Post-Soviet Media Law & Policy Newsletter


Issue 15     Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law     February 27, 1995

Decisions of the Russian Federation Presidential
Judicial Chamber for Information Disputes

1.  “ON THE STATE OF FREEDOM OF MASS INFORMATION IN THE MARITIME KRAI,” December 13, 1994, No. 35

    Many journalists and newspaper editors have addressed petitions and statements to the Russian Federation Presidential Judicial Chamber for Information Disputes and the Russian Federation Press Committee regarding violations of freedom of mass information in the Maritime Krai.  They point to violations of journalists’ rights of access to information, rude and insulting attitude towards them of various administrative personnel, interference with the professional activity of editorial offices, suspension of a series of publications, persecution of journalists due to disagreement with their political positions, etc.

    These facts are indicated in the statements and petitions of the journalists N. Barabash, N. Ostrovskaia, V. Shkrabov, G. Medvedov, and others.  A statement by the Political Council of the “Russia’s Democratic Choice” party, signed by party chairman E. Gaidar, also draws the Judicial Chamber’s attention to violations of freedom of mass information in the Maritime Krai.

    In accepting all these appeals, petitions, and statements for examination, the Judicial Chamber and the Russian Press Committee proceed from the high social significance of freedom of mass information, which is guaranteed in the Russian Federation Constitution, and the need to defend the rights and legitimate interests of journalists.  The Judicial Chamber and the Russian Press Committee consider freedom of mass information as a most important component of democracy and an indicator of the state of society.  The status of freedom of mass information in the Maritime Krai—a component of the Russian Federation that is resolving important and complex social, economic, and ecological problems—should be examined comprehensively and objectively, with regard to the significance of the results of this examination for other regions of Russia.  After hearing the report of the deputy chairman of the Russian Press Committee (A.B. Morgun) and the speeches of journalists (G.M. Medvedeva, I.A. Kots, E.V. Gorchenkov, L.G. Artemova and others); editors-in-chief (I.G. Grebneva (“Arsen’evskie Vesti”), V.V. Bakshin (“Vladivostok”), and V.P. Shkrabov (“Krasnoe Zvezda”)), representatives from the krai administration (S.I. Novoselov, T.B. Vadil’eva, and I.V. Buivol), the head of the “Vladivostok” State Television and Radio Company (B.V. Maksimenko), the head of the Regional Inspectorate for Protection of Freedom of the Press and Mass Information (V.N. Savchenko), State Duma deputy Iu. N. Iakovlev, representative of the radio station “VVC” (A.V. Kalanchinskii), and “Dal’press” employees (Iu. A. Bondarenko and R.K. Abbasova) and after familiarizing itself with the letters of N. Barabash and Iu. Mokeev, numerous documents, newspaper clippings, and the statement of V.I. Cherepkov and other persons, the Judicial Chamber has established:

    There have indeed been instances in the Maritime Krai of flagrant violation of freedom of mass information.

    Publication of the regional newspaper “Krasnoe Znamia” and the Maritime Krai weekly “Arsen’evskie Vesti” was in fact suspended.  The krai administration, interfering with the professional independence of the newspaper “Krasnoe Znamia,” impeded the work of editor-in-chief V.P. Shkrabov and, exceeding its authority, attempted to remove him from his position.  Only after examination of this dispute by the Judicial Chamber on October 14, 1994  did the administration, in accordance with the decision, acknowledge its wrongful conduct, cease its obstruction of the newspaper’s publication, and withdraw from the position of founder.  At the present time, the newspaper continues publication.

    According to the statements of many session participants, the deputy chief of the Krai administration (I.P. Lebedinents) rudely insulted journalists he found objectionable, impeded their access to information, put pressure on them, and “generally failed to conform to the functions entrusted to him as curator of the krai mass media” both in his knowledge and level of legal and political culture.

    Iu. A. Bondarenko, the general director of the “Dal’press” State Publishing and Printing Complex, is playing a negative role in guaranteeing freedom of mass information in the Maritime Krai.  Taking a selective approach to various publications, he impeded publication of the newspapers “Krasnoe Znamia” and “Arsen’evskie Vesti” and made illegitimate demands of editors-in-chief.  In particular, contrary to the provisions of part 2 of Article 19 of the Russian Federation Law on Mass Media, Iu. A. Bondarenko demanded that the editorial office of “Krasnoe Znamia,” which had already been registered as a mass information medium by an authorized registering organ (the State Regional Inspectorate for Protection of Freedom of the Press and Mass Information), undergo supplementary registration as an enterprise.  This was despite the fact that the editorial office’s charter indicated that its fundamental purpose was solely publication of the newspaper and that the editorial office has no other purposes connected with commercial activity.

    At the very height of the subscription campaign, the “Dal’press” State Publishing and Printing Complex prevented publication of a number of central newspapers.

    B.V. Maksimenko, general director of the “Vladivostok” State Television and Radio Company, suspended television reporter G.M. Medvedeva for five months without sufficient cause.  Her subsequent dismissal as part of a staff reduction was ruled illegal by judicial decision.

    In March of this year, the Judicial Chamber was forced to intervene and make a corresponding recommendation with respect to the conflict between the head of the All- Russia State Television and Radio Company’s Far East Bureau (M.B. Voznesenkii) and the administrations of the Maritime Krai and the city of Vladivostok, which had restricted the journalist’s professional rights.

    Unfortunately, in the Maritime Krai, as also in a number of other Russian regions, journalism is becoming a dangerous profession.  Unknown persons abducted and tortured the young journalist A. Sadykov.  The Russian Television correspondents’ center in Vladivostok came under fire.

    There is much that is unclear in the situation concerning the change in leadership of the newspaper “Utro Rossii.”  Former editor Iu. Mokeev maintains that at a meeting of mass media leaders, the head of the krai administration “not being fastidious in his choice of words, gave ‘Utro Rossii’ and its journalists a dressing down and declared that the newspaper would not be published until there was a change in its leadership and direction.”

    It is significant that after Iu. Mokeev’s forced resignation, all the problems (lack of paper, etc.) that had made publication of the newspaper impossible —  according to Iu. Bondarenko, “Dal’ press” general director —  were immediately “resolved.”  It is also noteworthy that the suspension of “Utro Rossii” coincided with the campaign for election of deputies to the krai Duma.

    Thus, after evaluating the adduced facts and journalists’ numerous appeals at various instances for protection of their professional rights, the Judicial Chamber is forced to affirm that many of the problems involved in realization of freedom of mass information in the Maritime Krai are the result of the krai authorities’ inability or unwillingness to establish an equal, civilized dialogue with the press and remain within the framework of the law and ethical norms.

    At the same time, the Judicial Chamber observes that exposés regarding the state of freedom of mass information in the Maritime Krai are, in several instances, unjustifiably summary in nature and their conclusions often not supported by evidence.  A notable example is the report prepared by the “Russia’s Democratic Choice” party’s group of experts, who worked in the Maritime Krai.

    In this connection the Judicial Chamber also observes that, despite invitation, neither the party leader, E. Gaidar, nor representatives deemed it necessary to participate in the hearings and explain their position and that this conduct is, to a lesser degree, unethical.

    In consideration of the above and guided by Articles 4, 9, 10, and 13 of the Statute of the Russian Federation Presidential Judicial Chamber for Information Disputes, the Judicial Chamber has decided:

    1.  To demand of the Maritime Krai administration (E.N. Nazdratenko) strict compliance with the norms of the Russian Federation Constitution and the Russian Federation Law “On Mass Media” regarding guarantees of freedom of mass information and the professional rights of journalists.

    2.  To propose that the Maritime Krai administration consider the suitability of I.P. Lebedinets for his position as deputy chief of the krai administration.

    3.  To recommend that the Russian Federation Press Committee study the advisability of continued use of Iu. A. Bondarenko in the position of general director of the “Dal’press” State Publishing and Printing Complex.

    4.  To draw the attention of V.B. Maksimenko, general director of the Vladivostok State Television and Radio Company, to the fact that it is impermissible to violate legal and ethical norms in the leadership of a journalists’ collective.

    5.  To publish this decision in “Rossiiskaia Gazeta.”

Chairman of the Judicial Chamber
A. Vengerov

Published in Rossiiskaia Gazeta on December 27, 1994.  Translated into English by Frances H. Foster.

2. “ON DEFENSE OF FREEDOM OF MASS INFORMATION IN CONNECTION WITH THE EVENTS IN CHECHNYA,” December 26, 1994, No. 11

    The dramatic events of recent days in Chechnya are being accompanied by cases of flagrant violation of journalists’ rights of access to comprehensive and reliable information, impermissible pressure on journalists, instructing them how and what to write on the events in Chechnya, and other deviations from the Russian Federation Constitution’s provisions on freedom of mass information and prohibition of censorship.

    The Judicial Chamber declares that no one and nothing can revoke the direct effect of the Russian Federation Constitution, including provisions on freedom of speech and the right of citizens to receive reliable and objective information.

    At the same time, said right of citizens also assumes comprehensive press coverage of the real goals and motives of measures adopted by the Russian Federation President, Russian Government, MVD organs and armed forces to ensure operation of the Russian Federation Constitution on the territory of the Chechen Republic and restoration of constitutional order.

    The Judicial Chamber declares that, within the limits of its competence and established means, it will defend freedom of mass information and rights of journalists and at the same time appeal to them to weigh every word and to try to differentiate facts from opinions, analysis from emotion, and the interests of Russia from the interests of various political forces.

    The Judicial Chamber calls on citizens and Russian military forces in the conflict zone to observe strictly the rights and legitimate interests of journalists and to render them maximum assistance in fulfillment of their professional duty.
 The Judicial Chamber is deeply grieved over the tragic casualties in Chechnya and the death of American journalist Cindy Elbaum, and expresses condolences to the nearest and dearest of the deceased.

Chairman of the Judicial Chamber
A.V. Vengerov

Published in Rossiiskaia Gazeta, December 30, 1994, at 4.  Translated into English by Frances H. Foster.