21 Jul 2020 | News and features
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_single_image image=”114332″ img_size=”full” add_caption=”yes”][vc_column_text]Should President Andrzej Duda continue supporting all key policies of the United Right currently governing Poland, media freedom and the independence of journalists will likely be curtailed.
During his first term as the president of Poland, Duda, formally independent, proved his loyalty to the Law and Justice (PiS) party on numerous occasions. For example, in 2016 he signed a law that gave the government greater control over state broadcasters.
State broadcasters have since become a propaganda machine for the governing majority. Many reports on the general elections held in Poland in 2019 and on the presidential elections in 2020 highlighted their lack of pluralism. But at least privately-owned media has remained an alternative source of information for a significant part of the population in Poland. But even that is not safe.
Over the years, foreign-owned media has been criticised as being anti-Polish and these criticisms grew louder during the presidential campaign. Duda implied that Germans wanted to influence the outcome of the election after the popular German tabloid Fakt published a story saying that Duda had pardoned a man convicted of sexual abuse of his daughter. Duda also unleashed an attack against Philipp Fritz, Warsaw correspondent of German newspaper Die Welt, accusing him of promoting the opposition’s campaign.
“Today, ladies and gentlemen, we have yet another German attack during these elections,” Duda said.
These remarks by the president, as well as other comments by the government officials, have raised concerns among journalists in Poland that after Duda’s win, the governing majority will try limiting independent media and journalism. The concerns are that first state-owned companies will try to buy-out key TV, radio, print commercial media from foreign owners. Second, the profession of journalists, now free, might be regulated, opening up a possibility to activate disciplinary proceedings against journalists and limit who can be a journalist in Poland.
And our fears are already feeling justified; since Duda’s re-election top public servants and high-profile PiS politicians have announced plans to take on commercial media and independent journalists.
Who will protect journalists? As president of Poland Duda has the power to veto legislation and issue motions to the Constitutional Tribunal to verify if the adopted laws conform with the Constitution. But on many occasions he has shown his loyalty to PiS. Since they came to power in 2015, they have waged a campaign to take control of the judiciary in open defiance of the law. By May 2018 they had managed to gain direct control over the Constitutional Tribunal and the National Council of the Judiciary. A triumvirate has therefore formed between the government, the Constitutional Tribunal and the president, which has allowed fast-tracking key legislation and rubber stamping controversial policies targeted against judicial independence.
Duda’s victory in the presidential contest on 12 July 2020 opens up the possibility that this alliance continues. The next general election in Poland should happen no earlier than in 2023. The United Right camp has three more years to implement its desired policies.
I fear discouragement and the chilling effect on journalists the most. In Poland, as in many places elsewhere, the profession has become more precarious which in itself could be a discouragement for many young people interested in pursuing this sort of career. Add an increased political pressure, and people may start having doubts if it is all worth it.
We need independent, broad-minded, professional journalists more than ever. It’s the most critical time since 1989 and we need to improve standards of democratic debate. OKO.press is keeping up the good work and we hope to continue fulfilling our mission to offer in-depth journalism on topics of public interests to all of Poland, without a paywall. Hopefully we can continue well into the future, but it has never felt more in peril.
Anna Wójcik is a journalist at Polish investigative journalism and fact-checking website OKO Press. OKO are the 2020 Index on Censorship Freedom of Expression Awards Journalism Fellow. Read more about them here.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][/vc_column][/vc_row]
15 Jun 2020 | Press Releases
Index on Censorship has today (Monday 15th June) announced the appointment of Ruth Smeeth as the organisation’s new chief executive.
Ruth Smeeth was the MP for Stoke-on-Trent-North from 2015 to 2019, and prior to that was deputy director at HOPE not hate.
Ruth Smeeth, chief executive, Index on Censorship, said:
“I’m excited to be joining Index on Censorship at a time when the organisation’s work to protect free speech is more important than ever.
“As governments and citizens seek to navigate increasingly complex and intimidating global issues – from Covid-19 to systemic racism – we’ve seen just how easily our fundamental right to freedom of expression can be threatened.
“From the arrests of journalists covering Black Lives Matter protests in America to the silencing of medics in China who sought to inform the world about the effects of Covid-19, it’s clear that the fight to enshrine and protect the right to free speech across the world has not yet been won.
“And this is not just an issue to be tackled abroad. Here in the UK, we’ve seen increasing threats to journalistic freedom as individuals are hounded and attacked simply for doing their jobs.
“Too often, free speech is portrayed as a fringe or foreign issue. Nothing could be further from the truth. Freedom of expression should be a mainstream concern, and it is time for a proper debate and discussion about its importance – and its limitations – in a rapidly changing world.
“Index on Censorship is uniquely placed to lead this discussion, alongside the campaign to protect freedom of expression here in the UK and abroad. I look forward to working with stakeholders and supporters to do just that”.
Trevor Phillips, chair, Index on Censorship, said:
“Ruth brings a wealth of relevant knowledge, experience and above all, courage to the organisation at a pivotal moment for Index on Censorship. Her independence of mind and non-partisan approach to freedom of expression is exactly what is needed at a time when the voices of people from all backgrounds need to be heard – not least those from minorities.
“Ruth’s experience, both as an MP and as a campaigner against fascism and racism, will enable her to champion our cause as we seek to tackle ever more frequent challenges to freedom of expression both across the globe and in every medium”.
Kate Maltby, deputy chair, Index on Censorship, said:
“I could not be more delighted to welcome Ruth as our new chief executive at Index on Censorship. Ruth has a proven record as a campaigner, unwavering in her principles and exceptional in her ability to build cross-partisan coalitions that make substantive change.
“Index on Censorship was founded in 1972, and in its first decades provided lifelines to dissidents as they endured harassment in Soviet regimes. As Index approaches its fiftieth birthday, it can sometimes seem that both progressive and conservative forces forget the lessons of those years.
“With Ruth at the helm, I am confident that Index on Censorship will play a central role in rebuilding an open, civic and intellectually diverse public sphere. Freedom of expression needs tough defenders, and in Ruth we have one.”
Media enquiries: Luke Holland, 07447 008098, [email protected].
15 Jun 2020 | News and features, Statements
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
Maria Ressa, a former CNN bureau chief and one of four journalists named Time’s Person of the Year in 2018, has today been given a sentence of up to six years in prison by a Filipino court, under a cyber libel law that didn’t even exist when the article in question was published.
Her journalism has been about fighting for the right to criticise power, and to hold her government to account.
Ressa is one of four journalists named Time’s Person of the Year in 2018. Ressa and her co-defendent Reynaldo Santos were found guilty of cyber libel at the Manila Regional Trial Court.
Ms Ressa was sentenced to a minimum of 6 months and a maximum of 6 years imprisonment and granted bail pending appeal. A fine of approximately $8,000 (P400,000) was also imposed.
Index on Censorship and English PEN condemn this decision which is part of a campaign to silence dissenting voices in the Philippines.
“This campaign is a frightening indictment of the pressures on journalists to stop reporting. We call on those who care about media freedom globally to stand up and take notice. This is not just about one journalist in one place, this has significance for journalism everywhere as part of a trend where we see reporters put under enormous pressures to stop covering stories” said Rachael Jolley, Index editor-in-chief.
Daniel Gorman, director of English PEN, said: “Today is a terrible day for those who care about freedom of expression and a free press, in the Philippines and across the world. This judgement aims to intimidate journalists and writers working across the Philippines. English PEN stands with Maria Ressa, and calls for the government of the Philippines to drop these spurious charges immediately.”
Through the past few years Index and English PEN has worked to bring attention to escalating restrictions on media freedom in the Philippines. Ressa and her team have written for Index on Censorship magazine, and Ressa was a judge at the annual Index on Censorship awards.
Seven further cases remain pending against Ms Ressa. The cases against Ms Ressa, which allege illegal foreign media ownership of her news site and alleged tax offences, are equally spurious, and an act of retaliation by the current administration against her reporting.
Reporting by the Rappler website, which Ressa co-founded as CEO, has exposed corruption and abuses, including the execution of thousands of Filipinos in the name of a war on drugs.
On behalf of her legal team, Amal Clooney said of today’s verdict: “Today a court in the Philippines became complicit in a sinister action to silence a journalist for exposing corruption and abuse. This conviction is an affront to the rule of law, a stark warning to the press, and a blow to democracy in the Philippines. I hope that the appeals court will set the record straight in this case.”
The National Union of Journalists of the Philippines has characterised the cases against Ms Ressa as an act of “persecution” by a “bully government.”
English PEN and Index on Censorship calls for the government of the Philippines to drop their cases against Maria Ressa and her co-defendants. We stand with them, along with all writers standing for a free media in the Philippines.
This statement is signed and supported by other organisations including:
Civicus
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]
8 Jun 2020 | Statements
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
The problem: gag lawsuits against public interest defenders
The EU must end gag lawsuits used to silence individuals and organisations that hold those in positions of power to account. Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPP) are lawsuits brought forward by powerful actors (e.g. companies, public officials in their private capacity, high profile persons) to harass and silence those speaking out in the public interest. Typical victims are those with a watchdog role, for instance: journalists, activists, informal associations, academics, trade unions, media organisations and civil society organisations.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column width=”3/4″][vc_column_text]Recent examples of SLAPPs include PayPal suing SumOfUs for a peaceful protest outside PayPal’s German headquarters; co-owners of Malta’s Satabank suing blogger Manuel Delia for a blog post denouncing money laundering at Satabank; and Bollore Group suing Sherpa and ReAct in France to stop them from reporting human rights abuses in Cameroon. In Italy more than 6,000 or two-thirds of defamation lawsuits filed against journalists and media outlets annually are dismissed as meritless by a judge. When Maltese journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia was brutally killed, there were 47 SLAPPs pending against her.
(Index has recently published a comprehensive review of the laws being used to silence journalists – click on the report cover to the right to read it.)[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][vc_column width=”1/4″][vc_single_image image=”113782″ img_size=”full” onclick=”custom_link” img_link_target=”_blank” link=”https://www.indexoncensorship.org/campaigns/the-laws-being-used-to-silence-media/”][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]SLAPPs are a threat to the EU legal order, and, in particular:
● A threat to democracy and fundamental rights. The EU is founded on the rule of law and respect for human rights. SLAPPs impair the right to freedom of expression, to public participation and to assembly of those who speak out in the public interest, and have a chilling effect on the exercise of these rights by the community at large.
● A threat to access to justice and judicial cooperation. Cross-border judicial cooperation relies on the principles of effective access to justice across the Union and mutual trust between legal systems. That trust must be based on the legally enforceable upholding of common values and minimum standards. To the extent that they distort and abuse the system of civil law remedies, SLAPPs undermine the mutual trust between EU legal systems: member states must be confident that rulings issued by other member states’ courts are not the result of abusive legal strategies and are adopted as the outcome of genuine proceedings.
● A threat to the enforcement of EU law, including in connection to the internal market and the protection of the EU budget. The effective enforcement of EU law, including the proper
functioning of the internal market, depends on the scrutiny of the behaviour of individual entities by the EU, member states and – crucially – informed individuals. Watchdogs, be it media or civil society actors, play a key enforcement role. Therefore, the absence of a system which safeguards public scrutiny is a threat to the enforcement of EU law. The same reasoning applies to the management of EU programmes and budget, which cannot be monitored through the sole vigilance of the European Commission.
● A threat to freedom of movement. The absence of rules to protect watchdogs from SLAPP has an impact on the exercise of the Treaty’s fundamental freedoms, since it affects the ability of media, civil society organisations and information services providers to confidently operate in jurisdictions where the risk of SLAPPs is higher, and discourages people from working for organisations where they can be the target of SLAPPs.
The solution: an EU set of anti-SLAPP measures
The EU can and must end SLAPPs by adopting the following complementary measures to protect all
those affected by SLAPPs:
1. An anti-SLAPP directive
An anti-SLAPP directive is needed to establish a Union-wide minimum standard of protection against SLAPPs, by introducing exemplary sanctions to be applied to claimants bringing abusive lawsuits, procedural safeguards for SLAPP victims, including special motions to contest the admissibility of certain claims and/or rules making the burden shifting to the plaintiff to demonstrate a reasonable probability of succeeding in such claims, as well as other types of preventive measures. The Whistle-Blower Directive sets an important precedent protecting those who report a breach of Union law in a work-related context. Now the EU must ensure a high standard of protection against gag lawsuits for everyone who speaks out – irrespective of the form and the context – in the public interest.
The legal basis for an anti-SLAPP directive is to be found in multiple provisions of the Treaty; for example, Article 114 TFEU on the proper functioning of the internal market, Article 81 TFEU on judicial cooperation and effective access to justice and Article 325 TFEU on combating fraudrelated to EU programmes and budgets.
2. The reform of Brussels I and Rome II Regulations
Brussels I Regulation (recast) contains rules which grant claimants the ability to choose where to make a claim. This must be amended to end forum shopping in defamation cases, which forces defendants to hire and pay for defence in countries whose legal systems are unknown to them and where they are not based. This is beyond the means of most and falls foul of the principles of fair trial and equality of arms.
Rome II Regulation does not regulate which national law will apply to a defamation case. This allows claimants to select the most favourable substantive law and therefore leads to a race to the bottom. Today, victims may be subject to the lowest standard of freedom of expression applicable to their case.
3. Support all victims of SLAPPs
Funds are needed to morally and financially support all victims of SLAPPs, especially with legal defence. Justice Programme funds should be used to train judges and practitioners, and a system to publicly name and shame the companies that engage in SLAPPs, for example in an EU register, should be created.
Finally, the EU must ensure that the scope of anti-SLAPP measures include everybody affected by SLAPPs, including journalists, activists, trade unionists, academics, digital security researchers, human rights defenders, media and civil society organisations, among others.
This paper was signed by the following 116 organisations
Abalone Alliance Safe Energy Clearinghouse
Access Info Europe
Access Now
ActionAid International
Adéquations
Amigas de la Tierra
Amis de la Terre France
ANTICOR
ARTICLE 19
Association Justice and Environment, z.s.
Bruno Manser Fonds
Terre Solidaire (CCFD)
CEE Bankwatch Network
Centre for Free Expression
Citizens Network Watchdog Poland
Civil Liberties Union for Europe
Civil Rights Defenders
Civil Society Europe
Clean Air Action Group (Hungary)
Committee to Protect Journalists
Common Weal
Consumer Association the Quality of Life
(EKPIZO)
Corporate Europe Observatory
Defend Democracy
European Digital Rights (EDRi)
Electronic Frontier Foundation
Environmental Partnership Association
ePaństwo Foundation
Environmental Paper Network International
(EPN)
Estonian Forest Aid / Eesti Metsa Abiks
ETC Group
Eurocadres / Council of European Professional
and Managerial Staff
European Center for Not-for-Profit Law
European Centre for Press and Media Freedom
European Civic Forum
European Coalition for Corporate Justice
European Coordination Via Campesina
European Environmental Bureau (EEB)
European Federation of Journalists
European Federation of Public Service Unions
(EPSU)
European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC)
Fern
Fitug
Forest Initiatives and Communities
Forum Ökologie & Papier
FOUR PAWS International
Free Press Unlimited
Friends of the Earth Europe
Friends of the Earth Nuclear Network
Friends of the Siberian Forests
Fundacja Otwarty Plan
Fundacja Strefa Zieleni
Global Justice Ecology Project
GM Watch
Gong
Government Accountability Project
Green Light Foundation
Greenpeace EU Unit
Homo Digitalis
IFEX
Index on Censorship
Institute for Sustainable Development
Institute of Water Policy
International Corporate Accountability
Roundtable (ICAR)
International Press Institute (IPI)
Iraqi Journalists Right Defence Association
JEF Europe
Jordens Vänner
Journalismfund.eu
Justice Pesticides
Legal Human Academy
Maison des Lanceurs d’Alerte
Mighty Earth
Milieudefensie / Friends of the Earth
Netherlands
MultiWatch
NGO Neuer Weg
NGO Shipbreaking Platform
Nuclear Consulting Group
Ending Gag Lawsuits in Europe – Protecting Democracy and Fundamental Rights 4
Nuclear Transparency Watch
OGM dangers
On ne se taira pas (We will not remain silent)
Osservatorio Balcani e Caucaso Transeuropa
PEN International
Polish Ecological Club Mazovian Branch
Polish Ecological Club Pomeranian Branch
Polish Institute for Human Rights and Business
Protection International
RECLAIM
Reporters Without Borders
Rettet den Regenwald e.V.
Salva la Selva
Sciences Citoyennes
Sherpa
Society for Threatened Peoples Switzerland
SOLIDAR
SOMO
Stowarzyszenie Ekologiczno-Kulturalne
Wspólna Ziemia / Common Earth
SumOfUs
The Daphne Caruana Galizia Foundation
The Ethicos Group
The Good Lobby
The Signals Network
Transnational Institute
Transparency International EU
Umweltinstitut München e.V.
Vouliwatch
Vrijschrift
vzw Climaxi
Chceme zdravú krajinu / We want a healthy
country
WeMove Europe
Whistleblower Network Germany
Whistleblowing International Network (WIN)
WildLeaks / Earth League International
Women Engage for a Common Future (WECF)
XNet
Zielone Wiadomości[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]
