r Freedom of Speech and Information, called on President Leonid Kuchma to intervene to prevent the Presidential Administration from pressuring the nation’s media. The following is the text of the letter, as translated by BBC Monitoring.
As chairman of the Rada Committee for Freedom of Speech and Information, I consider it necessary to inform you about the current situation in the country’s information sphere.
Since the appointment of Viktor Medvedchuk as head of the Presidential Administration [on June 12], there have been substantial changes in the priorities and nature of the management of the country’s information policy.
According to the Constitution and the laws on information and on TV and radio broadcasting, information policy is developed and implemented by the Rada, the president and the relevant state bodies. The bodies authorized to act in this sphere by the parliament and president are, respectively, the Rada Committee for Freedom of Speech and Information and the State Committee for Information Policy, TV and Radio Broadcasting. In the broadcasting field, state policy is also implemented by the National Council for TV and Radio Broadcasting (Articles 2 and 18 of the law on the National Council of Ukraine for TV and Radio Broadcasting).
On July 2, a Main Department for Information Policy was created in the Presidential Administration for the first time. Its powers and responsibilities are not determined by legislation, unlike those of the State Committee for Information Policy, which functions within the executive power system.
Another important development in media relations was the recent approval of a number of presidential decrees and Cabinet resolutions that directly contradict constitutional and legislative principles. At issue is, in particular, Cabinet resolution No. 764 of June 4 on some issues concerning the National TV Company and the decrees on the status of the National TV Company, and on changes to the composition of the Council for Information Policy under the president. A notable feature of the latter document is that for the first time in the history of such structures, no representatives of the Rada or civic institutions were included in the council.
In general, personnel policy at the Presidential Administration under Medvedchuk amounts to establishment of complete control over key positions in the media by one party: the Social Democratic Party of Ukraine (united) [which is led by Medvedchuk]. Medvedchuk himself is deputy chairman of the Council for Information Policy under the president (Kuchma is chairman); according to the division of responsibilities between the leaders of the parliament, deputy Rada Speaker Oleksandr Zinchenko, one of the SDPU(u) leaders coordinates legislative support for the information sector; Serhy Vasylyev, who heads the Main Department for Information Policy at the Presidential Administration and is secretary to the Council for Information Policy under the president, was until recently an adviser to the SDPU(u) leader. When the new post of first deputy chairman of the State Committee for Information Policy was introduced, it was taken by Mykhailo Onufriychuk, an active SDPU(u) supporter and a member of the SDPU(u) faction in the previous parliament.
The only body where the SDPU(u) still has no direct influence over decision making is the National Council for TV and Radio Broadcasting, to which Zinchenko has tried to appoint one of his party colleagues in violation of regulatory procedures and the parliament’s procedural rules. The absence of an SDPU(u) representative on the national council is clearly the reason why Medvedchuk and Zinchenko are delaying the implementation of the Rada resolution on the report by the National Council for TV and Radio Broadcasting for 2001.
The nature and content of news and current affairs reporting in the media has changed considerably since the appointment of the new Presidential Administration personnel. Political debate between representatives of the government and opposition has virtually vanished from the electronic media. The parliamentary committee has received numerous appeals from journalists about cases of political censorship in various forms. You have probably not been informed that the Rada resolution on the coverage of the second session of the fourth Rada regulates the coverage of the activities of the political opposition. The reporting of the activity of parliament by TV and radio companies stipulated by this resolution is aimed at informing the public about the legislative activities of the Rada, the Cabinet and the president. Meanwhile, the political opposition is entitled to coverage of its activities in the news and current affairs output of broadcasters and the print media on the basis of Article 34 of the Constitution and Article 2, Part 1 of the law on TV and radio broadcasting, which states “in their activities, broadcasters are guided by the principles of impartiality, accuracy and competence, guarantee each citizen’s right of access to information and free expression of views and opinions, and safeguard ideological and political plurality …”, and other legislative acts.
The state of affairs in the country’s information sphere as described above gives rise to serious concerns. Article 15, Part 2 of the Constitution envisages that “no ideology may be defined by the state as mandatory.” Now there is every reason to suppose that the media are being used to propagandize just one ideology – that espoused by the SDPU(u). The best illustration of this fact is the circulation of video materials about the president’s activities to broadcasters through the private TV company Alternatyva, which is controlled by the SDPU(u). Have the leaders of the party decided to censor the activities of the head of state?
The political activities of the above officials may ultimately undermine the country’s media sovereignty. A number of agreements were signed recently under the auspices of Medvedchuk and in cooperation with the deputy director‑general of [Russian TV company] ORT, according to which commercial TV companies are to rebroadcast in Ukraine ORT’s news and current affairs programs. The content of these programs is often directed against the national interests and territorial integrity of Ukraine. Regional state broadcasting companies, whose main task is to provide timely reporting to TV and radio audiences about current affairs, to disseminate official announcements, to explain the decisions of the legislature, executive and judiciary, and to facilitate the strengthening of Ukraine’s international ties and authority are being destroyed to benefit the Inter commercial TV channel, which is fully controlled by the SDPU(u).
It is possible to cite other examples of illegal activities by the leaders of the Presidential Administration and, accordingly, the leaders of the SDPU(u), in the country’s information sector.
I am convinced that the president should give a fitting assessment to such activities.
