“We’re ready to hear the public. We value freedom of the press and we believe in democracy,” chant the presidential administration and government in unison. But the unfortunate reality is that they ignore everything the public says, while transforming the nation into an autocracy.
TV and Radio regulator
The team in power continues to consolidate political control. Its latest power grab was at the National TV and Radio Council, the main regulator of broadcast media, which the Viktor Yanukovych administration has now stacked with loyalists.
Here’s how it happened: Half of the National TV and Radio council’s eight members are appointed by the president, and the other half by parliament. But Ukraine’s laws also allow public organizations to propose candidates. The National Media Trade Union and Stop Censorship! civic movement had suggested three candidates who have authority and qualifications in this sphere: Nataliya Ligacheva, head of Telekritika, Ukraine’s leading media watchdog, media lawyer Taras Shevchenko and chief of media NGO Internews, Kostyantyn Kvurt.
These three people received the largest number of votes during the session of parliament’s media committee. But they were subsequently ignored by the ruling majority and failed to be voted onto the National TV and Radio council.
Instead, the seats were taken by people with no relevant experience, completely unknown among the journalistic and professional communities. They’re the ones who will be setting the rules for the TV and radio market in Ukraine. They have power not only to allocate the new digital frequencies, but to issue warnings and withdraw licenses from existing TV channels.
Considering that all of them were supported by the party in power [Party of Regions], and that the council includes no public representatives, one should not hope much for the transparency of the regulator’s work.
Public TV
But there’s more. The government has said that it would create a public TV channel as an alternative to oligarch-controlled channels and also ensure everyone gets access to television. This has been a long-standing demand of Ukrainian journalists and the public at large. Ukraine has also made a corresponding commitment to the Council of Europe.
But there’s been plenty of embarrassment on this front, too. First, journalists and Stop Censorship! experts officially requested the presidential administration to invite them to the session of the Humanitarian Council, where the concept of public TV was to be discussed. They wanted to present their own draft law.
But the journalists were stubbornly ignored. Instead, Hanna Herman, deputy head of the administration, invited a lawyer from the Reporters Without Borders organization, Jean Martin, explaining that he had agreed to consult the Ukrainian government on this issue. A day later, a scandal erupted. Reporters Without Borders made an official statement that, although Martin works as one of the organization’s lawyers, he was not authorized to get involved in this issue. It turned out to be his private initiative in response to Herman’s invitation.
It’s not clear why the government should pay for a foreign specialist, while at the same time failing to consider extensive research by local experts approved by western partners.
It’s even less clear how the government wants to ensure independence for a putative public broadcaster. So far the tide has been moving in the opposite direction. First National, the nation’s state-owned television channel, is slated to transform into a public TV channel.
But of late, it has been acting more as a propaganda machine, with its news coverage coordinated closely with the pro-administration slant of Inter TV channel. Inter TV is the country’s leading television channel owned by Ukraine’s controversial top spy, State Security Service chief Valery Khoroshkovsky. You won’t find any reports critical of the government, or exposing wrongdoing, on this channel or on First National.
Freedom laws
The government has also buried hopes that a ‘Law On Access to Public Information’ could be approved soon.
The draft went through its first reading, but was subsequently taken off the legislative agenda. No freedom of information means no strong and influential journalism, let alone public watchdogs to control it.
There is a similar situation with the misnamed ‘Law on Peaceful Assembly’ that proposes strict limitations on demonstrations. It contains, for example, a requirement to inform the authorities about public gatherings 10 days in advance, giving them enough time to challenge it in court, move its time and place, or even cancel it altogether. The draft law is now up for its second reading.
Democratic rhetoric, authoritarian rule
It has become clear that the government has mastered both democratic rhetoric and authoritarian thinking. This is a dangerous combination. You can talk about public TV, but if the content of the programs does not change, the new sign on the door won’t convince anyone that society’s interests are being served. You can talk stability, but ignoring the active public and journalists does nothing for this stability.
If the new government wants to achieve anything, they should keep this in mind.
Viktoria Siumar is head of the Institute for Mass Information in Ukraine, a non-profit organization. You can read more about its activities on http://imi.org.ua/.
