
Commenting on media laws, European Federation of Journalists (EFJ) President Maja Sever said that, although some things have been changed, “in the end not everyone is satisfied with the adopted laws and with what is now to define the media space.”
“This that is happening now, what this law has paved the way for is legalization, state control of media exists in Serbia anyway, this is just one step further, the legalization of that control and pressure,” she said.
The procedure surrounding the law adoption process was such that a person simply “gets lost,” said Sever.
“Had I not had the help and assistance of people from NUNS (Independent Journalists’ Association of Serbia, to at all understand what had been proposed, who withdrew what, who added what… People in NUNS are working on this thoroughly, I thank them for their help. Although they were invited to additional consultations and, despite the fact that some things were changed, in the end not everyone is satisfied with the adopted laws and with what is now to define the media space,” she said.
First of all, there is “that issue of Telekom.”
“Media ownership in Serbia has been officially legalized in this way. We know that ‘captured media’ is strongly emphasized in your society, the influence of the ruling structures on mainstream media, state advertising, all of it has really resulted in a big blow to media pluralism, media independence. This that is happening now, what this law has paved the way for is legalization, state control of media exists in Serbia anyway, this is just one step further, the legalization of that control and pressure,” she said.
Sever said she regrets that the “representatives in the Parliament failed to realize this.”
“They did not accept the proposal to drop the provisions allowing Telekom to own media outlets. They like to compare themselves with European politicians, but this is incomparable at the European level. The decision is a new form of category, of media capture and of the state structures’ influence on the media. The other provisions that I am also sorry the MPs failed to understand is that judicial and civic control of the REM (Regulatory Body for Electronic Media) is necessary, as is civic control of the REM’s action on complaints by citizens and organizations,” she stressed.
According to her, one year in the recent past “out of 85 complaints filed with REM, only three were resolved.”
“You are aware of it and you know well just how big REM’s ‘non-influence’ is, what consequences it has on your entire society. The issue of election campaign control, methodology criteria based on which the REM would have to monitor media reporting in election campaigns… In the past campaigns everyone clearly saw why this is needed, why the absence of such control is fatal to pluralism and democracy, in every, and especially in your and our countries,” said Sever.
The EFJ President voiced her opinion that European values are adopted very selectively in Serbia.
“Not everything is adopted and it is not being shown that this European path is truly something sincere. The European way and what the European law on media freedoms stipulates, it seeks to solve the problem of the abuse of state institutions, to solve the problem of state interference in the media and media space. These laws certainly did not ensure that. In the latest law on media freedom at the European level, a uniform approach to media pluralism is required, protection of users from harmful influence, reduced risk associated with state interference in editorial freedom, and ensuring of a transparent and fair distribution of money in the internal national market. I wouldn’t really say that a law under which a company, Telekom, has now officially legalized its ownership of media, follows European values. Examples are always cited very selectively, without looking at the big picture. Have we ensured the media’s independence from state interference with this law, or the strengthening of the REM’s independence, the two basic things that are the main idea when we talk about media pluralism and media freedom in the EU,” she said.
The Serbian Parliament adopted two media laws that have been strongly criticized by journalists’ associations. Professional associations and some opposition parties were against their adoption because they allow for a company founded by the state to own media outlets.