Incomplete information on media financing

On the occasion of Draft Law on Media and Public Informing

Transparency Serbia (official chapter of Transparency International) emphasizes that Draft Law on Media and Public Informing[1], although represents progress compared to existing status, doesn’t completely resolve problem of insufficient transparency of data on media financing, which should be resolved with amendments in Parliamentary procedure. Furthermore, we emphasize that public debate on this Draft was held by the beginning of 2013, and that reasons for refusing to accept prepositions from that debate were not published.

We pointed out to problematic nature of certain provisions in public debate on draft law, held sixteen months ago[2]. In the meantime draft was sent to analysis to Brussels, which is obviously very important due to Serbian euro-integrations, but in any case must not represent substitute for duty of the Government towards its citizens that took part in the public debate and remained uninformed of reasons for refusing to accept their prepositions. Ministry of Culture and Information that way abandoned its already established good practice.[3]

Provisions of draft law can secure easier access to certain information that are of significance for creating impression of influences to editorial policy of media that are result of media ownership or media financing by the state. Those are primarily provisions of article 39. para. 1. point 9. and 10. of the Draft, that will allow more clear insight into data on scope of incomes media receive from authority organs on various accounts (subsidies, project financing, advertising etc.). These provisions should be amended in parliamentary procedure, to comprehend indubitably financing by enterprises in which state has minority of share.

Draft was improved compared to initial draft in regards to transparency of ownership, because it envisages obligatory publishing of data on  „legal entities and physical persons that directly or indirectly  possess more than 5% of initial capital“ in media[4]. However, obligation from the Draft, to deny registration of media whose ownership structure composes of enterprise with vague ownership structure – physical persons (e.g. in the case of off shore companies), is not being stated specifically, and it remains unclear whether existing provisions can secure accomplishing of that goal.

Greatest problem, by our opinion, is that Draft Law does not provide transparency of other data that can be of significance to the citizens for estimation of possible influences to editorial policy, which was envisaged by state media Strategy from 2011, and is stated that one of the problems from the report of Governments Anti-corruption Council from 2011[5]. Namely, enterprise that established media, can be established with very modest initial investment of one physical person or one legal entity (e.g. 60.000 RSD), but indubitably large advertisers, sponsors and loaners can influence work of media. Draft Law doesn’t say anything  on possibilities of influencing editorial policy on those base grounds, that can be far more significant than ownership itself, which is according to Transparency Serbia unacceptable[6]. We remind that resolving of this issue was part of Governments political program from 2012, but, in spite of constant mentioning of „Verica Barać report“ by government representatives, it was clearly given up[7].

Following prepositions of TS during public debate were not accepted:

For all above mentioned, TS feels necessary to amend and change provisions on transparency of media ownership in parliamentary procedure, when public debate wasn’t used properly to do so.

Transparency – Serbia

Belgrade, 28 July 2014