Source:

Owing to buyout of newspaper Kommersant, killing of journalist Politkovskaya, and increased pressure for greater censorship on the Internet, Russia’s rating for independent media worsens from 6.00 to 6.25 [ID 20445]

For further information on government's crackdown on media please see full report

"In 2006, constraints on the media tightened. There is little diversity of views on television or in the key national newspapers. A Kremlinfriendly company purchased Kommersant and replaced the editor. The murder of Anna Politkovskaya silenced one of Russia’s most fearless investigative reporters. The authorities are increasingly using the courts to exert pressure on journalists, and recent legislation imposes stiff penalties for slandering bureaucrats. The Kremlin is now examining ways to exert greater control over the Internet, which remains an island of freedom in the media world, though the increased censorship suggests this could be short-lived.

Owing to the buyout of Kommersant, the killing of Politkovskaya, and the increased pressure for greater censorship on the Internet, Russia’s rating for independent media worsens from 6.00 to 6.25. "

06.08.2008 - Source: Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty

Daghestan: Authorities have closed a newspaper, accusing it of spreading extremist views, Russia's Prosecutor-General said ("Russian Authorities Close Daghestani Newspaper") [ID 24383]

Document(s): Open document

17.06.2008 - Source: Committee to Protect Journalists

Ingushetia: A court in Moscow ordered on 6 June 2008 to shut down the regional news website Ingushetiya; allegations of containing extremist content ("Moscow court orders closure of North Caucasus news Web site") [ID 23904]

Document(s): Open document

11.06.2008 - Source: Reporters Sans Frontières

Prosecutors drop criminal case against Russia’s director of American NGO that trained journalists ("Prosecutors drop criminal case against Internews Russia’s director") [ID 23900]

Document(s): Open document

02.06.2008 - Source: Reporters Sans Frontières

Moscow: Paper critical of mayor given notice to quit premises ("Paper critical of Moscow mayor given notice to quit premises") [ID 23895]

Document(s): Open document

06.2008 - Source: Freedom House

Authorities exert extensive control over television and radio broadcasters and much of the print media; most outlets are willing to focus on nonpolitical information; opposition newspapers such as Novaya Gazeta have been harassed ("Nations in Transit 2008") [ID 23748]

"The federal authorities exert extensive control over Russia's television and radio broadcasters and much of the print media.

Free speech remains in a few newspapers, on the Ekho Moskvy radio station, and over the Internet.

But the situation is dismal.

Reporters Without Borders ranked Russia 144 out of 169 countries studied in 2007.

In recent years, Kremlin-connected oligarchs have been buying up the last outposts of media that still provide critical coverage.

[...] the Putin government has an extensive arsenal to use against the media, including frequent tax audits, complex reregistration procedures, orders to present the government in a positive light, blacklists of who cannot be allowed on the air, bans on live reporting and debate in talk shows, and public officials who tell companies not to advertise on certain stations.

Accordingly, most outlets are willing to toe the Kremlin line or focus on nonpolitical information, highlighting entertainment, business, and sports. [...]

There are plenty of cases of regional officials working to keep local publications in line.

For example, on May 11 the police in Samara investigated the local office of Novaya Gazeta for allegedly using pirated software and confiscated three computers.

The use of illegal software is common in Russia, and investigating such charges is a favorite ploy of the authorities against opposition groups.

The special services thus kill two birds with one stone - shut down the opposition by confiscating their computers and show the West that they are combating software piracy, at least selectively."

Document(s): Open document

06.2008 - Source: Freedom House

Putin signed amendments to the Law on Extremism; critics claim that law can be used to stifle political opposition and independent journalists; one prominent member of Yabloko party was put on trial for extremism under the new law ("Nations in Transit 2008") [ID 23749]

"In July, Putin signed amendments to the Law on Extremism that make "public slander of state officials," "humiliating national pride," "hampering the lawful activity of state organizations," and "hooliganism committed for political or ideological motives" extremist acts.

Critics claim that the provisions of the law are so broad that it can be used to stifle the political opposition and independent journalists.

In one example of how the law is being used, Andrei Piontkovsky, a prominent member of the Yabloko party, was put on trial for extremism because of passages in his books, Unloved Country and For the Motherland! For Abramovich! Fire!, which allegedly stirred violence against Russians, Jews, and Americans.

The absurd nature of the case became clear when the prosecution was not able to cite concrete passages where Piontkovsky's books were "extremist."

The court is currently seeking more information before ruling.

Many observers see Piontkovsky's case as a warning to less prominent critics to be careful of what they say."

Document(s): Open document

06.2008 - Source: Freedom House

Bloggers who offended local officials put on trial; one blogger faces maximum sentence of 2 years imprisonment for denouncing local police in explicit language ("Nations in Transit 2008") [ID 23750]

"[...] local officials have filed criminal cases against a number of bloggers outside of Moscow.

These individual cases are not part of a federally organized crackdown.

Typically, these online commentators offended local officials.

Examples include Savva Terentyev, a Syktyvkar resident, who faces charges filed August 9 under Article 282 of the criminal code, inciting hatred or enmity and humiliating a person's dignity, with a maximum sentence of two years for denouncing the local police in explicit language, calling for them to be burned in a public square.

Terentyev was angered because the police had removed computers from the office of Iskra, a local opposition newspaper, and found pirated software on them."

Document(s): Open document

06.2008 - Source: Freedom House

Crackdown on opposition website Ingushetiya.ru, which publishes articles critical of corruption and political leadership in Ingushetia ("Nations in Transit 2008") [ID 23751]

"Because of its location in the volatile Caucasus, the federal government seems to be playing a greater role in the campaign against Ingushetiya.ru, which publishes frequent articles critical of the corruption and poor management of Ingushetia's leaders.

Ingushetia's president, Murat Zyazikov, ordered two local Internet providers to block access to the opposition Web site Ingushetiya.ru, though they refused to implement the order.

In October, the Russian procurator general reopened a 1999 case against the site's owner, Magomed Yevloyev.

The site is also being investigated for inciting ethnic hatred.

The authorities closed it in December, but it was able to resume operations within a few days.

Just before the end of the year, it conducted an investigation of the State Duma elections in the region, gathering data to show that the authorities had inflated turnout figures, and again courting official ire."

Document(s): Open document

31.05.2008 - Source: Prima News

Moscow: Apartment of attorney of opposition website ingushetiya.ru, Kaloy Akhilgov, searched ("Apartment of attorney for Ingushetiya.Ru searched") [ID 23893]

Document(s): Open document

28.05.2008 - Source: Amnesty International

In the months prior to State Duma elections, authorities became more restrictive of public expressions of dissent: scores of people, including journalists and monitors, were detained; authorities used various methods to prevent journalists, well-known political activists and human rights activists from attending and monitoring demonstrations ("Annual Report 2008") [ID 23502]

"In the months prior to the State Duma elections, the authorities became more restrictive of public expressions of dissent.

Scores of people, including journalists and monitors, were briefly detained prior to, during and following demonstrations and many were convicted of violations of the Administrative Code in trials which did not always meet international standards of fair trial.

In November opposition leader Garry Kasparov was sentenced to five days' administrative detention after he had participated in a "dissenters' march" in Moscow a week before the Duma elections.

Amnesty International considered him a prisoner of conscience and called for his immediate release.

Police used excessive force on a number of occasions in order to break up demonstrations organized by opposition parties and anti-government activists.

Following a demonstration in St Petersburg on 15 April, several people had to undergo hospital treatment.

The authorities used various methods to prevent journalists, well-known political activists and human rights activists from attending and monitoring demonstrations.

In May, Moscow mayor Yuri Luzhkov banned a gay rights march in Moscow.

Gay rights activists, including several members of the European Parliament, were briefly detained when they attempted to hand over a petition to Yuri Luzhkov, urging him to respect the right to freedom of expression and protesting against his decision to ban a gay rights march from taking place in Moscow."

Document(s): Open document

27.05.2008 - Source: Reporters Sans Frontières

Ingushetia: Independent media threatened after a Moscow court yesterday ordered the suspension of Ingushetyia.ru (www.ingushetiya.ru), the country’s only news website in the Ingushetian language ("Independent media threatened in Ingushetia") [ID 23889]

Document(s): Open document

01.05.2008 - Source: Committee to Protect Journalists

Amendment that would allow courts to close media outlets for publishing defamatory statements was approved by Duma ("Restrictive media law amendment moves forward in Duma") [ID 23109]

Document(s): Open document

01.05.2008 - Source: Committee to Protect Journalists

Amendment that would allow courts to close media outlets for publishing defamatory statements approved by Duma's lower house ("Restrictive media law amendment moves forward in Duma") [ID 23877]

Document(s): Open document

08.04.2008 - Source: Prima News

It has become more difficult for journalists to obtain information about the work of the Russian government ("It has become more difficult for journalists to obtain information about the work of the Russian government") [ID 23925]

Document(s): Open document

30.11.2007 - Source: Reporters Sans Frontières

Reporters covering opposition candidates harassed, while state media lavish coverage on Putin ("Reporters covering opposition candidates harassed, while state media lavish coverage on Putin") [ID 21714]

Document(s): Open document

19.09.2007 - Source: Amnesty International

Recently adopted changes to law on extremism contain fewer restrictions to right to freedom of expression than first draft of amendments, but concerns remain about vagueness and lack of definition of certain aspects of the law ("Human rights concerns [EUR 46/040/2007]") [ID 21390]

"The recently adopted changes to the law on extremism contain fewer restrictions to the right to freedom of expression than the first draft of the amendments, but concerns remain about the vagueness and lack of definition of certain aspects of the law. For example, Amnesty International is concerned that the definition of "hooliganism" and the inclusion of hatred or enmity against any "social group" as a extremist motivation for a crime are vague and can lead to an arbitrary use of the law."

Document(s): Open document

27.03.2007 - Source: International Helsinki Federation for Human Rights

Respect for freedom of expression and media deteriorated; newspapers and journalists reporting critically about government policies experienced obstacles, such as limited access to information, and were subjected to intimidation, arrests, attacks and other forms of pressure ("Human Rights in the OSCE Region: Europe, Central Asia and North America, Report 2007 (Events of 2006)") [ID 19373]

"Respect for freedom of expression and the media deteriorated, with state and state-controlled media increasingly promoting political state propaganda and contributing to manipulating public opinion. There were almost no live broadcasts, with the exception of sport events, on state and state-controlled TV and radio stations. These media also did not feature any genuine political discussions and adhered to a tacit rule of denying broadcasting space to opposition politicians and a range of dissidents. Newspapers and journalists reporting critically about government policies experienced different obstacles in their work, such as limited access to information of legitimate public interest, and were subjected to intimidation, arrests, attacks and other forms of pressure. Numerous newspapers faced lawsuits for allegedly undermining the dignity of state officials, and given the dependency of courts on the executive power such lawsuits typically resulted in findings against these newspapers. Several such cases were brought to, and admitted by the European Court of Human Rights."

Document(s): Open document

13.07.2006 - Source: Committee to Protect Journalists

Call to the leaders of the G8 to raise concerns about the country's press freedom record; impunity in the murders of a dozen journalists since 2000 ("As G8 summit nears, CPJ urges examination of Russia’s press record") [ID 15391]

Document(s): Open document

11.07.2006 - Source: International Helsinki Federation for Human Rights

Lack of transparency and accountability of government in dealing with public emergencies including terrorist attacks in Moscow, Nalchik and Beslan ("Six Points for the G7") [ID 15410]

"The G-7 states should support the Russian population’s legitimate demands for more transparency and accountability in the way the Russian government has handled public emergencies including terrorist attacks in Moscow, Nalchik and Beslan. It is apparent that hundreds of Russian citizens have needlessly died and been injured due to incompetence and even malfeasance of local and federal authorities, and that these problems have not been investigated by independent bodies so as to allow reforms to be instituted. Too often, the state has not only failed to protect citizens from threats, but violated their rights in the process. "

Document(s): Open document

07.2006 - Source: Freedom House

Russia's rating for independent media remains unchanged at 6.0. TV and newspapers widely controlled by the state, internet still provides hope for free flow of information ("Nations in Transit 2006") [ID 15811]

"The Putin administration continued its long-standing attack on the freedom of Russian media. Having already brought the three main national TV networks to heel, a Kremlin-friendly company this year took action against Ren-TV, a relatively minor player. The Kremlin is increasingly using its television and radio stations to spread state propaganda and replace serious political debate with entertainment programming. With dropping readership and influence, newspapers remained a secondary target, and Gazprom-Media acquired control of the prominent national daily Izvestia. The Internet was a bright spot for Russia, offering alternative viewpoints on difficult questions such as the conflict in Chechnya, though only to a limited audience. The appearance of new Web sites like livejournal.com is creating online communities to discuss pressing issues. This material is making its way into the traditional media, giving the Internet the potential to influence even Russians who are not online. Russia's rating for independent media remains unchanged at 6.0. The country's political leadership spent the year fine-tuning its ability to keep alternative opinions off the airwaves, which are the main source of information for most people. At the same time, the Internet provided hope for those seeking to learn about and discuss pressing issues in a non-state-controlled format."

Document(s): Open document

30.06.2006 - Source: Committee to Protect Journalists

Bill before parliament broadens definition of extremism to include media criticism of public officials ("Bill seeks to label critical journalists extremists") [ID 15400]

Document(s): Open document

28.06.2006 - Source: Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty

Staatsanwälte forderten Medienvertreter auf, 3 populäre Jugendmagazine zu schließen, da sie angeblich frühe sexuelle Aktivität propagieren ("Russian Teen Magazines Pressured On Sex Coverage") [ID 15402]

Document(s): Open document

08.06.2006 - Source: Institute for War and Peace Reporting

Report of an independent journalist of her difficulties to work in the Russian Caucasus (pressure on mass media, criminal prosecution, physical violence against journalists) ("Press under Threat in the North Caucasus") [ID 15413]

Document(s): Open document

01.05.2006 - Source: International Helsinki Federation for Human Rights

Situation with respect to freedom of expression and media continued to deteriorate in 2005; some cases of active interference with free circulation of information by public officials ("Human Rights in the OSCE Region: Europe, Central Asia and North America, Report 2006 (Events of 2005)") [ID 15641]

"All major national TV-stations were controlled by the federal authorities, and most newspapers exercised great caution with respect to the information they published on politically sensitive issues.Both federal and local authorities sought to control the information published by the media, and in some cases, public officials actively interfered with the free circulation of information.
• The management of the state-controlled NTV reportedly removed a program about the murder of the Ukrainian journalist Georgi Gongadze from its broadcasting schedule on direct orders from the Kremlin.
• The chairman of the committee on informational policy of the government of the Altai demanded that the newspapers Zvezda Altaya and Altaydyn Cholmony not write about the activities of certain members of the regional parliament.
• The head of the Chernyakhovskiy municipality of the Kaliningrad region demanded to review the newspaper Polus prior to publication.
• Media in Kuban in the Krasnodar region were ordered by authorities not to make mentioning of the illness of the regional governor, Alexander Tkachev.
The fact that there were virtually no live broadcasts on the national TV-stations was also indicative of the control federal authorities exercised over these media outlets."

Document(s): Open document

01.05.2006 - Source: International Helsinki Federation for Human Rights

In 2005, according to MHG, 21 cases of intimidation of journalists, 64 cases of physical attacks, 313 cases of defamation suits, 35 cases of criminal prosecutions, 37 cases of detention by police and six cases of killings ("Human Rights in the OSCE Region: Europe, Central Asia and North America, Report 2006 (Events of 2005)") [ID 15642]

"Journalists critical of the authorities were subject to various forms of pressure, including intimidation, physical attacks, defamation suits, criminal prosecution and detention. During the year, the MHG and its local partners registered a total of 21 cases of intimidation of journalists and editorial staff, 64 cases of physical attacks, 313 cases of defamation suits, 35 cases of criminal prosecutions and 37 cases of detention by police or security police. There were also six cases of killings of journalists that appeared politically motivated.
Moreover, the MHG and its partners reported 24 cases in which printed issues of independent newspapers and magazines were confiscated, 34 cases in which printing houses refused to print independent newspapers and ten cases in which independent media outlets were evicted from their premises on apparently politically motivated grounds.
Relatives of journalists were also subject to pressure."

Document(s): Open document

08.03.2006 - Source: US Department of State

Government pressure on the media persisted, resulting in numerous infringements of the freedom of speech and of the press ("Country Report on Human Rights Practices 2005") [#46144],  [ID 11646]

"The law provides for freedom of speech and of the press; however, government pressure on the media persisted, resulting in numerous infringements of these rights. Faced with continuing financial difficulties, as well as pressure from the government and large private companies with links to the government, many media organizations saw their autonomy further weaken. The government used its controlling ownership interest in all national television and radio stations, as well as the majority of influential regional ones, to restrict access to information about issues deemed sensitive. It severely restricted coverage by all media of events in Chechnya. There were indications that government pressure frequently led reporters to engage in self-censorship. Nonetheless, on most subjects, the public continued to have access to a broad spectrum of viewpoints in the print media and, for those with access, on the Internet."

Document(s): Open document

08.03.2006 - Source: US Department of State

Although all but two national newspapers remained privately owned, the government attempted to influence the reporting of independent publications. ("Country Report on Human Rights Practices 2005") [#46144],  [ID 11647]

"Although all but two national newspapers remained privately owned, as did more than 40 percent of the 45 thousand registered local newspapers and periodicals, the government attempted to influence the reporting of independent publications. In June Gazprom, a company in which the government owns a controlling stake, bought the daily newspaper Izvestiya. In the months before the sale the newspaper's critical coverage of governmental performance, and particularly its coverage of the Beslan school massacre, had reportedly aroused the ire of the Kremlin and given rise to significant editorial changes, including an increase of non-political content at the expense of political analysis, and resignations of senior editors critical of the Kremlin. Media freedom advocates viewed the paper's acquisition by Gazprom, which in 2003 had acquired the last major independent television channel, as further evidence of continuing Kremlin efforts to expand control of media beyond national television before the 2007-08 parliamentary and presidential elections. In late 2005, after a personnel change at Izvestiya, the newspaper's editorial staff was reportedly told on several occasions to be careful not to provoke Kremlin authorities. Izvestiya's coverage of the late-2005 elections in Chechnya was allegedly less critical than might have been expected under the previous ownership."

Document(s): Open document

08.03.2006 - Source: US Department of State

Government indirectly influenced private broadcasting companies; however, such influence was not uniform ("Country Report on Human Rights Practices 2005") [#46144],  [ID 11648]

"Approximately two-thirds of the 2,500 television stations in the country were completely or partially owned by the federal and local governments, and the government indirectly influenced private broadcasting companies through partial ownership of such commercial structures as Gazprom and Eurofinance Bank, which in turn owned controlling or large stakes of media companies. Such influence was not uniform, however. Employees continued to exercise program control at the radio station Ekho Moskviy, although it is owned in part by Gazprom. The station maintained an independent editorial position, offering political figures across the entire political spectrum the opportunity to air their views and covering issues skirted by other electronic media. A similar stance was maintained by a number of sister stations that Ekho has established in other major cities.

Of the three national television stations, the government had a direct interest in two, the Rossiya Channel, which it owned outright, and the First Channel, in which it held a majority interest (the third national television network is NTV).The only remaining television network that had exhibited independence of the Kremlin, REN-TV, was sold during the year. REN-TV ended up under the shared control of Severstal Group and Surgutneftegas Company, each with 35 percent of the shares and both under the control of Kremlin allies. The German media company RTL owned the remaining 30 percent of REN-TV. Following the sale REN-TV observers alleged that the network's editorial line became more pro-Kremlin. The network's November 24 decision to cancel the news show "24," which was anchored by one of Russia's most outspoken journalists, Olga Romanova, was seen as evidence of this trend. A wave of resignations of REN-TV news staff ensued, amid allegations the network had started to practice self-censorship aimed at keeping the government happy.

[…] Gazprom had a controlling ownership stake in NTV, the third national television station, which maintained a more independent editorial line. The government also maintained ownership of the largest radio stations, Radio Mayak and Radio Rossiya, and the news agencies ITAR-TASS and RIA-Novosti."

Document(s): Open document

08.03.2006 - Source: US Department of State

Government exerted its influence most directly on state-owned media ("Country Report on Human Rights Practices 2005") [#46144],  [ID 11649]

"The government exerted its influence most directly on state-owned media. Journalists and news anchors of Rossiya and First Channel reported receiving "guidelines" from the management prepared by the Presidential Administration, indicating which politicians they should support and which they should criticize. The two networks promoted a positive image of President Putin and suppressed reporting on the war in Chechnya, the government's legal prosecution of Yukos, the electoral crisis in Ukraine, the nationwide public protests against unpopular welfare reform, and the elimination of gubernatorial elections. Apparently as a result of government influence, criticism of presidential policies was also muted on NTV. The federal government and some regional governments also sought through various means to dampen criticism in many privately owned print publications, although with little apparent effect.

During the year the government continued to circumscribe the editorial independence and political influence of NTV. On March 10, NTV management prohibited the airing of an investigative program about the 2000 killing of Ukrainian journalist Georgiy Gongadze. Media reports cited NTV sources as saying the program contained interviews with Ukrainian politicians and former senior government officials who made allegations of possible Russian government involvement in the killing. According to media freedom advocates, the program was pulled by order of Presidential Administration officials, who also demanded that NTV abstain from further reporting on Gongadze's case."

Document(s): Open document

08.03.2006 - Source: US Department of State

Government-controlled media exhibited considerable bias in favor of President Putin in its coverage of the March 2004 presidential campaign ("Country Report on Human Rights Practices 2005") [#46144],  [ID 11650]

"Government-controlled media exhibited considerable bias in favor of President Putin in its coverage of the March 2004 presidential campaign. President Putin did not actively campaign, but, as the OSCE election observation mission noted, he received coverage on the state-controlled television channels far beyond what was reasonably proportionate to his role as head of state. For example, the OSCE election observation mission reported that First Channel provided him with more than 4 hours of all-positive political and election coverage; the next most covered candidate received approximately 21 minutes of prime time coverage (see section 3)."

Document(s): Open document

08.03.2006 - Source: US Department of State

Authorities at all levels employed administrative measures to deter critical coverage ("Country Report on Human Rights Practices 2005") [#46144],  [ID 11651]

"Authorities at all levels employed administrative measures to deter critical coverage by media and individual journalists. One method was to deny the media access to events and information, including filming opportunities and statistics theoretically available to the public. For example, under the new media accreditation regulations adopted by the government of Karachayevo-Cherkesiya Republic in March, only media outlets providing "objective" reporting on the local government are allowed access to government media events. On June 8, traffic police in Kabardino-Balkariya stopped a vehicle taking a Ren-TV film crew to the town of Tyrnauz to report on a public rally. When the journalists pressed the police for an explanation, they were told that an order had been received not to allow the press into town. Fatima Tlisova, a correspondent of the Regnum information agency, who was also going to report on the rally, was stopped by two police officers, who got into her car and forcibly drove her back to the nearby town of Nalchik. On June 17, authorities in Yoshkar Ola, Mari-El Republic, denied Radio Liberty correspondent Yelena Rogacheva access to a press conference with Estonian, Finnish, and Hungarian ambassadors at the conclusion of their visit to the republic. According to Rogacheva, local authorities in Mari-El rarely allowed non-state media representatives to attend official press events. In August the Moscow city court introduced special accreditation for journalists to attend open court sessions. The accreditation rules allow authorities to deny journalists access to the court for "criticism devoid of evidence of judges and other court employees," and require journalists to give one-day advance notice of their visits.

At times officials or unidentified individuals used force or took extreme measures to prevent the circulation of publications that were not favored by the government. For example, on February 23 the administration of Krasnodar Kray purchased and destroyed the entire local issue of Versiya newspaper, which carried an article critical of Governor Aleksandr Tkachev. On March 17, police in Gus Khrustalniy, Vladimir Oblast, seized the entire issue of Vladimirskiy Kray daily. The newspaper's editor-in-chief, Irina Tabatskova, linked the seizure to the newspaper's criticism of local officials affiliated with the pro-Kremlin United Russia party. On May 26, unidentified individuals in Sokol, Vologda Oblast, forcibly seized from a distributor all the copies of the local newspaper Nash Regyon. The newspaper's employees said the issue contained articles critical of the mayor of Sokol and favorable to his rival in an upcoming election.

Legal actions against journalists and journalistic organizations were another tool employed by authorities at the federal and local levels, primarily in response to unfavorable coverage of government policy or operations. The GDF estimated that more than 100 such cases were brought during the first 6 months of the year. However, the utility of this tool was partially diminished as a result of a decision by the Supreme Court in December 2004 prohibiting courts from imposing sentences in libel and defamation cases that would bankrupt the media organization being sued. However, one NGO reported that the decision was not always implemented properly on the local level. The court's order stated that compensations "should be commensurate with the damage and not infringe upon press freedom.""

Document(s): Open document

08.03.2006 - Source: US Department of State

Authorities took advantage of the financial dependence of most major media organizations to undermine editorial independence ("Country Report on Human Rights Practices 2005") [#46144],  [ID 11652]

"Authorities at various levels took advantage of the financial dependence of most major media organizations on the government or on major financial-industrial groups to undermine editorial independence and journalistic integrity in both the print and broadcast media. Government structures, banking interests, and the state-controlled energy giant Gazprom continued to dominate the Moscow media market and extend their influence into the regions. Most news organizations experienced continued financial difficulties during the year, which reinforced their dependence on private sponsors and, in many cases, on the federal and regional governments. As a result, the autonomy of the media and its ability to act as a watchdog remained weak.

The authorities also made use of the media's widespread dependence on governments for transmission facilities, access to property, and printing and distribution services to discourage critical reporting, according to the GDF and media NGOs. The GDF reported that approximately 90 percent of print media organizations relied on state‑controlled organizations for paper, printing, or distribution, and many television stations were forced to rely on the government (in particular, regional committees for the management of state property) for access to the airwaves and office space. The GDF also reported that officials continued to manipulate various other "instruments of leverage," including the price of printing at state‑controlled publishing houses, to apply pressure on private media rivals. The GDF noted that this practice was more common outside the Moscow area than in the capital. For example, on January 13, city authorities in Petropavlovsk-Kamchatskiy abruptly cancelled a lease contract with Troyka media company, which includes three newspapers, a television station and a radio station, and demanded that the media outlets leave their city-owned premises in five days. Troyka's management said the company was being persecuted for its frequent criticism of local authorities. In June a printing plant in Prokhladniy, Kabardino-Balkariya Republic, refused to print the local newspaper Islam and Society, citing instructions from the republic's prosecutor general. According to GDF, law enforcement authorities accused the newspaper of supporting religious extremism. The journalists argued that the newspaper came under pressure when it began to reprint articles from the national press about the political and economic situation in the republic.

According to the GDF and other media NGOs, there were numerous instances of the use of taxation mechanisms to pressure media across the country."

Document(s): Open document

24.02.2006 - Source: Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe

OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media, Miklos Haraszti, appealed to prosecutors in Russia and Belarus to drop criminal charges against newspapers that are under investigation for "incitement of hatred" after publishing controversial cartoons depicting the Prophet Muhammad ("OSCE media freedom representative asks prosecutors in Russia and Belarus to drop 'cartoon cases'") [#44994],  [ID 11653]

Document(s): Open document

17.02.2006 - Source: Committee to Protect Journalists

Volgograd: Daily Gorodskiye Vesti (City News) closed for publishing cartoon of leading figures of Judaism, Buddhism, Christianity and Islam ("Paper closed for publishing cartoon of world religious figures") [#44529],  [ID 11654]

Document(s): Open document

16.02.2006 - Source: Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe

Report on Freedom of the Media (cartoon controversy, cases of violence against media freedom) ("Report to the Permanent Council by the OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media") [#44347],  [ID 11655]

Document(s): Open document

02.2006 - Source: Committee to Protect Journalists

Annual report on press freedom in 2005 ("Attacks on the Press in 2005") [#44096],  [ID 11656]

For details please refer to the original document

"President Vladimir Putin and his allies continued to expand control over the media, using methods that critics called reminiscent of the Soviet era. Journalists who took on powerful political or business interests sometimes paid with their lives. Two journalists were killed in 2005 for their reporting. In the five years since Putin took power, 12 journalists have been killed in contract-style slayings. None of the killers have been brought to justice."

Document(s): Open document

31.01.2006 - Source: Prima News

According to governmental decision, as of July 2006, people wishing to use Internet will have to present passports, organisations will need proof of registration ("Internet access only with passport?") [#43230],  [ID 11657]

Document(s): Open document

08.2005 - Source: Freedom House

Government continues to put pressure on the independent media outlets; journalists’ access to the war zone in Chechnya often restricted by the military ("Freedom in the World 2005") [#41473],  [ID 11658]

"Although the constitution provides for freedom of speech, the government continues to put pressure on the dwindling number of media outlets still critical of the Kremlin. Since June 2003, when the last independent national television network, TVS, was seized by the government, allegedly to settle the company’s debts, all Russian national television networks have been controlled by the government or by economic interests that support the government and uniformly praise the president. The government routinely intimidates media outlets for unsanctioned reporting on issues related to terrorism and the war in Chechnya. While the independent Ekho Moskvy radio station airs a wide range of viewpoints, it is vulnerable because it is owned by the Kremlin-controlled Gazprom conglomerate. […]
With print and broadcast media increasingly under government control, the Internet, where there is wider access to independent information, is used regularly by 4.2 percent of the population. This cohort of regular users is growing by 20 to 40 percent a year, according to a Russian Federation government report.
In the breakaway republic of Chechnya, the military continued to impose severe restrictions on Russian journalists’ access to the war zone, issuing accreditation primarily to those of proven loyalty to the government."

Document(s): Open document

08.2005 - Source: Freedom House

Libel laws used to intimidate independent media ("Freedom in the World 2005") [#41473],  [ID 11659]

"Libel laws are used to intimidate independent media. In August 2004, Alfa Bank, a top financial institution owned by Roman Fridman—a magnate with strong Kremlin support—filed a lawsuit against the daily Kommersant, one of the country’s few independent newspapers. The suit charged the newspaper with damage to the bank’s reputation through its coverage of a summertime liquidity crisis. The suit demanded more than $11 million for libel in a move that the newspaper’s owners believed was motivated by the government’s vendetta against the newspaper, which is owned by exiled Russian businessman Boris Berezovsky and is sharply critical of Putin and the Kremlin’s policies."

Document(s): Open document

24.06.2005 - Source: Committee to Protect Journalists

Saratov: Journalist and adviser to former regional governor Dmitry Ayatskov, convicted of criminal defamation; he was sentenced to 7 months in prison colony for defaming public officials in 2 articles published last year ("Russian court imposes prison term in defamation case") [#33307],  [ID 11660]

Document(s): Open document

15.06.2005 - Source: Freedom House

State-controlled media used to promote Putin’s candidacy for president; Putin received 69 percent of the campaign coverage, but did not participate in the debate ("Nations in Transit 2005") [#32939],  [ID 11661]

"Most important, Putin received an overwhelming 69 percent of the campaign coverage on the main television networks' news programs, claimed the Union of Journalists. Needless to say, almost all of this coverage was positive. Opponents received much less news coverage, and there was considerable negative reporting about their activities. The Central Electoral Commission did nothing to counteract this bias.
Although Russia's major television networks offered opportunities for the candidates to debate, Putin chose not to participate. The president's decision not to discuss his policies face-to-face with his opponents deprived voters of the opportunity to see how he would defend his choices against hostile questioning. Without Putin's participation, the debates merely brought together candidates with no chance of winning. First Channel and RTR broadcast these debates mainly early in the morning, when viewership was likely to be small."

Document(s): Open document

03.06.2005 - Source: Council of Europe - Parliamentary Assembly

Increased pressure from the government on the media resulting in numerous infringements of constitutional rights of freedom of speech and of the press ("Honouring of obligations and commitments by the Russian Federation [Doc. 10568]") [#32710],  [ID 11662]

"109. The Constitution of the Russian Federation provides for freedom of speech and of the press; however, government pressure on the media persists, resulting in numerous infringements of these rights. Faced with continuing financial difficulties as well as increased pressure from the Russian government and large private companies with links to the government, many media organisations are seeing their autonomy weakened55.

110. While five of the six national, and more than 20% of the 35,000 registered local, newspapers and periodicals remain in private hands; only approximately one-third of the 2,500 television stations are private, the rest are completely or partially owned by the federal and local governments. However, the government indirectly influences most private media companies through partial government ownership of federal and local-level commercial structures, including the gas monopoly Gazprom and the oil company Lukoil, which in turn owned large shares of media companies.

111. During 2003, the Government enhanced its influence over NTV, once owned by Vladimir Gusinskiy but taken over in 2001 by Gazprom Media, the media arm of government-owned gas monopoly Gazprom56. In June 2003, TV Spektrum (TVS), renowned for its criticism of government policy and the only remaining nationwide non-state affiliated channel, was taken off the air because of "bad management and financial crisis".

112. Today, of the three national television stations, the State owns Rossiya Channel (RTR) and a majority of First Channel (ORT). The Government owns a 38% controlling stake of Gazprom, which in turn has a controlling ownership stake in the third national television station, the prominent, privately owned NTV57. It also maintains ownership of the largest radio stations, Radio Mayak and Radio Rossii and news agencies ITAR-TASS and RIA-Novosti.

113. On 16 September 2004 the OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media, Miklos Haraszti, presented a report on how the Russian media covered the recent terrorist attacks in Beslan, North Ossetia. Mr Haraszti stressed that the main sources of information for the Russian people were the three nationwide broadcasters and that, unfortunately, they did not provide accurate and up-to-date information. In the end the print media and Internet news sites stepped in, filling the information void as much as they could58. The same appears to be true for the state television coverage of the recent protests against the social benefits reform.

[...]

115. In the light of the considerations above, we can only conclude that the pluralism and the independence of media in the Russian Federation are not sufficiently guaranteed and that this has consequences for the normal functioning of democracy in the country."

Document(s): Open document

03.06.2005 - Source: Council of Europe - Parliamentary Assembly

Shrinking freedom of expression; cases of closure and takeovers of media outlets ("Honouring of obligations and commitments by the Russian Federation [Doc. 10568]") [#32710],  [ID 11663]

"385. In recent years, Russia is witnessing a shrinking of freedom of expression. Several show cases of closure or takeover of media outlets (takeover of NTV channel, closure of TVS channel, shutting of several independent analytical programs on national television, etc.) promoted an atmosphere of self-censorship among the journalistic community."

Document(s): Open document

03.06.2005 - Source: Council of Europe - Parliamentary Assembly

Harassment of journalists reporting on the Beslan events; tapes with content of the Beslan school storming confiscated ("Honouring of obligations and commitments by the Russian Federation [Doc. 10568]") [#32710],  [ID 11664]

"387. The OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media's in his "Report on Russian media coverage of the Beslan tragedy" noted several worrying cases of harassment of journalists: Anna Politkovskaya, a correspondent from Novaya Gazeta, was prevented from coming to Beslan as she was allegedly poisoned on the board of the plane flying to Rostov-on-Don; Andrey Babitskiy, the correspondent for Radio Liberty, was detained at Moscow's airport on 2 September on his way to cover the siege after being arrested for "hooliganism"; Nana Lezhava, a reporter with Georgian Rustavi-2 TV channel and her cameraman were detained on 4 September for not having the proper documents to work in the region. They were taken to an FSB building in the nearby city of Vladikavkaz, where Lezhava said she underwent a "forced gynaecological inspection."

388. On 3 September, during and after the storming of the school, tapes with content of the storming were confiscated from TV crews from ZDF (Germany), ARD (Germany), APTV (USA), and Rustavi-2 (Georgia); on 7 September, North-Ossetian security services expelled the crew (correspondent Zurab Dvali and his cameraman) from the Georgian TV channel Mze from Beslan without any explanation. On 6 September 2004, the editor-in-chief of the Russian daily Izvestia Raf Shakirov was fired by the paper's owner after the newspaper's coverage of the Beslan events."

Document(s): Open document

03.06.2005 - Source: Council of Europe - Parliamentary Assembly

Concerns that the draft Anti-terrorism law will restrict freedom of expression ("Honouring of obligations and commitments by the Russian Federation [Doc. 10568]") [#32710],  [ID 11665]

"406. We are concerned by the adoption in the first reading (17 December 2004) of the draft law on countering terrorism. This draft provides for the introduction of a regime of terror alert, in addition to an emergency situation regime and a regime of counter-terrorist operations enforceable under the current anti-terrorism legislation. The bill gives Russian authorities the power to impose a 60-day security restriction measure solely on suspicion that a terror attack is being planned without having any confirmation. During this period authorities can introduce emergency measures including banning public demonstrations, tapping phones, conducting spot street checks, restricting movement of people, etc. The draft law also proposes restraints on media activity that could block photographs and television footage of graphic scenes of violence and restrict journalists' reporting at the scene of attacks. Moreover, if adopted the law will include in the notion of terrorist activity "informational or other assistance to the planning, preparing or realisation of the terrorist attack", "propaganda of terrorism ideas, spreading of information which calls for carrying out terrorist activity or such that substantiates or justifies the necessity of such activity". Thus the journalists who inform about terrorist attacks can be charged with terrorism themselves.

407. We therefore urge the Russian authorities to revise the draft law before final adoption and check its provisions against Council of Europe standards of freedom of expression, Article 10 case-law of the European Court of Human Rights and Article 56 of the Russian Federation Constitution, which allows imposition of restrictions on human rights and freedoms only under a state of emergency."

Document(s): Open document

19.05.2005 - Source: International Helsinki Federation for Human Rights

Repressive measures against media during the hostage taking in Beslan ("Human Rights in the OSCE Region: Europe, Central Asia and North America, Report 2005 (Events 2004)") [#32117],  [ID 11666]

"The independent media reportedly experienced difficulties in obtaining relevant information from the authorities. Against the background of the repressive measures taken against media during the hostage taking in Moscow in 2002, many journalists also feared the consequences of publishing objective information. Such fears were substantiated by the statements made by some politicians. For example, when interviewed by Nezavisimaya Gazeta, the first deputy chairperson of the State Duma, Lyubov Sliska, declared that he believed that “any means” were justified to prevent that “media facilitate terrorists’ activities.”
The following case gave rise to concern:
• On 6 September, the editor-in-chief of the newspaper Izvestiya, Raf Shakirov, resigned amid a discussion about the newspaper’s coverage of the Beslan events. According to Shakirov, he was forced to hand in his resignation after the newspaper featured large and detailed pictures of victims the day after the storming of the sc