Speech by Andy McGuffie, EU Delegation/EUSR Head of Communication and Spokesperson, at the conference ‘Security and Protection of Journalists’ organised on Human Rights Day

Human Rights Day: EU in BiH confirms strong support for freedom of media and work of professional journalists

Sarajevo, 10 December 2014

Dear colleagues, ladies and gentlemen – good morning.

Thank you very much for the opportunity to attend this important event on Human Rights Day and to bring you greetings from the Delegation of the European Union and EU Special Representative Office here in Sarajevo.

The European Union attaches great importance to freedom of expression in the region and freedom of the media in particular. We regularly take a stand on these issues as you will have seen only yesterday from the EU statement on the imprisonment of journalist Khadija Ismayilova in Azerbaijan.

The key documents and standards of the European Union leave no room for doubt. Article 49 of the Lisbon Treaty, for example, states that freedom of expression is a key indicator of a country’s readiness to become part of the EU. It implies a commitment to democracy, good governance and political accountability. Accordingly, no country can join the EU without guaranteeing freedom of expression as a basic human right.

Ensuring freedom of expression and of the media is one of the main challenges facing enlargement countries today. It’s therefore one of the European Commission’s fundamental policy priorities in the Western Balkans region. Some of you, I know, have participated in the Speak Up! conferences of the European Commission as well as other gatherings, and we’re grateful for your continuing input and participation. May I take this opportunity to congratulate you all too on the often lonely work you do day-to-day.

We’re all familiar with, and you have no doubt experienced the flash points: political interference and pressure from other vested interests on the media; economic concerns such as low pay and manipulation of advertising; and harassment that can include, most unacceptably, violence against journalists. All are topical issues in the societies of the Western Balkans and Turkey. That’s why this conference is needed and timely.

It’s needed because improving this situation means going beyond formal legislative change, lip service to international standards and simple and formal transposition of EU directives into domestic law. It calls for real behavioural and cultural change right through society: in politics, the judiciary; in media and in the public opinion. It means some changes in what we see the media as being there to do; and in what we see the authorities and institutions (and I use those terms in the widest sense to include the executives, the legislatures and judiciaries) as being there to do.

The authorities first: clearly they have the responsibility to carry out their duties – governing, maintaining law and order, legislating, rendering justice and so on. But their public duty also includes being open to scrutiny and debate – because listening and learning and changing improves governance and hence public confidence in the authorities. I don’t exclude the European Union from that principle either and we too try to improve how we work on the basis of feedback and experience.

All this said, we are concerned to hear from media associations about an increasing trend of officials suing journalists for defamation.

On this matter, and it’s applicable to other questions, there is clear best practice in the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights which has held that: “the limits of permissible criticism are wider with regard to the Government than in relation to a private citizen, or even a politician.”

In the case of individual politicians, in the judgment in Lingens v. Austria, the Court specifies that “freedom of the press […] affords the public one of the best means of discovering and forming an opinion of the ideas and attitudes of political leaders. […] The limits of acceptable criticism are accordingly wider as regards a politician as such than as regards a private individual. Unlike the latter, the former […] knowingly lays himself open to close scrutiny of his every word and deed by both journalists and the public at large, and he must consequently display a greater degree of tolerance.”

So officials and institutions should display due restraint – as they say in football: play the ball and not the man – and we would expect court practice in cases involving media to be mindful of the best practice of the European Court of Human Rights and conventions protecting freedom of expression.

I would also like to underline the responsibility of authorities and institutions to fulfil in letter and spirit their obligations under legislation regarding access to official data, documents and information. Creating unnecessary, overly bureaucratic obstacles to media always backfires in the end.

On the other side of the fence, there are equally responsibilities for media owners, editors and journalists. Even after commercial imperatives are taken into account, media houses, we believe, should play a socially positive role, assisting their audiences to interpret the world around them on the basis of comprehensive information and research. Journalists in terms of general practice in EU Member States are not stenographers or secretaries. They have a recognised professional calling to bring their judgment to bear in good faith and without fear, and where this is suppressed or discouraged – that is not journalism. Journalists who are working professionally in line with internationally accepted ethics must be supported and encouraged.

We are not however practising journalism when – I am sure you will agree – journalists expect to be spoon-fed, and work in a ‘copy and paste’ fashion without making the effort to exercise their own independent thought. I’m sure you agree that we are not talking about journalism when facts are not checked, when proper research is not done, when clearly incorrect accusations are made. As a professional group here today we look to you to shine the light along the path and lead through your professional example.

The EU, for our part, will continue to provide our support to all in the media sector through providing legal assistance and guidance in drafting media legislation; thoroughly monitoring the policies of candidate countries and potential candidates in this field, speaking out against attacks on media and providing financial support through IPA programmes – and of course by doing our best day to day to uphold the standards I have just discussed.

Right now I also have to mention that in Bosnia and Herzegovina we at the EU Delegation/EUSR are very preoccupied by the 17 June 2015 deadline for digitalisation in Europe. Bosnia and Herzegovina is in serious risk of being a black hole in Europe when it comes to digital broadcasting. We urge all parties and competent authorities in this country to direct their attention and resources to strengthening the independence and professionalism of the current channels in the public broadcast system; setting up the corporate structure for BiH’s public broadcast system, harmonizing entity-level laws with the Law on Public Broadcasting System of BiH, and urgently addressing the issue of digitalization in order to meet the deadline for the digital switchover.

Ladies and gentlemen, in conclusion let me once again restate the EU’s commitment to freedom of expression and the security of journalists in the Western Balkans. This is a joint task in which we all have a role to play. Without freedom of expression and freedom of the media, an informed, active and engaged citizenry is impossible. And without the citizens on board there will be no accession to the EU.

I wish you a good and fruitful discussion today and I am very much looking forward to seeing the conclusions and recommendations of today’s conference. We will welcome your advice and input. We wish you best of luck in your future work and initiatives.

Thank you!

Europa.ba