4 Oct 2024 | Israel, News and features, Newsletters, Palestine, Sudan
If a tree falls in a forest, and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound? This well-known philosophical question most likely stems from the work of 18th century philosopher George Berkeley, who questioned the possibility of “unperceived existence”. In other words – did something really happen if no one is around to witness or perceive it?
This might seem a lofty and pretentious way to start this week’s Index newsletter. But the first-hand observance and subsequent documentation of events is the fundamental basis of rigorous journalism, and enables injustices to be accurately reported around the world. It provides us with the ability to understand truth from falsehood. And it is being increasingly undermined.
Journalistic “black holes” are appearing in conflicts globally, stopping the world from being able to witness what is happening on the ground, and therefore causing us to question reality.
Since the start of the Israel-Hamas war, triggered by Hamas’s incursion into Israel on 7 October 2023, Israel has banned foreign media access in Gaza. Only very limited international news crews are allowed in under strict conditions. This has left the world reliant on press statements, the words of government officials, and individual Palestinian journalists, who have risked their lives to showcase the brutality of the war on social media.
And many have lost their lives in the process. According to investigations by the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), as of 4 October 2024, at least 127 journalists and media workers are among the more than 42,000 Palestinians and 1,200 Israelis killed since the war began, making it the deadliest period for journalists since the organisation started gathering data in 1992. The CPJ has determined that at least five of these journalists were directly targeted.
Major broadcasters have also been targeted. Last month, Al Jazeera’s office in the West Bank was raided and shut down for 45 days by Israeli soldiers, following the closure of the channel’s East Jerusalem office in May, on claims that they are a threat to Israel’s national security. But as Al Jazeera English’s Gaza correspondent Youmna El Sayed writes for Index this week, such shutdowns of legitimate news providers prevent global audiences from being able to see the pain and suffering that is being endured by both Palestinians and Israelis, encouraging misinformation to propagate.
As hostilities escalate across the Middle East, news channels continue to be curtailed. This week, an air strike destroyed the headquarters of the religious al-Sirat TV station in Beirut, Lebanon, on grounds that it was being used to store Hezbollah weapons, a claim which Hezbollah denies. Foreign correspondents are, however, still allowed in Lebanon – but in Iran all broadcasting is controlled by the state, with foreign journalists barred, meaning access to objective reporting is essentially impossible.
Outside of the region, other countries’ severe reporting restrictions and intimidation of journalists have made it difficult for global audiences to comprehend what is happening in conflicts. This includes Kashmir, the disputed mountainous region between India and Pakistan, and Sudan, where it is estimated that 90% of the country’s media infrastructure has been wiped out by the civil war.
What is the impact of this? The worrying rise in press suppression not only creates huge risks for journalists, but severely curtails people’s ability to understand geopolitics, conflict, and in future, historical events. It stops us from being able to weigh things up and form opinions based on what we have perceived.
Ultimately, it is impossible for any news producer, whether they be an individual correspondent or a major broadcaster, to be truly “objective”. People are driven by motives, both emotional and financial, and their own lived experiences. A news organisation, backed by a particular country or group, will appear truthful to some and severely biased to others.
But the only way to ensure some level of objectivity is to retain access to a broad range of sources, from the BBC to Al Jazeera, helping us form a more rounded world view. To go back to Berkeley’s philosophical analysis, the only way to verify the truth is to have the privilege of witnessing the evidence. Without this, it becomes virtually impossible to be able to tell fact from fiction.
3 Oct 2024 | Europe and Central Asia, Georgia, News and features, Statements
The Mission of the Partner Organisations of the Council of Europe’s Safety of Journalists Platform and members of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) consortium have concluded a fact-finding mission to Georgia. The aim of the mission was to collect information on Georgia’s implementation of its freedom of expression and freedom of the media commitments, including in relation to the on-going election campaign.
This statement presents interim findings of the mission.
We, international press freedom, freedom of expression and journalists organisations, have just concluded a two day mission to Georgia. Before diving into the concrete findings of the mission, we want to say that we have observed the deterioration of press freedom as well as human rights at large in Georgia. It has been made clear to us that a wide range of tools and mechanisms are used to discredit and curtail dissenting voices, including those of independent journalists.
We want to once again declare our full support and solidarity with the journalists, media, press freedom and civil society organizations. We came with concerns about media freedom, but we were appalled by what we heard.
Media situation ahead of the election
Exchanges with journalists, civil society and political and institutional leaders bear witness to a democratic backsliding and human rights violations that go far beyond the erosion of media pluralism and violations of press freedom. Civil society as a whole is facing an illiberal drift, characterized by a weakening of democratic checks and balances.
Concerns over recent legislation
The representatives of journalists’ organizations, media and civil society alike heavily criticised the recently passed law on ‘Transparency of Foreign Influence’ and ‘Law on the Protection of Family Values and Minors’. They cited obstacles to the normal functioning of media outlets and media rights organisations, which are obliged to register under the foreign influence law if they receive at least 20 percent funding from abroad. They noted that only a small number of CSOs and one media outlet had so far consented to register. Both laws are perceived as tools of the executive and the ruling party for exerting pressure on the media.
When questioned about this, a representative from the ruling Georgian Dream party did not fully address our concerns. Even if not yet fully implemented, the law on Transparency of Foreign Influence has already had a significant chilling effect on CSOs and media outlets. The law already leads to self-censorship, intimidation of journalists’ sources, and a hostile environment, preventing journalists from reporting from the field.
All interlocutors have complained about polarisation of the media sphere. The lack of political debates between opposing parties exacerbates this division. The Mission recommends that political actors, public figures, and parties should abstain from fuelling it and refrain from ostracising societal groups and public figures.
Safety of Journalists: a feeling of fear and exodus from the profession
Our meeting with the stakeholders reinforced the picture, which was mentioned in the previous reports. Journalists are attacked physically, verbally, legally and financially. Journalism has become a dangerous occupation in Georgia.
Journalists are concerned about their safety to such a degree that some of them take chaperons to journalistic assignments. Representatives of several outlets noted that journalists leave the industry, and some relocate abroad. Additionally, several media outlets reported that they were making arrangements to register their media abroad.
Besides physical assaults on journalists, numerous cases of intimidation of journalists were reported to the Mission. Threats, short-term detention, cases of alleged abuse of the administrative code and targeted smear campaigns in social media were reported by journalists themselves and media rights organisations.
The interlocutors were also concerned about misuse of national sentiments by naming journalists and or media outlets ‘anti-Georgian’. The Mission is concerned that the ‘foreign influence law’ pours fuel on the fire of a deeply polarized political environment and dramatically undermines the safety of journalists.
Impunity for crimes and intimidation of journalists
Most of the organisers and perpetrators of physical assaults, threats, smear campaigns or other pressure on journalists are not prosecuted. We observed that this impunity creates a hostile climate for journalists’ work. During the mission we met with representatives from political parties, from the Public Defender’s office and media. We raised the question of impunity with all and were told that the existing means are insufficient or insufficiently used to resolve an issue.
Ever since the tragic events of July 2021,the people who attacked journalists and the organisers of these heinous acts as well as members of law enforcement allegedly responsible for violence against reporters were not held accountable for attacks.
Public service media
In 2023 the Georgian Public Broadcaster’s (GPB) funding was reduced by amendments to the Broadcasting Law and the funding mechanism of the GPB changed, from a fixed percentage of gross domestic product (GDP) to an annual allocation in the state budget. The amendments were proposed without prior assessment, without consultations with GBP and without an open public debate with stakeholders and experts. Public Service Media in Georgia needs stable and predictable funding, which safeguards their independence.
SLAPP lawsuits against media
Interlocutors reported that lawsuits concerning defamation against media are used as a tool by high-ranking politicians and businesspeople affiliated with the ruling party, less by private actors. Concerns about the lack of independence of the judicial system amplify concerns about these cases. At the same time, in order to prove innocence journalists are indirectly pressured to reveal their sources.
Journalists in exile
Some media outlets have already moved their staffers abroad and have spent their resources on registering their outlets abroad, especially in the campaign period and in the anticipation of the enforcement of the Law On Transparency of Foreign Influence.
Access to information
Reportedly, a law on creating a body responsible for regulating access to information has remained a draft since 2014. However, even the existing norms of replies by public bodies to journalists’ requests within ten days are frequently not met. Reportedly, critical and investigative journalists have the most difficulty receiving replies to their requests.
The Mission recommends that the capacity of the body dealing with the implementation of the Law on Free Access to Information should be strengthened.
Rules are imposed which limit journalists’ presence in the parliament and accreditation is used as a tool of curbing independent reporting. In 2024, journalists were not allowed in the Parliament during the vote on the Law on Transparency of Foreign Influence.
Recommendations
- Guarantee a safe and free working environment for journalists. Ensure that journalists can cover the pre-election period and elections without obstruction or interference.
- Pieces of media legislation which are not in line with international freedom of expression standards should be revised, the Law on Transparency of Foreign Influence and the Law on protection of Family Values and Minors must be repealed.
- Ensure the proper implementation of the media legal framework, with a particular focus on the law regarding Free Access to Information. Establish relevant bodies where necessary to support and oversee the effective enforcement of these laws.
- Foreign journalists who are in exile in Georgia must be allowed to work freely and not be denied access to the country.
Background
The mission comprised of representatives from the ARTICLE 19 Europe, Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), the European Federation of Journalists (EFJ), the European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF), Index on Censorship, the International Press Institute (IPI), the Justice for Journalists Foundation, and Reporters Without Borders (RSF).
On 1 and 2 October 2024, the Mission met with the Chief of Staff of the Speaker of the Parliament of Georgia, the Communications Commission (the Georgian media regulator), the Office of the Public Defender of Georgia, representatives of the public service broadcaster GBP, representatives of political groups and MPs, representatives of civil society organisations, journalists and editors of broadcast, printed press and online media and representatives of the international community. The Mission requested meetings with the Ministries of Justice and Culture as well as the Legal Affairs Committee of the Parliament. The Ministries could not meet the Mission; the Chief of Staff spoke on behalf of the Legal Affairs Committee.
The Partner Organisations and MFRR members held a press briefing on 2 October 2024.
The Platform for the Protection of Journalism and Safety of Journalists is a unique mechanism which helps the dialogue between the governments and the organisations of journalists, with the aim of stopping violations to press freedom in the member states of the Council of Europe and enabling journalists to exercise their profession without the risk of compromising their safety.
Since 2015, the Platform facilitates the compilation and dissemination of information on serious concerns about media freedom and safety of journalists in Council of Europe member states, as guaranteed by Art. 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
The Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) tracks, monitors and reacts to violations of press and media freedom in EU Member States and Candidate Countries. This project provides legal and practical support, public advocacy and information to protect journalists and media workers.
This is a revised version of a statement.
5 Apr 2024 | Israel, News and features, Palestine
Almost six months to the day since the outbreak of war between Israel and Hamas, the Israeli government made a decision to shutter the Al Jazeera bureau in Jerusalem. The Knesset vote was an overwhelming 71-10. “The ability of the Communications Minister to shutter press for political motivation is a complete and utter threat to democracy in Israel,” said Noa Sattath, the director of the Association for Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI), Israel’s leading human and civil rights organisation. “We want a journalist to be thinking about the truth, not about what a minister is thinking about them—this is a chilling effect. “
In addition to the attack on freedom of expression and freedom of the press, the new law also effectively precludes the court from intervening in decisions regarding the closure of media outlets. In addition to closing Al Jazeera’s offices, the law allows removing its website and confiscating the device used to deliver its content. Al Jazeera, termed a “propaganda machine” not a news organisation by many in the Israeli government, was an easy target perhaps, especially during wartime, but it is especially in wartime that a democracy’s fortitude is tested.
In a new sixth-month survey of the impact of the war on human and civil rights in Israel, ACRI makes these points: “Even before the terrorist attack Hamas perpetrated on 7 October, and before the war broke out, Israeli democracy was facing severe threats. Combined together, laws designed to take over the judicial system [what Prime Minister and his government called ‘judicial reform’, but what opponents called a ‘judicial coup’ attempt] and a slew of other initiatives in different areas crystallised to produce a judicial overhaul, as part of which the government sought to undermine the pillars of democracy and reduce human rights protections. Some initiatives to take over the judicial system have been put on hold since the war began, partly because this was put forward as a condition for expanding the government [by member parties]. Other initiatives that threaten democracy have also been suspended.”
Yet, there are enough new curbs and potential curbs on human and civil rights to warrant a 14-page document from ACRI. Sattath, the ACRI director, explains: “The government has pushed forward with existing trends such as targeting Arab society, restricting freedom of movement, increasing the prevalence of firearms in public spaces, and accelerating the annexation of the West Bank. Given the general climate in a time of war, these efforts are met with less resistance. In other fields, such as prisoners’ rights, the state of human rights has taken a significant turn for the worse, while the public remains entirely indifferent. Human rights violations are often carried out via emergency regulations (Hebrew), an undemocratic tool that allows the government to enact laws, seriously violating the principle of separation of powers.”
In addition to the actual censoring of media, the mainstream media has self-censored in Israel, aware of—and even setting—the tone among the public. Nightly newscasts cover soldiers in the field, the hostages, and other security concerns but rarely focus on the situation for Palestinians, including the humanitarian concerns in Gaza.
Additionally, people have been detained by the police for a “like” on social media after the Ministry of Justice removed the State Prosecutor’s oversight on charges for offences of freedom of expression during the war, so that police don’t need approval before investigating such cases. Police were directed to detain people for social media posts until the proceedings’ end and prosecute them even for a single publication. This change led to a surge in arrests of Arab citizens regarding social media posts; arresting without cause.
Meanwhile, there is a proliferation of widespread hate speech online incriminating Jewish social media spots promoting hate against Arabs, but enforcement disproportionately targets Arab citizens and residents.
By November, there were 269 investigation cases for incitement and support for terrorism, resulting in 86 expedited indictments for incitement to violence and terrorism. Suspects faced prolonged detention and even remand until trial, a departure from due process.
Additionally, there are significant violations of policing of peaceful demonstrators, along with unlawful detentions of protesters and unauthorised visits to the houses of suspected protest organisers by the police. The police (which is federalised in Israel), led by far-right minister Itamar Ben Gvir, seem to be pre-imagining what steps he anticipates for them and taking them–all with no retribution so far.
Security prisoners in Israeli prisons have faced much worse, with protocols, including lawyers’ visits, upended. Meanwhile, there is a proliferation of guns in the streets with a free-for-all dispensation by Ben Gvir’s office to create private militias both inside Israel and in the Occupied Palestinian Territories where actions by Jewish settlers against Palestinian residents have multiplied.
These are just a few key examples of what Israelis are facing. Even when the war ends and when the current government falls, much of the backtracking in Israeli society will be hard to reverse.
27 Mar 2024 | News and features, Russia
This Friday, 29 March, marks the one-year anniversary of Russia’s arrest and unlawful detention of my colleague, Evan Gershkovich, of The Wall Street Journal. That’s one year that Evan has been deprived of his basic rights and confined to a cell 23 hours a day, held on a charge of espionage which he, the US government and the Journal vehemently deny. One year that his parents and his sister have been deprived of their son and brother. And one year since a mass chilling effect descended on the foreign press corps in Russia because of this brazen assault on the freedom of the press.
Evan’s detention is a singular outrage but also part of a much broader pattern. Last year and this year have been brutal for the safety of journalists working to get the facts from dangerous places across the globe, as chronicled by the Committee to Protect Journalists, Reporters Without Borders and others.
Even within Russia, Evan is not alone: Alsu Kurmasheva, a Russian-American reporter for Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty was seized by Russian authorities on a trip to visit her mother and has been in prison since October. Paul Whelan, of course, has been detained there for five years.
After Evan’s arrest, many news outlets withdrew to cover Russia from Berlin, Warsaw and elsewhere given that Vladimir Putin’s regime has made what you and I understand to be fair and independent reporting effectively a crime.
So we are deprived of fact-based news from a country that is central in defining the future for the USA and other democracies. If we don’t stand up and protest against the silencing of the media on such a vital story, when will we decide the time is right to be loud?
We have been making noise for a year now, to ensure we are drawing as much attention as possible to Evan’s predicament and this broader outrage. We did so in part because journalists run at the story. But we also did so because, in the very early days after Evan’s arrest, we received advice from a trusted source that there will be times to be loud and times to be quiet and this was a time to be loud. Put another way, until there is reason to be quiet – which might suggest a sensitive breakthrough is near at hand – be loud.
We also didn’t have a choice. There may be times when quiet diplomacy can be effective to resolve such hostage issues. In our case, the Russian government had publicly accused our innocent colleague of spying, a message we had to counter as forcefully and as quickly as we could.
In that, as in so many other things over the course of the past year, we were greatly aided by outside help.
The White House, the State Department and the US Senate Intelligence Committee immediately made clear Evan – an accredited reporter in Russia – is not a spy. And in the days, weeks and months that followed, we have benefitted hugely from the interest and support of other news organisations, the international community of journalists and well-wishers the world over to keep awareness of Evan’s situation high.
We know that The Wall Street Journal won’t directly negotiate his release – that is the responsibility of governments. But we are convinced keeping Evan in the spotlight will help set the stage for successful negotiations at the right time. We hope that time is very soon.
Within the Journal, we have learned that being loud is a companywide effort. I don’t think there is a department at Dow Jones & Co., the Journal’s parent, that hasn’t in some way been involved.
The company’s leadership, legal team, the newsroom and communications department would be obvious. Less so, maybe, the marketing team, which we rely on to create ads that we and other newspapers have run on milestones such as 100 days of Evan’s incarceration. Or the advertising department, which has used barter ads to push Evan’s cause on social media. Or government affairs, which has launched a campaign of awareness on Capitol Hill in Washington. Or technology and circulation, which have built a page outside of our paywall on WSJ.com so readers can learn about Evan free of charge. Or our Standards team, which ensures that our advocacy work and our news reporting are kept appropriately apart. Or our individual reporters, who have taken it upon themselves to organise runs, swims, read-a-thons and letter-writing campaigns to highlight Evan’s work and interests.
Yet we also realise all this has yet to pay the one dividend that matters: Evan’s safe return.
So on his one-year anniversary we also ask that you take the time to think of Evan, to talk about him, to amplify stories about him with the hashtag #IStandWithEvan, to explore his work at WSJ.com/evan, and to dig in with us so that the light we shine on Evan and the broader cause of press freedom is brighter than ever.
