Post-Soviet Media Law & Policy Newsletter
Issue 15 Benjamin
N. Cardozo School of Law February 27, 1995
Selected Other Country Reports from Central and Eastern
Europe
ALBANIA
The 1993 Law on Fundamental Freedoms and Human Rights
provides for freedom of speech and press, but laws on slander, insult,
and protection of state secrets were used to prosecute persons for criticism
of the Government. In practice, freedom of speech, including freedom to
criticize the Government and government officials, was sometimes restricted.
A 1993 press law sets out large fines for publishing
material that the Government considers secret or sensitive, permits confiscation
of printed matter or property by judicial order, and allows for criminal
punishment under certain circumstances yet to be defined by the Penal Code.
The media and the AHC continue to denounce this law. While several Albanian
journalists were arrested and tried under slander and libel laws, none
was prosecuted under the 1993 press law. No law governs electronic media.
The Government took legal action against four journalists
in 1994. Martin Leka and Aleksander Frangaj, reporter and editor respectively
of the opposition newspaper Koha Jone, were arrested in January after Koha
Jone published a classified order prohibiting military officers from carrying
their sidearms while off-duty. Leka and Frangaj were prosecuted under the
penal code article concerning protection of state secrets. The court sentenced
Leka to 18 months in prison, while Frangaj was found not guilty; the prosecution
appealed, and Frangaj was subsequently sentenced to 5 months in prison.
In addition, two other journalists from opposition papers, Illyrian Zhupa
from Populli Po and Shyqyri Meka from Aleanca, were arrested for libel.
President Berisha pardoned all four on May 3. An appeals court later declared
Frangaj and Leka not guilty.
Opposition parties, independent trade unions, and various
societies and groups publish their own newspapers. Some 250 newspapers
and magazines appear on a regular basis. Three newspapers in the Greek
language are published in southern Albania.
Foreign journalists encountered difficulties in Albania
in 1994. Several Greek and Cypriot journalists covering the trial of the
five members of Omonia in August were expelled from Albania for “improper
documentation,” having entered Albania as tourists, not journalists. Plainclothes
police subjected other Greek journalists to petty harassment, and Greek
television journalists were not permitted to film the Omonia trial sessions,
while Albanian television taped the entire trial.
Only state-run radio and television provide domestic
programming, but many municipalities offer locally fed international programs
via satellite.
Since November 1991, Parliament has exercised direct
control over television, delegating some oversight duties to an Executive
Committee of Radio and Television, which it appoints. The Executive Committee,
comprised of 11 members from outside Parliament, meets occasionally to
review programming and the content of news broadcasts. Opposition critics
of the Government continued to allege that television serves the interest
of the ruling Democratic Party. State television’s portrayal of the events
outside the courthouse during the Omonia trial, including police use of
force against Greek journalists and lawyers, was misleading since it created
the false impression that the police were violently provoked. Opposition
parties claimed that some controversial interviews and programs, including
rebroadcast segments of the Voice of America, were not aired, reportedly
at the request of political and governmental leaders. Local radio in southern
Albania broadcasts some Greek-language programming, with its content translated
directly from Albanian-language reporting. The AHC continued to express
concern over the lack of legislation covering electronic media ownership
and broadcasting.
BULGARIA
The Constitution prohibits censorship of the press and
mass media, and the Government generally respected this prohibition.The
variety of newspapers published by political parties and other organizations
represented the full spectrum of political opinion, and foreign newspapers
circulated without hindrance. A notable degree of self-censorship exists
in the press among journalists who believe they must conform to what are
often heavily politicized editorial views. Large financial groups hold
controlling interests in many nominally independent national dailies and
in some cases intervened directly to control editorial content.
Following an October 1993 newspaper article which accused
a high-level prosecutor of using his position to acquire an apartment at
a low price, the Chief Prosecutor issued a warrant to begin an investigation
of the case. The Union of Bulgarian Journalists and human rights groups
complained the warrant did not specify charges and amounted to an effort
to intimidate the press. On March 31, the Sofia Regional Court terminated
the case for technical reasons, effectively closing the case. In November,
the press reported, the Chief Prosecutor’s Office began a preliminary proceeding
against the editor in chief of the Bulgarian Socialist Party’s daily newspaper,
charging him with insulting the President in an earlier article. The President
said that he did not need the “protective measures” taken by the Chief
Prosecutor’s Office, and the Deputy Chief Prosecutor characterized the
action as only an “examination” rather than a preliminary proceeding. Nevertheless,
some observers thought the incident might have a negative effect on freedom
of the press in Bulgaria.
Most television broadcasting is in state hands and under
parliamentary supervision. Two channels broadcast in Bulgarian, while a
third broadcasts Russian programming, and a fourth broadcasts a mixture
of Cable News Network, international, and French-language programming.
Bulgaria’s first private television channel received a license in 1993
and began limited broadcasting in July 1994. Foreign government radio programs,
such as those of the British Broadcasting Corporation and the Voice of
America, had unrestricted access to commercial Bulgarian radio frequencies.
Television and radio news programs present opposition views but are generally
seen as being biased in favor of the Government. There are no formal restrictions
on programming. Some political groups complained that coverage was one-sided,
although they acknowledged that their representatives were interviewed
regularly by media journalists. Both television and radio provide a variety
of news and public interest programming, including talk format and public
opinion shows.
More than 30 independent radio stations are licensed
in Bulgaria. The Government twice required Radio Aura of the American University
in Blagoevgrad to stop broadcasting, and it complained of harassment; the
Government correctly asserted that the station was broadcasting beyond
its licensed area of operations and had never gone through the procedure
to obtain an appropriate license. Other private stations complained that
their licenses unduly restricted the strength of their transmissions in
comparison to state-owned stations. Some Turkish-language broadcasting
takes place. The Government owns all radio transmitter facilities.
CROATIA
The Constitution provides for freedom of thought and
expression, specifically including freedom of the press and other media
of communication, speech, and public expression, and free establishment
of institutions of public communication. In practice, government influence
on the media through state ownership of most print and broadcast outlets
limits these freedoms. In addition, government intimidation induces self-censorship.
Politicians, political activists, and journalists are often reluctant to
criticize the Government in public forums for fear of harassment, job loss,
intimidation, or being labeled a traitor to war-torn Croatia.
The Government controls all national television broadcasting
and all but one national radio station, and retains a controlling interest
in two of four news dailies and some weeklies. The sale of a majority of
shares in the leading newspaper, Vjesnik, to a local bank appeared to increase
rather than reduce government influence at the paper. The chairman of the
bank’s board of directors is an HDZ Member of Parliament, and the editor
in chief of the paper was replaced in December by a less experienced journalist,
who despite claiming no party affiliation, had close links with the HDZ.
Although these state-controlled or heavily state-influenced media, particularly
the press, frequently carry reportage critical of the Government, government
control nonetheless ensures an overall editorial slant generally favorable
to the Government and the HDZ. Each of the opposition parties is allocated
4 minutes of television time per week. Access to the print media is minimal,
with occasional coverage of press conferences and interviews. Two nationally
publicized instances of physical threats against journalists by local politicians
generated media debate but no action by the Government.
A few newspapers continue to guard their independence,
including the daily Novi List in Rijeka, the weekly Globus, the intellectual
bimonthly journal Erasmus, the satirical weekly Feral Tribune, and the
weekly Arkzin, published by “the Antiwar Campaign.” A new weekly, Pecat,
with an independent editorial line began publishing in September. Even
some extremist publications, with a virulently antigovernment slant, could
be purchased at newsstands, although they had very small circulation. The
highly popular Feral Tribune, whose material continued to push the boundaries
of good taste, was reclassified for tax purposes as a pornographic magazine
and, therefore, subject to a 50-percent turnover tax. The Minister of Culture
admitted that this reclassification was a result of Feral’s continuing
attacks on the Government. International papers and journals remained available
throughout government-controlled areas, including Serbian periodicals which
subscribers continued to receive by mail.
Croatia has four major television channels, as well
as regional stations in Zadar, Split, Vinkovci, and Osijek. Zagreb-based
Channels One, Two, and Four are part of the official Croatian Radio and
Television enterprise (HTV), headed by a well-known HDZ member. Zagreb
Channel Three, OTV-youth television, with a signal that reaches only the
capital district, has an uncertain legal status and operates at the sufferance
of the Government.
Parliament in July passed a broadcasting law providing
for the allocation of radio and television frequencies to new, private
outlets, but the Government has not yet implemented it. Private local radio
stations operate under provisional licenses in Croatia, but their legal
status is open to question until the media law is implemented. The broadcasting
law mandates that one parliamentary member of the Council for Croatian
Television be a minority representative, but this person has not yet been
appointed. A seven-member council of government and nongovernmental representatives,
established by Parliament in 1993 to protect the freedom of the press,
has yet to meet because Parliament failed to appoint a chairman until late
in the year.
In the Serb-controlled portions of the UNPA’s, freedom
of speech and press virtually does not exist. With martial law still in
effect, there are no guarantees of press and other freedoms, and the authorities
control the tone and content of the media. Serbian papers, usually published
in Belgrade, are generally available, although the supply is sometimes
sporadic. There is one small paper published weekly or biweekly in Serbian
in Sector North.
A few low-powered local radio “stations” broadcast from
Serb-held territory in some of the UNPA’s, and Croatian radio and television
signals are received in these areas as well. The Serbian Television Krajina,
whose studios are in Petrova Gora and Knin, broadcasts daily. Two other
Serbian mobile studios operate out of Beli Manastir and Plitvice.
POLAND
Although these freedoms are generally provided for in
the Constitution, they are subject to some restriction in law and practice.
Polish citizens may generally express their opinions publicly and privately.
Article 270 of the Penal Code, however,states that anyone who “publicly
insults, ridicules, and derides the Polish nation, Polish People’s Republic,
its political system, or its principal organs is punishable by between
6 months and 8 years of imprisonment.” Article 273 imposes a prison term
of up to 10 years on a person who commits any of the acts prohibited by
Article 270 in print or through the mass media. Speaker of the Sejm Jozef
Oleksy called in 1994 for revisions of these sections of the Constitution
in order to ensure it complied with the European Convention on Human Rights
in relation to freedom of speech. Polish neo-Fascist activist Boleslaw
Tejkowski was convicted in October of insulting Polish authorities, the
Jewish minority, the Pope, and Polish bishops and received a 1-year suspended
sentence.
The Penal Code stipulates that offending religious sentiment
through public speech is punishable by a fine or a 2-year prison term.
An August cover of the popular weekly newsmagazine, Wprost, which showed
an image of the Black Madonna and Child in gas masks to protect themselves
from environmental pollution, raised a strong reaction among Poland’s Catholic
community, resulting in several legal complaints and demands from Catholic
extremists that the magazine cease publication, prompting the editor to
issue an apology.
The print media in Poland are uncensored and independent,
although they may be subject to prosecution under the Penal Code provisions
described above. A proposal by some parliamentarians in June to create
a national press council awakened concerns about the possible return of
censorship in some form, and the idea was quietly dropped.
The Government owns a controlling interest in one major
newspaper, which serves as the semiofficial newspaper of record. It does
not restrict the establishment of private newspapers. Journals also appear
regularly on newsstands. Books expressing a wide range of political and
social viewpoints are widely available, as are foreign periodicals. Poles
have access to foreign publications and foreign radio broadcasts.
The parliamentary opposition expressed strong concern
over provisions in a draft law on the protection of state and official
secrets presented to the Parliament in September which would make journalists
and private citizens liable to prison terms for up to 10 years for disclosure
of state secrets, broadly defined to include both military and government
economic activity. The opposition contends the law would unduly restrict
the public’s freedom of information. After a major outcry from the press,
consideration of the law was deferred pending approval of a new constitution.
Organized crime in Poland’s larger cities poses a threat
to reporters: a journalist who covered organized crime was attacked in
Gdansk during the summer, and in August the cafeteria of the Poznan offices
of Gazeta Wyborcza, an influential daily, was bombed after the paper published
a series of exposes about organized crime.
The National Broadcasting Council (NBC) supervises programming
on public television, allocates broadcasting frequencies and licenses,
and apportions subscription revenues. The Council may interpret these very
broad prerogatives at its discretion. In order to encourage the NBC’s apolitical
character, the nine NBC members are obliged under the law to suspend any
membership in political parties or public associations. However, they were
chosen for their political allegiances and nominated by the Sejm, the Senate,
and the President following political bargaining, raising serious questions
about the independence of broadcasting from government influence. Private
broadcasters were concerned that the awarding of licenses for the limited
number of broadcast frequencies available could be politically motivated.
After the awarding of the first nationwide television license, President
Walesa withdrew his support from his three nominees and removed his nominee
from the chair. The President’s right to intervene was taken to the Constitutional
Tribunal, and after a court decision the three remained on the board, and
Walesa named one of them chairman.
The NBC granted a nationwide concession for a private
television network to the Polsat corporation in February; competitors alleged
that the decision was legally flawed, and some charged it was taken under
undue political influence. In August the Government closed down 6 of 12
stations which the Polonia 1 network operated without authorization (in
the absence of a law on broadcasting) since 1992, charging that the stations
were operating on frequencies assigned to the military. The foreign owner
of Polonia 1, who competed unsuccessfully for the national television concession,
claimed the action was politically motivated. Polonia continued to operate
six other local television stations, for which it had outstanding concession
applications, and to broadcast to Poland via satellite from abroad.
The broadcasting law stipulates that programs should
not promote activities that are illegal or against Polish state policy,
morality, or the common good. The law also requires that all broadcasts
“respect the religious feelings of the audiences and in particular respect
the Christian system of values.” The law does not fully define the term
“Christian values.” Since the NBC has the ultimate responsibility for supervising
the content of programs, these restrictions could be used as a means of
censorship. The penalty for violating this provision of the law is up to
50 percent of a broadcaster’s annual fee for the transmission frequency,
plus the prospect of having the license withdrawn or experiencing difficulty
in renewing the license when it expires.
In March the Constitutional Tribunal declared that there
was no contradiction between broadcasting law regulations, which prescribe
respect for the Christian system of values in particular, and regulations
concerning the pluralism of the public media and freedom of speech. In
its verdict the Tribunal stated that respect for Christian values was not
tantamount to their propagation. Observers concluded that the ruling made
self-censorship more likely and left publishers and broadcasters with the
threat of legal action if any individual feels his or her Christian values
have been violated. In June, acting on the request for an opinion by 89
deputies from the SLD, the Constitutional Tribunal confirmed that the requirement
that broadcast programs “respect the Christian system of values” was constitutional.
The daily news editor of the main state television’s
evening news program was punished in May with a 1-month suspension from
his duties for neglecting to broadcast anything about President Walesa’s
visit to Estonia. The action was taken after the President’s spokesman
strongly protested the news program’s failure to cover the visit.
SLOVAKIA
The Constitution prohibits censorship and provides for
freedom of information and the right of expression. In a December speech
introducing his new Government, Prime Minister Meciar said that “We recognize
that a free and independent media is also the foundation of a democratic
society” and thus “the Slovak Government shall, in the spirit of the Constitution
of the Slovak Republic, consistently protect the freedom of expression
as one of the fundamental human rights.” However, the law prohibits public
utterances fostering ethnic or religious hatred.
Human rights monitors objected to Article 103 of the
Slovak Criminal Code, which prohibits defamation of the President, on the
grounds that it was being implemented in a manner that limited freedom
of the press. They cited the case of a newspaper editor under investigation
in 1994 for publishing the letter of a reader who was indirectly critical
of the President. Observers voiced concern over proposals by some nationalist
politicians for a law on the protection of the Republic, fearing that such
a law would undermine freedom of speech.
During 1994 numerous newspapers, magazines, and journals
spanning the entire spectrum of political views were published freely.
The print media continued frank and occasionally critical coverage of government
activities, but the HZDS renewed its call for increased government regulation
of journalism, promising in its election program that it would not allow
“tendentious fabrications and reporting by people in the mass media.”
There is no civil service law protecting jobs after
a change of government. In March the Moravcik government took steps to
restore employment to two persons who had lost their jobs in 1993 on free
speech grounds. Lubomir Lintner, the Slovak radio journalist fired in 1993
because of alleged government pressure, was named press spokesman for the
Office of the Prime Minister. Slovak Press Agency Chief Dusan Kleiman,
dismissed by the incoming Moravcik government in March was reinstated in
his position by the incoming Meciar Government in December. The director
of the National Oncology Institute, fired in 1993 after he had spoken critically
of the health care system on television, regained his post in 1994 in a
competitive selection process.
Councils made up of nine members elected by Parliament
to 6-year terms administer the government-sponsored Slovak Radio and Slovak
Television. Slovakia has one government-sponsored television station broadcasting
on two channels. One of 17 radio stations is government sponsored; the
remainder are privately owned and controlled.
The pro-HZDS majority in November replaced the members
of both councils. Simultaneously, the Radio Council fired the director
of Slovak Radio, who had served continuously since 1989. A new director
of Slovak Television--the seventh since the 1989 revolution--was appointed
in January. Subsequently a number of other staff changes were made at both
radio and television. Listeners report that coverage of internal political
news was greatly reduced, with the views of opposition politicians reported
only minimally, if at all.
Early in 1994, agreement was reached for Radio Free
Europe (RFE) to continue its medium-wave broadcasts to Slovakia. At an
HZDS demonstration on the day of the Meciar government’s March ouster,
an angry crowd viciously beat RFE journalists covering the event after
a speaker at the rally identified them. Police refused to aid the journalists,
who subsequently reported they were afraid to cover HZDS meetings. The
Government later replaced the police chief of Bratislava.
Just prior to the Meciar government’s fall, reception
of some Radio Free Europe (RFE) broadcasts was blocked for several hours.
The Meciar government denied responsibility, and reception subsequently
was restored.
After the fall of the Meciar government, the new government
dismissed the general director and chief editor of the government-owned
Slovak Republic Press Agency (TASR). TASR soon thereafter divested itself
of its ownership of the pro-HZDS newspaper Republika, which continued its
activities under private ownership as Slovenska Republika. Some HZDS representatives
criticized these actions as interference in the media. Subsequently the
HZDS hired the editor as its press spokesman and restored him to his former
position when it returned to power in December.