Sword proving mightier than pen Journalists react quietly to libel case

Kyiv journalists have very little to say – or are willing to say very little – about last week’s court decision ordering the opposition daily Kievskie Vedomosti to pay punishing libel damages to a leading ally of President Leonid Kuchma. But amidst the general silence, scattered voices are worrying aloud that the case represents yet another calculated assault on press freedom by the Kuchma administration. They say the muted reaction of the journalistic community shows just how successful that campaign has been. ‘There has been no reaction from any sort of journalistic union and that is very surprising,’ said Vladimir Mostovoy, editor-in-chief of the weekly Zerkalo Nedeli. ‘This is precisely the moment that solidarity between journalists should be manifested through a statement that speaks out against such actions.’ As far as Mostovoy was concerned, the Starokyivsky District Court ruling was a ‘purely political action directed at closing the paper’ by forcing it into ‘an unsustainable economic condition.’ That echoed the comments last week of Kievskie Vedomosti Editorin-Chief Yevhen Yakhunov, who also declared the court decision ‘a political action.’ But the beleaguered editor’s call for other media outlets to impose an information boycott on authorities has so far gone unheeded. In fact, several journalists received awards from Kuchma in a ceremony at Mariyinsky Palace on Saturday marking Press Day. ‘Freedom of speech helps the development of democracy,’ the president said, while also calling journalism a ‘serious weapon’ in politics which should be wielded with full ‘objectivity and independence.’ Kievskie Vedomosti, which is planning an appeal, is standing by its series of stories that Interior Minister Yuri Kravchenko bought a $115,000 Mercedes sedan with money from a fund for the families of slain policemen. Kravchenko filed suit last year after the paper first printed the allegation. On page 4 of last weekend’s edition, Zerkalo Nedeli questioned the ‘exorbitant’ damages awarded to Kravchenko. On page 2 of its Friday edition, the daily Den said ‘the president’s attitude toward independent media would appear a lot more civilized if state policy didn’t hinge on the political views of that media.’ By contrast, the media was positively outspoken in its criticism of the presidential administration when another Kyiv opposition daily, Vseukrainskie Vedomosti, was forced to shut down after a court ordered it to pay Hr 3.5 million ($1.8 million) in damages to a pro-Kuchma businessman and politician. At the time, many journalists openly contended that the presidential team was trying to gag opposition voices in the run-up the March parliamentary elections. Yakunov said that for commercial reasons, competing newspapers have not rushed to the defense of Kievskie Vedomosti. ‘Mass media is separated into different camps,’ he said. ‘Even those on friendly terms with us might not support us because we are competitors. However, I want to warn them that the repression has started, and it won’t stop for any of unless we get their support.’ Kievskie Vedomosti attorney Viktor Nikazakov sees apathy as the enemy. ‘Those papers that might want to scream about the decision don’t do it because they know it won’t accomplish anything,’ he said. ‘Plus, more and more newspapers are working for the presidential team anyway.’ Foreign observers of Ukrainian media were less cautious in their assessment of Kievskie Vedomosti’s plight, saying it was part of troubling pattern of opposition newspapers falling afoul of the law. In two other recent cases, the newspaper Polityka had its bank accounts frozen by a local tax administrator for failure to submit documents in time, and the newspaper Pravda Ukrainy faced similar close scrutiny from government inspectors. ‘Cases like this [Kievskie Vedomosti] are worrisome because they show how one-sided the libel and defamation laws are in Ukraine,’ said Tim O’Connor, Kyiv resident advisor of ProMedia, a U.S.-financed nongovernmental organization supporting international press reform. He said holes in Ukrainian press law were partly to blame for the decision, with plaintiffs currently not required to prove any actual damage in court. He also said there is currently no legal distinction between press scrutiny of a private citizen and public official. ‘Certainly public officials should be scrutinized closely, no matter what country you’re in,’ O’Connor said. Irina Polykova, regional office director for the European Institute for the Media, said that Ukraine lacks both courts and lawyers experienced in handling press freedom issues. And she criticized the fact that legislation places no limit on the amount of damages a plaintiff can seek from a media outlet. Kievskie Vedomosti attorney Nikazakov said pressure needs to put on lawmakers. ‘The media should press Parliament to change laws so that they defend themselves against high-ranking officials,’ he said. ‘Parliamentarians probably would pass this kind of law just to spite the president.’