9 September 2026: Albania: Social media platforms must protect media and public-interest accounts from coordinated manipulation

September 10, 2026 • • disabled comments

The SafeJournalists Network (SJN), the partners of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) and partner organizations are concerned about recent incidents in Albania in which media, journalists, civic initiatives and other public-interest accounts have faced unexplained restrictions, removals and apparent attempts to manipulate social-media enforcement systems.

In recent days, a number of accounts have become inaccessible or restricted on Meta platforms. Meta subsequently acknowledged that some accounts had been removed incorrectly, restored affected accounts and indicated that additional safeguards were being applied. We welcome these corrective measures and Meta’s engagement with affected media and civil-society actors.

However, subsequent incidents, including sudden influxes of thousands of apparently fake followers and other indications of coordinated or abusive activity targeting public-interest accounts, suggest that the underlying vulnerability remains. Similar tactics have previously affected independent media in Serbia, where coordinated bot activity and malicious reporting contributed to account suspensions.

At this stage, there is no verified evidence identifying who is behind the recent activity in Albania, nor sufficient evidence to conclude that all affected accounts were targeted through the same mechanism or as part of a single operation. Any attribution to political, state or other actors must therefore be based on independently verified evidence.

The broader media-freedom concern is nevertheless clear. The design of online platform reporting, copyright and automated integrity mechanisms must not enable being weaponised against the very journalists, media and civic voices they are intended to protect. When malicious activity directed at an account results in that account being restricted or removed, platform enforcement risks amplifying the original attack. In this way, disruption of these channels can affect freedom of expression, media pluralism and the public’s access to information. The European Media Freedom Act reflects the importance of safeguards in this area by requiring that, for qualifying media service providers on very large online platforms, restrictions be imposed only with prior reasons, that there be an opportunity to respond, that complaints be given priority, and that meaningful dialogue be provided in cases of repeated restrictions. While Albania is not yet an EU Member State, these protections provide an important benchmark for platform responsibility and for the standards towards which candidate countries are moving.

The impact of such weaponization of online platform mechanisms is particularly serious in politically sensitive or repressive environments where journalists, independent media and civic actors are reporting on protests, government accountability and other matters of significant public interest. For smaller outlets and civic initiatives, social-media platforms may also represent their principal means of reaching audiences. Such contexts require online platforms to take measures with enhanced diligence.

Restoring wrongly removed accounts is necessary, but restoration alone is not enough. Platforms whose systems increasingly shape the reach of journalism and public-interest expression have a responsibility to ensure that those systems are safe, transparent, resilient against manipulation, and capable of protecting those targeted by coordinated digital attacks and access to reliable information. The EU Digital Services Act reflects this principle by requiring very large online platforms to mitigate systemic risks affecting fundamental rights and civic discourse. Although Albania remains an EU candidate country, these standards provide an important benchmark for platform responsibility.

MFRR and SafeJournalists call on Meta and other major platforms to ensure that:

• journalists, media and public-interest accounts targeted by malicious third-party activity are not penalized as a consequence of that activity;

• potentially erroneous content or account restrictions receive rapid and meaningful human review;

• journalists and media organizations facing account suspensions, coordinated attacks or other restrictions that can disrupt public-interest reporting have access to a clearly identifiable, rapid escalation channel, with priority human review and reasoned decisions rather than having to rely solely on standard user-reporting and appeal routes;

• platforms investigate coordinated reporting, bot attacks, copyright abuse and other attempts to manipulate enforcement systems; and

• put in place appropriate proactive safeguards and mitigation measures to protect media and public-interest accounts at heightened risk.

We also encourage Meta to communicate, at least in aggregate, the outcome of its review of the recent Albanian cases and the measures taken to prevent similar incidents.

The SafeJournalists Network and MFRR partners will continue to monitor developments in Albania and the wider Western Balkans and support journalists, media workers and civic actors facing threats, intimidation or interference.

Signatories

Media Freedom Rapid Response partners

European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)

Free Press Unlimited (FPU)

OBC Transeuropa (OBTC)

European Center for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)

SafeJournalists Network

Association of Journalists of Albania

Association of Journalists of Kosovo

Association of Journalists of Macedonia

BH Journalists Association

Croatian Journalists’ Association

Independent Journalists’ Association of Serbia

Trade Union of Media of Montenegro

Reporters without Borders (RsF)

Reporting Diversity Network (RDN)

International Federation of Journalists

South East Europe Media Organisation (SEEMO)

4 September 2026: International media organizations call for strong safeguards to protect the independence and financial sustainability of RTV Slovenija:

September 5, 2026 • • disabled comments

The EBU has joined other media and journalist organizations in calling for any reform of the legal framework for RTV Slovenija to protect its institutional and editorial independence and guarantee adequate, sustainable and predictable funding for its public service remit.

On 26 August 2026, the Slovenian Ministry of Culture published proposed amendments to the Law on Radiotelevizija Slovenija. They would restructure the organization’s governance and management and change parts of its financing.

We recognize the legitimate aim of an efficient, accountable and financially sustainable public service broadcaster. Different governance and funding models work well across Europe. But what matters is whether the framework protects independence in practice. Several elements of this proposal raise concerns.

Governance

The proposal replaces the Management Board with a Director General. A new 7-member Supervisory Council would hold significant powers, including the appointment and dismissal of the Director General. The Government would formally appoint 6 of its 7 members, although professional organizations would nominate several of them.

We welcome the safeguards in the proposal, including a public competition for the Director General and the requirement for the Programme Council’s prior consent to the appointment and dismissal.
Nevertheless, given the Supervisory Council’s extensive powers, that concentration of appointment powers raises concerns about protection against political influence, direct or indirect.

We are also concerned that the mandates of the current RTV Slovenija Council, Financial Committee and Management Board would end automatically when the new law takes effect. Security of tenure protects the independence of public service media management. The Slovenian Constitutional Court found on 2 July 2026 that ending these mandates by law may put the broadcaster’s institutional and programme autonomy at risk, and so interferes with freedom of expression. It upheld the 2022 termination only because specific exceptional circumstances justified it, so any new blanket termination needs careful scrutiny.

Article 5 of the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA) requires Member States to guarantee the editorial and functional independence of public service media. Appointment procedures must be open, effective and non-discriminatory, and rest on objective criteria set in advance.
Dismissal before the end of a term must be exceptional and justified, with prior notice and a route to judicial review. The EMFA also requires independent monitoring of compliance with these safeguards, free from government influence. Council of Europe Recommendations R (96) 10 and CM/Rec(2012)1 reinforce these principles.

Financing

The amendments would remove the statutory benchmarks for state funding of minority programmes and music production. The State’s obligation to fund this work would remain, but any new mechanism must guarantee sufficient and timely resources on transparent, objective and predictable terms.

This matters all the more now. On 28 August 2026, the National Assembly called a consultative referendum on abolishing the mandatory licence fee (RTV contribution). The vote takes place on 11 October 2026. European standards do not prescribe one funding model, but any fundamental change needs a clear, credible and sustainable alternative in place first.
Article 5(3) EMFA requires funding procedures to be based on transparent and objective criteria set in advance, and to guarantee adequate, sustainable and predictable financial resources. Dropping the licence fee without such a framework risks financial uncertainty and greater dependence on annual political and budgetary decisions.

Consultation

A reform of this significance requires broad and meaningful public debate. The consultation on these proposals only runs until 9 September 2026, and the explanatory memorandum confirms there was no earlier public participation. Two weeks over the end of the summer holidays is very short for legislation of this institutional importance.
Stakeholders need time to analyse the proposals, weigh them against European standards and contribute.

We therefore call on the Slovenian authorities to allow proper time for meaningful debate, and to ensure the final law provides strong safeguards for RTV Slovenija’s independence and secure funding for its full remit. We remain available for constructive dialogue with the authorities, RTV Slovenija and other stakeholders, and stand ready to contribute European public service media expertise.

Supported by:

European Broadcasting Union — EBU
Bulgarian National Radio — BNR (Bulgaria)
Bulgarian National Television — BNT (Bulgaria)
Croatian Radio-Television — HRT (Croatia)
Czech Radio — ČRo (Czechia)
Czech Television — ČT (Czechia)
Estonian Public Broadcasting — ERR (Estonia)
European Federation of Journalists — EFJ
Georgian Public Broadcaster — GPB (Georgia)
Latvijas Sabiedriskais medijs — LSM (Latvia)
Lithuanian National Radio and Television — LRT (Lithuania)
Österreichischer Rundfunk — ORF (Austria)
Public Media Alliance — PMA
Radio and Television of Serbia — RTS (Serbia)
Radio Romania — SRR (Romania)
Radio-Television of Bosnia and Herzegovina — BHRT (Bosnia and
Herzegovina)
Radio Television of Montenegro — RTCG (Montenegro)
Reporters sans Frontières — RSF
South East Europe Media Organisation — SEEMO
Suspilne Ukraine (Ukraine)
Telewizja Polska — TVP (Poland)

17 August 2026: Hungary- IPI, SEEMO and CASE partners write to Ministers calling for strong anti-SLAPP law

August 18, 2026 • • disabled comments

Dear Márta Görög and Zoltán Tarr,

The undersigned organisations are writing to you as members of the Coalition Against SLAPPs in Europe (CASE), an alliance of over 120 non-governmental organisations from across Europe and beyond united in the fight against Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs).

Our organisations firstly welcome the positive steps taken so far by the new Tisza government and your Ministry to improve the legal landscape for freedom of expression and the freedom of the press in Hungary, after years of sustained democratic and rule of law backsliding.

We also welcome the new Government’s stated commitment to greater openness and meaningful public consultation, which it has presented as an important departure from the practices of its predecessor.

As part of this ongoing reform process, we note the recent public consultation launched regarding a draft bill which would amend several justice related laws, including new provisions intended to transpose the European Union’s 2024 Anti-SLAPP Directive.

CASE organisations and its Hungarian member welcome this step in transposing the Directive, the deadline for which passed on 7 May 2026. SLAPPs are an emerging but serious concern in Hungary, highlighting the need for effective legal safeguards to protect journalists and other public watchdogs from abusive litigation by powerful actors seeking to silence public debate.

In our view, the legal amendments foreseen within the current draft bill, which we note was published with only five working days of public consultation, represent a basic and verbatim transposition of the EU Directive which would introduce only minimum standards. Crucially, this reform would only safeguard public watchdogs in Hungary against cross-border SLAPPs, leaving them without such protection in cases that
are purely domestic.

While our organisations recognise the desire at the political level for swift transposition of the Directive – given the recent opening of infringement proceedings against Hungary by the European Commission over the delay – we warn that a rushed reform process would fail to address the majority of SLAPP cases in Hungary, which are domestic in nature.

Our organisations fear that if the current bill is not amended to create a wider anti-SLAPP framework which includes domestic cases as well as cross-border, journalists and other public watchdogs will continue to operate in a legal climate in which powerful political or economic actors within Hungary can abuse civil proceedings to muzzle and censor public debate.

We note that in recent months EU Member States, including Poland, Greece and Belgium have passed new laws which both transpose the Directive and go beyond its minimum standards by expanding legal protections to domestically-filed lawsuits. These reforms broadly align with the high standards set out by the 2024 Council of Europe Recommendation on SLAPPs.

The Hungarian Civil Liberties Union, a member of CASE, has sent a detailed assessment of the draft bill along with recommendations for reform, which we attach with this letter. An additionally important recommendation outlined here – and backed by CASE partners – is that the bill should also be expanded to cover criminal proceedings as well as administrative litigation.

Moving forward, the undersigned CASE partners urge your Ministry to accept the request by the HCLU for an in-person consultation and to engage in meaningful dialogue with it and other expert civil society organisations in Hungary. Such dialogue is essential not only to improve this bill in line with the highest European standards set out in the
Council of Europe Recommendation, but also to ensure that the legal safeguards take account of the particular patterns that organisations with direct experience of litigating such cases see emerging in Hungary.

Our organisations remain at your disposal to provide expert input, legal analysis, and European perspectives on anti-SLAPP legislation and litigation, and are available to travel to Budapest or meet online. With Parliament not likely to vote on this bill until September, we urge you to closely consider the recommendations in the coming weeks and to craft legislation accordingly. If more time is needed to conduct a proper public consultation and develop a comprehensive anti-SLAPP bill, then this reform process should be pushed until later in autumn, with expert input.

If Hungary is to make sustained and concrete progress in restoring democracy and the rule of law, it is essential that public watchdogs and independent journalists are able to operate in a legal climate in which the law cannot be abused to silence and censor them. Hungary both deserves and requires high quality Anti-SLAPP laws. Our organisations hope to see these recommendations included into the reform and look
forward to reading your response.

Signed:

International Press Institute (IPI)

ARTICLE 19 Europe

Civil Liberties Union for Europe

European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)

European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)

Foundation Atelier for Community Transformation – ACT

Free Press Unlimited (FPU)

Frente Cívica, Portugal

Greenpeace Magyarország

Index on Censorship

Institute for Mass Media, Cyprus

Legal Human Academy

Pro Publico (PP)

Reporters Without Borders (RSF)

SLAPP Watch Coalition Turkey

South East Europe Media Organisation (SEEMO)

30 July 2026:Appeal to Tunisian authorities

August 1, 2026 • • disabled comments

We, the undersigned members of IFEX and civil society partners, appeal to the Tunisian authorities to stop imprisoning journalists and human rights defenders in violation of international law. There is a pattern of sentencing to prison those who criticise government policies, human rights violations or corruption, during trials that lack the minimum international standards.

Among those recently sentenced are well-known journalists Zied El-Heni, Sonia Dahmani and Haythem El-Mekki, and prominent human rights defenders Saadia Mosbah and Sihem Bensedrine.

Zied El-Heni, a founding member of the National Union of Tunisian Journalists (SNJT), was sentenced to one year in prison on 7 May 2026 for social media posts critical of the authorities. He was tried outside the framework of Tunisia’s Press Freedom Decree-Law No. 115, on defamation charges filed without any prior individual complaint – a
clear violation of press freedom standards. On 26 June 2026, El-Heni’s sentence was upheld by a judge in the correctional chamber of the Tunis Court of Appeal.

He was sentenced on charges of “harm to others” under Article 86 of the Telecommunications Code for social media posts in which he criticised the unjust sentencing of journalist Khalifa Guesmi, who spent three and a half years wrongfully imprisoned, and a National Guard officer who died after being detained. He was sentenced for calling those responsible “criminals”.

In a separate unrelated case, on 9-10 June 2026, El-Heni was targeted in the “Carthage municipal property” case along with four former municipal officials. On 30 June 2026, the criminal chamber of the Tunis Court of First Instance postponed the trial to an undetermined date, and rejected the release requests filed by El-Heni and his co-defendants. The legal basis of this case concerns a property exchange dating back to 1967 when El-Heni was three years old, leaving it highly suspect that El-Heni
bears responsibility in this case. As an adult, he served on the Carthage municipal council with the cultural affairs portfolio, and had no authority over property matters.

It should be noted that these cases are taking place in a time of extreme heat where the court rooms are very hot. Within the span of four days, El-Heni was transported to court twice, both times in a windowless prison van, in the middle of a severe heatwave, alongside other detainees, and left handcuffed for hours without water, leaving him in pain and incapacitated.

Among other journalists prosecuted in Tunisia recently for public comments critical of the authorities, Sonia Dahmani was sentenced to another two years in prison on charges related to criticising inhumane prison conditions from her prior sentences, at a hearing on 22 May 2026 at the Tunis Court of First Instance. She is appealing the sentence, and remains conditionally free after spending time behind bars on various
charges related to her comments about harsh treatment of migrants in Tunisia. She is also facing charges of criticising the wave of arrests in Tunisia.

Previously, on 11 May 2024, Dahmani was violently arrested by masked men who stormed the Tunis Bar Association headquarters after she made a sarcastic comment on television about racism against migrants in the country. On 30 June 2025, a Tunis court sentenced her to two years in prison. She was convicted three times under Decree-Law 54, the so-called “fake news” law used to silence dissenting voices. She was sentenced to a total of four years and two months in prison, and was detained at the Manouba Women’s Prison, under harsh and humiliating conditions. On 27 November 2025, Dahmani was released after spending more than 18 months in prison, following a conditional release order issued by the Ministry of Justice.

On 8 July 2026, Haythem El-Mekki, a columnist and satirical journalist with the independent media outlet Rachma and Radio Mosaïque FM, was sentenced to one year in prison by the Sfax Court of Appeal, which overturned a lower court’s dismissal of charges following a social media post about problems at the Habib Bourguiba University Hospital.

Among human rights defenders sentenced harshly this year is Saadia Mosbah, the co-founder of Mnemty (“My Dream” in Arabic) Association for Combating Racial Discrimination in Tunisia, which advocates for racial equality and on behalf of victims of racial discrimination in Tunisia.
Her work has focused on combatting prejudice against migrants and promoting migrant and refugee rights. Mosbah was arrested on 6 May 2024 on false accusations of financial crimes, as perceived retaliation for comments about human rights violations of migrants. On 19 March 2026, the Tunis Court of First Instance sentenced Mosbah to eight years in prison and a fine of over €36,000. The Court also handed down fines and
prison sentences of one to three years against other colleagues from the Mnemty Association. The sentence was upheld on 26 June 2026, and Mosbah and her colleagues filed an appeal.

Prominent human rights defender Sihem Bensedrine is awaiting appeal after being sentenced to a combined 25 years in prison in two cases related to her work as President of the Truth and Dignity Commission (TDC) from 2014 to 2018. Bensedrine was arrested on 1 August 2024 and held in Manouba prison, where she carried out a hunger strike to protest the charges against her, until her release on 19 February 2025. She was sentenced on 26 June 2026 by the Court of First Instance of Tunis to 10 years and 15 years on charges of “fraud,” “use of forged documents,” and “abuse of official capacity to harm the administration,” as a result of the Commission’s final report, specifically the chapter concerning corruption in the banking sector. The TDC was established under Organic Law No. 53 of 2013 on Establishing and Organizing Transitional Justice, and Article 69 stipulates that TDC members and staff are not responsible for its contents. She remains free while awaiting appeal.

These are just a few cases that form part of the backsliding of human rights in Tunisia, in which civil society is being targeted with retaliation.

Recommendations
We, the undersigned NGOs, call on the Tunisian authorities to:

– Free those unjustly imprisoned on charges related to freedom of expression, and their work documenting human rights violations, and drop all charges against them;
– End the abuse of laws such as the Telecommunications Code and Decree-Law – 54 to persecute journalists for exercising their rights to free speech;
– Stop imprisoning government critics on false charges related to so-called financial crimes, corruption or fraud; and Ensure that those held in prison are treated humanely and fairly, including while attending trials.
Also, as the alarm has been sounded on Tunisia for a long time in recent years, we call on all the international mechanisms including the United Nations system to publicly condemn the Tunisian government’s repression and take actions to stop the massive human violations.

Signatories
Afghanistan Journalists Center (AFJC)
Africa Freedom of Information Centre (AFIC)
Aliansi Jurnalis Independen/Alliance of Independent Journalists (AJI)
Association for Media Development in South Sudan (AMDISS)
Association of Caribbean Media Workers
Canadian Journalists for Free Expression
Cartoonists Rights
Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility (CMFR)
Centro de Archivos y Acceso a la Información Pública
CIVICUS
Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ)
Egyptian Human Rights Forum (EHRF)
Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF)
European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
Freedom Forum
Freedom of Expression Institute (FXI)
Free Media Movement (FMM Sri Lanka)
Front Line Defenders
Gambia Press Union
Global Voices
Gulf Centre for Human Rights (GCHR)
HuMENA for Human Rights and Civic Engagement
Independent Journalism Center Moldova (IJC Moldova)
Instituto Prensa y Sociedad de Venezuela
International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), within the framework
of the Observatory for the
Protection of Human Rights Defenders
International Press Centre (IPC) Lagos-Nigeria
International Press Institute (IPI)
International Publishers Association (IPA)
International Service for Human Rights (ISHR)
I’LAM Arab Center for Media Freedom Development and Research
Maharat Foundation
Mediacentar Sarajevo
Media Foundation for West Africa (MFWA)
Media Institute of Southern Africa (MISA)
Media Rights Agenda (MRA)
Media Watch Bangladesh
Mizzima
Pakistan Press Foundation (PPF)
Palestinian Center for Development and Media Freedoms (MADA)
PEN America
PEN Norway
South East Europe Media Organisation (SEEMO)
Syrian Center for Media and Freedom of Expression (SCM)
The Regional Coalition for Women Human Rights Defenders in South West
Asia and North Africa (WHRDMENA)
Tunisian League for Human Rights (LTDH)
World Association of Newspapers and News Publishers (WAN-IFRA)
World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT), within the framework of the
Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders

30 July 2026: Albania Cumulative pressure on media freedom and civic space demands urgent action

July 31, 2026 • • disabled comments

We, the undersigned organisations, express serious concern about the deterioration of media freedom, civic space and democratic debate in Albania during the ongoing civic mobilisation known as the Flamingo Revolution.

Over the past two months, journalists have faced obstruction, attacks and police interference while reporting. The use of crowd-control measures, including water cannon and tear gas, has raised concerns about necessity, proportionality and the protection of journalists and others present. Protest-related criminal procedures have also raised concerns about transparency and due process, while journalists, activists, civil society organisations and environmental defenders have been publicly identified, personally targeted and portrayed as paid, politically controlled or directed by foreign interests. 15 of the 27 threats and actual attacks registered by SafeJournalists Network in 2026 occurred in June and July alone. Taken together, these practices make reporting, peaceful participation and public criticism increasingly risky. These concerns draw on sustained documentation and repeated public warnings by Albanian journalists’ organisations, independent media, civil society groups and human rights defenders.

Any violence, threat or obstruction against journalists must be investigated, regardless of the perpetrator, and those responsible must be held accountable. Individual incidents must not be used to justify interference with reporting, restrictions on peaceful assembly or the delegitimisation of wider civic movements. Journalists and media workers must be able to report on public assemblies, police operations and other
matters of public interest safely and without intimidation, regardless of their outlet, employment status or perceived editorial position.

Public officials and media actors have a particular responsibility not to single out individuals or organisations, question their legitimacy without evidence, or portray criticism, civic advocacy and cooperation with international partners as political or unlawful conduct. Such rhetoric fuels harassment and discourages participation in public debate.

We call on the Albanian authorities to:

– guarantee that journalists and media workers can work freely and safely, and that civil society organisations, environmental defenders and citizens can exercise freedom of expression and peaceful assembly without intimidation;
– ensure that policing of assemblies complies with the principles of legality, necessity, proportionality and accountability; fully implement the State Police Protocol for the Safety of Journalists; and guarantee access to legal assistance, medical examination and clear information about the grounds and status of any police measure;
– promptly, independently and transparently investigate all reported incidents involving violence, threats, obstruction, detention, alleged ill-treatment or disproportionate use of force, regardless of whether the alleged perpetrator is a police officer, protest participant, public official or private actor; preserve relevant evidence, publish the
findings and take measures to prevent recurrence;
– distinguish peaceful civic participation from individual unlawful conduct, and refrain from publicly singling out, politically labelling or making unsupported accusations against journalists, independent media, civil society organisations and citizens engaged in public debate.

We call on the European Union, the Council of Europe, the OSCE and diplomatic missions in Tirana to:

– raise these concerns directly and publicly with the Albanian authorities and seek concrete commitments and transparent follow-up;
– monitor the cumulative impact on media freedom, freedom of expression, peaceful assembly and civic participation, and reflect it in assessments of Albania’s rule of law, fundamental rights and EU accession progress;
– maintain engagement with journalists’ associations, independent media and civil society, and support documentation, legal assistance and protection for those facing threats or pressure.

Albania’s progress towards EU membership must be measured by whether journalists, civil society organisations and citizens can scrutinise public authority and participate in democratic debate without fear of violence, intimidation or retaliation.

We will continue to monitor developments and support journalists, media workers and civic actors facing threats, intimidation or interference.

Signatories

Balkan Free Media Initiative (BFMI)

European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)

European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)

Free Press Unlimited (FPU)

International Federation of Journalists (IFJ)

Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT)

Reporters Without Borders (RSF)

Reporting Diversity Network (RDN)

Safejournalists Network (SJN)

South East Europe Media Organisation (SEEMO)

8 July 2026: Türkiye: Media freedom groups demand release of journalists detained ahead of NATO Summit

July 8, 2026 • • disabled comments

ECPMF is joined by 25 other organisations representing media freedom, freedom of expression, journalists’ and human rights organisations in expressing profound alarm at the recent wave of detentions and arrests of journalists and civil society representatives in Türkiye in the immediate lead-up to the NATO Summit in Ankara on 7-8 July.

In the last two weeks, Turkish authorities have launched a coordinated crackdown on critical voices in the country, including independent media. In this period, the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) monitoring platform Mapping Media Freedom documented 11 journalists and media workers detained under vague or unjustified pretexts, many with no connection to the NATO event in Ankara.

Turkish Media regulator RTÜK also issued a written warning ahead of the NATO Summit, urging broadcasters to keep “public interest and the national security perspective” in mind when covering the event in news and discussion programs. The statement called for broadcasting to be based on verified information, to remain measured, and sensitive to “societal sensitivities,” noting that RTÜK’s monitoring experts would be watching all broadcast content.

Developments since the last week of June 2026 represent a coordinated strategy to silence critical voices in Türkiye. The targeting of critical journalists also cannot be viewed in isolation. The detentions and arrests are linked to the denial of accreditation for independent media outlets operating in the country, which previously prompted a joint letter to NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, urging the organisation to reconsider the requests of these media to cover the summit in Ankara. The targeting of journalists also coincides with the pre-emptive detention and arrest of hundreds of activists, lawyers, academics and rights defenders from diverse backgrounds.

The journalists who have been targeted in this period include:

Doğa Baskan, of Evrensel Daily, was detained and arrested on June 25 on charges of disinformation and prosecuted for uploading a text to the newspaper’s website without editorial approval, despite the content being immediately removed. She was released on June 27. Yıldız Tar, the chief editor of LGBTI+ news portal Kaos-GL, was arrested on June 25 during the raids targeting over 200 people in Ankara; Yıldız was questioned concerning their publications about President Erdoğan’s “The Year of the Family” that highlights conservative values.
Ali Çağatay was detained on June 25 on charges of disinformation due to one of his social media posts concerning the operations led by the police forces and was subsequently arrested on June 27. Müberra Ünsal was detained on June 28 while covering the banned Pride March in Istanbul; Ünsal was released later that evening.
Gülnur Saydam of Cumhuriyet Daily was detained on charges of disinformation following her reporting on criminal gangs and was questioned for four hours on July 1.
Ceren Erdoğdu of OdaTV, Buse Söğütlü of T24, and Abbas Vural of Niha+ were detained following house raids on July 5 as part of broader operations targeting politicians, journalists, lawyers, and activists ahead of the NATO Summit.

Berfin Ay, chief editor of Kurdish Daily, Azadiya Welat, was detained in Şırnak at a border check-point on July 5 due to her previously issued and then lifted international travel ban. Kayhan Ayhan, Birgün Daily reporter known for live-tweeting from the trial hearings of imprisoned Istanbul Mayor Ekrem İmamoğlu, was detained with a house raid on July 6, questioned specifically about his journalistic activities by anti-terrorism investigators, and accused of disinformation. Ayhan was released under judicial control order and international travel ban the next day.
Hazar Dost of the investigative journalism platform Ortak, was detained on July 6 on the pretext of failing to give testimony in a 2018 case, a move widely seen as a pretextual harassment tactic. Dost was released the next day from police custody and revealed mistreatment and physical violence he endured during detention. Suspicions of facial recognition technology were raised with regard to Dost’s detention.

Pattern of Intimidation and Legal Violations

The raids and arrests imply a broader pattern of anti-terror laws, disinformation law (Article 217/A of the Turkish Penal Code), and arbitrary police powers to criminalise journalism and intimidate journalists.

The operations targeting journalists coincided with preparations ahead of international leaders’ visit to Ankara and this raised questions of a deliberate strategy to prevent independent reporting on the NATO Summit, and to intimidate those who cover sensitive political and social topics.

The confiscation of journalists’ devices and demands for their passwords raise further concern, in violation of the right to privacy and correspondence under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).

Additionally multiple journalists were blocked from seeing their lawyers, violating the right to legal counsel. The detention and arrest of journalists for their reporting and their social media posts constitutes a clear violation of Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights and international media freedom standards.

The undersigned organisations call on the Turkish authorities to:

Immediately cease the targeting of independent media and critical journalists.
Release all arrested journalists, including those detained in connection with the “NATO Operations.”
Drop all charges against journalists arising from their professional work.
End the use of anti-terror legislation and disinformation laws to suppress independent journalism.

During coverage of an international event, journalists should be free to do their jobs without fear of reprisal, harassment or detention. We therefore call on the officials attending the NATO Summit in Ankara to raise these concerns with their Turkish counterparts and emphasise that a free and independent media is the cornerstone of democratic security.

Signed by:

European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
Index on Censorship
International Federation of Journalists (IFJ)
International Press Institute (IPI)
Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ)
PEN International
PEN Sweden
PEN Denmark
Progressive Journalists Association (ÇGD)
South East Europe Media Organisation (SEEMO)
Turkey Human Rights Litigation Support Project (TLSP)
Kaos GL
17 Mayıs Derneği
Mersin Lgbt 7 Renk Derneği
Media and Law Studies Association (MLSA)
PEN Türkiye
Dicle Fırat Gazeteciler Derneği (DFGD)
Muamma LGBTİ+ Derneği
Özgür Renkler Derneği
20 Kasım Nefret Suçlarıyla Mücadele Derneği
Genç LGBTİ+ Derneği
Ankara Gökkuşağı Aileleri Derneği (GALADER)
Norwegian Helsinki Committee (NHC)
Articolo 21
P24 Platform for Independent Journalis

3 July 2027: Joint Statement: Pegasus in the European Parliament, the EU Must Act Now

July 8, 2026 • • disabled comments

1 July 2026 – Joint Letter: Drop the Criminal Complaint Against CIN-CG Journalists in Montenegro

June 30, 2026 • • disabled comments

His Excellency Jakov Milatović
President of Montenegro
Bulevar Svetog Petra Cetinjskog 12
81000 Podgorica, Montenegro

His Excellency Milojko Spajić
Prime Minister of Montenegro
Karađorđeva bb
81000 Podgorica, Montenegro

CC:
Council of the European Union
European Commission
European Parliament
Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe
The Council of Europe

1 July 2026

Your Excellencies,

The undersigned press freedom, freedom of expression, journalists’ and human rights organisations strongly condemn the criminal complaint filed against investigative journalists Andrea Perišić and Đurđa Radulović of the Centre for Investigative Journalism of Montenegro (CIN-CG) in Podgorica, Montenegro, in connection with their legitimate journalistic work in the public interest.

We express our full solidarity with journalists Andrea Perišić and Đurđa Radulović, who are facing criminal proceedings following the publication of their investigative article, “Security Vetting in the NSA: Are Hiring Decisions Driven by the Wishes of the Powerful?” (“BEZBJEDNOSNE PROVJERE U ANB-u: Zapošljava li se više po volji moćnih?”), published on the CIN-CG website on 31 May 2026.

The investigation examined the recruitment practices within Montenegro’s National Security Agency (ANB) (Agencija za Nacionalnu Bezbjednost – ANB) and the alleged employment of officials assessed as posing a security risk, raising legitimate questions of significant public interest regarding transparency, accountability, and the integrity of public institutions. It is Montenegro’s state intelligence and security service, established in 2005, and operates under the authority of the Government of Montenegro.

According to publicly available information, the Director of the National Security Agency, Ivica Janović, filed a criminal complaint against the journalists and unidentified persons, alleging the disclosure of classified information.

On 17 June 2026, the journalists were summoned by the Podgorica Security Centre regarding the criminal complaint, where they provided statements in the presence of their lawyer, Siniša Gazivoda. During the questioning, they were reportedly asked to reveal their confidential journalistic sources. They were informed that the Director of the National Security Agency of Montenegro, Ivica Janović, had filed the complaint on 2 June with the Special State Prosecutor’s Office (SDT), addressed to Chief Special Prosecutor Vladimir Novović. The case was subsequently referred to the Higher State Prosecutor’s Office, which instructed the Podgorica Security Centre to collect statements from the journalists. Both journalists stated that the criminal complaint is unfounded, as the article did not disclose any classified information, contrary to the allegations on which the complaint is based, but rather information of legitimate public interest.

We are deeply concerned by this attempt to criminalise investigative journalism. Criminal proceedings against journalists for reporting on matters of public interest pose a serious threat to media freedom and risk creating a chilling effect that discourages investigative reporting and deters sources from exposing wrongdoing.

The reported attempt to compel journalists to disclose their confidential sources is equally alarming. The protection of journalistic sources is a fundamental principle of press freedom, guaranteed under Montenegrin legislation. Without effective source protection, investigative journalism cannot fulfil its essential democratic role of holding those in power accountable.

Rather than responding transparently to legitimate questions raised by investigative reporting, the leadership of the National Security Agency has chosen to pursue criminal proceedings against journalists. Such actions send a deeply troubling message at a time when Montenegro seeks to demonstrate its commitment to democratic values, the rule of law, and the protection of fundamental rights as part of its European Union accession process.

Investigative journalism plays an indispensable role in every democratic society. Journalists must be free to investigate matters of public concern without fear of criminal prosecution, intimidation, or retaliation. Public officials and institutions, particularly those exercising significant state powers, should respond to scrutiny through transparency and accountability—not through legal actions that risk undermining media freedom.

We therefore call upon the competent prosecutorial and judicial authorities of Montenegro to handle this case strictly in accordance with the Constitution and laws of Montenegro, as well as Montenegro’s obligations under international standards protecting freedom of expression and media freedom. We also call upon the Prime Minister of Montenegro, Milojko Spajić, the Government of Montenegro, and the President of Montenegro, Jakov Milatović, to react and protect the journalists, uphold the right of journalists to protect their confidential sources, safeguard press freedom, and ensure that no investigative journalist is subjected to intimidation, retaliation, or criminal sanctions for reporting on matters of legitimate public interest. As Montenegro, a frontrunner candidate for European Union (EU) membership, advances in its accession process, the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA) should be the benchmark against which to assess the protection of journalistic sources in Montenegro and in the rest of the EU.

We stand in full solidarity with Andrea Perišić and Đurđa Radulović, with the Centre for Investigative Journalism of Montenegro (CIN-CG), and with all journalists in Montenegro who continue to carry out independent, professional, and courageous investigative reporting in the public interest.

An attack on investigative journalism is an attack on the public’s right to know.

Sincerely,

South East Europe Media Organisation (SEEMO)

Article 19 Europe

Association of European Journalists in Belgium

Association of European Journalists – Bulgaria

Balkan Free Media Initiative (BFMI)

Balkan Investigative Reporting Network (BIRN)

BIRN Serbia

Catholic Media Council (CAMECO), Germany

Centre for Civic Education (CCE/CGO), Montenegro

Center for Investigative Journalism from Moldova

Center for Investigative Reporting (CIN), Bosnia and Herzegovina

COMMIT – Community Media Institute (Vienna/Austria)

Estonian Association of Journalists (Eesti Ajakirjanike Liit, EAL)

European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)

European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)

Free Press Unlimited (FPU)

Gesellschaft Katholischer Publizistinnen und Publizisten (GKP), Germany

Human Rights Action (HRA), Montenegro

IFEX *

Independent Journalism Center, Moldova

Index on Censorship

International Press Institute (IPI)

Institut za medije Crne Gore

Institute for Regional Media and Information, Ukraine

Investigative Journalism Center (IJC), Croatia

Journalismfund Europe

Media centar – Sarajevo

Media Center, Montenegro

Media Diversity Institute

Montenegro Media Institute, Podgorica

n-ost – Network for Border Crossing Journalism e.V.

Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP)

Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT)

Peace Institute, Ljubljana.

Reference Circle

Reporters Without Borders (RSF)

SafeJournalists Network
Croatian Journalists Association (CJA)
Trade Union of Media of Montenegro
BH Journalists Association ( BH Novinari), Bosnia and Herzegovina
Association of Journalists of Kosovo
Association of Journalists of Macedonia
Independent Journalists’ Association of Serbia

Slovene Association of Journalists

South East European Network for Profession¬alization of Media (SEENPM) **

The Daphne Caruana Galizia Foundation

Trade union of Croatian Journalists

*IFEX brings together more than 100 organizations from around the world

**The SEENMP network consists of 18 organisations

___________________________________________________________________
On behalf of the undersigned organisations – correspondence contact:
Oliver Vujovic, Secretary General
South East Europe Media Organisation (SEEMO)
Email: info@seemo.org

www.seemo.org

26 June 2026: Joint Letter to NATO – Accreditation Process Excludes Independent Turkish Journalists from Summit

June 27, 2026 • • disabled comments

Dear Secretary General Rutte,

The undersigned press freedom, freedom of expression, journalists’ and human rights organisations are writing to express our serious concern regarding the denial of media accreditation to independent news outlets and journalists in Türkiye seeking to cover the 2026 NATO Summit in Ankara on 7–8 July.

Over the past few days, NATO’s Office of Strategic Communications has rejected by e-mail accreditation requests from a number of media organisations and journalists, including Halk TV, Sözcü TV, Nefes, BirGün, Cumhuriyet, ANKA News Agency, Medyascope, and T24 — independent media operating in an already severely restricted press environment. Among the affected applicants are journalists with extensive records of covering NATO summits, now turned away without explanation. The
rejection notices stated that the reasons for this decision could not be discussed and were final.

Of particular concern to us is the recent announcement by the NATO Spokesperson, who acknowledged that NATO “relies on the host nation to provide assessments on journalists from their country to ensure access to the meeting site.” The NATO spokesperson at the same time states that “[I]t is very important for NATO that media can attend major events in person.”

Türkiye’s Directorate of Communications, operating under control of the Presidency, has repeatedly been criticised by international press freedom organisations for systematically using press accreditation to pressure critical journalists. NATO’s reliance on an institution with the Directorate’s track record gives rise to serious concerns: that the accreditation decisions for the upcoming summit were influenced by the editorial or political orientation of the rejected media organisations.

Given NATO’s own accreditation criteria, which lists editorial independence as a core eligibility requirement, rejection of outlets defined by that very quality is difficult to reconcile. Should a governmental institution with a documented track record of restricting press access have played any role in this process, NATO risks allowing
domestic media pressures to influence what should be an independent credentialing framework.

Under international standards, the following minimum requirements are necessary for an accreditation scheme to be compliant with freedom of expression principles:

be administered by a body which is independent from the government and follow a transparent procedure;
be based on specific, non-discriminatory, and reasonable criteria published in advance;
only be applied to the extent justifiable by genuine space or safety constraints; and
not permit accreditation to be withdrawn based on the work of the journalist or media outlet concerned.
Independent journalists in Türkiye are already under intense pressure. NATO, an alliance explicitly built upon the shared values of democracy, individual liberty, and the rule of law, has an institutional responsibility to ensure that its public-facing events do not mirror or legitimise repressive domestic media environments.

Against this backdrop, the denial of accreditation raises urgent concerns that NATO has an obligation to address. Therefore, the undersigned organisations respectfully request:

NATO explain in full the criteria applied in assessing media accreditation requests for the 2026 Ankara Summit, and what role Turkish governmental authorities played in that process.
Provide specific, written reasons for the rejection of accreditation requests, particularly given that outlets known to have been affected are independent media organisations.
Reconsider the rejected applications and restore accreditation to outlets that meet NATO’s own eligibility criteria, including the requirement for editorial independence.
Establish an immediate appeals mechanism that allows rejected media organisations and journalists to challenge decisions before the summit opens.
The undersigned organisations consider these accreditation rejections a direct limitation on publicly available information and a deprivation of independent perspectives from Türkiye — for both the Turkish public and the international community.

In view of the NATO Spokesperson’s announcement that NATO is in contact with the Turkish authorities on accreditation for the Summit, we urge you to ensure the ability of independent media to cover the summit by reconsidering the rejected accreditation requests and restoring meaningful press access before the gathering opens.

We look forward to your prompt response regarding this urgent matter.

Sincerely,

Signatories:

International Press Institute (IPI)

ARTICLE 19 Europe

Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ)

European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)

European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)

Foreign Media Association (FMA Turkey)

Human Rights Watch

International Federation of Journalists (IFJ)

Media and Law Studies Association (MLSA)

Norwegian Helsinki Committee (NHC)

Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT)

PEN Norway

Progressive Journalists Association (ÇGD)

P24 Platform for Independent Journalism

South East Europe Media Organisation (SEEMO)

The Journalists’ Union Of Turkey (TGS)

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