May 3 was officially designated as World Press Freedom Day. According to UNESCO and the United Nations, an independent media is a prerequisite for better understanding local events in an international context, and a non- partisan, pluralistic media is a pre-condition for a democratic, open and tolerant society. Democracy, openness, tolerance- these are principles to which the Croatian government has repeatedly claimed to adhere. The principle of a free press is also enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, to which Croatia is party. Croatia's constitution provides for freedom of thought and expression, specifically including freedom of the press and other media of communication, speech and public expression. However, recent developments would suggest that the freedom of press in Croatia is actually limited to such a degree as to warrant scrutiny of the claims made by President Tudjman's government that Croatia is a democratic, open and tolerant society.A U.S. Department of State Report of March 1996 on Human Rights Practices in Croatia states, "government influence on the media through state ownership of most print and broadcast outlets limits press freedom." During the election campaign of 1990 all political parties pledged to pass laws that would prevent political interference of freedom of the media. Since assuming power, however, the ruling HDZ party has taken numerous steps to assume increasing control over state-owned media, and to interfere with, or even curtail the activities of, independent media.
The government controls the state-owned Croatian national television network and has been working to eliminate local independent radio stations. Licenses for frequencies are taken away from independent stations and granted to broadcasters who are sympathetic to HDZ policy. Zagreb's independent Radio 101 is currently fighting to keep its broadcast frequency. The state also has a controlling interest in a number of national publications.
Both the broadcast and print media controlled by the state often exclude news reports that put Croatia or its government in an unfavorable light. According to the U.S. Department of State, "...HRT (Croatian Radio-Television) has on several occasions not broadcast statements made by foreign diplomats made in highly public forums on the need to observe human and minority rights."
HRT was also used for the benefit of Tudjman's HDZ during the national election campaign last October. In the opinion of the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs, which monitored the election process, HRT produced unbalanced news coverage which favored HDZ candidates, and severely restricted criticism of the government and HDZ by imposing limitations and criteria on opposition party political broadcasts and adverts. The Croatian Republic Election Committee warned HRT several times against favoritism towards the ruling party, and the Croatian constitutional court confirmed that HRT's behavior was opposed to accepted programme principles for election monitoring. These admonitions were ignored.
Those publications in Croatia which have remained independent have come under repeated attack by the government. These attacks have increased in frequency in the past two months. This new campaign to curb media freedom seems to have arisen from several factors- a HDZ fear of losing control in upcoming elections for the Zagreb assembly and local elections, criticism of governmental financial dealings, accusations of financial corruption by HDZ members, and inner-party squabbles within HDZ ranks in which the press was used by HDZ members to air grievances.
This new wave of government crackdowns began in March of this year with the passing of laws which significantly restrict press freedom. The Croatian parliament passed amendments to the Penal Code that re-established "crimes of the media," which were previously abolished in 1991. These "crimes" carry penalties ranging from six months to three years in prison.
According to the new libel law, the public prosecutor must bring charges against journalists who, in their opinion slander or offend Croatia's president, prime minister, president of the parliament and the presidents of the supreme and constitutional courts. An amendment to the Penal Code also makes it illegal for the "publication of (civil or military) state secrets." However, as one local political analyst pointed out, "the law itself is not disputable, but what is a state secret has to be defined... the authorities can proclaim anything a state secret." (Reuters)
There has been much local and international outcry against these new laws. Reporteurs sans Frontiers called for international appeals to be sent to the Croatian government, citing the amendments as, "a serious infringement of press freedom" which would allow "authorities to carry out legal proceedings against journalists quite easily and unjustly" (open letter to the Croatian government, RSF 14 March 1996). When vice-president of the Parliament Vladimir Seks earlier promised to reinstate the old Yugoslav law on "Crimes of the Media," Human Rights Watch/Helsinki believed the law "would criminalize speech against the country's most powerful government officials and would have a chilling effect on the media, effectively barring all criticism of such officials." (Civil and Political Rights in Croatia, Human Rights Watch/Helsinki)
It has not taken the government long to enforce the new law and prove these predictions right. The editor-in-chief of the weekly independent newspaper "Feral Tribune", Victor Ivancic, was taken to the police station in Split on 3 May for "informative talks" with a member of the Ministry of the Interior, who had arrived unannounced at "Feral Tribune's" editorial office, unwilling to initially show any identification. The proceedings were reportedly started by President Franjo Tudjman, who seems to have taken offense to an article in the previous week's issue of "Feral Tribune" (no.554, 29 April 1996), which criticised the President for his plan to turn the Jasenovac memorial for victims of WWII fascism into a memorial for Croatian victims of war and post-WWII communist suppression. Victor Ivancic and the journalist who wrote the article, Marinko Culic, were then charged with libel under the new law.
Other developments in the past month also point to an increasingly ominous future for the independence of the media in Croatia:
Rijeka's "Novi List", Croatia's leading independent daily and third largest newspaper, has been fined $2.5 million for allegedly importing printing equipment from Italy at low custom rates reserved for minority groups, and for evading tax payment between 1992-1995. The editors deny the charges, and believe that the action is an attempt to silence their publication, which is sometimes critical of the government, as the fine would leave "Novi List" virtually bankrupt. However, they have promised to pay the fine in order to keep publishing, as "Novi List's" assets would be otherwise be frozen. They will contest the allegations in court. In a vote of confidence, more than 40,000 people have signed a petition protesting the Croatian government's actions against "Novi List".
This is not the first time that "Novi List" has had to deal with government interference. In 1992, the paper successfully resisted attempts by the government's Agency for Reconstruction to appoint a new board of directors headed by a HDZ deputy interior minister.
The state-controlled daily newspaper "Vjesnik", of Zagreb, purged 15 of its journalists at the beginning of April, among them Franjo Kiseljak, an experienced reporter whose work was criticised by some members of HDZ. The move came as a new editor, Nenad Ivankovic, who is known for his criticism of the Bosnian government and the Croatian opposition parties, was appointed.
"Panorama", a tabloid based in Zagreb, was closed on 1 May. The police maintained that "Panorama" had "engaged in publishing activities before its newsroom was approved on technical and environmental grounds." This occurred after "Panorama's" newsroom had been inspected two months previously by the police, and after a history of printing 105 editions. The editor-in-chief believes that the closing was in reaction to the content of some of "Panorama's" articles, which were critical of the government.
Croatian police have twice in the past two weeks investigated the weekly "Nacional" newspaper. The editor in chief Ivo Pukanic, as well as journalists have been questioned over articles which have recently appeared in the paper. (The first article concerned substandard technical equipment at Dubrovnik airport following the plane crash involving American Secretary of Commerce Ron Brown The second article reported that a Croatian soldier who had killed four people and had been released had killed again.) Pukanic believes that the second investigation will end in a further indictment, the first already having been served after the publication of the first article.
As mentioned before, there is nothing new in these attempts by the Croatian government to gain further control over the media. In the past, independent newspapers have been taken over by the state ("Slobodna Dalmacija", "Glas Slavonije"), they have been fined or had illicit punitive taxes slapped on them ("Feral Tribune"), closed down ("Danas") and generally harassed. Journalists who have written critically about members of the Croatian government have sometimes been harassed, intimidated, investigated and even charged under criminal and civil codes.
Many believe that a form of self-censorship exists among journalists, who in these difficult economic times do not want to risk their jobs by writing critical articles. According to the Croatian Union of Journalists, statistics show that about 600 journalists have left their jobs in the past 5 years under various circumstances.
Government interference, therefore, is not a new phenomenon for the young state of Croatia., Some people believe that this interference is becoming more sophisticated. However, the Croatian government's actions in the last few weeks seem to point more at desperation.
President Tudjman and his government must realise that these ever-increasing desperate measures do not go "hand in hand" with a democratic, open and tolerant society. Despite efforts to thwart criticism of the President, his government, and his party in the independent media, this criticism has not disappeared. President Tudjman's frustration at not being able to silence criticism is encapsulated by his behavior during a meeting with the president of the international Committee to Protect Journalists, Kati Marton. Holding up a copy of a "Feral Tribune", he cried, "a president of a country should not be objected to such attack," to which Ms. Marton replied, "if the President of the United States gets upset at press coverage, the only thing he can do is either stop reading it, or switch off the TV."
President Tudjman must learn to stop reading that which upsets him, and instead take heed of the European Court of Human Rights ruling on political defamation, "...the limits of acceptable criticism are accordingly wider as regards a politician as such than regards a private individual. Unlike the latter, the former inevitably and knowingly lays himself/herself open to close scrutiny of his/her every word and deed by both journalists and the public at large, and he/she must consequently display a greater degree of tolerance." (Lingens v. Austria, Judgment of 8 July 1986, Series A No. 103, para. 42.)
Those in control of the Croatian government may think that they have a substantial amount to lose in terms of power, influence, and even wealth, if the media is not controlled and censored. While government leaders may retain their power with the help of a suppressed, controlled media, it is the people of Croatia who will ultimately lose their dream of a democratic, open society if a free and independent press is not allowed to flourish.
The above text may freely be reproduced, copied, or translated, in whole or in part, as long as the source is stated as the Balkan Peace Team.
balkan-peace-team@bionic.zer.de