25. 12. 2013

Why is Media Reform In Serbia Late?

Vranje, December 25, 2013 (JUGpress) - The reform of the media sector, which was expected for over one decade, did not take place in 2013. A poor legal framework, combined with the economic crisis, resulted in a non-transparent financing, relationships between influential circles and the media, and had an impact on the quality of reporting, are the findings of the new report by the Association of Independent Electronic Media (ANEM) .

It was pointed out that a new source of funding was not found for the (Complaint) Commission of the Press Council, and that this self-regulatory body is facing shutdown.

"The media community waited 11 years after the democratic changes for a media strategy. For its implementation, by all accounts, it will wait some more," is said in the publication entitled Legal Monitoring of the Media Scene in Serbia .

It was pointed out that none of the three media laws - the Law on Public Information, the Law on Broadcasting and the Law on Public Service Broadcasters  - entered the procedure for adoption even though the draft laws  have been completed. Although the draft laws are not perfect, it is emphasized that this leads to delays with the implementation of key decisions that should improve the media situation in Serbia.

"The State continues to successfully resist the imperative of exiting from media ownership, which is a declared goal of all governments since 2001; the implementation of the rule on project-based  media financing is also delayed, so that non-transparent allocation of budget funds to state media and to media close to the government and the lack of any control of state aid in the media sphere, free interpretation of the public interest in the media sector, as well as un disloyal competition, continue to remain among the most important problems of the media sector," the report states.

As a result, economic and political pressure against media are strengthened.

No significant changes were recorded in case law. Although there were verdicts which represent a positive step toward the protection of freedom of expression, case law remains inadequate and continues to be one of the causes of the poor position of the media and their self-censorship .