Losing a point of reference: Press freedom in the US

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]By Nicole Ntim-Addae and Long Dang. With additional reporting by Shreya Parjan and Sandra Oseifri.[/vc_column_text][vc_single_image image=”100888″ img_size=”full” add_caption=”yes”][vc_column_text]“What do we do next? We are losing our point of reference. The loss of the United States and the United Kingdom as democratic beacons for the rights of journalists and the freedom of information is a bad omen for the rest of the world.”

The question was raised by Javier Garza of Article 19, a British human rights organisation, at the discussion about the growing threats to press freedom in the United States that took place at the Free Word Centre on Thursday 14 June. The panel was held to explore the findings of the unprecedented mission to the USA undertaken by six press freedom groups — Index on Censorship, Article 19, Committee to Protect Journalists, IFEX, International Press Institute, and Reporters Without Borders—in January 2018. Representatives of the groups conducted interviews with journalists in St. Louis, Missouri, Houston, Texas, and Washington DC. Their findings were published in a mission report in May 2018.

Jodie Ginsberg, CEO of Index on Censorship, stated the motivation behind the mission. “It is unusual for press freedom organisations to take a mission to the US”, she said. “According to the findings of the mission, violations of freedom of press and freedom of information may be closer to home.” The mission was carried out in recognition that discussions regarding press freedom are taken for granted in democracies in a way that they are not in authoritarian states.

At the same time, Trump’s hostile rhetoric directed against the US press is problematic for press worldwide. Rebecca Vincent, UK bureau director of Reporters Without Borders, noted that the Trumpian denunciation of the press as “fake news” and “enemies of the people” is gradually becoming a global phenomenon.

Vincent, Ginsberg, and Dave Banisar, senior legal counsel of Article 19 were moderated by Paddy Coulter, director of communications at Oxford Poverty & Human Development Initiative and member of the Article 19 board,  to review the mission.

According to the US Press Freedom Tracker, there were 34 arrests of journalists made by the authorities in 2017 alone. Along with that, there has been a noticeable uptick in border controls since 2017, with journalists being searched, forced to hand over their phones for inspection, and denied entry into the U.S. This kind of problematic border control renders it extremely difficult for journalists to travel for work. Moreover, the excessive phone screening not only poses a violation of journalists’ right to privacy, but also a risk to the safety of their sources.

“The US office [of RSF] now puts out a weekly violations report because there are so many of them” said Vincent. The UK is currently ranked 40th out of 180 countries in terms of press freedom, according to the 2018 World Press Freedom Index. The US is faring worse, ranking at 45th. Since the beginning of 2018 alone, two journalists have been arrested and 12 have been attacked. The panelists noted that these problems did not start with the Trump administration. “Don’t get complacent. The beautiful [Clinton-Bush-Obama]  administration’s era when nothing went wrong hasn’t existed for a long time.” said Banisar.

Banisar explained how little protection there is for whistleblowers and their sources under the Espionage Act of 1917. It is important to note that the improper use of the act had started before the Trump administration: under the Obama administration, the act was used to prosecute more whistleblowers than ever before. Banisar highlighted the case of Reality Winner, the former NSA contractor who was incarcerated only a few days after she released information that the Russians had hacked the 2016 presidential election. Jen Robinson from Article 19, an Australian human rights lawyer and barrister with Doughty Street Chambers in London and advisor to Julian Assange WikiLeaks founder noted that Wikileaks’ 2010 investigation was unprecedented. Never before has the Espionage Act been used in a civil lawsuit as that would have set the stage for larger news agencies such as The New York Times.

How could we do better?

Ginsberg stressed the importance of  “reverse education” – that is, showing people how to navigate the negative environments. Border stops, according to her, are “a deeply concerning intrusion on the confidentiality of a reporter’s sources”. Accordingly, when journalists travel to the US to work, they should be aware of the situation and take steps to protect themselves and their sources.  In that vein, Index has provided a journalist tool kit drawing from the experience of journalists who have had to deal with problems first hand. It has also corroborated with the Missouri School of Journalism in Project Exile, which documents the experience of journalists forced to live in exile because of their work.

Vincent reaffirmed that the hostile rhetoric directed at journalists needs to stop, since “the line between hateful, hostile terms and violence against journalists is blurring”.  Bainsar emphasized that legal changes needs to be made to facilitate the free flow of information. He also stated that the US government needs to strive to improve its laws on source protection, protection for whistleblowers and statutory rights. Banisar calls for the Espionage Act of 1917 to be “ceremonially buried”.

But it is not all doom and gloom. Ginsberg, pointing to the demonstrations taking place around the world, commented that there is “still a huge appetite to assemble freely”. Banisar reported that the influx of cash flow into organisations such as the ACLU and HRW shows citizens are aware that press freedom violations are not problems they want to see coming back. He also reminded the audience that  the president could just serve four years, and there are rules and regulations that would keep him in check. Despite Trump’s adamant dismissal of climate change, 10,000 documents— obtained through the US’s landmark Freedom of Information Laws—from the Environmental Protect Agency were published in The New York Times this past week, demonstrating that there is still professionalism in the use of laws.

“There are still those with liberal values.” said Rebecca Vincent. “There is a younger generation of journalists who care about issues. It’s also about making people realize that this is not just the happening in the ‘world’. This is happening in our borders. We must stand up to our own standards.” [/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:1529312741775-6402968b-d0c0-9″ taxonomies=”9044″][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Turkey should immediately release Mehmet Altan and Şahin Alpay

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]

Şahin Alpay and Mehmet Altan

Şahin Alpay and Mehmet Altan

Turkey should immediately implement the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and release the veteran journalists Mehmet Altan and Şahin Alpay without delay, a coalition of nongovernmental groups said on 23 March 2018. Furthermore, Turkey must ensure that domestic remedies for human rights violations are effective, in particular by ensuring the urgent review of all cases of journalists and writers currently pending before its Constitutional Court.

The organizations, which had intervened as third parties in the cases before the court, included PEN International, ARTICLE 19, Committee to Protect Journalists, European Centre for Press and Media Freedom, European Federation of Journalists, Human Rights Watch, Index on Censorship, International Press Institute, International Senior Lawyers Project and Reporters Without Borders. The coalition welcomed the judgments announced on March 20, 2018. The rulings are the first by the court in the cases of journalists arrested and detained on charges in relation to the failed 2016 coup attempt in Turkey. They set an important precedent for the other cases of 154 detained journalists in Turkey.

“The Turkish government must take action to implement the European Court of Human Rights’ judgement. The ongoing trials are a serious breach of human rights and freedom of expression by the government. Turkey must cease its judicial harassment of journalists, academics and lawyers,” said Joy Hyvarinen, head of advocacy of Index on Censorship said.

In its two judgments, the European Court found violations of Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which protects the right to freedom of expression. The court made clear that criticism of governments should not attract criminal charges since, in addition to pre-trial detention, this would inevitably have a chilling effect on freedom of expression and would silence dissenting voices.

“We welcome these rulings, in particular the European Court’s recognition that a state of emergency must not be abused as a pretext for limiting freedom of expression,” said Carles Torner, executive director of PEN International.

While acknowledging the threat posed to Turkey by the attempted coup, the court crucially noted that “the existence of a ‘public emergency threatening the life of the nation’ must not serve as a pretext for limiting freedom of political debate, which is at the very core of the concept of a democratic society.”

The European Court has also found that the journalists’ detention was unlawful under the right to liberty protected by Article 5 (1) of the European Convention. The European Court endorsed the January 2018 ruling of Turkey’s Constitutional Court, which held that there was not sufficient evidence to keep the defendants in detention and ordered their release.

The judgment further sharply criticized the lower courts for refusing to carry out the Constitutional Court’s decision. In particular, the applicants’ continued pre-trial detention raised serious doubts as to the ability of the domestic legal system in providing an effective remedy for human rights violations, stating: “For another court to call into question the powers conferred on a constitutional court to give final and binding judgments on individual applications runs counter to the fundamental principles of the rule of law and legal certainty.”

“We welcome the court’s finding that the right to liberty of the applicants was violated,” said Caroline Stockford, Turkey Advocacy Coordinator for the International Press Institute. “The Court rightly criticised the refusal by the lower domestic courts to implement the Turkish Constitutional Court’s decisions and to release Mehmet Altan and Şahin Alpay.”

The European Court decided not to examine the applicants’ complaint that the detention of the applicants was politically motivated, under Article 18 of the convention.

“In deciding not to rule on Article 18, the European Court dodges an important question at the core of this litigation, which is whether Turkey’s prosecutions of journalists just for doing their work is part of a larger campaign to crack down on independent journalism?”, said Torner.

“The decision stated that ‘the investigating authorities had been unable to demonstrate any factual basis’that indicate that both journalists had committed the offenses with which he was charged’. The Court repeats what we have been saying with our affiliates for years to Turkish authorities that journalism is not a crime and journalists, like writers or academicians in the country, must not be prosecuted for their work or opinions,” said Ricardo Gutiérrez, EFJ General Secretary.

What the judgments mean for other cases

The judgments contain some important statements of principle on unlawful detention and freedom of expression. In particular, the European Court emphasised that it is not permissible to prosecute individuals on the basis of expression that is critical of the government.

However, in practice, the judgments also imply that the European Court will wait for the Constitutional Court to rule on the other pending cases of Turkish journalists before proceeding to its own review. This is because the European Court still considers the Constitutional Court an effective remedy in general.

Although the European Court was prepared to accept the length of time the Constitutional Court took to review these cases, the judgment is effectively putting the Constitutional Court on notice, saying that it will keep the situation under review and that it cannot continue taking this long to decide on cases.

The coalition repeats its call for the immediate implementation of these two judgments and for the release of Mehmet Altan from prison and Şahin Alpay from house arrest.

“These judgments are an important affirmation of the right to free expression and clearly state that the state of emergency is not a good enough reason to hold journalists and writers in detention for what they say,” said Gabrielle Guillemin, Senior Legal Officer at ARTICLE 19. “The Turkish authorities must now immediately release them both and the Turkish courts should apply these principles to the many other cases of detained journalists in Turkey,” she added.

[/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:1521808770518-0e88bc5e-2722-5″ taxonomies=”8862″][/vc_column][/vc_row]

New fund to support EU investigative journalism launched

A fund of up to €450,000 to support cross-border investigative journalism in the European Union is being launched today by the European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF) and the International Press Institute (IPI).

The Investigative Journalism for Europe (#IJ4EU) fund is intended to foster and strengthen collaboration among European Union-based journalists and newsrooms on revelations in the public interest and of cross-border significance. The fund aims to support investigations that reflect the media’s watchdog role and that assist the public in holding those in power accountable for their actions and to their obligations. In so doing, it seeks to contribute to the sustainability of democracy and the rule of law in the EU. 

The fund will be managed by IPI, a global network of editors, media executives and leading journalists defending press freedom.

In 2018 cross-border teams of investigative reporters and/or media outlets based in at least two EU countries can apply for grants up to a maximum of €50,000 to produce investigations on a topic of cross-border relevance and of public interest.

Proposed projects must aim to reveal new information. Investigative teams already in existence or formed for an #IJ4EU project are equally welcome to apply. Ongoing but incomplete investigations are eligible to apply for funds to complete a publishable story. Teams of journalists or media outlets based outside of the capitals or largest cities or in countries where investigative journalism is at particular risk are especially encouraged to apply.

The programme will consider funding all platforms, including print, broadcast, online media, documentary filmmaking and multi-platform story-telling.

To be eligible for funding, proposed projects must aim to be published (and available in publishable form) by respected news outlets or platforms in at least two EU countries no later than December 31, 2018.

The deadline for applications is May 3, 2018, which also marks World Press Freedom Day. Applications must be submitted in English. Applicants will need to provide a detailed project description, information on the investigative team, a research and publication plan, a budget, and a risk assessment.

An independent jury will select the projects to be funded, with the aim of concluding agreements with all successful applicants by June 15, 2018. 

To apply and to read full information about eligibility, applications and the selection process, please visit the fund’s website: http://www.ij4eu.net/

“Investigative journalism, which performs an essential service in any functioning democracy, is under pressure across the EU”, IPI Executive Director Barbara Trionfi said. “Providing financial support to investigative projects is a way of helping ensure that information on issues such as corruption, financial crime, human rights abuses and environmental damage reaches the public.”

She added: “As such investigations are nowadays rarely confined to a single state, it is critical for teams of journalists to work across borders on issues. We are proud that #IJ4EU will provide an opportunity do so.”

For any questions, please contact:

Javier Luque
Head of Digital Media
IPI
Email: [email protected]
Tel.: +43 1 5129011

 

USA: Climate for press freedom worsens in Missouri and surrounding states

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]Climate for press freedom worsens in Missouri, surrounding states

St. Louis, Missouri — An already adverse environment for journalists in the Midwestern United States has worsened in the year since President Trump’s inauguration, an international group of media watchdogs concluded after travelling to the state of Missouri. The group also met with journalists from Illinois and Wisconsin.

The fact-finding mission this week concluded in St. Louis, where journalists were indiscriminately arrested in 2014 and 2017 during protests in response to police shootings in the city and its suburb, Ferguson. The group also met with journalists from the city of Columbia and the capital, Jefferson City, as well as representatives of the Missouri Press Association and national media groups headquartered at the Missouri School of Journalism.  

The group, which included leaders of Index on Censorship, the Committee to Protect Journalists, IFEX, Article 19, and the International Press Institute, found that local public officials have embraced Trump’s rhetoric toward the media and bypassed the press in favour of social media. A Wisconsin sheriff used expletives to deny an interview. Missouri Gov. Eric Greitens has called the media “fake news,” refused interviews, and directed his staff to use software that immediately erases mobile chats.

“The hostility to the press at the national level gives a free pass for state officials to use harmful rhetoric and has contributed to a polarisation in public attitudes toward the press,” said Marty Steffens, North American chair and member of the executive board of the International Press Institute, a global network of journalists and editors. Steffens, also a professor at the Missouri School of Journalism, served as local host for the mission.

Journalists stressed that the threats are not new, but an acceleration of existing trends of public mistrust and political obstruction of the press. They were split on how the national discourse has affected their daily reporting, with some saying they see it as simply one more factor in an already difficult environment.

A longstanding unwillingness of authorities in Missouri to comply with freedom of information laws has worsened since Trump’s election, with extended delays, prohibitive costs, and the use of technological tools to prevent the release of public records, journalists said. They cited a lack of effective independent oversight and inadequate training of public officials regarding what is known as the Sunshine Law.

“The reality of shrinking newsrooms and financial resources for news media makes the adherence of authorities to both the letter and spirit of the Sunshine Law ever more important. The disregard being shown poses the question whether the current legal structure is fit for purpose,” said Thomas Hughes, executive director of Article 19.

Hostility to the media comes as the Midwestern press corps has been hit hard by changing economic conditions. News staffs in Missouri as well as Chicago and Milwaukee, Wisc., told the group that declining revenues have reduced reporting ranks by two-thirds. One Wisconsin editor said some public meetings go uncovered, leaving the public uninformed about the use of tax dollars.

Proposed legislation in some Midwestern states would shift mandated paid public notices to government websites, making the information harder to find and exacerbating the media’s economic woes, especially at small community newspapers. This also raises the spectre that authorities could use public notice revenues as a means to influence editorial content.

“While many reporters are more galvanised than ever in the current news climate, local media and city newspapers said they did not receive the bump in funding and subscriptions that bolstered national papers after the election,” said Courtney Radsch, advocacy director at the Committee to Protect Journalists. “Journalists said lack of financial resources make it harder to fight back when politicians deny access.”

One photographer from the St. Louis Post-Dispatch told the delegation that at public demonstrations, journalists are increasingly caught between aggressive police and sometimes hostile protesters. In St. Louis and Ferguson, police have adopted increasingly militarised tactics such as “kettling”— a surround-and-arrest tactic that sweeps up working journalists and bystanders. In the fall of 2017, at least 10 journalists were arrested in St. Louis during protests over a police shooting. Two new protest laws up for consideration in the state could raise the stakes for journalists who are swept up in arrests.

“Nothing fake about the dedicated and resilient journalists working in Missouri encountered during this tour. They continue to play a key role in keeping the public informed and the democracy healthy in spite of myriad challenges,” said Annie Game, IFEX executive director.

CPJ is an independent, nonprofit organisation that works to safeguard press freedom worldwide.

Media contacts: 

Bebe Santa-Wood
Communications Associate
[email protected]
212-300-9032[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_basic_grid post_type=”post” max_items=”4″ element_width=”6″ grid_id=”vc_gid:1516359796596-1b5d0b84-b35f-5″ taxonomies=”579″][/vc_column][/vc_row]