“The situation in the field of media remains almost the same as in previous years”

Because of the  coming National Press Day, ASTNA  asked Khalid Agaliyev, media expert and head of the “Media Rights” group, to talk about the situation of the media and journalists last year.

* * *

Question: What has been happening in the media over the past years? What   is this year remembered for in the field of media?

Answer: For many years, the media sphere, media freedom in Azerbaijan has been in the grip of serious problems. Media laws are problematic, the media has problems accessing finance and advertising, there are problems with professionalism  and very serious problems with  freedom.  There have been expectations and hopes since the last summer that cardinal changes will take place in the above fundamental issues, that favorable conditions will be created for the free and independent activities of the media. However, these hopes were not justified. In the field of media, the situation remains approximately the same as last year, as in previous years. The media is still dependent on annual government allocations, the advertising market is closed to independent media, and this situation has a negative impact on the media and journalists.

Question: Again there were arrests and threats. I would like you to talk about it. What can be said about the motives behind these arrests and the investigation into the facts of the threats? In general, what events have happened this year regarding violations of freedom of speech, repressions against journalists, suppression of the media, lawsuits against journalists?

Answer: As in previous years, perhaps even worse, arrests of journalists and other arrests for exercising the right to freedom of speech, unfortunately, continue. There is no legal assessment of the actions committed against journalists. Looking over the past six months, we can say that there have been over 70 incidents involving journalists. Most alarming is the trend of threats to journalists because of their professional activities. In this context, the most dangerous incident occurred with the well-known journalist Aytan Mammadova, who received death threats. Another journalist, Aziz Orujov, also faced threats. Journalists practicing their profession have been detained and ill-treated more than 20 times. Worst of all, although the law provides for the protection of the rights of journalists in such cases, these mechanisms have not worked for years. Months have passed since the incident with A. Mammadova, but no one has been held accountable for this terrible incident that occurred in one of the central districts of the city, and the society is not informed about the progress of the investigation. Laws providing for severe criminal penalties for defamation and insult have not only not been changed, but have become more widely applied. Even the dead clauses of the laws, on the application of which a moratorium was introduced in most Soviet countries, are used to restrict the media, freedom of speech, and intimidate journalists. For this, journalists were brought to trial more than 20 times. Judicial practice in connection with defamation and insult is outdated, the experience of the European Court is not taken into account.

Question: Have there been any positive changes in the media situation in Azerbaijan this year?

Answer: There are many changes affecting the media, but it cannot be said that they generally have a positive effect on the media environment. For example, there have been external changes, mainly due to a cosmetic update of media legislation and institutions that carry out state regulation in the field of media. But all this does not improve the general state of the media, but worsens it. In my opinion, the most noticeable trend in the media sphere of the last year is the rejection of media self-regulation. The government is tightening control over the media, trying to completely tame them. This is very similar to media regulation in Soviet times.

Question: A new Law on Media came into force in Azerbaijan. Do you think this new law can have a positive impact on the activities of journalists and the media?

Answer: Before the adoption of the new law, Azerbaijan's media legislation was partly problematic and required certain changes. However, the legislation was quite clear, whether it was TV and radio media, or print and online media, the directions were clear. The new law was adopted against the backdrop of the repeal of all previous laws and applies to all media. The general text of the new law is abstract, the concepts are confusing, its content is aimed at the complete subordination of the activities of the media and journalism to state regulation. The law gives the state the tool to regulate all the most important rules, from determining who can legally engage in journalism, to the requirement to obtain a license or regulatory approval for broadcasting television and radio and online media. The ability of the media and journalism to self-regulate is of great importance in terms of protecting editorial independence, minimizing outside interference, improving quality, increasing public trust in journalism, examining the public's expectations of objective and honest media, and ensuring media access. The new law creates serious problems in all these areas and does not show any positive changes. The Venice Commission of the Council of Europe has clearly expressed these concerns in its opinion. “Such a law should not be applied in a country-member of the Council of Europe,” says the conclusion of an institution specializing in CE standards. We expressed the same thoughts at the end of last year. Therefore, it is very difficult to expect any progress from the new legislation. The law is new, it is applied in a new way, as it is applied, many problems will be revealed.

Question: What steps should Azerbaijan take to protect freedom of speech and freedom of the media? How to make sure that not a single journalist is subjected to repression and pressure?

Answer: If the talk is about protection, then such mechanisms should be created. There are laws that protect journalists and the right to freedom of speech, but, as we have said, they do not work. First of all, these mechanisms should work. Protecting journalists, promptly investigating all cases of pressure on them, bringing the perpetrators to justice is an obligation arising from both national laws and international treaties to which our country is a party. The government must fulfill this obligation. Journalism is a risky profession, and it is in the nature of the profession to face pressure and challenges. It is extremely difficult to form a regime that completely excludes all this. But this can be reduced to a minimum. One of our main problems is that putting pressure on journalists goes unpunished. Impunity encourages those who want to settle scores with journalists and media force. There must be a fair investigation and punishment for pressure so that this unsightly trend is eliminated.