Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
APPENDIX
Tables'3,'4'and'5'concerning'UPR'process'as'per'Belarus,'Moldova'and'Ukraine'
Sub-Issues
Recommendations (summary
of rec & proferring state)
Implemented.
distribute practically
Independent
media
political publications.
74!
!
!
!
Retribution
Accepted/Implemented.
for criticizing
The procedure for the registration of media outlets in freedoms of citizens to access to
the
information should
government
retribution (Canada)
media
Accepted
75!
!
!
!
Adopt measures to
prevent attacks, harassment,
arbitrary detention of political
Attacks on
journalists
Republic)
Accepted
investigation
of the crimes
against
journalists
Accepted
Rejected/The legislative framework was
reviewed during the drafting of the 2009 Mass
MediaAct, which took account of the views of a
broad section of the professional public,international
experience of the lawmaking process and law
enforcement practice in respectof the media. On 1
Media sector
liberalization
(France)
!
!
Registration
of
registration of independent
independent
media
freedom (Ireland)
Continue the
State
coordination
over media
Accepted
77!
!
!
Registration
of
independent
media
procedures (Lithuania)
Accepted
JS1 indicated that existing legislation on
defamation and extremism creates an
environment of self-censorship, limits
press freedom and is not in line with
European and international standards on
press freedom. CIVICUS
Defamation
legistlation
on defamation (Netherlands)
Accepted
78!
!
!
!
not
Attacks on
journalists
Accepted
of opponents of the
Government, including
Torture of
journalists
defenders (Spain)
79!
!
!
!
Freedom of
expression in
media
(Switzerland)
Accepted
of independent media.
80!
!
!
Sub-Issues
!
2 Recommendations,
Pre-Session
StHdrs'
Recommendations,
ID)
State
all
implementation
violent
attacks
Create
persistent
of
threat
the
to
press.
the
Both
and
an
ensure
enabling
fully
ensure that all acts of violence committees requested Ukraine to Ensuring freedom of the press transparent and impartial
Acts
of against
journalists
violence
investigated
against
appropriate punishments are and impartial investigation and also the prohibition in practice of attacks
journalists
full
compliance
Media
for legislation
and
be protect freedom of opinion and requires not only the appropriate investigation
that expression, and to ensure prompt legal
prosecution.
and
effective
of
national
and
framework,
and
them
(Austria)
law
national
enforcement
practices,
minorities
81!
!
!
!
of
Covenant
the
on
International
Civil
and
to
freedom
of
attacks,
arrest
and
journalists
been
of expression, particularly
the
provided
integrity
had
detailed
protection
of
of
the
persons
Arrests, trials
of journalists
(Chile
82!
!
!
!
determination
was
of cases of
violence
against journalists and many of the Popovich and V.M. Kostenko). They abuse
against
perpetrators have not been brought were sentenced in 2008 to various which they are subject
journalists
to justice.
undue
delay
in
who
was
directly
Protasov,
A.V. journalists
and
and
combat
violence
to
(France)
reportedly
underrepresented
service
of
the
in
remain
the
public
Autonomous
ensure
their
adequate
a for national
minorities
levels.
83!
!
!
!
and
information
to
information
Act
and
an
Independent
as
key
elements
for
broadcast
under States
pressure
and radio.
of
expression
(Poland)
Measures
against State
organs
to
restricting
journalists (Germany)
limit
media
and
84!
!
!
!
media
freedom
85!
!
!
!
Sub-Issues
Moldova
2011
(1st
Cycle)
3 Recommendations (summary of rec
& proferring state)
justification)
Guarantee of freedom Make efforts to fully guarantee freedom of
of expression
Accepted
Critical media
Accepted
media (Germany)
Media
for
minorities
Accepted/
in
had
in the language of the national minorities, Since 2009 the Government programmes
including Russian (Russia)
continued
in
to
minority
broadcast
languages.
in
stations
in
broadcast
languages
of
86!
!
!
!
national
minorities,
of
pluralism;
restrictions
upon
access to websites
of
the
Political
dependence
Broadcasting
regulatory body
State
UNESCO
stated
media;
expression
was
access of international
depended
journalists
country
control
to
over
the
The
Organization
that
limited.
freedom
Print
of
media
on
also
reported
that
following
87!
!
!
!
the
independent
broadcasters;
Civil
defamation
laws
noted
against
independent
with
prosecution
concern
of
reports
independent
of
the
television
journalists
broadcasters.
Media restrictions in
Transnistria
region,
the
restrictive,
media
that
environment
media
outlets
was
were
88!
!
!
!
Table'6.'Civil'society'survey'results''
Stakeholders
from
Moldova
The most common measures the
Stakeholders from
Ukraine
*State
establishes
State uses for the free speech legislative level as well as in a more public interest information, state the useless institutions just
restriction
restrictive law enforcement. The level of institutions avoid to give it written or free speech control, like
medias free speech restriction is one of the spoken, public servants refer to press National
highest in Europe.
*Restrictions
regard
to
*When
of public morality.
filming
or
*Previously
discrimination of the independent media (the documenting a story journalists can were
State
companies
Expert
and be
assaulted,
and
their
nobody
widely
spread
be checks.
involves
intimidation
Presently,
it
physical
and
harm,
newspaper firm.
direct funding of
there
!
!
with
foreign
media
are
you
recommend
eliminate/introduce
eliminate
would on States secrets, Law on state service in transparent the name of media protection
Law
of
on
public
to Republic of Belarus (it restricts State owners, now we have a dangerous morality
officials from making statements in the concentration of most TV channels
media), Decree of the President! On in the same political-oligarch pocket
improving the performance of government
agencies and other public institutions with
the media ". In general the whole system of
Belarusian media regulation needs to be
reformed.
Cases the state interference in All the justifiable free speech restrictions are The state should protect human No, it can be justified only
the free speech regulation could prescribed by ICCPR which is signed and rights,
be justified
ratified by Belarus.
diversity
and
!
!
commercials.
State justification of introducing Need to protect the interests of the State and No justification
Ukraine.
Recommendations on how could It is impossible to change the media We need stronger media, NGOs, It is difficult to answer
it be possible to influence the situation in Belarus if the political regime professional trade unions, periodical
restrictions State imposes over remains the same.
debates
between
politicians
and
!
91!
!