Exiled Journalists Network : Reports

click on date for events
clear dates | view all

Press Freedom Forum Series 2008 Belarus Report

by Dr Seaga Shaw & Olga Birukova

Press Freedom Forum Series 2008 Report

Censorship, State Restrictions and Democracy in Belarus
An Exiled Journalists’ Network Report

By Ibrahim Seaga Shaw

Published by Exiled Journalists’ Network

Funded by the Open Society Institute

PROLOGUE

Censorship, State Restrictions and Democracy in Belarus

Media freedom in Belarus was the focus of the third Press Freedom Forum Series organised by the Exiled Journalists’ Network.

Focusing on censorship, state restrictions and democracy in Belarus, the two-part event included a public discussion at the House of Lords on 8th October and a media talk at the National Union of Journalists Headquarters in London on 9th October 2008.

Speakers included Lord Andrew McIntosh of Haringey, who hosted the event; Marc Gruber, European Co-Director of the International Federation for Journalists; Zhanna Litvina, Chair, Belarus Association of Journalists (BAJ); Aliaksei Karol, Editor-in-chief of Novy Chas newspaper; Andrei Aliaksandrau, International Officer, BAJ (Belarusian translator); Anoush Begoyan, Europe Programme Officer, ARTICLE 19; Mike Jempson, Director, Mediawise Trust; and Michelle Stanistreet, Deputy Secretary General of the National Union of Journalists.

Background

Democracy is fast coming under siege because press freedom which is central to its very existence seems to be increasingly coming under attack. In most countries of the world the right to freedom of expression guaranteed by Article 19 of the 1948 UN Human Rights Charter is yet to move beyond the rhetoric. What is more alarming, according to Reporters Without Borders’ (RSF) 2008 Annual Press Freedom Report released in Washington and Berlin in February, is “the lack of determination by democratic countries in defending the values they supposedly stand for”.

The organisation’s Secretary General Robert Menard said: “The spinelessness of some Western countries and major international bodies is harming press freedom”. He charged the UN Human Rights Council for caving in to pressure from countries such as Iran and Uzbekistan and condemned EUs soft approach towards dictators who dismiss threats of European sanctions. Democracy cannot function without checks on corruption, embezzlement and other forms of abuse of power, and yet journalists who are expected to be playing this role are constrained by all sorts of repression such as censorship, state restrictions, arbitrary arrests and detentions, protracted prison terms, deaths and kidnappings etc.

Press Freedom Campaign organisations such as RSF, CPJ, IPI, INSI generally agree that while there are increasing concerns for the safety of journalists in countries facing conflict such as Iraq, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Somalia, DR Congo there are concerns for the increase in censorship and state restrictions facing journalists almost on a daily basis in countries in Europe, especially in the former Soviet Republics. The authoritarian regimes in these former Soviet Republics continue to crush press freedom although most have recently moved to democracy. In Belarus in 2006, and Russia and Uzbekistan in 2007, elections confirmed the same dictatorial regimes in power thus reducing prospects of moving towards a better press freedom climate.

The situation seems to be getting worse in Belarus since the re-election of Europe’s last dictator Alaksander Lukashenko in 2006 to serve a third term. According to the 2008 RSF report, ‘the free press has virtually disappeared and been forced underground. Printing and distribution of newspapers is done by state-controlled firms that have a monopoly. The national post office, Belpochta, has a monopoly on distribution of newspapers to subscribers and can strike a dissident paper off its list at any time.’

Parliament turned down a request from the Belarusian Association of Journalists (BAJ) in August 2007 to review article 10 of the press law to see if it conformed to articles 33 and 34 of the country’s constitution. Article 10 forces media outlets to register with the authorities, who have used it in recent years to block the setting up of perceived dissident outlets. MediaWise Director Mike Jempson who spent a week in Belarus with BAJ in February 2008 working on an International Federation of Journalists’ project said these journalists are facing the worst restrictions and official obstruction in Europe. ‘Belarus’ President Lukashenko recently told journalism students that the media is a weapon of mass destruction that must be kept under state control’, Mike Jempson wrote in the April edition of the NUJ magazine Journalist.

Successful newspapers face the worst challenges. According to Mike Jempson, the weekly Slonim Gazette that has a circulation of 7,000 was recently reprimanded for exceeding the official 30 per cent advertising space limit, ‘it must increase pagination and thus its costs, but not its income. The law forbids changes to cover price and ad rates set when a paper was first registered.’

The situation has deteriorated so that the New York-based Freedom House (FH) ranked Belarus among 10 countries with the worst situation on the freedom of the press in the world featuring 188th place out of 195 in its 2008 freedom of the press table released ahead of press freedom day 3rd May.

The organisation recorded 2007 as the worst year for the country’s free press as the government suppressed the few remaining independent media outlets and strengthened restrictions on the Internet. President Lukashenko, who re-entered RSF latest Press Freedom Predators list released in May, restated his government’s goal of maintaining a monopoly over the broadcast media while addressing a news conference in April. In June 2006 U.S imposed travel ban on the top Belarus officials and designated their assets to be blocked if found abroad, in order to influence the country’s deteriorating human rights situation and poor democracy records.

Killings and disappearances of journalists are often conducted under the suspicious circumstances in Belarus. A reporter Vyacheslav Tkach was found hanged in a forest near the capital Minsk the day in February Zhoda deputy editor Alexander Zdvizhkou, who was jailed for three months for publishing the Mohammed cartoons, announced he is leaving the country for his own safety.

With all this Belarus appears to be a forgotten country although of course organisations such as the UN Human Rights Council, RSF, CPJ, IFJ, FH, and OSCE have made some efforts to raise the problems of press freedom violations on the agenda. There has so far been no concerted effort by the international community and press freedom campaign organisations to pro-actively engage the Belarusian authorities to end undue censorship and state restrictions inhibiting the free press in the country.

It is therefore in the context of addressing this vacuum that the Exiled Journalists’ Network sought to focus its 3rd annual Press Freedom Forum Series on Belarus. The forum brought together some stakeholders and media workers in the country who are involved in efforts to get rid of the country’s obnoxious laws and other state restrictions affecting freedom of the press. The event, which focused this time on censorship and state restrictions in an east European country, was arguably an important follow up to the forums on Sri Lanka in 2007 and that on Ethiopia 2006, both focusing on the problems of journalists’ safety and harassment, and on two different continents, Asia and Africa, respectively. It is hoped that this event would help raise Belarus on the agenda and kick start future projects to improve the situation such as sending a mission by press freedom campaigners and media development organisations.

Dr Ibrahim Seaga Shaw
Press Freedom Desk Officer and Vice Chair
Exiled Journalists’ Network

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Censorship, State Restrictions and Democracy in Belarus

The 2008 general elections offered Belarus the best opportunity to quit its self isolation and return to the Council of Europe. But according to the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) Observer Report, the elections were not conducted in accordance with European standards of transparency and democracy. “Although the Belarusian authorities judged the elections as meeting Western standards, independent journalists called them sterile, transparent up to the level of full invisibility”, said BAJ Chair Zhanna Litvina. The BAJ chair said this shows the serious lack of media freedom in Belarus adding that the media failed to perform their constitutional duty to provide the society with diverse information and political opinions. “Instead what we saw was the creation of an atmosphere of total fear in the society by the state media with the aim to influence the result of the elections and to create negative image for the whole opposition”, said Litvina.

Since its creation in 1949 the Council of Europe has been concerned with the issue of media freedom. And indeed lack of media freedom was, according to Lord Andrew McIntosh, the reason why Belarus was suspended from its Observer Status in the Council of Europe in 1997. “There have been several resolutions by the Council of Europe over the last 12 years, criticizing the government and state operators of Belarus”, said Lord McIntosh. The lord affirmed that the issue of press freedom would never be ignored by the Council of Europe and yet sounded pessimistic about changing the mind of Lukashenko to improve the situation in Belarus.

On the question of state restrictions, distribution of independent print media remains one of the greatest challenges. There are about 30 independent print media, half of which don't have the right to be sold out by state subscription system or via State retail network while three of which are not permitted to be published in Belarus and are instead printed in Russia. Another nightmare for press freedom in Belarus is the introduction of the new draconian media law which quickly passed through parliament and enforced since February 2009. The first negative fallout is that all media must be re-registered by the officials. “The whole procedure is long, very bureaucratic and officials can refuse or make the process of registration longer with the aim to create additional pressure on the media”, said BAJ chair Zhanna Litvina.

Article 19’s Anoush Begoyan described the media law as having “very harsh administrative and criminal restrictions to freedom of expression”, adding that it “gives absolute powers to the state to register media they like and refuse those that they don’t like.” While moves were afoot to introduce this bill, Article 19, said Begoyan, wrote a letter to President Lukashenko and protested the introduction of this legislation and urged him to stop it. Article 19 did this by rallying the support of other press freedom organisations such as CPJ and IFJ.

Another cause for concern is censorship. For example according to Zhanna Litvina, the government would tell the journalists: “you either say that we are good or you keep quite” and so those who chose to say the truth risk victimisation. And although the authorities do not directly tell journalists what to publish or not to publish, when the printing house, according to Aliaksei Karol, “receives recommendation from the authorities not to publish our media, as it contains something they consider ‘not welcomed, they will refuse us”. Karol said the idea is “to force the free media to use self-censorship within the newspaper and to refuse to cover hot topics which can create problems in the future”.

However, despite the rather gloomy picture of press freedom in Belarus all is not yet lost as Zhanna Litvina acknowledged some progress on the political front: “today there is no political prisoner in Belarus; in the last three years political prisoners were set free because of pressure from the West. Now that the political prisoners have now been set free the issue of press freedom is now the priority.”

Some of the ways forward to improving the situation of press freedom and democracy in Belarus advanced by some of the speakers, especially Litvina and Karol include: Belarus media should have better access to information about European Union, European agenda and daily life of the average person; need to provide more information on Belarus worldwide through European and other mainstream media; need for a Lord ‘Anti-Bell’ to counter the propaganda of Lord Bell; need to put freedom of expression on the agenda of any dialogue with the Belarus regime to return to the Council of Europe; need to have more independent newspapers and internet media outlets; need for support for the underground press; and finally increasing broadcasting from abroad.

8 October 2008
House of Lords discussion on: Censorship, State Restrictions and Democracy in Belarus

MODERATOR: Michelle Stanistreet Deputy Secretary General, National Union of Journalists (NUJ): I am very pleased to be here again to chair this important forum by the Exiled Journalists’ Network this time on the press freedom situation in Belarus. Issues of press freedom have also been the concerns of the National Union of Journalists in the UK and Ireland of which I am the National Deputy Secretary General. We have a very important panel to talk about ‘Censorship, State Restrictions and Democracy in Belarus‘ in Belarus and so I am not going to make any lengthy speech; I would like to move straight into the programme by calling on the Chair of the Exiled Journalists’ Network Mohamed Elsharief to give the opening remarks.

Mohamed Elsharief (EJN Chair): I am very happy to have the opportunity to officially open the third forum series of our annual press freedom forum events. The last two series were on Ethiopia and Sri Lanka and this time we are looking at Belarus. I want to thank our colleagues from the Belarus Association of Journalists and from the independent media for coming all the way to make this event happen. I want to thank all the other panellists including our host for today’s meeting, Lord Andrew McIntosh. I want to thank MediaWise for all the support and Ibrahim for working hard on this project.

Michelle: I would like to now call on our host Lord Andrew McIntosh to give the keynote address.

Lord Andrew McIntosh: My initial interest particularly in Belarus has been strengthened by the fact that I joined the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) in 2005. I immediately joined the Culture, Science and Education committee which deal with media issues. I am now the chair of Subcommittee on Media of the Parliamentary Assembly of Council of Europe. And also I am what is called the standing Rapporteur on the subject of the media freedom in general, but particularly of the protection of journalists. And this arises because two years ago the PACE approved the resolution of what I had prepared, resolution 1535, which is concerned with protection of journalists from harassment, from being prevented from doing their jobs, and from being the subject of murder.

There are too many examples such as the murder of Russian journalist Anna Politkovskaya, and there have been other physical attacks on journalists as well. Clearly since Russia is a member State of the Council of Europe, this is not an acceptable situation. Council of Europe has been concerned with media freedom issue for many years since it was created in 1949. And indeed lack of media freedom was the reason why Belarus was suspended from its Observer Status in the Council of Europe in 1997. There have been several resolutions by Council of Europe over the last 12 years, criticizing the government and state operators of Belarus. We do not also hesitate to criticize any other member state guilty of press freedom restrictions.

For example we are deeply unhappy with the media situation in Italy, not because journalists have been attacked or murdered, but because of a combination of Italian prime-minister Silvio Berlusconi ownership of media organizations and its effect on political control; this is not good for diversity and independence in the Italian media. Thus, we are prepared to criticize any member state where there is need of correction.

So far we have been uncertain with the issue of protection of journalists in this country [Belarus]. We also have been uncertain with the possible effect of the new media law which was rushed into legislation in late July 2008 and which comes into effect 8 February 2009. We have serious concerns about some of the provisions in that law, and probably we will get more details during today's meeting with Belarus Association of Journalists. We highly appreciate all monitoring of printed and broadcast media made by BAJ and dialogue with our Belarus colleague-journalists. So far we find it very hard to get Belarus state authorities to talk to us. What can we do? We cannot change Lukashenko's mind. We cannot change the authoritarian way which he rules Belarus. I hope our colleagues from BAJ can provide us with some advice on this issue. Besides we see there is some desire from the government to have closer links with the rest of Europe, with the Council of Europe and with the European Union. If Belarus is really willing to get back to European institutions and normalize its relations with European community, it has to do much more than officials are doing today. I can truly say that human right and media subjects in Belarus will never be ignored by the Council of Europe, and we will use all instruments available to EU institutions to improve the situation.

Zhanna Litvina (Chair, BAJ, Belarus): We highly appreciate the opportunity to discuss problems of journalists of my country here in the House of Lords. It is good to feel this support of the European community and European politicians. The recent general elections in Belarus were a very important chance for Belarus to quit the self isolation and come back to the Council of Europe. For this to happen those elections should have been held in a transparent and democratic way and should have corresponded to OSCE standards but unfortunately this was not the case according to the observer report. Although the Belarusian authorities judged the elections as meeting Western standards, independent journalists called them sterile, transparent up to the level of full invisibility. No opposition representative from the political opposition was elected into parliament; nor was there anyone from the private business sector; President Lukashenko asked to have 30% of female representation in the parliament, and we got exactly 30% women MPs.

Those elections showed once again the extent of the problems we have in Belarus and the serious lack of media freedom first of all. Today with the full responsibility we (BAJ) state that Belarus media in general during this Parliamentary campaign failed to fulfil their duty contrary to what is stated in the Belarus Constitution - to provide the society with full variety of information on different political problems, and different political issues. As some positive change I can only point out the fact that during the campaign we didn’t registered from State media side such actions as: creation of total fear atmosphere in the society in aim to influence the result of elections and to create negative image for the whole opposition, large scale discrediting of political opponents and severe cases of direct censorship in media and printing houses.

We had registered such cases during previous parliamentary elections campaign, but during the election-2008 there weren't such incidents. The state media also refused to have any political debate and so there was no possibility for voters to compare the political programmes of the candidates. Independent media provided the only platform where different candidates were able to represent their programs, to give the audience a chance to compare their positions, to get different opinions. Independent media represented the wide range of the actors of the electoral process. For the independent media the main problem is the problem of distribution. The large Belarus audience had no chance to be involved, or to read about any political debates before the election.

State media became voices of Central election committee, statisticians and the president, who didn't run for the parliament. By BAJ statistics there are about 30 non-state media who cover current affairs and politics in Belarus, half of them don't have the right to be sold out by state subscription system or via State retail network. Three of those outlets are not permitted to be published in Belarus and they are printed out in Russia (Smolensk region which is close to the Belarus-Russia border). The next problem and possibly we will have negative influence later on - the fact that the new Media Law had been approved in a record short term. It was approved by the old Parliament and signed by the president in July 2008. It took 10 days to discuss and approve the law by the lower Chamber of parliament. The new media law comes into force on 8th February 2009. The first negative consequence - all media must be re-registered by the officials. The whole procedure is long, very bureaucratic and officials can refuse or make the process of registration longer with the aim to create additional pressure on the media. Moreover, by the new media law the government is responsible for the regulation of the Internet media which don't need to be officially registered for the moment. It means Internet media will be ruled not by the law itself, but by the government. The law contains non-democratic rules, which in fact prevent and forbid Belarus journalists from co-operating with Foreign Media, and it restricts foreign investments that can be provided to the media sphere. In fact, according to the opinion of BAJ legal experts the law worsens substantially the general climate for the media in Belarus. On the question of censorship, I must say state apparatus are now using harsh counteraction to extremism against journalists. Literally few days ago one of the main influential state newspaper - Zvyazda started to publish the official list of media outlets and printed materials that are considered to be of extremist nature.

This list starts from the audio and video discs which contain recording of the concert which recently (summer 2008) took place in Warsaw - "Solidarity with Belarus". During the border control three such discs had been confiscated. And the content has been considered to be to be of extremist nature. Six discs with recording of Documentary "Lessons of the Belarusian language" were confiscated as well under the same pretext - their content is considered to be of extremist nature.

Another example of censorship is the legal case started against the book "Occasional president" by Belarus journalists Svetlana Kalikina and Pavel Sharamet "Letter from the forest" by the young politician Paval Seviarynets, and the review of the Report of Human rights violation in 2004. My colleagues consider those legal cases as examples of particular censorship. Once the content is accepted by the Court as extremist, all those who distribute such discs and books can be under legal investigation as well. The legal cases had been launched by the high ranked KGB officials, in particular by the head of Grodno regional district KGB (State Security Committee).

We appreciate support from international organizations in one of the biggest problems of Belarus journalists - problems of those who cooperated with Foreign Media from inside Belarus.
Belarus authorities must be aware of a very strong and principal position of the EU for the full scale cooperation - freedom of expression and demonopolisation of media and increasing their number and influence.

Aliaksei Karol (Editor-in-chief, Novy Chas, Belarus): Thanks for providing me with the opportunity to take part in this discussion. Lord McIntosh said "We cannot change Lukashenko's mind", but with your support Belarus media can influence the minds of a wide Belarusian audience who can work for the development of the democracy in the country. The story of the private media, in particular of my newspaper we published since 1992, is an example of our resistance to the authorities; it is a reflection of the whole development of private media in Belarus. In the early 90s after the collapse of Soviet Union more than 100 independent media had been created in Belarus. Now we have about 15-20 professional independent media who cover current agenda and politics in the country. But I can proudly say that this small amount of free media really influence the situation in Belarus and the fact that the authorities pressurize free media means they consider us as a serious power. I believe that past parliamentary elections was a hallmark of the mass protest of Belarus people to the authoritarian regime. It was a passive resistance. But, by independent poll (by the national news site www.tut.by), only 30% of electors came to polling stations, despite massive pressure and state propaganda to vote for the "right" pro-Lukashenko candidates.

It might sound contradictory to what Zhanna Litvina said, but I think such low level of confidence to State propaganda, such low presence of electors on unfair elections is a result of the work of free media during all last 15 years. Sure, our newspapers don't have a lot of pages, our circulation is limited. Few years ago we used to have 50.000 copies circulation of our weekly Zhoda, now we have only 5.000 and we had to launch a new newspaper from the scratch. In accordance with surveys of independent sociologists no less than 2-3 people read each copy. Now we have full Internet sites of printed newspapers. I feel this is the reason the authorities consider new media as the main danger. That's why they increase pressure and repression. Thus, resistance is a must for us. This is a main condition for Belarus to become a democratic country one day. It's the main condition for journalists to keep high level of professionalism. I see it in the example of our newspaper and on other free media as well. Really highly professional journalists work only in private newspapers, not in the States ones. In Belarus we have seen a number of examples when bright and gifted journalists, who used to be stars, lost their talents when they turned to the side of the regime. Now their writings aren't interesting to anybody.
Independent journalists help each other. Our newspaper is a perfect example. We published weekly Zhoda (Concord) since 1992, but it was closed after the president TV speech where he said that all Zhoda staff (journalists and editors) should be jailed. It was on the eve of presidential elections and one month before the election in March 2006, newspaper had been banned. We (Zhoda newspaper) faced criminal case, one year later my deputy Alexander Zdvizhkou who allowed re-printing of the famous Mohammed cartoon in our newspaper, was arrested when he came back from Moscow for the anniversary of his father’s funeral. He was sentenced to three years imprisonment for the "agitation of the national-religious hostility", but was happily released after three months with other political prisoners who were set free after demands from the European Union. We managed to keep all our editorial team and in 2008 registered a new newspaper called "Novy Chas" (New Times).

During all this time our friends, colleagues and BAJ lawyers supported us a lot. Lawyers helped us to find holes in the legal system and to get through the registration labyrinth. Thus the resistance is a must and this is the life style of the independent Belarusian journalists who have to operate in extreme situations.

On the issue of censorship, we are a private newspaper and the authorities don't tell us directly what to publish or not to publish. But if the printing house receives recommendation from the authorities not to publish our media, as it contains something they consider "not welcomed" they will refuse us as the printing house itself can be closed by the authorities in such situation. In my view the main goal of such an approach is to force the free media to use self-censorship within the newspaper and to refuse to cover hot topics which can create problems in the future.

Our way to cope with such pressure includes as well wide use of euphemisms; try not to use such hard lexicon as tyrant or dictator. Otherwise we could be accused for libelling the president, which is a criminal offence in Belarus. But our objective information, picture and good analysis lead to the same conclusion without using labels. Thus we keep our professional principle afloat while trying to survive at the same time. Such approach increases our level of professionalism as well. Besides we avoid doing cartoons and collages with the face of the president of Belarus Alexander Lukashenko.

I have some suggestions in terms what kind of support we would like to get from the EU, from European democratic and journalists organizations. In our newspaper we have pages dedicated to the International news. We publish articles about neighbouring countries, about European countries and sometimes about countries that have similar regimes with ours.

I think Belarus media should have better access to the information about European Union, European agenda and daily life of the average person. It will help us to provide more information about the real situation in the world. Our newspaper always asks our friends abroad to send us articles, to provide us with the exclusive information from the first source. We call our friends to France, UK and ask their comments. Your contacts, your good will to provide us with the interview, to comment on current agenda - that is the real help to us, which we need so much.

Lots of our journalists speak English very well, so they don't have language barrier. One more way of supporting us - to provide more information on Belarus worldwide, in European media wherever is possible. When our newspaper "Novy Chas" had legal case launched by the demand of militia general and senator Nikolay Cherginets, during the trial they stressed out they are not happy to see numerous articles on the Internet - especially in the English sector - with the coverage of the trial.

Belarus authorities take very seriously the position and opinion of EU representatives, of European journalists. You should be aware that the famous British politician Lord Bell is PR -adviser for Mr. Lukashenko. I believe that right now we need Lord anty-Bell. I can quote an extract from a press release of Lord Bell, issued by his PR- agency. It states: "There were 102 cases of persecution of journalists in Belarus during 2006 and only 1 such case in 2008." This is an open lie. My last suggestion: Media are the main target for the Belarus officials right now. We would be happy if freedom of expression, freedom for Belarus media will be the principal point for EU in dialogue with the Belarus regime. That would be a priceless support for us. Thank you very much.

Michelle: We have heard very interesting contributions from our colleagues about the difficulties the press is facing in Belarus; I would now like to open the floor for discussion.

UK UNESCO Commission Chairman, Tim Williams: I would like to know where you can locate the journalists who have been facing most of the problems with the authorities in Belarus. Do you see them as independent journalists or journalists working in the interest of the opposition?

Zhanna: The issues we are talking about here are about independent journalists. Of course there are media that work with opposition parties and others that deal with the state but most of those who face difficulties are those that are independent. The government would tell the journalists: “You either say that we are good or you keep quite”. And so the people who try to say the truths are finding themselves in trouble most of the time.

Former Freelance Journalist: I have been involved with Belarus for over 50 years; most of my Belarusian friends know me. We have a situation where people in the West see Belarus as a country that does not exist. Now what I want to know is what we in the West are doing to promote the image of Belarus generally in the media and not just talk about human rights.

Brian Bennett, former British ambassador to Belarus: I was ambassador in Belarus between 2003 and 2007. I think Belarus would continue to exist and that is how Lukashenko wants it. And that is the main trend. He has no interest in democratising the country. The elections are fixed; it is a general trend.

Observer: It is true what Lord McIntosh said we cannot overthrow Lukashenko by our democratic ways. And it is true that we cannot change his views because he has his own views. So we should stop joking about him changing. It is not true that he wants to mend fences with Western Europe because that would undermine his position. And as I said we got to be nicer to Lukashenko otherwise we would end up pushing him to the Russian camp. So my suggestion is to keep the pressure up; Lukashenko is subject to pressure, psychological pressure not political persuasion. We must try to persuade him that he needs to get out (applause from the audience). And a two-pronged approach we must at the same time support the people of Belarus who are actually the only ones who are capable of making any change. And I have been supporting the democratic forces in Belarus, including the media. And I must say in conclusion that I am very pleased that this meeting is taking place at all; it is a very good place to start.

Aliaksei: Lukashenko prefers to show the West that he is doing fine with democracy but inside the country the reality is totalitarianism. So to bring about change the pressure must continue.

Zhanna: If Lukashenko is serious about mending fences with countries of Western Europe he must do enough to open up the country and allow freedom of the press.

Anoush Begoyan, Europe Programme Officer, Article 19: I would like to talk specifically on the problem of censorship facing the media in Belarus. Here very strict and disproportionately harsh legislations restricting freedom of expression have been introduced. I will offer a couple of examples. There is a draft legislation on the freedom of information which ensures that state bodies oversee the flow of information. The legislation gives absolute powers to the state to register media they like and refuse those that they don’t like. This new amendment makes it difficult not only for journalists but also institutions doing the printing and also for customers. Under this new regulation public officials must receive approval from their institutions prior to any communication with the media. The sanctions are extremely harsh as it makes arbitrary arrest and detention of journalists legal. The media law has very harsh administrative and criminal restrictions to freedom of expression. At Article 19, while this legislation was at the draft stage preparing to go to parliament for approval, we wrote a letter to President Lukashenko and protested the introduction of this legislation and called for him to stop it. We also put out a press release and rallied our colleagues in other press freedom campaign organisations to support the call for a repeal of the law.

Marc Gruber, European Co-Director of the International Federation for Journalists (IFJ): I would like to start by coming back to some of the issues raised earlier by some of the speakers in this forum regarding Belarusian journalists practicing with media outside Belarus doing better than those in the country. The thing I found most interesting of the recent Belarus elections is that there was more media focus on the international football that Belarus participated in than the elections.

Media Talk on Belarus at the NUJ Head Quarters on Thursday 9th October 2008

Moderator: Mike Jempson, Director of MediaWise
Panellists: Zhanna Litvina, Chair of Belarusian Association of Journalists; Aliaksei Karol, Editor- in-chief of Novy Chas newspaper

Zhanna: It is better to start by talking about the media as the real agents of change in mapping the ways forward for Belarus, a country that has been in isolation in recent years. It is important to have close relation between the media and civil society. We had the problem of disappeared politicians with no idea of what happened to them. This prevented other opposition politicians to join the political fray. It is however better that today there is no political prisoners in Belarus; in the last three years political prisoners were set free because of pressure from the West. Now that the political prisoners have now been set free the issue of press freedom is now the priority. We plan to create a European Media Monitoring Council. We are very happy that some prominent British politicians like Lord McIntosh are discussing this matter. We are working with RSF, IFJ, and Article 19 to push this forward. We feel it is very important that dialogue should start inside the country because nothing can be achieved from outside if the internal support is lacking.

Jim Dingley, Chairman of the Anglo-Belarusian society: What effect does BELSAT (Independent TV channel) based in Poland has on what is going on now in Belarus?

Zhanna: For us it is very important to have a source of information that provides beyond the stereotypes. I support all efforts of media broadcasting to Belarus not just BELSAT but unfortunately the electronic media failed to provide the service they are supposed to provide to the public. To get the immediate effect we have to tackle the technical problem in the country. Another important point is that a new generation of Belarusian journalists work for that media and so the authorities cannot call them voices of enemies. Media projects are very expensive; BELSAT is mostly financed by the Polish government and I think it is important to have others supporting it. The situation in the media is so difficult and so we cannot say we can only have one priority; that is why we need several independent newspapers. The second priority is Internet media that is more or less free although the authorities are beginning to feel it is dangerous. Another point is support to underground press while the fourth point is broadcasting from abroad.

Aliaksei: We visited the BBC Russian Service today and I think that this can be used effectively. I feel that there was an attempt to form a parliamentary committee and it is good to lobby for this. According to the surveys only 7.4% of Belarusians watch BELSAT TV. We should keep in mind that it is good to have more print material on the web so that we have more audiences accessing the information.

Brian Bennett, Former UK Ambassador to Belarus: Has there been any support from Russia?

Aliaksei: So far the support received from Russia is gas. It is the political pressure from the West and the economic pressure from Russia that are influencing the situation in Belarus. But this kind of economic support from Russia can make Belarus become a Russian satellite state. On the question of who the Russian journalists are helping we cannot expect any help because they themselves are having difficult times.

Zhanna: We cannot regard the presence of the Russian media helping the situation in Belarus. Another vivid example is the reporting of the war in the Caucasus where the geopolitical viewpoint of Russia was dominant. Journalists were sent to cover the Belarus opera in South Africa while no one was sent to cover the war in the Caucasus.

Appendix 1
Update on press freedom restrictions and violations in Belarus
Reporters Sans Frontieres (Reporters without borders www.rsf.org) ranked Belarus 154 out of 173 countries by Press Freedom Index-2008, still better than Iran and Saudi Arabia, but worse than any European country, Russia and even Zimbabwe. RSF concluded that the situation is very serious.

BELARUS MEDIA - UNDER STRONG CONTROL
Any edition, printed in the amount more 299 copies, must be registered by Belarus Ministry of information. Thus, as on April 1, 2009, Belarus had 1.305 registered printed periodicals, about 70% of them - private. Most of them either deal with advertising or with pure commerce or published once or twice a year, as their owners need just to keep registration, while hoping for better future.

As a result, according to BAJ statistics there are just about 20-30 regular private newspapers which cover current affairs, politics, economics and social issues. Among them less than 10 can be considered as national level media, with circulation about 10,000 copies for different target audience.

State-controlled media clearly dominate in TV and radio sector. By data of the Ministry of Information there are 321 TV and radio broadcasting media, around 73% of them are owned and controlled by different State bodies of different levels - from local up to nationwide. Quickly growing, relatively free from open censorship and cheap internet is quite attractive for media. Belarus officials try to establish strong control over that segment as well.

The government said on 2 June 2008 that it could resort to Chinese experts to block access to foreign websites likely to have a “bad influence” in Belarus. There is no evidence that such a filtering system has been put in place for the time being, but the authorities nevertheless do censor some opposition and news websites, according to RSF. Website of Charter97 (www.charter97.org) reported several times serious cyber-attacks in May and June 2009, and earlier on 26 April -5 May 2008, and in March 2006. Usually it coincides with important events in the political life of the country, huge demos and protest actions, widely covered by journalists.

Free Europe/Radio Liberty (www.svaboda.org) often had similar problems. The site promotes “citizen journalism”, allowing users to post their own photos, films and articles, including evidences - photos and written statements of frauds during parliamentary and president elections. Belarus partisan site (www.belaruspartisan.org), BELAPAN news agency (www.belapan.com) and other independent media also have been targets for similar attacks of unknown origin.

From 10 February 2007, a decree adopted by the Council of Ministers has made Internet surveillance legal, forcing owners of cybercafés and computer clubs to denounce to police Internet users who go on to “sensitive” sites. It also forces them to register the browsing history on their computers over the previous 12 months, and to keep the information available for the security forces and the KGB. New Media law, which came into force 8 February 2009, states that online media should be regulated by legal acts issued by the Belarus government.

COOPERATION WITH FOREIGN MEDIA CAN BE A PROBLEM
Belarus officials don't want journalists to provide foreign media with uncensored information from inside the country. They try to prevent any form of such cooperation and require accreditation from journalists and registration from such media, what is impossible to get, if you are "not welcomed". Thus, journalists can be punished for such illegal cooperation.

So far, Belarus Ministry of Foreign Affairs refuses to register. Belarus-Polish TV channel BELSAT (www.belsat.eu) under different pretexts. Meanwhile Ministry of Information regularly issue warnings to journalists who work for "illegal" BELSAT from inside Belarus.

In summer 2009 Belarus Ministry of Foreign Affairs refused press credentials to journalist Ivan Roman who worked for "Radio Raciya" (Poland, broadcast in Belarusian to Belarus and Poland) and nullified press accreditation to Andrei Pachobut, who worked for Gazeta Wyborcza as a correspondent located in Belarus. Official warning from KGB to Ivan Roman is published on KGB site.

See: http://www.kgb.by/press/inform/104.html. (Only in Russian).
Two journalists who worked for BBC TV as fixers-researchers-interpreters during 2001-2006 had to claim asylum in Belgium and the UK due to pressure from Belarus authorities after reports had been broadcasted. About 10 Belarus journalists claimed asylum in different countries, mainly in European Union.

BLACK LISTED JOURNALISTS
Belarus authorities use different ways of intimidation against journalists - from open threats to "a strong advice" to newspaper owners against employment of ‘unwanted persons’. Murders of journalists are not the exception. When discovered such cases get huge worldwide coverage.

MISSING AND MURDERED JOURNALISTS
Dozens of journalists have recently either gone missing or murdered. Some of the more recent ones include:
DMITRY ZAVADSKY, former personal camera man of president Lukashenka during his first years after elections and then camera operator for ORT TV (Russia), disappeared without trace on 7th of July 2000, while en route to Minsk international airport to meet his colleague from the Moscow office. His empty car was found in front of the main entrance to the airport. His body has never been found. On 27th of November 2003 he was legally acknowledged as dead. Former police officers Valery Ignatovich and Maksim Malik and two former police cadets Alyaksei Huz and Siarhei Saushkin were imprisoned for his kidnap. Many questions in this case are still unanswered. For more details see: http://www.zavadsky.org.
VERANIKA CHARKASAVA, 45 journalist and BAJ member, was found dead in her Minsk apartment with forty stab wounds on 20th October 2004, two days after the nationwide referendum, which allowed Lukashenko to go for the third term as president. Investigations were abandoned by the authorities in February 2007. Her murderer has never been found. Many believe she was killed because of her professional activity and investigation of deals between Belarus and Iraq under Saddam Hussein. For more details see www.veronikacherkasova.org.

YURI SHIROKUY 36, found dead on a street in a provincial town Smorgon on 13th of January 2008. He was a deputy director of one of the largest private news agencies in Belarus - BELAPAN who actively participated in all BELAPAN projects, including ELECTIONS - 2006 (news sites with full coverage of all events related to presidential elections March 2006 -Russian and English versions), Internet newspaper naviny.by and others. Official version - strong heart attack.

In October 2005 VASSILY GRODNIKOV, 67 had been found dead in his home. He was a freelancer for opposition newspaper Narodnaya Volya. By official conclusion, death was caused by craniocerebral injury as a result of "contact with a blunt object" as the death was a suicide or an accident.

VYACHESLAV TKACH, 41 journalist of "Komsomolskaya prauda v Belarusi" had been found hanged in the forest near Minsk on 25th of February 2008.
The body and vicinity had not any trace of fight or violence. He had in his pockets his business card and accreditation, issued by Ministry of Internal affairs. By official version Tkach committed suicide. He used to work for opposition weekly "Gazeta Andreya Klimova" 1994-1995 and had problems with KGB in 1999 while covering criminal case launched by the Department of Military Counterintelligence Service (preparation of a murder of a high level official from the Belarus railway).

MANY STATE PRESSURES AND RESTRICTIONS
During 2008, by BAJ statistics, Belarus Ministry of Information issued 56 written warnings to 51 media (often two warnings at once to the same media). Officials used it as way to create pressure, as three warnings lead to the closure of the media (by new Media law which came into force 8 February 2009 - two warnings are enough to close any media). One advertising newspaper Vsio Dlya Vheh Grodno (Everything for everyone in Grodno city) was suspended for publication of jokes, using obscene language (February 2008). In March, KGB officers carried out searches in number of local offices of foreign media, NGO offices and in private apartments of many journalists across Belarus who worked for TV channel BELSAT, European radio for Belarus, radio Racija.

According to BAJ, 25 media workers were searched in 2008, some of them temporary detained while others interrogated by KGB. Computers of many were confiscated. All of them worked for foreign media without proper accreditation, later explained the chief of press-service of Belarus Foreign Affairs Ministry Maria Vanshina. The KGB asked all of them the same questions about activity of TV channel BELSAT in Belarus and about authors of satirical cartoons, which "humiliated honour and dignity of the president of Belarus (art. 367 part 1 of Belarus Criminal Code). The animated films are small plots of satirical character which feature main
heroes looking like Alexander Lukashenka and other highest officials. In August 2005 criminal case had been launched on the grounds of the distribution of the page on the Internet: www.mult.3dway.org
Cartoon films (translated to the English), discredited the honour of the president of Belarus. Facing criminal prosecution all three persons involved in the project had to leave Belarus and now run the site from abroad and have no contacts with Belarus journalists.

On June the 12th 2008 Belarus KGB suspended criminal case of slander on Belarus president. None of the searched journalists was charged. In September 2008 the KGB started to return confiscated items such as computers and documents to the harassed journalists.

BAJ reported more than 30 cases of detention of journalists during 2008 -- for just a few hours or up to 3 months, often accompanied with searches in private apartments. Journalists were frequently detained while covering street actions, rallies and so on, despite the fact they had press-cards. For instance on 25th March during the street rally on the Day of Freedom in Minsk, Belarus police detained a crew of Lithuanian TV (LRT), checked their IDs, confiscated tapes with footage shot at the rally and released them.

After explosion of home-made bomb on 3rd of July, during outdoor Independence Day concert, which injured about 50 persons, but none from Lukashenka team; police conducted several searches in apartments of journalists under pretext they were looking for "substances and materials related to this crime. In Minsk and other Belarus cities, several journalists were summoned to the local police office for detailed report on what they were doing between 2nd and 3rd of July and for fingerprinting, what should be only a voluntary procedure by the law. Later on during the year, police tried to use the law “On Counteraction to Terrorism” against media and it confiscated several disks and printed editions as "propaganda of extremism".

Independent weekly "Belarusy i rynok" had been burgled during night in March 2008, when the weekly moved to the new office and alarm system wasn't installed during first night on a new location. Few computers had been stolen, including one with full photo archive and one - powerful with special software, used for final editing and pagination. Editor in chief V. Hodosovkiy didn't blame anyone. See http://www.charter97.org/en/news/2008/3/13/4760/.

Alexander Zdvizhkou, former deputy editor of the newspaper "Zhoda" got longest sentence. The newspaper reprinted caricatures of the prophet Mohammed from Danish press. Criminal case against the media had been launched and in March 2006 "Zhoda" was closed for this reprinting. In November 2007 Zdvizhkou was arrested and initially sentenced to three years in jail. On February the 22nd, by the decision of the Supreme Court, the sentence was shortened to up to three months. By then, the journalist had already served his term in jail. He was released the same day and declared he was going to leave Belarus and change citizenship.

During 2008, BAJ reported some cases of physical attacks, incidents with equipment broken by the police, official summons and "informal invitations" (usually by private mobile phones) for conversations with KGB or police representatives. Interrogations aimed to scare journalists, or suggested deals - information or loyalty in exchange for the permission to be allowed to cross the border (some of media workers are in secret black lists and are not allowed to leave the country under different pretext), or just permission to be employed.

Appendix 2
Belarus Country Profile
Belarus is a post-soviet country, considered as the last dictatorship in Europe with declining population of less than 10 million. President Alexander Lukashenko, who runs the country since 1994, has described himself as having an "authoritarian ruling style. Western countries have described Belarus under Lukashenko as a dictatorship. In 2005 United States Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice labelled Belarus among the six nations of the "outposts of tyranny”. The Belarusian government has been regularly criticized for human rights violations and its actions against non-governmental organizations, independent journalists, national minorities, and opposition politicians.

However, the West highly appreciated some steps toward democracy made by Belarus officials since 2008, including the release of opposition figures considered as political prisoners, registration of the opposition movement "For Freedom!” inclusion of three independent media outlets in the state distribution network and the appointment of consultative councils involving civil society.

Parliamentary Assembly of Council of Europe (PACE) declared on 23rd June 2009 that Belarus parliament may get back special guest status in the organization, if the country abolished the death penalty or introduced moratorium on capital executions as a first step. But the Belarus authorities are yet to react to this condition. It means that PACE is ready to come back to the situation of 1992, when the organization granted special guest status to the Belarus parliament. Due to the lack of progress in terms of democracy, human rights and the rule of law, this status was suspended in 1997, and Belarus' request for membership of the Council of Europe was frozen. Now both sides seem to enjoy reboot of the dialogue, which may lead to closer ties with the West and less dependence on Russia as result. However some experts are sceptical about how serious is Lukashenko’s Western game. It could just be his usual bargain to get more benefits from the Kremlin, like cheaper gas and oil, access to the Russian market, they said.

BRIEF HISTORY OF BELARUS
Belarus is a landlocked country in Eastern Europe, bordered by Russia to the North and East, Ukraine to the South, Poland to the West, and Lithuania and Latvia to the North. Its capital is Minsk; other major cities include Brest, Grodno (Hrodna), Gomel (Homiel), Mahilyow (Mahiloŭ) and Vitebsk (Viciebsk). Until the 20-th century, the Belarusians lacked the opportunity to create a distinctive national identity because for centuries the lands of modern-day Belarus belonged to several ethnically different countries, including the Duchy of Polatsk, the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, and the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.

In XX century after the short-lived Belarusian People's Republic (1918–1919), Belarus became a constituent republic of the Soviet Union, the BSSR. The final unification of Belarusian lands within its modern borders took place in 1939, when the ethnically Belarusian-Russian lands (though with a very substantial Polish population) that were part of interwar Poland were annexed by the USSR and attached to the Soviet Belarus. The territory and its nation were devastated in World War II, during which Belarus lost about a third of its population and more than half of its economic resources.

After the war ended, Belarus was among the 51 founding countries of the United Nations Charter in 1945 and began rebuilding the Soviet Republic. Due its status of "assembly unit" for different industries, - from trucks and tractors up to textile and complex optical devices - Belarus enjoyed steady growth during the post-war period, but faced economic collapse following the break-up of the Soviet Union. Belarus declared independence on 25th of August 1991. However it retained closer political and economic ties with Russia than any other former Soviet Republics.

A national constitution was adopted in March 1994, in which the functions of prime minister were given to the president. Two-round elections for the presidency (24 June 1994 and 10 July 1994) resulted in Alexander Lukashenko winning more than 45% of the vote in the first round and 80% in the second round, beating former prime-minister Vyacheslav Kebich, who was disliked by electorate as "one of those communist officials".

MP Lukashenko was standing on an anti-corruption platform in 1994. He got access to some media coverage, including the TV, but in general, he was unknown by the wide audience. Recently, after elections, he turned to the authoritarian style of rule reminiscent of communist rule, unexpectedly even for his own team, which at that time included a lot of gifted and educated professionals.

During his presidency, Lukashenko has implemented Soviet-era policies, such as state ownership of the economy, State control on prices and exchange rates despite objections from Western governments and Belarus independent experts. Lukashenko modified the Constitution to extend his first term up to 2001 and then again in 2004 to allow him to stand for one more term.

International observers have consistently raised doubts over the validity and credibility of Belarus elections. Many independent observers and journalists have produced several evidences of frauds during elections. Widespread protests against the fraudulent elections, including "tent city" on the central square in Minsk in March 2006, were crushed in a coercive way. The opposition did not get any seat during the parliamentary elections in September 2008.

BELARUS TODAY
Country Facts
Area: 207,600 sq km
Population: 9,724,723 (July 2007 est.)
Capital City: Minsk (population 1.8m)
People: Belarusian (77.9%), Russian (13.2%), Polish (4.1%), Ukrainian (2.9%), other (1.9%)
Languages: Belarusian and Russian, are the official national languages
Religions: Eastern Orthodox Christian (80%), Roman Catholic, other (incl. Protestant, Jewish and Muslim)
Currency: Belarusian rouble (BRb)
Major political parties:
Pro-government parties: Agrarian Party or AP [Mikhail Shimansky]; Communist Party of Belarus or KPB; Belarusian Patriotic Movement (Belarusian Patriotic Party) or BPR [Nikolay Ulakhovich, chairman]; Liberal Democratic Party [Sergey Gaydukevich]; Republican Party of Labor and Justice [Vasiliy Zadnepryanyy]
Opposition parties: Belarusian Christian Democracy Party (unregistered) [Pavel Severinets]; Belarusian Party of Communists or PKB [Sergey Kalyakin]; Belarusian Party of Labor (unregistered) [Aleksandr Bukhvostov]; Belarusian Popular Front or BPF [Aleksey Yanukevich]; Belarusian Social-Democratic Hramada [Stanislav Shushkevich]; Belarusian Social Democratic Party Hramada or BSDPH [Anatoliy Levkovich]; Christian Conservative BPF [Zyanon Pazniak]; European Coalition [Nikolay Statkevich]; Party of Freedom and Progress (unregistered) [Vladimir Novosyad]; United Civic Party or UCP [Anatoliy Lebedko]; Belarusian Women's Party Nadzeya ("Hope") [Yelena Yeskova, chairperson]
Form of government: Presidential Republic
Head of State: Alexander Grigoryevich Lukashenko
Prime Minister/Premier: Sergei Sidorsky
Foreign Minister: Sergei Martynov
Membership of international groupings/organisations: Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS), Euro Atlantic Partnership Council (EAPC), European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD), International Labour Organisation (ILO), International Monetary Fund (IMF), Interpol, NATO's Partnership for Peace, Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), United Nations (UN), World Bank, World Health Organisation (WHO)
HEALTH
Although Chernobyl is located in Ukraine, over 70% of the radioactive fallout resulting from the meltdown and explosion in April 1986 fell on the territory of Belarus. Twenty per cent of Belarus' forests are contaminated as is over 6,000 sq km of prime agricultural land. Many Belarusians have been affected by the catastrophe and many Belarusian children visit the UK for recuperative holidays funded and supported by British charities, individuals and the British Embassy.

Appendix 3
KGB muzzles Belarus media in UK investment forum
by Olga Birukova

‘Businessmen jailed in Belarus’ - this was the warning lead headline on a miniature newspaper handed out by exiled journalists at the Belarus Investment Forum on November 18, in the centre of London.

The forum, said to have cost £300.000, was organized by the Belarusian government to attract foreign investment. The four-page newspaper, entitled Zvon (Belarusian Clarion) was produced by the Exiled Journalists’ Network as a follow-up to its Press Freedom Forum on Belarus. Members of the Belarusian community in London helped EJN members to distribute the paper on this cold and rainy day.

It focused on problems of press freedom, the harassment of private investors and the role of the KGB in the country. It highlighted the plight of Emmanuel Zeltser, the New York-based lawyer sentenced to three years for ‘commercial espionage’ while visiting Belarus in March 2008. It also mentioned the case of Andrei Klimau, a former real estate developer and MP, who became a