08 May 18 | Europe and Central Asia, News and features, Serbia
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
Milan Antonijević (Craig Jackson / Human Rights House Foundation)
As one of Serbia’s most influential activists, Milan Antonijević uses the rule of law as his main line of defence in human rights protection. This is a major accomplishment considering he was a law student attending Belgrade University at the end of Milošević era, a time of censorship. Before Antonijević had completed his degree, the government fired any Serbian professor lecturing on the importance of human rights, gutting the education system of these important ideas.
However, Antonijević had barely reached adulthood in the wake of the atrocities that coincided with the Balkan wars and the fall of Yugoslavia in the 1990s. Witnessing these events at a young age sparked a passion for activism in him, which was only further fuelled by his professors’ expulsion. He completed an informal education with these persistent lecturers, all of whom were human rights pioneers that bravely continued teaching despite losing their academic careers.
Antonijević has served as the director of YUCOM since 2005, joining the organisation in 2001 after formally receiving his MA in International Law, along with his human rights education on the side. Over the course of his career Antonijević has worked with a large number of human rights organisations, contributing to the creation of multiple campaigns and educational initiatives. This includes the Youth Group of the Belgrade Centre for Human Rights, where he advocated for tolerance and reconciliation to the youth of the Balkan region in 2000. He is also currently involved in a coalition project promoting LGBTQ rights in Serbia, Montenegro and Kosovo.
Many of Antonijević’s successes in activism were made during his time leading YUCOM, the Belgrade-based Lawyer’s Committee for Human Rights. Internationally recognised for its efforts in defence, its team of lawyers and experts provide legal assistance to victims of human rights violations before Serbian and international courts. YUCOM grants legal aid to more than 1,500 citizens annually and also represents other human rights organisations in court when needed. The organisation is currently aiding citizens in several cases and represents activist groups such as Woman in Black and Youth Initiative for Human Rights.
YUCOM advocates for the rule of the law and seeks court orders to ensure the proper implementation of Serbian legislation when required. With each case, the organisation works to ensure genuine commitment and implementation of new laws protecting human rights. These cases involve economic and social violations such as unequal access to public resources, hate crime, harassment, hate speech, and denied access to healthcare and education.
Many of Serbia’s citizens and marginalised communities are subject to these violations frequently. In addition to legal assistance, YUCOM also organises civic initiatives and campaigns to further advance their cause of human rights protection and defence. In January of 2018, they launched a project to bolster and improve the level of reporting on the rule of law in several Balkan nations.
Antonijević is also a founder and board member of Human Rights House Belgrade, which interacts with an international network to promote and defend human rights in Serbia. YUCOM is one of the five member organisations that contributes to the efforts of Human Rights House Belgrade, the other four being Belgrade Centre for Human Rights, Civic Initiatives, Helsinki Committee, and Policy Centre.
Despite a regime that tried to hinder the formation of activist minds like Antonijević’s, he’s persisted with dedication to his cause, proving that censorship cannot stop a new generation from fighting for the rights of their fellow citizens.
Milan Antonijević spoke with Index on Censorship’s Samantha Chambers about the state of human rights in Serbia and his organisation’s work. Below is an edited version of their interview:
Index: What would you say are the most pressing human rights issues affecting Serbia’s democracy today?
Antonijević: To start, we can look at the rule of law and the possibility of our legal system to provide solutions for human rights violations. First, we spot deficiencies in implementation of existing law in the protection of human rights. So from the point of view of legislation and constitution, we do not have as many deficiencies, but there are still things that should be polished and there are improvements that can be made on the legal side. We’re identifying it in areas of discrimination, hate speech, hate crime, and in freedom of expression. I cannot say that there is any true implementation that we can be proud of. There is improvement, but the whole system of protection and implementation of the laws should be listed in order to really answer the needs of citizens for their rights to be fully protected.
Index: Just to verify, its solely the issue of the implementation laws and not the laws themselves causing human rights issues at the moment?
Antonijević: Yes, only the implementation of the laws, the laws themselves are agreed on by experts and the senate commission and so on, so full standards are there.
Index: Which human rights issues do you find yourself needed to defend the most often? What marginalised communities are facing the biggest threats?
Antonijević: YUCOM usually has around 2,000 cases per year defending rights through representation before the court, so this is our day to day work. Within those, generally we can say that economic and social rights are the biggest challenge for Serbia. But when speaking about marginalised groups and underrepresented minorities, the Roma are subject to multiple forms of discrimination, and there’s a breach on their rights in every level. So, of economic and social rights, specifically in healthcare, education and non-equal opportunities. In the Roma situation, there is no accurate response from the country’s social workers. Things are moving, we used to have a large population of Roma who were not registered, who didn’t have identification, who didn’t have any access to health care or welfare. Now things are solid on the level of the law, and they are solid on the level of implementation. If they do not have an address or live in an informal supplement, there are mechanisms in order to bring them into the system so that the system recognises them and gives them support.
Another minority group, the LGBT community also experiences harassment through hate speech and hate crimes without any adequate response from the state or from the judiciary. In Serbia we recently had a prime minister who was openly a member of this community. However, it hasn’t lowered the number of incidents for hate speech in front of the media or parliament.
Index: Why did you decide to work for and become the director of an NGO (YUCOM) defending human rights? Why is your work so important in the nation’s current state?
Antonijević: My passion for human rights began as a very young student. Some of my professors at Belgrade law school, who were deeply involved in human rights protection were expelled from the law school, by the regime under President Milošević. A new law that was adopted in 1996 on education, and later on in 1999, completely cleared the professors who were dealing with human rights from the law school. I just continued working with them through informal lessons and lectures. From that, I became devoted to human rights. In addition, some of the injustice that I witnessed from the armies in 1994 and 1995. In 1994 and 95 as a young kid of 18 or 19 years, I witnessed some of the mistreatment, and international justice became important to me.
Index: Do you find that academic censorship is still a very pressing issue in Serbia today?
Antonijević: Academically, the moves of Milosevic had a big negative influence, and the law school never recovered from that.Those professors didn’t come back to university to raise new generations, so now the education from the law school is leaning towards disrespect of human rights. I’m sorry to say that now, very rare are the professors who share the ideas of human rights in this law school.
Index: How did continue to learn from these professors after they were expelled?
Antonijević: Those were some of the people who were initially starting the human rights organisations at that time. They met with special groups of students because many of us worked in the same organisations, so we were able to meet and continue our education. You had to do continue with both had the formal education where you could get your degree and your diploma and you’d stay with the informal classes, with professors who were expelled. They were really the pioneers of human rights in 70s, 80s, 90s and are still the names that you quote today.
Index: Do the Balkan wars have an impact on human rights work in Serbia?
Antonijević: Yes.The Balkan wars led to gross human rights violations and displacement of populations on all sides, so neither side is innocent in that sense. Serbs were forced to leave Croatia and parts of Bosnia, Kosovo and the same can be said for all nations that used to live in ex-Yugoslavia. Only the civil society is speaking on the victims of other nations, while politicians are stuck in the rhetoric of proving that the nation that they come from is the biggest victim, quite far from the restoration of justice and future peace. When you have mass murders, mass graves, and disappeared persons, speaking out about human rights becomes a harder task. Frustrations are high on all sides, with reason.
Index: Has media freedom declined under Aleksandar Vučić?
Antonijević: Funding has a negative influence on the media, because subsidies are only given to media if they are pro-government, not to others. Sometimes there are higher taxes for media that is independent and there’s a disregard for journalists posing questions from these organisations. There are also trends that are visible often in other European countries, with officials and others using social media and fake news, there is an atmosphere that you can easily create in a country with that kind of attitude. People are not questioning the information that they’re getting, and its really leaving a lot of space for malinformation, leaving many misinformed.
Index: What do you find is YUCOM’s biggest struggle working under a sometimes oppressive regime? What have been the biggest systematic barriers in accomplishing the goals of the organisation?
Antonijević: I wouldn’t call it oppressive. We’re in this strange situation where you’re sitting at the table discussing legislation with the democratic officials of your country, but — at the same time — not seeing the change of policy on every level. We’ve managed to influence the induction of the laws, and we’re still working on the changes with the government so it’s not a typical regime where you cannot say one word against the government. They have proven that they are able to allow separation of powers and debate in our society. We’re just now talking about the quality of the democracy, not the existence or non-existence of the democracy. The country is really leaning towards the EU and all the EU values are repeated from time to time by our officials. It’s not something that can be compared with Russia. It’s really a bit different, however, we need more commitment to the laws. Examples we see are going in the wrong direction, on an implementation level. We have sets of laws that are not being fully implemented, including the labor laws, the anti-discrimination laws, hate speech and hate crime laws, laws on environmental protection, etc. A few years ago YUCOM organised a panel with the minister of labour at that time, who is still in the government, and we discussed the new labour laws. The minister stated openly that there is no “political will” to implement the law. But we must note that the political will has to come from the government, parliament, judges and prosecutors. Only they can generate it. The public can demand it, but we as a civil society can only demand this implementation.
Index: How have the human rights violations occurring in Serbia affected you personally?
Antonijević: There is a constant side against us by different non-paid sectors. Some of the media that are not quite pro-government are reading that we work with the officials. Sometimes we receive threats but they are not coming from the state. Receiving threats is something that happens in this area of work, especially in issues on war crimes and cases that are more sensitive.
Index: Why is it important for Yucom to be part of a larger organisation like Human Rights House Belgrade? What has the support of the larger organisation done for Yucom?
Antonijević: I’m the director of YUCOM, but we also founded the Human Rights House Belgrade. It’s a new possibility, a new space to have one place dedicated to human rights and the promotion of human rights. The Human Rights House concept has helped YUCOM gain visibility and connect us to activism on an international level with other Human Rights Houses across Europe. There are 19 other houses and we all have one unanimous voice and find support from one another. [/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_custom_heading text=”Monitoring Media Freedom” use_theme_fonts=”yes” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fmappingmediafreedom.org|||”][vc_separator color=”black”][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner][vc_column_text]Press freedom violations in Serbia reported to Mapping Media Freedom since 24 May 2014.
[/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 and monthly events newsletter, and periodic updates 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:1525781015236-34b43447-e710-3″ taxonomies=”113″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
03 May 18 | Europe and Central Asia, Mapping Media Freedom, Media Freedom, media freedom featured, News and features, Serbia
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
It’s been six months since Južne Vesti, the most popular news website in southern Serbia, was subject to severe and inexplicably long tax inspections. This was their fifth such investigation in five years. Their clients and advertisers have also been pressured, and their family members harassed and intimidated. These frequent, months-long visits are exhausting for employees, keeping them away from their regular day-to-day work. Inspectors have never established any irregularities nor has the website ever been penalised. Nonetheless, controls have intensified.
“It’s difficult for me to believe that the motives behind so many frequent and intense inspections are anything but political,” Predrag Blagojević, editor-in-chief of Južne Vesti told Mapping Media Freedom. But what was the trigger?
The first tax inspector knocked on Južne Vesti’s door in December 2013, right after the portal ran a story about Zoran Perišić, then mayor of the city of Niš, who hid his salary from anti-corruption investigators, Blagojević explained. Perišić asked the portal not to run the piece. “Why don’t you reveal incomes of Južne Vesti?” he asked. Blagojević let Perišić know that all the data was publicly available through the Business Registers Agency website. A few days later, after an anonymous tip, tax inspectors came looking for documents related to Južne Vesti’s incomes. Four months later, the website was told that “there were no irregularities found”. This was just the first in a series of inspections.
In an interview, Blagojević said state pressure on the media — like in the similar case of the weekly Vranjske which was forced to shut down — is dangerous and deceitful because the government can always justify it as “the rule of law”. There are few witnesses willing to publicly testify about the pressures they’re exposed to because people fear challenging the Tax Administration.
“They are chasing away our clients and by doing so, cutting our incomes, killing us financially in a way that even well-informed citizens can’t notice,” Blagojević said. “And if we give up in the end, our prime minister will say — just like in the case of Vranjske newspaper — that ‘they didn’t survive the market game’.”
After Južne Vesti informed the public about extensive audits followed by threats and intimidation of their clients and their family members, the Independent Journalists’ Association of Serbia (NUNS) issued a strong condemnation, demanding prime minister Ana Brnabić end the campaign of government pressure on Južne Vesti. The same letter was sent to the European Commission, the European Federation of Journalists and other international organisations.
The OSCE representative on freedom of the media Harlem Désir, who visited Serbia to discuss media freedom issues with Serbia’s highest officials — president Vučić and prime minister Brnabić — and media representatives, was also told about the problems and pressures that Južne Vesti has been struggling with.
Following the meetings with Désir, Brnabić stated that she asked the director of tax administration to “stop the controls if they are not needed”. At the time, there was only one tax inspector working on the case. On the very next day, Južne Vesti counted at least 14 new inspectors visiting their advertisers and business partners.
The president of NUNS, Slaviša Lekić, told Mapping Media Freedom that their public appeal to the prime minister and her conversation with tax authorities happened to coincide with intensified and extended inspection of Južne Vesti. “I want to believe it was a coincidence.”
Blagojević thinks that the real message is that Brnabić’s statement on the inspections actually conveys that there is no rule of law in Serbia. “How can a prime minister ask for the dismissal of tax controls? It means that she can make similar demands for other companies or individuals,” the editor explained. Blagojević also said he wonders if the prime minister knows that the tax administration is conducting investigations where none are needed.
The Serbian state secretary for media, Aleksandar Gajović, invited Južne Vesti to contact him in writing regarding their case. But Blagojević believes if Gajović really wanted to help, he would have contacted the management of the website himself instead of publicly inviting them to write to him. “These kinds of statements stultify all currently existing legal forms, and state secretary’s engagement in the production of new documents, such as Serbia’s new media strategy, clearly suspend everything that was achieved so far.”
NUNS strongly opposed the draft of Serbia’s new media strategy, which has yet to be released to the public. The union demanded a new strategy document be drafted because the first has been, according to NUNS, based on the interests of government officials and not the public’s right to information. “It is completely unacceptable,” Lekić said. “If it gets passed, it means that the state is coming back to the media and position of journalists and media organisations will be far worse than today, although that seems unthinkable now.”
If renationalisation of the media is the goal of Serbia’s government, the strategy that would run counter to the country’s media reform and privatisation laws.
Other media organisations and associations have also criticised the draft document. Many resigned from the working group that had been established to prepare the draft strategy. Representatives of those groups said they believe that the new document will only worsen the already worrying condition of media freedom in Serbia.
In the wake of Désir’s visit to the country, Brnabić announced on 24 April that the government’s media strategy would be put on hold because the working group that created the first draft was “illegitimate” due to the absence of relevant media associations’ representatives. It is unclear what the next steps in the development of the strategy will be or who will devise it.
The latest Serbia Human Rights report issued by the US department of state said that “while independent media organisations generally were active and expressed a wide range of views, there were reports that the government pressured media by withholding advertising, abusing tax audits, and restricting access to public information”.
But Južne Vesti is not the only organisation to face financial losses due to pressure from tax authorities. One of the consequences of intensive inspections into the publication and its business partners is that they paid 600,000 dinars (€5,079) less taxes for the first quarter of 2018. “We simply couldn’t deliver some services because we have to deal with nonsense,” Blagojević said.
Despite the near-constant pressures, Južne Vesti gained support from colleagues, citizens and civic activists who got in touch, asking how to help, offering expert advice and legal aid. “There is not much we can do. We are sure that everything is clear on our side and we have no concerns about that,” Blagojević says.
Južne Vesti never asked inspectors to end their investigations, but rather demanded they do not overstep their legal authorisation, that they stop intimidating their clients, advertisers and suppliers. The editor-in-chief said he is worried that the tax administration is ceasing to be an institution that works in the public interest and becoming a weapon in the hands of authorities.
Lekić notes that the “virus of fear”, which was thought to have been eradicated or suppressed, has infected almost all of Serbia’s journalists. “And that is dangerous for our society, especially when common citizens mostly expect journalists to be what the citizens themselves are not: truthful, brave and to represent the public interest.”
“Media freedom is deeply related with media sustainability, which means the situation is catastrophic,” Blagojević said. For the last three years, Serbia’s IREX global Media Sustainability Index is lower than it was in 2000, the last year of Milošević’s dictatorship, when it had been considered to be the worst possible. “I think it illustrates best the condition of media freedom in Serbia.”[/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:1525340385482-07b627f0-df12-5″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
12 Apr 18 | Awards, Fellowship 2018, Mapping Media Freedom, News and features
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_video link=”https://youtu.be/hKK5t6te-GE”][vc_column_text]Novosti weekly is a Serbian-language magazine in Croatia. It is run by journalists who are both Serbs and Croats, and are some of the most highly esteemed reporters in the country.
Although the weekly is fully funded as a Serb minority publication by the Serbian National Council, the paper deals with a whole range topics, not only those directly related to the minority status of Croatian Serbs, but also covering all the political, economic, social and cultural issues that are important for the Croatian society as a whole. 
The paper’s journalists have come under intense pressure in the last year from Croatian nationalists with attacks and death threats that have been sanctioned by ultra-conservative forces in the country.
“As journalists we realise that our professional duty is to write truth, but because of the conditions in which we work, a significant part of our business has become the defence of the right to freedom of expression, without which truth is not possible,” said Novosti Weekly.
This is against a backdrop of a nationalist coalition government led by the conservative Croatian Democratic Union (HDZ), which oversaw the sacking or demotion of 70 public broadcast journalists in the months after it came to power in January 2016.
Novosti irritates nationalists by writing about the things Croatian society is often silent on, for instance, the war crimes committed by the Croatian side during the Balkans war in the 1990s and the role of Croatian forces in the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina. It often uses satirical front covers to make its point.
The weekly also stands up for minorities, including LGBT groups, against the conservative forces of the Catholic Church and war veterans. One of their journalistic campaigns has been to challenge attempts by the far right to rehabilitate the Ustaše, the fascists who were in power in Croatia during World War II.
Novosti prides itself also on classic investigative journalism, which uncovers political and corporate corruption; and they do not shy away from exposing the pressure on editors and journalists from both censorship and self-censorship.
2017 was a year which saw the further rise in Croatia of right-wing extremism and ultra-conservative tendencies. Novosti weekly has been at the forefront of fighting the nationalist purges, becoming a forum for voices of resistance.
At the beginning of December 2016, Novosti broke a story about plans by the government, and veterans associations to install a memorial plaque with the World War II fascist slogan Za dom spremni (Ready for the Homeland) near the site of the former ustaše concentration camp at Jasenovac where more than 83,000 Serbs, Roma and Jews died.
Immediately after the release of the story in Novosti, the far-right political party A-HSP organised a protest under the windows of the magazine’s offices shouting, fascist slogans and anti-Serbian insults.
Some war veterans’ societies filed criminal charges against journalists, and others launched a series of private lawsuits against the publisher of the Novosti.
In August 2017, the extreme right piled on the pressure, accusing Croatian Serbs of setting the fires which burnt down forests in large parts of the Croatian coast during the summer.
They claimed Novosti Weekly had been encouraging the arsonists and Novosti received threats of violence – to shoot journalists and bomb the offices. The editorial team was told they would end up killed like Charlie Hebdo journalists.
The culmination of the summer of threats happened when the A-HSP organised another protest in front of Novosti’s offices and burnt copies of the magazine under the windows of the offices
“We would like to thank you for recognizing our work as well as for putting Novosti Weekly into the international spotlight after reaching the shortlist of the Freedom of Expression Awards,” said Novosti Weekly. “Your recognition means as much as the reactions of all relevant international journalistic organizations that stood in Weekly Novosti’s defense after facing pressure and threats for the work that we do. It’s a strong message of support that speaks volumes not only for all those who burnt out paper, but also to those who tried to ensure our destruction.”
See the full shortlist for Index on Censorship’s Freedom of Expression Awards 2018 here.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row full_width=”stretch_row_content” equal_height=”yes” el_class=”text_white” css=”.vc_custom_1490258749071{background-color: #cb3000 !important;}”][vc_column width=”1/2″][vc_custom_heading text=”Support the Index Fellowship.” font_container=”tag:p|font_size:28|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.indexoncensorship.org%2Fsupport-the-freedom-of-expression-awards%2F|||”][vc_column_text]
By donating to the Freedom of Expression Awards you help us support
individuals and groups at the forefront of tackling censorship.
Find out more
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][vc_column width=”1/2″ css=”.vc_custom_1521479845471{background-image: url(https://www.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/2017-awards-fellows-1460×490-2_revised.jpg?id=90090) !important;background-position: center !important;background-repeat: no-repeat !important;background-size: cover !important;}”][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_basic_grid post_type=”post” max_items=”4″ element_width=”6″ grid_id=”vc_gid:1523523750750-06e6cb2f-6ea9-6″ taxonomies=”10735″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
23 Jan 18 | Azerbaijan, Cyprus, Europe and Central Asia, Latvia, Mapping Media Freedom, Media Freedom, media freedom featured, News and features, Serbia, United Kingdom
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
Index on Censorship’s Mapping Media Freedom project verifies threats, violations and limitations faced by the media throughout the European Union and neighbouring countries. Serious threats verified by the platform in January indicate that pressure has not let up in 2018. Here are five recent reports that give us cause for concern.
A Serbian minister announced on 12 January that he is suing the Crime and Corruption Reporting Network (KRIK), nominees for the 2017 Index on Censorship Freedom of Expression Awards, over the publications reporting on offshore companies and assets outlined in the Paradise Papers, a set of 13.4 million confidential documents relating to offshore investments leaked in November 2017.
Nenad Popovic, a minister without portfolio, was the main Serbian official mentioned in the leaked documents that exposed the secret assets of politicians and celebrities around the world. Popovic was shown to have offshore assets and companies worth $100 million.
“Serbian and Cypriot authorities have already launched lawsuits against various media workers so we’re particularly concerned that investigative outlets like KRIK are being sued for uncovering corruption of government officials,” Hannah Machlin, project manager, Mapping Media Freedom said. “Journalists reporting on corruption were repeatedly harassed, and in some cases murdered, in 2017, so going into the new year, we need to ensure that their safety is prioritised in order to preserve vital investigative reporting.”
KRIK was one of the 96 media organisations from over 60 countries that analysed the papers.
In December 2017 suspended senior state attorney Eleni Loizidou sued the daily newspaper Politis, seeking damages of between €500,000-2 million on the grounds that the media outlet breached her right to privacy and personal data protection. The newspaper had published a number of emails Loizidous had sent from her personal email account that implied Loizidou may have assisted the Russian government in the extradition cases of Russian nationals.
On 10 January the District Court of Nicosia approved a ban which forbids Politis from publishing emails from Loizidou’s account which she claims have been intercepted.
The ban will be in effect until the lawsuit against the paper is heard or another court order overrules it.
On 4 January, the Iranian embassy in London asked the United Kingdom Office of Communications to censor Persian language media based in the UK. The letter said the media’s coverage of the protests had been inciting people to “armed revolt”.
The letter primarily focused on BBC Persian and Manoto. BBC Persian has previously been criticised by Iranian intellectuals and activists for not distancing itself sufficiently from the Iranian government.
A journalist who works for the All-Russia State Television and Radio Broadcasting Company (VGTRK) was branded a threat to national security on 4 January and ordered to leave the country within 24 hours after being detained.
Olga Kurlaeva went to Latvia planning to make a film about former Latvian president Vaira Vike-Freiberga. Kurlaeva had interviewed activists critical of Latvia’s policies towards ethnic Russians and was planning on interviewing other politicians critical of Latvian policies.
Two days earlier, her husband, Anatoly Kurlajev, a producer for Russian TV channel TVC, was detained by Latvian police and reportedly later deported to Russia.
Elchin Mammad, the editor-in-chief of the online news platform Yukselis Namine, wrote in a public Facebook post on 4 January that he is being investigated for threatening and beating a newspaper employee.
Mammad wrote that the alleged victim, Aygun Amiraslanova, was never employed by Yukselis Namine and potentially does not exist. Mammad believes this is another attempt to silence his newspaper and staff.
Mammad was previously questioned by Sumgayit police in November about his work at the newspaper. The police told him that he was preventing the development of the country and national economic growth. [/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:1516702060574-c4ac0556-7cf7-1″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
