guarantee its independence from political parties but also from what he called “the wall of money”. “Freedom of the press belongs to the one who owns one”, New Yorker media critic A.J. Liebling famously said. However, “while media academics have long looked at the question of commercial pressure, ownership (…) in shaping coverage”, writes Anya Schiffrin in a 2017 CIMA report on “captured media” press freedom groups’ focus had been mostly on the governments’ responsibilities and on criminal non-state actors.

In June 2016 Reporters Without Boarders made a splash with its report on oligarchs in the media. Proprietors’ interventions may have indeed a very negative impact on journalism’s proclaimed commitment to report the news without fear or favour. Pressures are particularly acute when the media are owned by conglomerates who dabble in other economic sectors. In France, for instance, a military aircraft manufacturer (Dassault), the luxury industry leader (LVMH), telecoms giants (SFR, Free), a powerful public works and telecoms company (Bouygues) directly own key media companies.

Ownership provides a powerful lever to influence media contents. Cases of direct intervention or of journalists’ self-censorship are not exceptional, even if they are often difficult to prove. In France, Vincent Bolloré, owner, among others, of TV channel Canal+, has been regularly accused of using his powers to determine content. It led the French Senate’s culture commission to invite him to a hearing in June 2016, but he firmly denied all allegations of censorship.

In other European countries, the landscape is much clearer. In Turkey, during the June 2013 Gezi Park events, major TV stations failed to report police repression live. They chose instead to broadcast animal documentaries, for which they were rewarded with the nickname of “penguin media”. In fact, they turned into “proxy censors” for Erdogan’s government who had the power to determine their economic fate by rewarding them -or not- with public works contracts or financial favors. The worst of the worst flourishes in some former communist eastern European countries where major media outlets have been snatched by oligarchs allied with political parties or even, allegedly, with criminal organisations.

Big companies may be ruthless. Advertising budgets can be cut when a media covers “inconvenient news”. In November 2017, according to satirical weekly Le Canard enchainé, Bernard Arnault, the boss of LVMH (luxury products, owner of Le Parisien and Les Echos), canceled his advertising budget in Le Monde until the end of the year after his name appeared in the Paradise Papers global investigation, which named people who had offshore accounts in tax havens. LVMH denied it was cutting all advertising in the paper, adding that it was currently “reflecting on its advertisement policy in classical media”.

The unraveling of the legacy media’s business model has increased their vulnerability to outside pressures. Advertising money is shrinking, therefore increasing the temptation to dismantle what was presented as an impassable wall between “church and state”. Differences between advertising and the news are also being diluted into ambiguous advertorials, sponsored content and “native advertising”.  

Such pressures however are not automatic. “Suffering pressures does not mean ceding to them”, says Hervé Béroud, director general of leading all-news TV channel BFMTV. Due to the way journalism actually works, the freedom to report, even against the owners’ interests, cannot be systematically crushed. In fact, as a former editor in chief of Belgian newspapers and magazines I was confronted with radically different forms of “advice” from my successive owners. While some were very protective of editorial independence others were blunter and ready to compromise with advertisers’ “wishes”. The existence of journalists’ societies, co-owners of the so-called “ethical capital” of the paper, provided some protection, but much was left to individual wrestling between the editor and the proprietor.

At the end, this issue comes down to defining who “owns freedom of information”. In 1993 the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe stated that “the owner of the right is the citizen, who also has the related right to demand that the information supplied by journalists be conveyed truthfully, in the case of news, and honestly, in the case of opinions, without outside interference by either the public authorities or the private sector”. A far cry from A.J. Liebling’s sentence…[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_custom_heading text=”Survey: How free is our press?” use_theme_fonts=”yes” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.indexoncensorship.org%2F2017%2F12%2Fsurvey-free-press%2F|title:Take%20our%20survey||”][vc_separator color=”black”][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/4″][vc_icon icon_fontawesome=”fa fa-pencil-square-o” color=”black” background_style=”rounded” size=”xl” align=”right”][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”3/4″][vc_column_text]

Are you a working journalist? Do you want to see better protections and freedoms for reporters?

This survey aims to take a snapshot of how financial pressures are affecting news reporting. The openMedia project will use this information to analyse how money shapes what gets reported – and what doesn’t – and to advocate for better protections and freedoms for journalists who have important stories to tell.

More information[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_separator color=”black”][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_custom_heading text=”Don’t lose your voice. Stay informed.” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_separator color=”black”][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/2″][vc_column_text]Index on Censorship is a nonprofit that campaigns for and defends free expression worldwide. We publish work by censored writers and artists, promote debate, and monitor threats to free speech. We believe that everyone should be free to express themselves without fear of harm or persecution – no matter what their views.

Join our mailing list (or follow us on Twitter or Facebook) and we’ll send you our weekly newsletter about our activities defending free speech. We won’t share your personal information with anyone outside Index.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/2″][gravityform id=”20″ title=”false” description=”false” ajax=”false”][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_separator color=”black”][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_basic_grid post_type=”post” max_items=”12″ style=”load-more” items_per_page=”4″ element_width=”6″ grid_id=”vc_gid:1513691969537-ee852610-8cb0-8″ taxonomies=”8996″][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Zaman journalists remain in prison after second hearing

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_single_image image=”96900″ img_size=”full” alignment=”center”][vc_column_text]Thirty-one people, mostly Zaman journalists, appeared before a judge for the second time on 8 December on charges of aiding Turkey’s failed coup attempt of 15 July 2016 in a session held in the courtroom on the territory of the Silivri Prison Complex, which is currently home to some 150 journalists.

Most of the suspects were marking their 500th day in prison on the day of the trial. The world didn’t seem to care.  

The crowds that attended the Cumhuiyet trial weren’t there. Only suspects’s families, several international observers and reporters from just two agencies and a local journalism organisation followed the hearing, which went on until after midnight. Among the defendendts were famous columnists as Şahin Alpay and Ali Bulaç.

Article 19’s representative posted a picture of the lonely courthouse with a tweet: “At the courtroom for #zaman trial, including several journalists and famous columnist Sahin Alpay. Apart from relatives of defendants there is hardly anyone here #journalism is not a crime.”

Zaman was the flagship newspaper of the Fethullah Gülen network, which has been declared public enemy number one since the attempted coup. Turkey claims that the Gülen network — with which the government had fallen out in 2012 — was behind the coup attempt. But foes of the government love to hate the Gülen movement, and maybe rightly so. At the peak of their power, prosecutors affiliated with the Gülen network conducted investigations into writers, secularist military officers and others, accusing them of plotting a coup against the then prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, and the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP). Many, including journalist Ahmet Şık, were jailed for months, some even years, on what today are known to be mostly false charges.

The suspects, who already submitted their full defense statements in the first hearing in September, were allowed to speak in the second hearing. As is the case in most of Turkey’s politically motivated trials, the sense of a combination of personal tragedy and Turkey’s own traumas over the past decade — starting with growing polarisation, which some say lies in the heart of Turkish President Erdoğan’s successive election victories; unnamed regime change; a bloody coup attempt was almost palpable in suspect testimonies. Some were fearful, some resentful, some apologetic. Many said they regretted having written at Zaman, while few said they were proud.

Former Zaman writer Ahmet Turan Alkan’s defense statement was unapologetic. He spoke clearly, distinctly and with purpose. Looking at the judges, he said:”You can’t take 500 days stolen from the life of a person lightly. For this reason, I ask of you to forgive me, I am a little bit angry, I am enraged.”

Alkan stressed the violations of due diligence, which have also been pointed out by international observers, “You are more aware of this fact than I am: This case is the result of a vengeful ambition, of political grudge. The accusations against me are mind bogglingly severe , while the evidence department is empty.”

He continued: “Is it that easy in this Republic of Turkey, which is governed by rule of law, to steal 500 days of the life of a person on such light and facetious accusations? I will answer: Yes. Is it that cheap playing with my life, honor and professional reputation? The answer is yes. “

The former Zaman writers also chastised some of the other defendants, who in their statements said their affiliation with Zaman had been a mere result of the circumstances. “I wrote at Zaman for 20 years. I am a Zaman columnist. I wrote what I believed in. I have no political commitments to anyone, neither to Recep Tayyip Erdoğan or Fethullah Gülen, and I am proud of this. This will be the most meaningful legacy I will be leaving to my grandchildren and children. Because I don’t know if I will walk out of prison alive.”

He said he was angry at the state. “I was a nationalist in my youth, I wish that God will forgive me.” The journalist also had a message for the judges: “The government until today has never owned up to any of its mistakes. It’s always been bureaucrats who have had to pay the price.”

“I don’t expect to see compassion or justice from you. I just need you to put concrete laws to work,” he said, and finally completed his statement:“There are such courts that it is better to be the defendant in them than the judge.”

In stark contrast, former Zaman columnist and liberal academic İhsan Dağı — who was released pending trial earlier in the investigation and therefore testified via court-conferencing from Ankara, where he lives — was regretful. He said he agreed with the indictment, that the Gülen network was a terrorist organization and Zaman had become a mouthpiece for it. “I am accused because I wrote for the Zaman newspaper. I left the newspaper the moment when I understood that it had turned into a mouthpiece for FETÖ propaganda,” he said, which made him the only defendant to use the acronym used for the Gülen network by Turkish authorities. He said “FETÖ” was a “post-modern terrorist organisation,” hiding behind a legitimate face and using not its own weapons, but those of the state.

Other writers and columnists

Former Zaman columnist Lale Kemal, who was also let go after spending three months in prison, also testified via the court’s video conferencing system. She likened her ordeal to Kafka’s The Trial. She said: “There are three short paragraphs about me in the indictment. There is not a single piece of evidence against me.”

She said she was known professionally for her opposition to all military interventions, against that as a defense reporter, this has made her life difficult as she was not well liked by military officers.

“I think my being tried here has something to do with that hostility [some generals have felt towards me].”

She said she worked from home, and visited the Zaman building in Ankara maybe once or twice. “The claim that I am part of a hierarchical structure is out of reason.”

“How can I know about an organisation where the senior administration of intelligence organisations failed to monitor and prevent?”, she asked.

Lawyer Cengiz: Indicted for acting as lawyer for Zaman

Lawyer Orhan Kemal Cengiz, whose name is named only mentioned once in the indictment — on a page which lists the names of the suspects —  said he was included in the investigation after filing an application with the constitutional court against the government’s appointing trustees to Zaman. Saying that throughout his career he had defended people of all creeds, Cengiz said his inclusion in the indictment was a blatant attack on the right to defense. He asked for his acquittal.

Şahin Alpay: “I was mistaken”

Columnist Şahin Alpay, who is 73 and who has complained of poor health,  said he had been imprisoned for more than 16 months. Alpay said he was accused on the basis of seven articles published in the Zaman daily three or four years ago.

Alpay said the articles showed his commitment to parliamentary democracy and the rule of law, saying they were evidence in his favor, not against. “Everyone knows that I defend exclusion of violence from politics as a fundamental principle.“

“I sent in my articles via email and I never worked as an editor or executive at the newspaper. If there had been a judicial ruling about the Gülen network being a criminal organisation, I wouldn’t have written for Zaman for another day. If it had ever occurred to me that the members of this movement will one day participate in a coup attempt, I would have never written for Zaman,” he said.

“I was mistaken because I failed to see the dark and secret face of the Gülen movement, to that, I’ll admit. I am not a terrorist. I have always been against violence and terrorism all my life.”

He also said he was not an enemy of the government, but had merely criticized its policies after 2011.  

No evidence against suspects

Many suspects in the trial — journalists and financial or advertising staff alike — said they weren’t sure what the indictment accuses them of. Mustafa Ünal, another former columnist, said “I have been under arrest for 500 days. I don’t know why I am under arrest. I am not a terrorist. I have written thousands of articles. I haven’t uttered a single word in favor of a coup. I am not a member of a terrorist organisation. If you claim the contrary, you should prove it.”

Columnist Ali Bulaç said: “That I wrote for Zaman is shown as an element of crime, there is no other evidence.”

Another Mümtazer Türköne,  “Many people here don’t have any idea what they are accused of. The articles presented here can only be presented in my favor as each of them contained arguments against coups and for democracy.”

Both Bulaç and Türköne had been with Zaman for a very long time and both are well known writers.

İbrahim Karayeğen,  a former editor said, “I don’t know what I am accused of. I can only make guesses. I worked as a night shift editor at Zaman for 12 years. I wasn’t an executive, I had no say on editorial policy. I understand that it is journalism on trial here. Journalism is not a crime,” he said.

Mehmet Özdemir: “I have been a journalist for 20 years. I haven’t done anything else. There is no evidence against me in the indictment, and nor can there be any. Because there is no crime.”

Defendants Şeref Yıldız, Onur Kutlu, İsmail Küçük and Hüseyin Belli, who were imprisoned for accepting old vehicles in return for premium payments owed by Zaman, also asked for their acquittal. Kutlu, Küçük and Belli were released in the court’s interim ruling.

The next hearing will be heard on 5 April 2018. [/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_custom_heading text=”Mapping Media Freedom” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_separator color=”black”][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/4″][vc_icon icon_fontawesome=”fa fa-times-circle” color=”black” background_style=”rounded” size=”xl” align=”right”][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”3/4″][vc_column_text]

Index on Censorship monitors press freedom in 42 European countries.

Since 24 May 2014, Mapping Media Freedom’s team of correspondents and partners have recorded and verified more than 3,700 violations against journalists and media outlets.

Index campaigns to protect journalists and media freedom. You can help us by submitting reports to Mapping Media Freedom.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_separator color=”black”][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_custom_heading text=”Don’t lose your voice. Stay informed.” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_separator color=”black”][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/2″][vc_column_text]Index on Censorship is a nonprofit that campaigns for and defends free expression worldwide. We publish work by censored writers and artists, promote debate, and monitor threats to free speech. We believe that everyone should be free to express themselves without fear of harm or persecution – no matter what their views.

Join our mailing list (or follow us on Twitter or Facebook) and we’ll send you our weekly newsletter about our activities defending free speech. We won’t share your personal information with anyone outside Index.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/2″][gravityform id=”20″ title=”false” description=”false” ajax=”false”][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_separator color=”black”][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Annual appeal: “Our mission will continue and we will persist”

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]

Alp Toker and Isik Mater of Digital Activism Award-winning Turkey Blocks at the 2017 Freedom of Expression Awards

Alp Toker and Isik Mater of Digital Activism Award-winning Turkey Blocks at the 2017 Freedom of Expression Awards (Photo: Elina Kansikas for Index on Censorship)

“We send a unified message to those who seek to silence independent voices: as long as freedom of expression and digital rights are not safeguarded, our mission will continue and we will persist.”  – Alp Toker, co-founder Turkey Blocks, 2017 Digital Activism Fellow

Silence is the oppressor’s friend. Targeting those who speak out against corruption and injustice is the favoured tool of those who seek to crush dissent. Don’t let the bullies win – help us champion the people who are fighting back. People like Freedom of Expression Awards fellows Turkey Blocks.

With your help, each year we are able to support writers, journalists and artists at the free speech front line – wherever they are in the world – through Index Fellowships. These remarkable individuals risk their freedom, their families and even their lives to speak out against injustice, censorship and threats to free expression.

I am writing now to ask you to support the Index Fellows. Your donation provides the support and recognition these outstanding individuals need to ensure their voices are heard despite the restrictions under which they are forced to live and work.

Your support will help winners like Turkey Blocks, who continue to work hard to track and battle internet outages around the world, trying to ensure that they “make technology a force for good” says Alp Toker, founder.

The team, working under the new name Net Blocks, have most recently been developing a new tool COST, which calculates the financial impact of mass-censorship, “a very powerful method for convincing governments not to censor content”. Index will help them to launch COST in 2018. Meanwhile, in a “quite historic” meeting, they sat down with the internet blocking authority of Turkey. “I think that it’s just great that we’re able to have some dialogue, because things in Turkey are very polarized right now. Normally it’s like oil and water—you can’t even exist in the same space” says Toker.

Alp Toker says the Index Awards Fellowship has made them feel “valued, recognised and befriended” and co-founder Isik Mater says “I can feel that if something bad happens to me or my colleagues, Index will be there to support us”.

I hope you will consider showing your support for free speech and the Index Fellows. A gift of £500 would support professional psychological assistance for a fellow; a gift of £100 helps them travel to speak at more public events. A gift of £50 helps us to be available for them 24/7. You can make your donation online now.

Please give what you can in the fight against censorship in 2018. Make your voice heard so that others can do the same.

Thank you for your support.

Jodie Ginsberg, CEO

P.S. The 2018 Index on Censorship awards will be held in April. To find out more about the awards including previous winners, please visit: https://www.indexoncensorship.org/awards

Index on Censorship is an international charity that promotes and defends the right to free expression. We publish the work of censored writers, journalists and artists, and monitor, and campaign against, censorship worldwide.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_basic_grid post_type=”post” max_items=”12″ style=”load-more” items_per_page=”4″ element_width=”6″ grid_id=”vc_gid:1512726349609-d7244289-6e40-2″ taxonomies=”9034″][/vc_column][/vc_row]