Media Helping Media - a free, global resource for media development

On 27 March, 2007, as the film crew from ProTV Chisinau focused their cameras on a peaceful opposition party rally in the Moldovan capital, the police moved in.

Members of the crew were held for questioning along with more than a dozen marchers. 

While this was happening, a crew from DTV, which was filming events, had the tape removed from their camera and were given a verbal warning by officers.

Both crews were later released without charge and without any paperwork changing hands. They later demanded and apology and a full investigation, but they knew they were wasting their time.

Incidents like these have become a common occurrence in the ex-Soviet state where the intimidation of journalists has never been taken seriously and where the police are reluctant to investigate complaints.

Instead, trials of unauthorised meetings and “misbehaving” reporters are arranged rapidly; the hearings on the incident described above are held on the very next day.

There is also little point in journalists taking legal action; they rarely win cases in the national courts. At the same time, the government keeps losing case after case in the European Court of Human Rights.

The move against the media is not only happening on the streets. Recently, the Moldovan legislators decided to stop the mandatory live TV and radio broadcast of the proceedings of parliament in a move that opposition politicians describe as an attempt to control parliamentary reporting. Journalists say the move is a violation of the public’s constitutional right to information.

The new measures allow parliament, which is governed by an alliance of the dominant Communist faction and a tiny Christian Democratic minority, to decide what to broadcast and when to broadcast. Parliament is also able to dictate which sessions are closed and which are open, although the law clearly says that all plenary sessions should be open and only special security issues should be discussed behind closed doors. 

In a secret ballot held on Friday 23 March 2007, the lawmakers ruled that “it is up to the national broadcasters to decide whether they want to broadcast live or broadcast a pre-recorded report”. The public corporation, TeleRadio-Moldova, is controlled by and accountable to parliament.  Some media institutions fear the law has been changed in order to manipulate the vote at the forthcoming elections in June.

Those defending the new legislation argue that the change will save public money. They say that the old law, under which the national television station was obliged to film the workings of parliament, was undemocratic because it left broadcasters with no option.  They also claim that few people bothered to watch the sessions, which are held during normal working hours, and argue that the small audience doesn’t justify the need to broadcast.

The opposition complains that measures were rushed through without adequate debate and without the correct procedures being adhered to. Some commentators say the move raises serious questions about Moldova’s future integration within the European Union - a goal welcomed by the majority with most parties in favour.

The decision by legislators to terminate the live broadcast from parliament came shortly after western embassies and international organisations released a joint declaration expressing deep concerns about freedom of the media in Moldova.

The declaration claimed that the new legislation, if adopted, would reduce the effectiveness of the media and, as a consequence, adversely impact the right of the public to information. They noted that the measure followed a series of shutdowns of independent TV and radio stations and crackdowns on some vocative publications.

The most notable case involved EuroTV Chisinau and the radio station Antena C. Both were sold to people close to the ruling coalition amid claims of procedural irregularities and arbitrary interpretation of law. The two stations are now hardly seen or heard, despite being popular a few months ago for their unbiased reporting on major developments.

Vasile Botnaru, director of the Moldovan bureau of Free Europe Radio, says the developments suggest the Eastern European nation is sliding away from democratic standards.

“We are witnessing a degradation of standards as well as attempts by this government to manipulate public opinion and obtain a favourable outcome at the summer elections.”

Mr Botnaru, who runs the local office of an international radio station, claims the Moldovan press has never been free or independent.

“I can name just a few newspapers and stations capable of surviving on their own; economically speaking, most of them are bankrupt.”

Igor Botsan, director of the think tank ADEPT, the Association of Participatory Democracy in Chisinau, says journalists must share part of blame for the situation. 

“Although they [journalists] have had plenty of reasons - and lots of opportunities – to go to court over violations of their right to work normally, it was only when some saw their offices sealed and computers confiscated that they decided to seek justice.”

However, Mr Botsan acknowledged that most reporters and editors could not afford the cost or time required to take legal action.

“If asked to write a story about themselves, many reporters would definitely put the word survival in the lead.”

With the country gaining a reputation for high corruption and slow reforms, media freedom remains a distant dream for most Moldovan journalists. A local cartoonist depicted the situation by drawing a scared man hurrying to an event as smiling police officers holding truncheons lined up on both sides of the path while stretching their legs to trip him up.

---

If you valued this article, please consider sharing it with others.

TrackBack URI for this entry

Comments (0)

Subscribe to this comment's feed