Two disturbing events involving journalists this month have rattled our confidence about the supposed irreversibility of Ukraine’s free press gains. Both are unquestionably bad signs for freedom of speech in Ukraine.

nk to extremes by becoming political mouthpieces for spin. Yet we are confident that the quality of journalism in this budding civil society will pick up over time, if it remains free of gag orders, so-called temniki (political orders on what news to cover and how) and other infringements from the recent past. But we are troubled by two disturbing events involving journalists this month. They have rattled our confidence about the supposed irreversibility of Ukraine’s free press gains. Both are unquestionably bad signs for freedom of speech in Ukraine.

Footage taken by a journalist working for a Russian television channel, TV-Center, renowned for its pro-Kremlin slanted coverage of Ukraine, was seized by Ukrainian officials. The Ukrainian side appeared worried that the planned report would undermine efforts to celebrate the country's 1,020th anniversary of the adoption of Christianity in the region, and efforts to unite Ukraine’s Orthodox churches, breaking them free from Moscow’s influence. The official argument used by the Ukrainian side: the journalist wasn’t accredited in Ukraine.

The other incident involves Serhiy Leshchenko, top reporter for leading Ukrainian news portal Ukrainska Pravda. Leshchenko was called in for questioning July 14 by prosecutors in connection with interviews published recently aimed at uncovering the truth behind the 2004 poisoning of then-presidential candidate Victor Yushchenko. Leshchenko claims that prosecutors warned him not to publish articles revealing details of Yushchenko’s poisoning, claiming it could harm the investigation.

After being propelled to power, Yushchenko pledged that high-profile cases, including the murder of muckraking journalist Georgiy Gongadze, founder of Ukrainska Pravda, and his own poisoning case, would be solved. Four years later, Yushchenko and prosecutors have little to show. And with many sounding alarms about cover-ups, the role of journalists should be encouraged, not blocked. After all, with trust in Ukraine’s leaders low, findings by investigators will need to be backed up by journalists to be considered legitimate. And many have more faith in honest journalists, rather than prosecutors and corrupt courts, to reveal the truth on these stalled high-profile corruption cases.

As for the Russian journalist, slanted or not, Ukraine will stand out as a beacon of democracy compared to Russia if it remains a haven for freedom of speech, not by utilizing technicalities to hush unwelcome reporting. It is doubtful that all foreign journalists who have published or broadcast interviews with Yushchenko are accredited. Accreditation should be a prerequisite for gaining access to security-controlled events, not a tool to stifle journalists and their reports, regardless of whether they are slanted or fair.