Download Luckily, reporters in Armenia are neither murdered nor jailed

SUMMARY: 2015 Report on Media in Armenia by Investigative Journalists NGO/AEJArmenia and the Committee to Protect Freedom of Speech
Fortunately, journalists in Armenia are neither murdered nor jailed. However, according to
various press freedom indexes, the country is classified as “not free”, and in reality journalists
suffer frequent harassment and improper pressures which seriously hamper their work and
their freedom to report on matters of public interest. The reasons are diverse – including
physical violence against reporters, the high level of self-censorship, lack of adequate
information regarding the ownership of media, and the consolidation of broadcast news
outlets in the hands of ruling regime representatives and their allies.
There were 9 registered cases of physical violence against reporters in Armenia in 2014 (one
fewer than in 2013); 43 cases of intimidation and other pressure tactics against media outlets
and their employees (14 less than 2013); and 13 cases of violations of the freedom to
disseminate and receive information 93 less than 2013).
In 2014, various courts in Armenia accepted 22 media-related lawsuits. 17 of these dealt with
issues of slander and insult; 3 in defense of copyright law; 1 with revealing an information
source; and 1 dealing with another matter.
Slander and Insult Court Cases
In 2014 Armenian courts heard a good many cases regarding freedom of the press and
reporters, and most slander and insult lawsuits filed were either completely or partially
rejected. However, in practice the courts often partially uphold complaints; and this
encourages the parties in dispute to reach a settlement before a verdict is handed down.
There are also a relatively large number of cases in which plaintiffs withdraw their suits in
the investigative phase. These tendencies can be explained by the fact that the courts have
set a high bar for evidence, which serves as a significant defence for media outlets, reporters,
and free speech.
Physical violence against reporters
When it comes to physical violence and threats against reporters, as well as various cases
where they are prevented from carrying out their professional duties, the situation is
seriously troubling and insufficiently known to the public. In general, experience shows that
the state authorities responsible for carrying out criminal investigations habitually respond
to information about crimes against reporters by announcing the opening of an investigation;
but later they decide not to take the case further because of a lack of evidence that a crime
was committed.
Another cause for concern, which has been exposed by NGO and media monitoring, is that
many journalists who have been attacked or threatened respond by attempting to keep the
matter out of the public eye. They either fail to report the crime to the law enforcement
authorities at all, or else they choose not to present testimony and press charges. It may be
assumed that in many such cases the journalists behave in that way because they have been
threatened or pressured into remaining silent.
Demands to Disclose News Sources
In 2014, unprecedented developments took place in Armenia in terms of pressures to expose
reporters’ sources, which have given rise to serious concern. Three news outlets (Hraparak
daily newspaper and the internet sites www.ilur.am and news.am) covered a story about an
athlete who was pistol whipped and threatened by top police officials in Goris, Armenia’s
third largest city.
Based on these news reports the police investigated the incident. The investigating body
petitioned the court to demand that the news outlets reveal their sources in order that they
could be questioned. The court sustained the petition. The news outlets appealed against the
lower court’s decision. Presently, the case is before the Court of Cassation and a ruling is
awaited.
Legislative proposal regarding transparency of online media owners and publishers
A large number of internet news outlets have appeared in Armenia during the past few years
whose content has no connection at all to journalism. These outlets disseminate falsehoods,
rumor, gossip, misinformation, crude political propaganda and sensationalism.
Such “fake” news outlets, which are often used for political aims, deal a great deal of damage
to professional and quality journalism by polluting the marketplace for news and harming
the public’s trust in the media in general.
The 2003 Armenian “Law on the Mass Media” obliges print media to publish data regarding
their ownership and management structures. However, the law does not cover internet
media, which were created and developed in Armenia later.
On May 3 of this year Liana Sayadyan, the Head of the Armenian Section of AEJ published
an article proposing reforms to the law to rectify this inconsistency, and so to allow the
public to distinguish between authentic news media and those whose purpose is essentially
political or self-promotional. She petitioned the National Assembly and proposed that the
law should be amended to cover online media as well, obliging internet-based news portals
to divulge the same information about themselves. Such information is important for
readers. News outlets must convince their audience and the public as to their transparency,
credibility, and journalistic integrity.