The international conference “Security of journalists as a prerequisite for free media: freedom of speech and public order” was held in Kyiv
In early February 2017 in Kyiv under the support of the OSCE, UNESCO, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine and the Ministry of Information Policy of Ukraine, Institute of Mass Information there was held a conference on the safety of journalists as a condition for free media. The conference was attended by the Commission Member Mr. Andrii Kozlov.
The event was also attended by the OSCE Representative on Media Freedom issues – Mrs. Dunja Mijatovic, OSCE Project Coordinator in Ukraine Mr. Vaidotas Verba, Chairman of the Council of Europe Office in Ukraine Mr. Morten Enberg, Senior specialist of program activities division of Freedom of Speech, UNESCO Secretariat representative Mr. Marius Lukoshyunas, Secretary General of the European Federation of Journalists Mr. Ricardo Gutierrez, Executive Director of the Institute for Media Mrs. Oksana Romaniuk, Deputy of the National Union of Journalists Mr. Serhii Tomilenko, Head of Department for Execution of Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights Mr. Pavlo Pushkar.
The first panel of the event was dedicated to the safety of journalists in the world and Ukraine. The Institute for Media cited statistics: only in 2016 in Ukraine one murder of journalist took place, there were 30 beatings, 108 facts of obstruction of professional activities and 7 cases of censorship recorded.
During the second panel of the conference, the issue of the protection of journalists and their possible solutions was discussed. There was also raised the issue concerning amendments to the criminal and administrative legislation of Ukraine concerning the protection of journalists.
The third set of questions was devoted to the issue of justice in the context of security of journalist activities. The discussion seemed extremely lively due to the direct dialogue between the journalists and the representatives of law enforcement officials, which happens rarely.
Mr. Yevhen Miezientsev, the judge of Kyiv Administrative Appeal Court noted that on the basis of this Court the Judicial Journalism School was established with the aim to facilitate future communication between judges and journalists, who are highlighting their activities. According to Mr. Miezientsev expectations, the results of this work will be visible in 5-10 years when a big number of journalists will be prepared.
Mr. Andrii Kozlov in his speech said that now all judges in Ukraine under the new legislation must pass through a qualification assessment which would include, in addition to the professional knowledge, the assessment of moral and psychological abilities and general skills of judges, their integrity, and ethical indicators. “There is also a procedure of forming a judicial dossier, which remains in the Commission and includes all the information about the judge, collected by different judicial governance bodies during the period of exercising his functions as a judge, including data on the qualification assessment”, - said Andrii Kozlov.
“No one prohibits, and the law even encourages providing any reasonable information on judges during the assessment. We are providing unprecedented openness of the competition to the Supreme Court, and all assessment procedures are open. Also, if the Public Council of Integrity issues the negative opinion regarding judges who are passing through qualification assessment, then, according to the new law, it can be overcome only by 11 votes of the Members of the Commission, which is almost three-quarters of its members. And if the information would be massive, proved and confirmed, then such a judge has a very little chance of successful passing the qualification assessment. As for the court proceedings, I think it should be open. But the obstacles in highlighting of some procedures by journalists are caused by the passivity of thinking by some judges. After all, when a person holding such position does his job and is transparent towards his colleagues, himself and society, then what he should hide? If the judge has no intention to implement something unfair and illegal, then he should be interested in providing and securing the transparency of the process (with certain exceptions). And the transparency of processes, in my opinion, is the best protection for the judge,”- concluded Mr. Andrii Kozlov.
