By In certain Western Balkan countries, there is a notable shrinkage of the space for media and journalists, accompanied by restrictions on their legal security. In Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH), for instance, the re-criminalization of defamation, proposals of foreign agents’ laws, and changes in media regulations introducing licensing are key examples of this negative trend.
“These laws are drafted to protect ‘favoured’ media. Political parties in BiH have, over the years, developed a dependent relationship with loyal media outlets and journalists, which, of course, involves significant budgetary and marketing funds flowing into these media outlets,” said Leila Bičakčić, Director of the Center for Investigative Journalism (CIN) in BiH.
According to Bičakčić, the legal solutions are designed to stifle criticism and eliminate competition.
“Amendments to the Criminal Code in the Republika Srpska, which re-criminalised defamation, had the intended effect after their introduction—intimidation and self-censorship. Journalists fear they could become subjects of criminal investigations and avoid taking such risks. They opt for less controversial topics,” Bičakčić explained.
On the other hand, the proposed Foreign Agents Act aims to “silence” critical media and civil society representatives who are disloyal to ruling parties.
“Finally, there’s the proposed Media Law in Republika Srpska, which, among other things, suggests the ‘certification’ of journalists by the ministry. All three laws share the common goal of eliminating critical voices,” she emphasized.
Bičakčić expects the “replications” of such practices in the region to continue.
“As long as there are no sanctions for such legal solutions – and by that, I mean concrete action from the European Union and its institutions, considering these are being proposed in candidate countries – this practice will persist,” she said.
Bičakčić believes that using the “right to be forgotten”, as a basis for media requests to delete content, is a dangerous trend. For this reason, her organization’s project, implemented within the Swedish Fojo Media Institute program, focused on addressing this phenomenon.
“If action isn’t taken in time, we risk creating a situation where media are obliged to delete content simply because someone requested it for personal reasons. If demands based on the ‘right to be forgotten’ are accommodated without adequately assessing what this right means and how it applies to the media, we could face a legal process of erasing history,” warned the CIN Director.
Bičakčić noted that those reported on by the media, often due to their involvement in illicit activities, naturally do not want such content to remain accessible.
“However, it’s crucial to highlight that just because someone has been legally rehabilitated does not mean that their ‘mistake’ is automatically erased from history. This must be taken into consideration when deciding on each request to delete content,” she said.
The media community, in her view, must initiate a debate on this topic and develop recommendations for its members.
“There are international documents, as well as rulings by the European Court of Human Rights on similar cases. It is vital to open a debate at the national and/or regional level so that media outlets can establish joint recommendations for responding to requests to delete content. Otherwise, someone else will decide for the media, which is never a good solution,” concluded Bičakčić.
This article was created as part of the program “Improving Working Conditions for Journalists in the Western Balkans,” implemented by the Fojo Media Institute, AMPEK, BIRN, and the Trade Union of Media of Montenegro.
