NUNS Report: 135 Attacks, Pressures, and Threats Against Journalists Since the Beginning of the Year.

Members of NUNS at the regular Assembly of the Association adopted the financial report of NUNS for the year 2024 and the minutes from the last session of the NUNS Assembly. They also discussed reports on the work of NUNS and the organs of the Association.

Following the conclusion of the regular session, a panel titled “Between Pressures and Resistance: Media Freedoms in the Mirror of NUNS Reports” was held, during which the latest report “Indicators for the Level of Media Freedom and the Index of Journalist Safety 2024” was presented. This report, which NUNS has been preparing for the ninth consecutive year, presents an annual overview of the state of media freedom and journalist safety in Serbia.

The introductory speech at the panel was given by the OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media, Jan Bratu, and the state of media freedom in Serbia was discussed by Rade Đurić, a lawyer and researcher at NUNS, Aleksandra Krstić, a professor at the Faculty of Political Sciences in Belgrade, and Dominik Tijeri, head of the media department within the OSCE Mission in Serbia. The discussion was moderated by the General Secretary of NUNS, Tamara Filipović.

At the beginning of the panel, Bratu thanked for the invitation and presented his findings on the state of media freedom while he was the head of the OSCE mission in Serbia.

“We know that freedom on paper is not the same as freedom in practice. In Serbia, as well as in other regions covered by the OSCE, we continue to record increasing pressure on journalists and the media. This is evident through the arrests of journalists, political and economic pressures, surveillance, threats, and physical and online attacks on journalists. This is not only the case in Serbia, but since we are here, we must emphasize that we are concerned about the situation in Serbia,” he stated.

He mentioned that threats and attacks on journalists are not isolated incidents; rather, they occur constantly, and it is concerning that the relevant institutions do not respond adequately in these cases.

“This is not just a human rights issue. It is a matter of democracy,” Bratu emphasized.

He added that Serbia has committed to protecting the rights of journalists and that he will support journalists during his mandate to fulfill these commitments.

After the address from the OSCE representative, Rade Đurić presented the latest report from NUNS.

At the beginning of his presentation, he noted that there was a decline in the media freedom index last year in Serbia.

Đurić pointed out that there is a notable concentration of power in Serbia, which is reflected in freedom of expression.

“The executive branch has a serious preponderance over other branches of government, which is also reflected in the relationship towards journalists and the media. Particularly, the President of the Republic and high officials, through their violent narratives and the way they communicate with journalists, actually incite numerous incidents and affect the safety of journalists, as well as the prosecution of criminal legal proceedings,” Đurić stated.

“All reports indicate that we have a serious decline. So, this is not just the conclusion of our research; other reports show the same,” he added.

Đurić also stated that there was a lack of will to improve media freedom and freedom of expression through amendments to media laws.

“We received only declarative amendments to certain provisions of the law,” emphasized the NUNS lawyer.

Regarding the Regulatory Body for Electronic Media (REM), Đurić reiterated that it still does not perform its function independently and in a non-discriminatory manner, and he reminded of the failed process of electing members of the REM Council.

“Two election processes were marked by serious irregularities, and we still do not know what the outcome will be,” Đurić stated.

He characterized the media co-financing process as senseless.

“Independent media today receive even less funding; the state has completely turned to alternative mechanisms that have been abused: for media services or directly providing funds to compliant media,” Đurić explained.

Professor Aleksandra Krstić spoke about the legal framework and the process of electing members of the REM Council.

“When it comes to laws, especially the Law on Public Media Services, I read that the authorities commented that this is actually a fulfillment of conditions for opening cluster 3… When we talk about media laws, we are talking about key issues that are important for the development of democracy, if we still believe that we live in a democracy and not in a semi-free state as Freedom House and other organizations have categorized us in recent years,” Krstić stated.

She mentioned that there were problems during the adoption of media laws in 2023, and that members of working groups did not receive final proposals and that the proposals of working group members were not accepted.

“Laws were changed on the go, without prior preparation; it seems that the state officials working on this did one thing while the journalistic community and media associations did not have proper inputs in this regard, and actually, those who should be consulted are the ones most affected by these laws,” the professor said.

She pointed out that public media services remain dependent on the state, which allows for government influence over their work. She noted that financial independence is crucial for their independence.

Krstić stated that the new laws failed to regulate media co-financing and campaign financing, and that in practice, what is good in the laws is not being applied.

She pointed out greater shortcomings in the selection of members of the REM Council in the second round.

“What happened in the last few days is that 18 candidates left the process, and even authorized proposers exited the process due to even greater violations of the law,” Krstić noted.

“If the European Union is satisfied with the selection of 9 members of the REM Council who are elected, I ask what we, as a society, will gain from it,” she added.

Dominik Tijeri, head of the media department within the OSCE Mission in Serbia, focused his presentation on the safety of journalists.

“The Permanent Working Group for the Safety of Journalists has held 50 meetings over the past seven years. This averages once every two months. In the last two years, the Working Group has met with 450 journalists, public prosecutors, and police officers in over 20 cities across Serbia, discussing specific cases in an effort to build trust,” Tijeri stated.

He noted that, according to the NUNS report, the number of threats and attacks has increased.

“These are brutal threats directed at certain journalists, undermining the fundamental principles of democracy and freedom of expression,” Tijeri said.

“This year alone, NUNS recorded 135 incidents against journalists, including 79 cases of pressure, 34 verbal threats, and 19 physical attacks. This is unacceptable. The state must do everything in its power to identify and punish all perpetrators without exception. Impunity only encourages those who try to silence independent voices,” he added.

He mentioned that the prosecution is facing a lack of capacity to prosecute these cases, and that only six prosecutors are working in the Department for High-Tech Crime, and it is concerning that the police do not respond to requests from prosecutors for information collection, which is contrary to the obligations that Serbia has undertaken.

Tijeri noted that journalists in Serbia face an increasing number of SLAPP lawsuits.

“Serbia ranks fifth in the number of these lawsuits. Media outlets such as KRIK, the Slavko Ćuruvija Foundation, and local media like In Medija and BIRN are facing many lawsuits. Many do not report lawsuits, which is concerning. Currently, there are about 200 proceedings against media outlets,” Tijeri reminded.

He added that in these cases, it is not about achieving justice, but rather the goal is to silence and discourage journalists who work in the public interest.

Tijeri stated that the safety of journalists depends on how much the state works on it. He also mentioned that he appreciates the efforts of journalistic and media organizations that strive to improve the position of journalists and that it is crucial to continue this work, as the OSCE will continue to support their efforts.

Conclusions from the report “Indicators for the Level of Media Freedom and the Index of Journalist Safety 2024” The security situation and working conditions of journalists in Serbia deteriorated further in 2024, despite the formally existing protection mechanisms and the legal framework that nominally protects freedom of expression. The biggest challenges relate to the increase in attacks and pressures, the inefficiency of institutions, the worsening social status of journalists, and the pronounced political instrumentalization of regulatory bodies. Regulatory Body for Electronic Media The Regulatory Body for Electronic Media (REM) in Serbia operates without actual independence, amid numerous political influences, irregularities in the selection of members, and the granting of licenses. Instead of protecting the public interest, REM favors pro-government media, ignores complaints, and does not conduct monitoring in accordance with the law, thereby seriously undermining media integrity. Media Co-Financing The media co-financing system in Serbia is characterized by numerous irregularities, including abuses in the selection of commissions, non-transparent allocation of funds, and favoritism towards media that violate the journalistic code. Contests often are delayed or not announced, and the appeals process is long and inefficient, further undermining trust in the process. Public Media Services The independence of public media services in Serbia continues to be seriously compromised by political influence, especially in governance structures and editorial policies. Although there are legal provisions that nominally strengthen autonomy, their application is selective, and public services often omit important topics and critical reporting under government pressure. State Advertising in Media State advertising in media in Serbia is conducted in a non-transparent and selective manner, favoring pro-government media. There are no clear criteria for the allocation of funds, which enables abuses and affects editorial policies. New regulations do not resolve the issue but further leave room for political pressure and market inequality. Attacks and Pressures on Journalists In 2024, there was a recorded increase in serious threats and physical attacks. Eighty serious threats were registered (including threats of death, rape, and violence against journalists and their families), as well as 23 physical attacks, with journalists covering protests or elections often being the targets. In some cases, violence was recorded by police officers. It is particularly concerning that the authorities do not condemn these attacks – on the contrary, they often rhetorically encourage them. SLAPP Lawsuits and Pressures through the Judiciary The increase in Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPP) seriously threatens investigative journalism. In 2024, at least 24 such lawsuits were filed, often by public officials. Journalists have their devices seized, their communications monitored, and proceedings are delayed. Final judgments in favor of powerful individuals, such as in the case of Minister Gašić against the KRIK portal, testify to the uneven application of the law. Economic and Social Position Journalists work in insecure conditions, most often without employment contracts, with low incomes and without rights to overtime. Particularly vulnerable are local and freelance journalists, many of whom take on additional jobs to survive. Such conditions often lead to self-censorship, stress, and mental burnout. Gender-Based Attacks Female journalists are particularly exposed to sexist and misogynistic attacks – both from the public and within newsrooms. After experiencing threats, they often face further harassment, leading to self-censorship (47%) and thoughts of leaving the profession (35%). Although reporting mechanisms exist, most female journalists do not trust institutions and rarely report attacks. Institutional Problems REM continues to operate as a political service instead of an independent regulator. Contests for co-financing media content have been abused, while state funds are selectively allocated to compliant media. Public services, such as RTS and RTV, fail to resist political influence, and their journalists are under constant pressure.

Source: NUNS