Ana Martinoli: We are far from having the Regulatory Authority for Electronic Media (REM) as stipulated by the law.

The spokesperson for the Regulatory Body for Electronic Media, Olivera Zekić, stated today that, in accordance with procedures and deadlines, the election of new members of the REM Council is expected in the first half of July.

Ana Martinoli, a professor at the Faculty of Dramatic Arts, reminds us that the entire previous election was compromised, but what is more important is that we entered the current elections with a statement issued by the Culture and Information Committee that does not address any of the contentious and problematic aspects of the previous competition – serious violations of both laws and procedures and rules.

“In fact, that statement says that a new competition is being announced because the public was disturbed and began to doubt the entire process. The public, if it was disturbed, was not so because someone was spreading disinformation, but because there were very serious omissions in the entire process that compromised the integrity of that process and actually called into question the very possibility of selecting a REM Council that will truly be independent. So, even before the announcement of the competition, we had problems. The criminal complaint against the chair of the Culture and Information Committee, Nevena Đurić, filed by several non-governmental organizations, was also not addressed, as she practically did not perform her duties within the legally prescribed deadlines. Therefore, it was already clear at that moment that there would be problems, and now we see that those problems have somehow continued,” she said for N1.

Speaking about the criticism from the opposition and journalist associations regarding certain candidates, she emphasizes the importance of the non-governmental organizations highlighting some of the shortcomings in the applications and potential issues that could arise in future work if these individuals are selected for the REM Council.

“On the other hand, I must say that the address we had yesterday from the position of the Speaker of the National Assembly is additionally concerning because individuals are somehow singled out from that position of power, actually the greatest power after the president, and then their cases are analyzed. I believe that this is not good; I think that the evaluation of candidates for future members of the REM Council should be carried out by the Culture and Information Committee. Therefore, we need a transparent process managed by those bodies that are responsible for it. I believe that this is also a form of pressure, not only on those individuals who have been named and targeted but also a form of pressure on the institution that will further deal with this process,” Martinoli noted.

She also added that the statements made by Ana Brnabić, who also presented her list of "problematic" individuals that includes a professor from the Faculty of Dramatic Arts, are an attempt to relativize serious and substantive objections.

“Our colleague, Professor Vanja Šibalić, is criticized for having some form of authorial engagement with the public service. Those engagements have ended, and someone who is a media professional, of course, in order to develop professionally and contribute to a relevant market, will have to have such forms of engagement. Therefore, I fear that these criticisms in this specific case are not valid. The Faculty has pointed this out not only to indicate that there is no conflict of interest or violation of procedures but also because it is creating an atmosphere of targeting individuals, an atmosphere of declaring those unfit, and so on, which, of course, later continues in tabloids, which is not good. What I believe is actually crucially important is that the address we had from the position of the Speaker of the National Assembly is actually trying to somehow mitigate very serious objections that exist in the case of some other candidates and thereby effectively equalize the entire process, leading us to enter further steps with a significant degree of distrust,” the interlocutor explained to N1.

On the other hand, she points out serious objections that are raised regarding certain candidates, such as the candidacy of the advisor to the Minister of Information, Miloš Garić.

“The problem with the fact that someone is an advisor to the minister is that it is a direct interference of the executive power in that process. We began this process, among other things, with statements, claims, and reports from civic initiatives stating that serious pressures have been registered from the executive authority on various associations dealing with child protection, even some calls from the cabinet of the minister without portfolio, etc. Therefore, these are truly incomparable categories. We have a situation, if I followed yesterday’s writings of Cenzolovka and the Slavko Ćeruvija Foundation correctly, that we have a candidate, Vladimir Đurić, who changed the activity code of his agency immediately before applying and competing, and through this change of code attempted to circumvent existing restrictions. Those restrictions were serious for numerous relevant professionals, and they could also have been members if they had decided to ethically circumvent the rules. Thus, by changing the code just before the competition, he essentially removed the burden of something that could later represent a serious conflict of interest in case he is elected,” Martinoli said.

The professor from the Faculty of Dramatic Arts also states that, as far as the REM is concerned, what the law provides and what we have in practice are two completely different poles.

“Now, even if we do not delve into what the fundamental problem of the REM is, which is its independence, that practically did not exist in the previous period. On the other hand, we have a series of very serious tasks and functions of this regulatory body in the market that the REM has not fulfilled. I will remind you that during the last competition for the issuance of broadcasting licenses, or licenses for media service providers for national coverage, that competition took place without meeting the previous condition that required a very precise analysis of the media market to determine how much television we actually need, what kinds of television, what type of programming, how financially substantial that market is, and so on. Therefore, that is just a small detail. If we were to try to summarize the tasks of the REM, they primarily include analysis of the media market, monitoring of that media market, monitoring compliance of the plans of those who received licenses with what they actually deliver in practice, imposing fines, and sanctions. Therefore, we know that the REM has not utilized almost any of the wide range of possible sanctions for media service providers for various types of violations of the provisions of the Law on Electronic Media,” Martinoli concluded.

Source: N1