19. 07. 2013

EIGHTH ANEM MONITORING PUBLICATION PRESENTED TO PUBLIC

ANEM Monitoring Round Table VIII was held in Belgrade on July 10, 2013. It served to publicly present the Eighth Monitoring Publication of ANEM, containing texts on current media issues (media reform and state aid to media), as well as those that were always important and topical (freedom of expression and media literacy). The Publication also included the overview of two judgments passed by the European Court of Human Rights, taken over from the Information Notes on the Court's case-law relating to freedom of expression. The event was attended by a large number of stakeholders, over 40 participants - representatives of the competent authorities and regulatory bodies (the Ministries of Culture and Media, Finance and Economy, Trade and Telecommunications, Serbian Parliament, the Appellate Prosecutor's Office in Belgrade, the Commissioner for Information of Public Importance and Personal Data Protection, the Ombudsman, the Intellectual Property Office, the Anti-Corruption Agency, RBA and Ratel), as well as representatives of the donor community and international organizations (USAID, OSCE, FOD, Dutch and Norwegian Embassies in Belgrade), representatives of the media community (journalists and media - including both public service broadcasters, media organizations and production companies), NGOs (BIRN, YIHR, Share Defense, Belgrade Centre for Human Rights) and other interested parties.

In his welcoming note at the opening of the event, ANEM President and member of the Working Group for drafting media laws Sasa Mirkovic reminded of the fact that in the last four years, ANEM had published eight Monitoring Publications and 44 Monitoring Reports, which had become a compulsory material for all those involved in the media and media reforms in Serbia and the region. Reflecting on the current state of media reform in Serbia, Mirkovic said that the delay in the adoption of the media laws (when only the Draft Law on Public Information had undergone public discussion, while discussion on the Draft Law on Electronic Media was still pending and the Draft Law on Public Services had not yet been completed) had drastically affected the media reform and jeopardized the survival of the media. The announced Government restructure may further slow down the process of media reform, while with the recent ending of engagement of the Working Group, of which its members were notified on July 3, the Ministry has assumed political responsibility for the texts of media laws, Mirkovic said. He also suggested that a revision of what had been accomplished in the period of exactly two years since the adoption of the Media Strategy on September 28, that was defined in the Action Plan for the implementation of the Media Strategy.

PRESENTATION OF THE PUBLICATION

The Publication was presented by the authors of the texts:

Attorney at law Kruna Savovic, author of the text "Why is there still no media reform in Serbia", reminded that media reform in Serbia was lasting more than ten years, explaining the reasons for the lack of success of this process: not only the lack of political will, but also a lack of government's capacity to formulate, adopt and implement public policy. She pointed out that despite the Media Strategy and its Action Plan, we were again discussing the delays and lack of media reform, in the situation where some solutions provided in the Media Strategy (i.e. withdrawal of the state from ownership in media), had been already foreseen by the Law on Public Information and Broadcasting Law much earlier. Knowing this, the set deadlines have therefore not been disobeyed for months, but rather for years. It is also a paradox, Savovic noted, that albeit the Strategy stipulates the funding of public services by TV subscription fee, we are now back to contemplating the system of budget financing, as though the Strategy does not exist. In her opinion, the media reform is delayed because the objectives have not been thought through enough and have not been translated into an adequate regulatory framework. What is important for media reform, Savovic says, is to have well defined objectives, translated into an appropriate regulatory framework and to have such regulatory framework realized.

Attorney at law Slobodan Kremenjak, author of the text "State aid control and media reforms in Serbia", discussed the system of media financing from public funds and the issue of state aid as the key issue in the media reform. He said that, according to data from the Media Strategy, which were incomplete, the state was annually allocating at least 25 million Euros for the media, which, in the situation where the media market is devastated (in the last 5, marketing budgets have been reduced by at least 10% each year), gives the state a huge influence and control over them. When the government is shaping, with its funds, the kind of information that will come to the public and decides which media will survive or rather, not survive, it is more than necessary to restore order in the system of media financing and create a system that will be transparent and based on the principles that would guarantee equal conditions to all market participants. This is the right time to put some order in this area, because it coincides with a broader picture of Serbia's EU accession process, which includes the harmonization of regulations in Serbia with EU regulations, the priority areas for harmonization being the protection of competition and state aid control, Kremenjak concluded.

Ombudsman Sasa Jankovic, author of the text "Freedom of Expression", spoke about freedom of expression as the most sensitive area of ​​human rights and freedoms, little known and understood but was often unreasonably to called to by the citizens, either in cases of using or limiting it. Such situation necessarily leads to litigation. It is therefore important, especially for journalism and journalists, to be familiar with the term freedom of expression, including the conditions for its limitations, to understand the difference between use and abuse, and for journalists' and media associations to, due to the rigidity of public authorities, effectively prevent, with self-regulation, education, prevention, even with the work of ethics committees, the need for the state to intervene with much cruder tools. As an example of the protection of freedom of expression, Jankovic cited the recent ruling of the European Court of Human Rights that said that the Republic of Serbia, namely, the Security Intelligence Agency BIA, had violated Article 10 of the European Convention, which guaranteed freedom of expression, because it failed to provide the Youth Initiative organization with the data on the number of wiretapped persons in Serbia - this judgment shows that the Court finds the access to information of public importance as the part of the right to freedom of expression.

Doc. Boban Tomic, PhD, author of the text "Media literacy as a social strategy" elaborated on the importance of opening discussions on a broader level about what media literacy was, why it was important for the development of society and how it should be implemented in the future. He stressed the importance of media education, not only media professionals - producers of media messages, but especially audience as a media consumer, for it to be prepared to critically access, analyze and evaluate media messages.

DISCUSSION

After the presentation of texts in the Publication, a discussion was opened on the media situation in Serbia, namely: slowness in the adoption of the media laws, which drastically affected the survival of the media, since their underlying problems could not have been solved without these new laws, while the situation was so dramatic that it might have only a few media surviving the process, given that the preparation and implementation of these laws would take a lot of time; delayed digitalization, a problem that could lead to people ending up in 2015 without  analog signal as well; need for financial independence of public service broadcasters and their difficult situation, which was further exacerbated by the public promise of cancelling TV subscription, which was the reason why fee collection rate had dropped dramatically, not to mention lack of sufficient state funds; ill effects of delay in implementing media reforms on the citizens, who remained deprived of the plurality of opinion; importance of changing the system of financing of media with public funds, a necessity to prohibit direct financing of the media and the introduction of equal rules for project financing at all levels, which would guarantee the transparency of spending of funds and equal market conditions for all media, as well as the importance of consistent application of the rules on state aid control in the media sphere; small progress recorded in judicial practice in media cases, representing a positive change of thinking of appellate courts - in Belgrade, but also at the local level, in line with European standards; media law that had become a very complex issue that required new capacities and knowledge of not only media experts, but of all participants in the process of media reform, primarily government bodies. Sasa Mirkovic provided participants with an exclusive information that he had received during the discussion about the answer of the Ministry of Culture and Media to the proposals and suggestions of Media Coalition on the Draft Law on Public Information and the Media - unfortunately, the Ministry had rejected most of the proposals. What were the proposals and suggestions of the Media Coalition concerning the project financing, media concentration, privatization of media, prohibition of funding of the media from public funds, putting out of force the provisions of other laws that were in direct conflict with the Strategy and this law, etc, was presented by Milos Stojkovic from ANEM legal team, who had also explained the reasons that Ministry gave for such decision. Sasa Mirkovic announced that the Coalition would continue to advocate for the improvement of legal solutions in the parliament, in order for the law to truly contribute to media reform and improvement of the position of the media and journalists.

http://serbia.nlembassy.org/ 

The content of this report is the sole responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily reflect the views of the Embassy of the Kingdom of the Netherlands.

 

This project is financially supported by the Open Society Foundation, Serbia.

 

 

The content of this report is the sole responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily reflect the views of the Open Society Foundation, Serbia.