22 June 2026: Concerns over Czech Government’s plan to abolish the licence fee and replace it with state budget funding for public service media

22 June 2026: Concerns over Czech Government’s plan to abolish the licence fee and replace it with state budget funding for public service media

June 23, 2026 • • disabled comments

The Czech government plans to replace the licence fee with state budget funding for public service media from January 2027. The proposed funding levels would represent a significant real-terms cut, with no safeguards for PSM independence, no prior consultation with the broadcasters, and insufficient time for public and parliamentary debate.

We, the undersigned organizations (see full list below), would like to express our serious concern regarding the Czech government’s announced intention, as described in public statements on 15 June 2026, to replace the existing licence fee funding model for Czech Television (ČT) and Czech Radio (ČRo) with direct state budget financing from January 2027.

While different funding models may be compatible with European standards, we are firmly of the view that any reform of public service media funding, regardless of the model chosen, must be adequate, stable, predictable, and accompanied by strong, binding safeguards for editorial independence. The existing model has provided stability, independence, and public value for decades.

This is the standard set by the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA) and by Council of Europe standards, including Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1878 (2009) on the funding of public service broadcasting and Recommendation CM/Rec(2012)1 on public service media governance.

Across Europe, public service media operate in an environment of disinformation campaigns, growing political and social polarisation, declining trust, increasing geopolitical pressures, and the rise of foreign big tech companies. In such circumstances, weakening national independent public service media risks weakening societies.

We are particularly concerned by the following elements of the announced proposal:

Funding levels

According to information made public by the Government, the proposed allocations of CZK 5.74 billion for ČT and CZK 2.065 billion for ČRo would represent a significant reduction compared to the current level of revenues available to the two institutions. Both ČT and ČRo have publicly stated that these amounts would be insufficient to maintain the current scope of their public service obligations and their investment
in quality local, domestic content of national interest across platforms. Such an approach would undermine their ability to maintain regional services, high-quality journalism, cultural production, sports coverage, and international broadcasting activities and would reduce their capacity to invest in high-quality domestic content that serves the public interest and strengthens national cultural and democratic life.

We are also concerned that the proposed funding levels would effectively return funding for Czech public service media to levels comparable to those of approximately two decades ago, despite substantial inflation and increases in production, distribution, and technology costs during that period.

Safeguards for independence

Based on the information currently available, we have not seen proposals for legislative safeguards designed to protect ČT and ČRo from political influence over future funding decisions. The annual budget allocations determined through the parliamentary process, if not accompanied by adequate safeguards (e.g. ring-fenced allocation immune from politics, a multi-year framework, protection against arbitrary cuts), may increase the risk of political influence over public service media. Any reform should therefore include clear and effective mechanisms to guarantee the editorial and financial independence of public service media, in line with EMFA and Council of Europe standards.

In this context, the absence of proposals for constitutional or similarly strong guarantees protecting the long-term independence of public service media raises additional concerns regarding the institutional autonomy of ČT and ČRo.

Consultation with ČT and ČRo

The proposed funding levels were announced without prior consultation with ČT and ČRo. Both organizations have stated that the proposal was prepared without initiating a discussion with all relevant stakeholders or meaningful engagement with the institutions concerned. Reforms of this nature and scale should be preceded by open and inclusive consultation involving all relevant stakeholders. We note the concerns
expressed by employees of Czech Television and Czech Radio and the public support these concerns have received.

Public debate

A reform of this magnitude, affecting the future funding and governance of Czech public service media, would benefit from broad public and parliamentary discussion and adequate time for scrutiny. Based on the information currently available, it remains unclear to what extent such consultation and debate will form part of the legislative process. We encourage the authorities to ensure that all relevant stakeholders have
an opportunity to contribute to the discussion. We would be willing to participate in the debate if deemed useful.

As staff from the public broadcasters are on strike today to protest the funding changes, the undersigned groups therefore call on the Czech authorities to:

Refrain from pursuing changes that would weaken a funding model which has successfully ensured the independence, stability, and public value of Czech public service media for decades. Guarantee that any change to public service media funding is accompanied by strong and legally binding safeguards guaranteeing the editorial and financial independence of ČT and ČRo, consistent with EMFA and Council of Europe standards.

Establish a genuine and meaningful consultation process with ČT and ČRo, providing both institutions with adequate time and opportunity to engage with any legislative proposals.

Facilitate a broad public and parliamentary debate on the future of public service media funding in Czechia, involving civil society, media experts and relevant international organizations.

Ensure that funding arrangements remain adequate to enable ČT and ČRo to fulfil their legally mandated public service remit, including regional broadcasting, cultural production, news, sport, and international services.

Signatories

AEJ – Association of European Journalists
Armenian Public Radio
BHRT – Radio-Television of Bosnia and Herzegovina
BNR – Bulgarian National Radio
BNT – Bulgarian National Television
CZ IPI – IPI National Committee in the Czech Republic
EBU – European Broadcasting Union
EBU Executive Board
ECPMF – European Centre for Press and Media Freedom
EFJ – European Federation of Journalists
ERR – Estonian Public Broadcasting
GPB – Georgian Public Broadcaster
HRT – Croatian Radio-Television
IPI – International Press Institute
LRT – Lithuanian National Radio and Television
LPSM – Latvijas Sabiedriskais medijs
PMA – Public Media Alliance
Polskie Radio
Radio Romania
RSF – Reporters sans Frontières
RTCG – Radio Television of Montenegro
RTS – Radio and Television of Serbia
RTV Slovenia
SEEMO – South East Europe Media Organisation
Suspilne Ukraine
TVP – Telewizja Polska
TVR – Television of Romania

12 June 2026: OPEN LETTER TO THE ALBANIAN AUTHORITIES

June 14, 2026 • • disabled comments

OPEN LETTER TO THE ALBANIAN AUTHORITIES – Elected officials must refrain
from public targeting and delegitimisation of media organisations 

The undersigned organisations express concern over the public targeting and ethnic delegitimisation of Kristina Voko, the Executive Director of Balkan Investigative Reporting Network Albania (BIRN Albania), by Ardit Bido, a member of Parliament for the Socialist Party, currently in government.

The case follows a parliamentary hearing held on 8 June in the Parliamentary Committee on Human Rights and Public Information Media, where civil society organisations discussed the annual reports of independent institutions, including the Audiovisual Media Authority and the public broadcaster RTSH. During the hearing, Kristina Voko raised a legitimate and legally grounded concern regarding the obligation of the public broadcaster to provide inclusive information and content, including for national minorities and persons with disabilities.

This intervention was later distorted in a public post by MP Bido, who targeted Voko through her ethnic background and portrayed a lawful civil society contribution in Parliament as suspicious, anti-national or linked to foreign interests. Such rhetoric is unacceptable from an elected representative. It risks turning participation in a
parliamentary process into grounds for public intimidation and delegitimisation.

We are further concerned that, following the joint reaction of Albanian civil society organisations, MP Bido published another post in which he did not de-escalate the situation, but instead broadened the attack against BIRN Albania and civil society organisations more generally. In that post, he portrayed civil society organisations as foreign-funded actors seeking financial gain through “victimisation” and accused BIRN
Albania of producing “fake news”. This rhetoric further contributes to the delegitimisation of independent watchdog organisations, media accountability actors and civil society voices.

Public officials may criticise media reporting or civil society positions. However, criticism must be based on facts and must not rely on ethnic framing, insinuations of foreign loyalty, smear narratives about civil society funding, or language that portrays critical voices as enemies.

This case is particularly concerning in the current context of heightened civic mobilisation around Zvërnec and the Vjosa-Narta protected area, known publicly as the “Flamingo Revolution”. Citizens, activists, journalists, media organisations and civil society groups have been raising concerns about environmental protection, transparency, public consultation, accountability and respect for the rule of law. In
such a context, rhetoric portraying critical voices as “foreign”, “enemies” or ethnically motivated can create a chilling effect on public participation, peaceful protest, media freedom and civic space.

Public officials and political actors have a heightened responsibility to avoid language that may fuel hostility against journalists, media accountability organisations, civil society representatives, activists and citizens. This responsibility is even greater when the public debate concerns human rights, minority rights, public broadcasting obligations and participation in parliamentary oversight processes.

We call on MP Ardit Bido to withdraw the posts, stop the public targeting of Kristina Voko and BIRN Albania, and issue a public apology.

We call on the Parliament of Albania, the Speaker of Parliament, the Socialist Party parliamentary group, and the bodies responsible for parliamentary ethics to clearly distance themselves from this rhetoric and review the case in line with the Rules of Procedure of the Assembly and the standards expected from Members of Parliament.

We also call on Prime Minister Edi Rama, as leader of the governing majority, to send an unequivocal public message that targeting civil society, media actors, journalists, activists or citizens on the basis of ethnicity, origin, language or critical opinion is unacceptable.

Civil society participation in parliamentary hearings, media accountability work and peaceful civic mobilisation are not threats to democracy. They are essential elements of it.

Signatories

Media Freedom Rapid Response partners:

European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)

Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT)

European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)

Reporters Without Borders (RSF)

SafeJournalists Network

Croatian Journalists’ Association

Association of Journalists of Kosovo

Association of Journalists of Macedonia

BH Journalists Association

Independent Journalists’ Association of Serbia

Trade Union of Media of Montenegro

South East Europe Media Organisation (SEEMO)

Balkan Free Media Initiative (BFMI)

Reporting Diversity Network

10 June 2026: OPEN LETTER TO THE LITHUANIAN AUTHORITIES

June 11, 2026 • • disabled comments

Geneva, 10 June 2026

The undersigned organisations — representing public service media,journalists, and
press freedom organisations across Europe and globally — call on the Lithuanian
authorities, including the Seimas, the Government and the President, to complete the
legislative work begun this year and to ensure that all outstanding recommendations
of the Council of Europe’s Venice Commission on the Law on Lithuanian National
Radio and Television are fully addressed.

Our call follows the adoption of amendments to the Law on Lithuanian National Radio
and Television on 2 June 2026.

We acknowledge the progress made. The final text of the amended law represents a
meaningful improvement over earlier drafts. The removal of provisions restricting
media participation at LRT, the narrowing of grounds for dismissal of the Director
General to only exceptional cases, and the addition of requirements for Council
members to act independently are positive steps. We recognise that this progress was
achieved through the determination of the Lithuanian public, the courage of LRT
journalists, and the engagement of civil society and international organisations. We
also welcome the constructive role played by members of the Seimas who worked to
improve the text.

However, significant concerns remain. The Council of Europe’s Venice Commission
issued two opinions — in March and May 2026 — both critical of the process and
substance of the amendments. Several of its core recommendations have not yet been
addressed:
• Political composition of the LRT Council. The expansion of the Council from 12 to 15
members does not resolve the fundamental problem: a majority of members remain
politically appointed. Genuine editorial and institutional independence requires a
governance structure insulated from political influence.
• The retroactive application of the revised dismissal procedures to the sitting Director
General, without a transitional provision expressly limiting the application of the
revised dismissal grounds to Directors General appointed after the law’s entry into
force, is directly contrary to Venice Commission guidance and raises serious concerns
regarding legal certainty and the rule of law.
• Weakened safeguards. Leaving the decision on whether Council votes on the
Director General are open or secret to the Council itself removes an existing and
important transparency safeguard.
• Funding independence. LRT’s financial independence remains undermined by a
funding freeze introduced without impact assessment, contrary to the Venice
Commission’s recommendations and requirements of the European Media Freedom
Act (EMFA). This must be resolved.

We also note that the Government has been tasked with preparing a public service
contract proposal by September 2026. We wish to signal clearly that this process must
be conducted transparently, in genuine consultation with LRT and all relevant
stakeholders, and in full conformity with EMFA and European standards for public
service media governance. A public service contract must not become a mechanism
for political control over LRT’s remit, funding or editorial independence.
We will follow this process closely.

Lithuania has demonstrated to its citizens and to its European partners that it takes
media freedom seriously. We encourage the authorities to take the further steps
necessary to bring the law into full conformity with European standards.
This is particularly important as Lithuania prepares to assume the Presidency of
the Council of the European Union facilitating dialogue across the Union.
The independence of public service media is not a technical matter — it is a democratic
one. We remain committed to constructive engagement with Lithuania on this issue
and stand ready to support further dialogue.

Yours respectfully,

European Broadcasting Union (EBU)
International Press Institute — IPI
European Federation of Journalists — EFJ
International Federation of Journalists — IFJ
Reporters Without Borders — RSF (Reporters sans frontières)
European Centre for Press and Media Freedom — ECPMF
Association of European Journalists — AEJ
Index on Censorship
South East Europe Media Organisation — SEEMO

4 June 2026: Turkey – Call for The Release of Journalist İsmail Arı Ahead of June 5 Court Hearing

June 6, 2026 • • disabled comments

International Press Institute (IPI) and undersigned press freedom, freedom of expression, journalists’ and human rights organisations call for the immediate release of BirGün journalist İsmail Arı, who has been behind bars for 75 days. Arı is due to appear before an Ankara court on June 5, after being jailed under Turkey’s so-called “disinformation law” in connection with his investigative journalism. Media Freedom Rapid Response’s (MFRR) monitoring database Mapping Media Freedom reports 55
cases related to disinformation, including that of İsmail Arı, since the introduction of Disinformation Law in 2022.

Arı was detained in the Turhal district of Tokat province on March 21, where he had travelled to visit family during the Eid al-Fitr holiday, and was subsequently transferred to Ankara. The investigation, conducted by the Ankara Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office, includes charges of “publicly disseminating misleading information” under Article 217/A of the Turkish Penal Code and “insulting a public official,” under Article 125. Following the investigation, Arı was formally arrested.

The investigation file is built primarily around Arı’s journalistic work, including his published reports, social media posts, and attendance at public events, making clear that Turkish authorities are treating routine journalistic activity as criminal evidence. Covering stories, speaking with sources, and investigating matters of public interest are not criminal acts.

Turkey’s disinformation law is structurally incompatible with international press freedom standards. Its vague wording fails to clearly define what constitutes “untrue information” or to specify what type of content poses a threat to national security or public order,
handing authorities broad discretion to weaponise the law against independent journalism and intimidate reporters.

Arı’s arrest earlier this year is not the first time the journalist has been targeted for his work. Last year, Arı received direct threats following his reporting on the “Şahinler” organised crime network and an article he wrote about alleged judicial bribery. These threats, sent from an unknown foreign number, included not only direct messages
targeting him personally, but also a list of information about his relatives. At least one family member also received direct threats.

Following the threats, Arı filed complaints with the police and the Ministry of Interior. Despite the seriousness of the incident, the police only provided him with a 90-day “caution protection” number to report further incidents.

We call on Turkish authorities to:

Immediately and unconditionally release İsmail Arı at the hearing in Ankara on June 5,
Repeal Article 217/A of the Turkish Penal Code in its entirety, Bring all legislation regulating freedom of expression into line with Turkey’s international obligations.

Signatories:

International Press Institute (IPI)

Articolo 21

Coalition For Women In Journalism (CFWIJ)

Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ)

European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)

European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)

International Federation of Journalists (IFJ)

Foreign Media Association Turkey (FMA)

Media and Law Studies Association (MLSA)

Norwegian Helsinki Committee

Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT)

PEN International

PEN Norway

PEN Sweden

Progressive Journalists Association (ÇGD)

P24 Platform for Independent Journalism

Reporters Without Borders (RSF)

South East Europe Media Organisation (SEEMO)

Wales PEN Cymru

28 Apirl 2026: IPI, SEEMO and partner organisations condemn escalating use of “disinformation law” against journalists and call for its repeal

April 28, 2026 • • disabled comments

The undersigned press freedom, freedom of expression, journalists’ and human rights organisations strongly condemn the intensifying use of Article 217/A of the Turkish Penal Code — widely known as the “disinformation law” — to arrest, detain, and prosecute journalists, and call on the government to repeal the provision immediately and release all journalists imprisoned under it.

Since the law entered into force in October 2022, at least 83 ournalists have been charged 114 times over disinformation according to news reports. The scale of Article 217/A’s use against journalists has been starkly illustrated in a recent article. The two journalists most frequently charged under the law are BirGün’s İsmail Arı, who faced the
charge six times, and DW Turkish’s Alican Uludağ, who faced it four times. Both journalists are currently imprisoned.

In recent months, authorities have escalated and accelerated use of the law to arrest and sentence journalists under the disinformation law’s vague prohibitions, as part of a wider pattern of the weaponisation of legislation to criminalise legitimate journalism and silence reporting in Turkey.

On February 19, judicial reporter and DW Turkish correspondent Alican Uludağ was taken into custody in Ankara and transferred to Istanbul on charges of “insulting the president” under Article 299 and disinformation under Article 217/A. Uludağ was ultimately arrested on the former charge and remains in prison pending trial, and still faces the disinformation charge.

On March 15, journalist Bilal Özcan was taken into custody after reporting that the death of an influencer may have been a homicide rather than a suicide. Özcan was arrested in Istanbul on disinformation charges and has since remained in pretrial detention.

On March 22, BirGün reporter İsmail Arı was detained in Tokat while visiting his family and transported to Ankara on disinformation charges stemming from a report about the financial mismanagement of public foundations. Arı denied any wrongdoing, stating that the information in his reporting had long been in the public domain. He was nevertheless imprisoned pending trial on disinformation charges and has since been
held at Sincan Prison in Ankara.

On April 14, an Istanbul court sentenced journalists Murat Ağırel and Barış Pehlivan to one year and three months in prison each under Article 217/A for their commentary on a Halk TV broadcast about trade between Turkey and Israel. While the sentences have been handed down, Ağırel and Pehlivan have not yet been imprisoned, as the verdicts are subject to appeal.

Also on April 14, a separate Istanbul court convicted journalist Zafer Arapkirli under the disinformation law and sentenced him to two years and six months in prison. Arapkirli had been charged in connection with a social media post from December 2024, in which he condemned attacks by jihadist groups on Alawite settlements in Syria.

On April 17, Turgay Kılıç, a journalist at NEO TV in İzmir, was detained at his workplace and referred to court on disinformation charges over a social media post. Kılıç had shared screenshots of threats and calls to violence circulating on Telegram targeting schools in İzmir, following two separate attacks on schools in Turkey. In his statement to police, Kılıç said he had acted in his capacity as a journalist and that the images were drawn from publicly accessible Telegram groups. Kılıç was formally arrested following the detention. He was subsequently released under judicial supervision, but still faces prosecution.

On April 18, Mehmet Yetim, editorial director of Kulis TV, was detained in Urfa. Yetim was charged under the disinformation law, with authorities citing a social media post as the basis for the investigation. His family disputed the arrest, noting that the journalist had no criminal intent. The court nonetheless ordered his pretrial detention, ruling that supervisory measures short of imprisonment would be insufficient.

This documented pattern of abuse of the “disinformation law” against journalists and media positions Turkey as a regional and even global outlier in the misuse of regressive fake news and disinformation legislation to stifle media freedom and freedom of expression, and further weakens an already hostile climate for free and independent
journalism in the country.

Turkey’s disinformation law is structurally incompatible with international press freedom standards. Its language fails to define clearly what constitutes “untrue information” or to specify what content poses a threat to national security or public order. As one journalist prosecuted under the law underlines: any information not sourced from the government is liable to be deemed false. Such deficiencies leave courts with unchecked power to determine criminality, enabling them to influence prosecutions of critical journalism.

The undersigned organisations reiterate that a free and independent press is itself the most durable safeguard against the spread of false information. Criminalising journalism is neither a lawful nor an effective response to it.

We call on Turkish authorities to immediately and unconditionally:

Release all journalists arrested under Article 217/A, Drop all pending charges against journalists arising from their reporting or commentary, Repeal Article 217/A in its entirety, and Bring all legislation regulating freedom of expression into conformity with Turkey’s international obligations.

Signatories:

International Press Institute (IPI)
Articolo 21
Association of European Journalists (AEJ)
Coalition For Women In Journalism (CFWIJ)
Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ)
Civil Rights Defenders (CRD)
European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
Foreign Media Association (FMA) Turkey
International Federation of Journalists (IFJ)
IFEX
IPS Communication Foundation (bianet)
Media and Law Studies Association (MLSA)
Norwegian Helsinki Committee
Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT)
South East Europe Media Organisation (SEEMO)
PEN America
PEN Denmark
PEN International
PEN Norway
PEN Sweden
Progressive Journalists Association (PJA)
P24 Platform for Independent Journalism
Reporters Without Borders (RSF)
The Journalists’ Union of Turkey (TGS)

World Press Freedom Day 2026- by Eva Maria Grabmair, SEEMO Contributor

April 26, 2026 • • disabled comments

Communicating towards Peace

„You cannot not communicate.“ (Paul Watzlawick)

True words.

The question is whether communication happens in a non-aggressive way or otherwise.

In times of crisis and wars such as these, levelheadedness is often replaced by frustration and aggression. This, in turn, hinders constructive dialogue.

The media in general and social media as well, have an important role in fostering dialogue in the current climate where people tend to suspect fakes and those suspicions are unfortunately – time and again – not unwarranted.

Thus one of the biggest challenges is how to prove authenticity. While different opinions about the same issue do not turn that issue into a fake, accuracy and intellectual property must be ascertainable especially where publications are concerned.

What about Artificial Intelligence, then? AI in itself certainly isn’t something negative. On the contrary, it is a very useful tool – used with care and discernment. In the field of science, for instance, it has huge advantages. Although it will cost jobs – in the media too, it will bring with its progress also new, different job opportunities.

Used for peaceful purposes, Artificial Intelligence can be of high value. Alternatively, it could be a weapon with enormous destructive power. In a way, AI is not unlike nuclear energy: useful to alleviate a severe (energy) crisis, but prone to generating dangerous by-products.

Those advantages and hazards, like so many more issues, need to be communicated and thoroughly discussed.

While verbal and nonverbal aggression and violence only snowball into even more violence, it is necessary to bear in mind that to achieve Peace it takes willingness and active outreach through constructive dialogue!

1 April 2026: Author’s text by Veran Matic: Bloody Sunday for Journalists in Serbia / Autorski tekst Verana Matića: Krvava nedelja za novinare

April 3, 2026 • • disabled comments

AUTHOR’S TEXT BY VERAN MATIĆ

Bloody Sunday” for Journalists in Serbia

Election day on Sunday in Serbia became a bloody Sunday for journalists. The shattered, battered and bloodied heads of journalists symbolize the image of elections in ten municipalities across Serbia.

While carrying out their professional duty—covering local elections in the city of Bor and its surroundings— “Revolt” journalists Lazar Dinić and Ivan Bjelić, along with freelance journalist Zorica Popović, arrived at a polling station outside the city, in the settlement of Šarbanovac.

Shortly thereafter, three masked individuals arrived by car. They first snatched Zorica Popović’s phone from her hands and smashed it, then physically assaulted her, punching and kicking her in the stomach. Ivan Bjelić tried to protect her, but he too was attacked.

The attackers were in video communication with a person who was giving them instructions, hurling insults at Bjelić, calling him an “Ustaša” and issuing death threats.

The three masked men then physically assaulted him, seizing his phone and camera and destroying them. Soon after, another car arrived carrying five masked individuals who took axes out of the trunk, attacked Bjelić, knocked him to the ground and kicked him so severely that his eyelids swelled shut and he temporarily lost his sight.

At the same time, the masked attackers chased Lazar Dinić and caught up with him near the Timok River, where he was subjected to torture. In addition to beating him, they filmed him and forced him to shout, “Aca is president.”

With bloodied heads, the victims were transported to a medical facility where they received assistance. Due to the severity of his injuries, Lazar Dinić was later transferred by ambulance to the Clinical Center in Belgrade. Bjelić was also referred for further examinations.

Darko Gligorijević, a journalist with the Zoomer portal, was attacked in Bajina Bašta, punched in the head and sprayed in the eyes with pepper spray. Miroslav Pantović, a journalist with the Mačva News portal, was attacked by men dressed in black; his camera and accompanying equipment were seized and destroyed. Only after the police arrived was the broken camera returned, without its memory card, though. Both Darko and Miroslav received medical treatment at a local health center.

In Kula, journalists from various media outlets were obstructed in their work—their cameras were seized, filming was prevented, they were physically attacked, threatened, and insulted…

Yet the bloodied heads—indeed, the attempted murder of Lazar Dinić and Ivan Bjelić—evoke a chilling association with the killing of journalist Milan Pantić. He was murdered in 2001 in the early morning hours, beaten to death with a club in front of his apartment building. This time, in addition to clubs, the perpetrators carried axes and displayed a level of brutality typical of monstrous regimes. Under blows, and while being filmed, the victims were forced to shout: “Aca (Aleksandar Vučić) is president!” The young female journalist was repeatedly hit in the stomach, with the clear intent of inflicting lasting injuries.

This attack on journalists resembles terrorist acts involving persecution, physical and psychological abuse, filming, and coercion to deliver political messages, along with intimidation and interrogation about their work and engagement—all under the threat of being bludgeoned with axes.

Once again, the police failed to respond in time, arriving only later at the scene. Although the perpetrators returned and drove past the site of the violence, officers refused the victims’ request to stop, identify, and detain them.

Last week, a mission of the Council of Europe visited Serbia, composed of all relevant international organizations for the protection of journalistic and media freedom—the International Federation of Journalists, the European Federation, Index on Censorship, Article 19, the Committee to Protect Journalists, the International Press Institute, and others. Their conclusion was that the position of journalists in Serbia is the most difficult in Europe and that violence is escalating.

The authorities, particularly the ruling party of President Vučić, seemed through yesterday’s conduct not only to confirm these assessments but to signal: “We can do even worse.” Over the past year and a half, Serbia has recorded record numbers of attacks on journalists.

The attackers come from the ranks of masked enforcers recruited by the ruling party. Criminals, drug dealers, individuals convicted of serious violence, convicted killers, habitual thugs treated for psychological disorders, abusers of women, and similar profiles make up units deployed to flood Serbia—seeking to instill fear in anyone with a different opinion: students, citizens, activists, journalists, and political opponents of the ruling party.

Serbia is in a constant state of emergency created by masked, black-clad, party-affiliated enforcers.

The media community prepared for these local elections in ten municipalities as if preparing for war. United within the Permanent Working Group for the Safety of Journalists, we visited all these locations ahead of the elections—speaking with local journalists about developments, issuing recommendations, and meeting with local prosecutors, discussing expectations.

Over the next year, parliamentary and presidential elections will take place across Serbia. In the past year and a half, there have been 165 attacks and threats against journalists, according to official statistics from the Supreme Public Prosecutor’s Office, of which only four have resulted in court verdicts. Impunity is nearly absolute. The violence witnessed during these local elections will only intensify in the coming months.
When it comes to the murders of journalists, there is also total impunity. The killings of Slavko Ćuruvija, Dada Vujasinović, and Milan Pantić remain unsolved.

Beyond severe injuries, intimidation, and the spread of self-censorship and censorship, such violence is highly likely to lead to new victims among journalists. These are not only our assessments from the field, but also those of observers from international organizations.

We must not allow another journalist to be killed. Not only because it is an unacceptable evil, but because it is clear it would be covered up. The murder of a journalist is the cheapest form of censorship, as someone once said—low cost, with no consequences.
That is why we must not allow this “bloody Sunday” in Serbia to become a permanent condition. Journalistic solidarity, along with solidarity among and with citizens, is crucial for now, while international organizations must maintain a permanent mission in Serbia to prevent it from becoming another dark Russia or Belarus—another country without journalists and without independent media.

The author is the president of the Management Board of the Association of Independent Electronic Media (ANEM), a member of the Permanent Working Group for the Safety of Journalists, and an operator on the Safe Line for Journalists 0800 100 115.

AUTORSKI TEKST VERANA MATIĆA

„Krvava nedelja“ za novinare u Srbiji

Izborna nedelja u Srbiji postala je krvava nedelja za novinare. Razbijene, pretučene i okrvavljene glave novinara simbolizuju sliku izbora u deset opština širom Srbije.

Dok su obavljali svoju profesionalnu dužnost – izveštavanje o lokalnim izborima u gradu Boru i okolini – novinari „Revolta“, Lazar Dinić i Ivan Bjelić, zajedno sa frilenserskom, novinarkom Zoricom Popović, stigli su na biračko mesto van grada, u naselju Šarbanovac.

Ubrzo nakon toga, automobilom su stigla trojica maskiranih muškaraca. Prvo su Zorici Popović oteli telefon iz ruku i razbili ga, a zatim su je fizički napali, udarajući je pesnicama i nogama u stomak. Ivan Bjelić je pokušao da je zaštiti, ali je i on napadnut.
Napadači su bili u video komunikaciji sa osobom koja im je davala uputstva, vređala Bjelića, nazivala ga „ustašom“ i pretila smrću.

Trojica maskiranih muškaraca su ga potom fizički napala, oduzela mu telefon i kameru i uništila ih. Ubrzo nakon toga, stigao je drugi automobil sa pet maskiranih osoba koje su iz prtljažnika izvadile sekire, napale Bjelića, oborile ga na zemlju i šutirale ga tako jako da su mu se očni kapci zatvorili i privremeno je izgubio vid.

Istovremeno, maskirani napadači su jurili Lazara Dinića i sustigli ga u blizini reke Timok, gde je bio podvrgnut mučenju. Pored batinanja, snimali su ga i terali da viče: „Aca je predsednik“.

Sa krvavim glavama, žrtve su prevezene u medicinsku ustanovu, gde im je ukazana pomoć. Zbog težine povreda, Lazar Dinić je kasnije kolima hitne pomoći prebačen u Klinički centar u Beogradu. Bjelić je takođe upućen na dalja ispitivanja.

Darko Gligorijević, novinar portala Zumer, napadnut je u Bajinoj Bašti, udarali su ga pesnicama u glavu i prskali u oči biber sprejom. Miroslav Pantović, novinar portala Mačva njuz, napadnut je od strane muškaraca obučenih u crno; njegov fotoaparat i prateća oprema su oduzeti i uništeni. Tek nakon dolaska policije, polomljeni fotoaparat je vraćen, bez memorijske kartice. I Darko i Miroslav su primili medicinsku pomoć u lokalnom zdravstvenom centru.

U Kuli su novinari iz raznih medija bili ometani u svom radu – njihove kamere su oduzimane, snimanje je sprečavano, fizički su napadani, prećeno im je i vređani su…
Ipak, krvave glave – zapravo, pokušaj ubistva Lazara Dinića i Ivana Bjelića – izazivaju jezivu asocijaciju na ubistvo novinara Milana Pantića. Ubijen je 2001. godine u ranim jutarnjim satima, pretučen na smrt palicom ispred svoje zgrade. Ovog puta, pored palica, počinioci su nosili sekire i pokazali nivo brutalnosti tipičan za monstruozne režime. Pod udarcima, i dok su snimani, žrtve su bile primorane da viču: „Aca (Aleksandar Vučić) je predsednik!“ Mlada novinarka je više puta udarana u stomak, sa jasnom namerom da joj se nanesu trajne povrede.

Ovaj napad na novinare podseća na terorističke akte koji uključuju progon, fizičko i psihološko zlostavljanje, snimanje i prinudu da prenose političke poruke, uz zastrašivanje i ispitivanje o njihovom radu i angažmanu – sve pod pretnjom da će biti prebijeni sekirama.

Policija još jednom nije reagovala na vreme, stigavši na lice mesta tek kasnije. Iako su se počinioci vratili i prošli pored mesta nasilja, policajci su odbili zahtev žrtava da ih zaustave, identifikuju i pritvore.

Prošle nedelje, misija Saveta Evrope posetila je Srbiju, sastavljena od svih relevantnih međunarodnih organizacija za zaštitu novinarskih i medijskih sloboda – Međunarodne federacije novinara, Evropske federacije, Indeksa o cenzuri, Artikla 19, Komiteta za zaštitu novinara, Međunarodnog instituta za štampu i drugih. Njihov zaključak je bio da je položaj novinara u Srbiji najteži u Evropi i da nasilje eskalira.

Vlasti, posebno vladajuća stranka predsednika Vučića, jučerašnjim ponašanjem su, izgleda, ne samo potvrdile ove procene, već i signalizirale: „Možemo i gore.“ U proteklih godinu i po dana, Srbija je zabeležila rekordan broj napada na novinare.

Napadači dolaze iz redova maskiranih policajaca koje je regrutovala vladajuća stranka. Kriminalci, dileri droge, osobe osuđene za teško nasilje, osuđene ubice, uobičajeni nasilnici lečeni od psiholoških poremećaja, zlostavljači žena i slični profili čine jedinice raspoređene da preplave Srbiju – nastojeći da uliju strah svima sa drugačijim mišljenjem: studentima, građanima, aktivistima, novinarima i političkim protivnicima vladajuće stranke.

Srbija je u stalnom vanrednom stanju koje stvaraju maskirani, u crno obučeni, stranački povezani izvršitelji.

Medijska zajednica se pripremala za ove lokalne izbore u deset opština kao da se sprema za rat. Ujedinjeni u okviru Stalne radne grupe za bezbednost novinara, posetili smo sve ove lokacije pre izbora – razgovarajući sa lokalnim novinarima o dešavanjima, dajući preporuke i sastajući se sa lokalnim tužiocima da bismo razmotrili očekivanja.

Tokom naredne godine, širom Srbije će se održati parlamentarni i predsednički izbori. U proteklih godinu i po dana, bilo je 165 napada i pretnji novinarima, prema zvaničnoj statistici Vrhovnog javnog tužilaštva, od kojih su samo četiri rezultirala sudskim presudama. Nekažnjivost je gotovo apsolutna. Nasilje koje je viđeno tokom ovih lokalnih izbora samo će se intenzivirati u narednim mesecima.

Kada su u pitanju ubistva novinara, postoji i potpuna nekažnjivost. Ubistva Slavka Ćuruvije, Dade Vujasinović i Milana Pantića ostaju nerešena.

Nakon teških povreda, zastrašivanja i širenja samocenzure i cenzure, takvo nasilje će vrlo verovatno dovesti do novih žrtava među novinarima. To nisu samo naše procene sa terena, već i procene posmatrača iz međunarodnih organizacija.

Ne smemo dozvoliti da još jedan novinar bude ubijen. Ne samo zato što je to neprihvatljivo zlo, već zato što je jasno da bi se to zataškalo. Ubistvo novinara je najjeftiniji oblik cenzure, kako je neko jednom rekao – jeftino, bez posledica.

Zato ne smemo dozvoliti da ova „krvava nedelja“ u Srbiji postane trajno stanje. Novinarska solidarnost, zajedno sa solidarnošću među i sa građanima, je za sada ključna, dok međunarodne organizacije moraju da održe stalnu misiju u Srbiji kako bi sprečile da postane još jedna mračna Rusija ili Belorusija – još jedna zemlja bez novinara i bez nezavisnih medija.

Autor je predsednik Upravnog odbora Asocijacije nezavisnih elektronskih medija (ANEM), član Stalne radne grupe za bezbednost novinara i operater na Sigurnoj liniji za novinare 0800 100 115

26 March 2026: Joint statement on Czechia- Future of Public Service Media Funding

March 27, 2026 • • disabled comments

The European Broadcasting Union (EBU) and the undersigned international media and journalists’ organisations are deeply worried by the direction of current discussions in Czechia regarding the future of public service media funding.

The ruling coalition has announced its intention to submit a parliamentary bill proposing a significant reduction in licence fee contributions – excluding roughly a quarter of all Czech households (seniors over 75, people with disabilities, dependent young people under 26) along with more than 17,000 businesses from payment.

Proposals to abolish the inflation clause also cause a concern as indexation ensures public service media can cope with the rising costs.

Czech Radio and Czech Television have warned that such changes would have severe economic consequences, undermining financial stability and potentially affecting their ability to fulfil their public service remit.

These measures have been presented as a transitional step toward the complete abolition of licence fees and their replacement with direct state budget funding, with full implementation envisaged from 2027.

In Czechia, recent increases to the licence fee were the first in almost 20 years, underlining the ongoing financial pressure on public service media. Any move to reduce, dismantle or replace this model of funding risks undermining the long-term sustainability and independence of these essential institutions.

Public service media are a cornerstone of democratic societies, providing trusted news, supporting pluralism and serving all audiences. To fulfil this role, they must be guaranteed stable, adequate and independent funding, in line with the European Media Freedom Act and long-standing European standards.

Funding reforms of this scale must be subject to broad and meaningful consultation with all stakeholders and include robust safeguards to protect editorial and institutional independence. The EBU stands ready to contribute to any such consultation.

At a time when trusted information is more important than ever, it is vital that Czech public service media are equipped with the resources and independence they need to continue serving society.

Signed by:

European Broadcasting Union (EBU)

European Federation of Journalists ( EFJ)

Justice for Journalists Foundation (JJF)

Association of European Journalists (AEJ)

Reporters Without Borders (RSF)

International Press Institute (IPI)

International Federation of Journalists (IFJ)

European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)

Index on Censorship

South East Europe Media Organisation (SEEMO)

Rory Peck Trust

Public Media Alliance (PMA)

26 March 2026: Joint letter to EU: Current visa policies obstruct Turkish journalists’ mobility

March 27, 2026 • • disabled comments

IPI and other press freedom, freedom of expression, journalists’ and human rights organizations sent the following letter to:

  • Drahoslav Stefanek, Chair of the Working Party on Human Rights (COHOM),
  • Council of the European Union
  • Ellis Mathews, Head of Human Rights Division of European External
  • Action Service (EEAS)
  • Beate Gminder, Director-General of the Directorate-General for
  • Migration and Home Affairs (HOME), European Commission
  • Gert Jan Koopman, Director-General of the Directorate-General for
  • Enlargement and the Eastern Neighbourhood (DG ENEST), European
  • Commission

Regarding the long-standing visa problems faced by journalists in Türkiye.

The undersigned press freedom, freedom of expression, human rights and journalists’ organizations are writing following the recent press freedom mission to Türkiye by IPI and a coalition of seven other international organisations, addressing an urgent matter that was raised repeatedly during meetings with media stakeholders in the country: the
critical contradiction between the European Union’s commitment to support independent media in candidate states and current visa policies that effectively obstruct the professional mobility of Turkish journalists.

In 2025, the systemic pressure on Türkiye’s media landscape remained as entrenched as ever, continuing a long-term pattern of hostility toward independent journalism. The country had the second-highest number of press freedom violations documented on the Council of Europe’s Safety of Journalists Platform and third most on the Mapping Media Freedom database. This year has been marked by the criminalization of independent reporting through vaguely defined “disinformation” and “terrorism” charges, arbitrary detentions, systemic police violence, and fines on critical outlets.

Under these circumstances, a streamlined visa process is a vital lifeline for Turkish journalists seeking safe haven. Such mobility enables journalists to engage and network with European colleagues, participate in international training and fellowships, coordinate with foreign media outlets, and engage in professional exchanges that
strengthen media quality and pluralism.

However, the current lengthy and unpredictable visa regime contributes to the professional isolation of Turkish journalists through several systemic failures:

Appointment and processing delays: Journalists report excessive waiting times of up to six months just to secure an appointment, with processing taking an additional two months. These delays render professional opportunities inaccessible and prevent attendance at important international conferences.

Arbitrary rejections and short-term visas: Many journalists report receiving visas valid only for the exact dates of a single trip or facing unexplained rejections, despite their profession and its collaborative nature.

Procedural inconsistencies for freelancers: There is a notable lack of institutional recognition and avenues for freelance and independent journalists. We have documented cases where journalists are advised to apply for business visas but are subsequently rejected because they lack the corporate registration required, a document that is often not applicable to project-based or investigative journalism.
Disproportionate financial strain: High cumulative costs and repeated application procedures create a significant bureaucratic and financial burden, particularly for small media outlets and independent professionals.

These barriers effectively sever Turkish journalists from their European colleagues, weakening professional coordination and cross-border collaboration on issues of shared importance.

In line with the European Union’s commitment to media freedom, we urge the EU missions and the Delegation to move beyond standard bureaucratic processes and recognize the public interest served by journalistic mobility.

We call for the establishment of a targeted “visa corridor” for recognized media professionals and those holding international press memberships.

In this context, we call on the European Commission to:

Establish a dedicated facilitation mechanism: Ensure that journalists have access to a specific channel that recognizes professional status, even in cases where state-issued press cards are withheld for political reasons.
Issue long-term, multiple-entry visas: This will reflect the recurring nature of cross-border reporting and reduce the financial strain on freelancer professionals and independent media organizations.
Simplify documentation requirements: Adapt requirements to the realities of freelance journalism by moving away from a reliance on traditional, long-term employment contracts.
Expedite processing times: Implement predictable and reduced waiting periods specifically for time-sensitive professional activities and press events.

Ensuring journalistic mobility is not a radical innovation, it is a practical adjustment within existing frameworks to support independent media and democratic accountability.

We trust that the European Commission will respond swiftly and effectively to this urgent challenge.

Signed by:

International Press Institute (IPI)
Articolo 21
Coalition For Women In Journalism
European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
Foreign Media Association Turkey (FMA)
IFEX
International Federation of Journalists (IFJ)
IPS Communication Foundation
Media and Law Studies Association (MLSA)
Norwegian Helsinki Committee
Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT)
P24 Platform for Independent Journalism
PEN Denmark
PEN International
PEN Norway
PEN Sweden
South East Europe Media Organisation (SEEMO