Slovakia's Tough New Press Law

Since taking office, many Slovak politicians have criticized the media, calling it biased. Sweeping new laws curtailing press freedom may give them the upper hand

by Marian Lesko

Since his victory in the parliamentary elections in Slovakia two years ago, Prime Minister Robert Fico has not participated in a single debate with a political opponent, not even on one of the talk shows where a couple of politicians can usually be found on any weekend. Fico says that he does not debate political opponents because his only real opposition is the media.

If Fico spent last weekend partying, he had good reason: On 25 April, President Ivan Gasparovic signed the law specially crafted by Fico's government to leash the print media.

'COMPLETELY UNACCEPTABLE'

Since taking office, the prime minister and other members of the government—a coalition of left-of-center and nationalist parties headed by his Smer Party—have consistently criticized, as one government press release put it, "the increasing number of false, biased and misleading statements that are published in several Slovak media outlets and are aimed against the current government of the Slovak Republic." Fico typically attacks the press en masse, but seems to be particularly fond of leveling such charges at two of the biggest daily papers (Sme and Pravda) and TV Joj. Under his premiership various branches of the government have issued at least 20 press releases concerning allegedly false or misleading press reports. What unifies all these statements is the conviction that the media are instinctively biased against the Fico government.

UNESCO

Fico even labeled the attitude of the Slovak media toward the government as "the biggest problem of Slovak politics." What has happened in past weeks is the culmination of his strategy to tackle his biggest problem by political means.

Throughout the past year, Culture Minister Marek Madaric worked on drafting a new law on the print media to replace one in effect, with minor amendments, since 1966. All year, Madaric strove to give the impression that the new law was completely unrelated to the government's exceptionally antagonistic attitude toward the printed press and all media. The new law was not meant to curb journalists but to extend the public's right to information, he said.

Madaric's soothing words on the effect and message of the bill couldn't have contrasted more sharply with those of the prime minister.

"We shall insist on a strict press law because what some media outlets dare in regard to the government is completely unacceptable," Fico said during one press conference.

The bill the government proposed earlier this spring certainly conformed to this proclamation. Two provisions in particular evoked heated responses from numerous domestic critics (journalists, publishers and opposition politicians among them), international media watchdogs, and Miklos Haraszti, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe's representative on media freedom. One provision gave the Culture Ministry authority to penalize editors for publishing articles that promote certain kinds of hate—the bill specified 16 different kinds in all.

The second established a sweeping "right of reply" by individuals to articles published in newspapers or magazines.

The OSCE media representative came to the conclusion that the government's bill contained provisions that "seriously restrict editorial autonomy" because the right of reply of the Slovak kind "would grant politicians limitless access to publicity."

Even though this assessment came from an official with a mandate from the OSCE member states—including Slovakia—Madaric dismissed it as an attitude of merely one of the organization's representatives, and not even the most important one. The government unanimously rejected Haraszti's request that it retract and rewrite the bill.

As the bill worked its way through parliament, coalition deputies did take into consideration some of the objections raised by the OSCE and other international organizations. They abandoned the paragraph, for instance, that gave the Culture Ministry authority to define and punish the promotion of hate in print.