In late March, the National Assembly of Republika Srpska, one of the two entities in Bosnia and Herzegovina, adopted a Draft Law on Changes and Amendments to the RS Criminal Code that criminalises slander and libel. The adopted Draft Law will now be put forward for public debate before it is once again voted on by the ruling majority in Republika Srpska. In addition to this Draft Law, on the same day, the Republika Srpska Government adopted and submitted to the Assembly the Draft Law on the Special Register and Public Nature of the Work of Non-Profit Organisations that aims to hinder the activities of non-governmental organisations. Vanja Stokić, an activist and reporter from Banja Luka, wrote an article for the Centre for Nonviolent Action Sarajevo-Belgrade about the changes specifically targeting independent reporters and activists.
by Vanja Stokić
Judging by the comments on social networks, a great many people in Bosnia and Herzegovina support the planned criminalisation of defamation. They welcome something they see as introducing order among media outlets and reporters. Because everyone who does not think, speak and write as we think, speak and write should be re-educated. So that they start thinking, speaking and writing like us. Right?
Bosnia and Herzegovina has big problems with the media (and it is not alone!). More accurately, with one part of its media outlets that belong to a grey zone, because it is unclear who is behind them, who is publishing edited news and why, who you should contact to ask for a retraction or an appearance before the court. They mostly crop up in election years or in periods of heightened tensions in society. They appear suddenly, practically overnight, and go on to very bravely and openly pillory specific individuals, publishing their photos, names and alleged wrongdoings. Or perhaps it only seems like that to the mostly uninformed public that believes everything it reads?
It is interesting that Republika Srpska’s institutions did not decide to deal with these media outlets, because if they had, they would have proposed a law requiring transparency of media ownership. Instead, their proposal is for slander and libel to be treated as criminal offences in the future, with fines going up to BAM 120,000. You cannot sanction a media outlet that is unregistered, with no record of who is behind it, so changes to the Criminal Code won’t impact these problematic media outlets. But they are not the target of domestic institutions and politicians, anyway. It is the media reporting on the crimes of public officials that are being targeted, and these changes are liable to pull the plug on them forever. And why would they punish the shady media, when this would amount to punishing themselves, would it not? Plus, the new legal regulations would prevent media from writing about officials’ families, the ones they often use to conceal traces of embezzled public funds. This is why they have decided to proclaim everything to do with their families as private, even when it is financed by public money.
This battle is already lost, but one part of the media is not giving up. They refuse to give in without a fight and without sending a clear message that they do not accept the new rules. They know that the more noise they make, the sooner they will be sanctioned, but they don’t seem to care. Meanwhile, reactions from international organisations have a very light touch. Expressions of concern and finger-wagging statuses on Twitter. We don’t know what’s happening behind the scenes, whether an emergency diplomatic weapon is being drawn perhaps? I doubt it. After all, we elected them. More than once. We provided them with power and legitimacy. We are the ones not coming out to protest, happy as long as no one’s shooting at us.
Just don’t say later how you didn’t know what you were letting happen. The media are not the only target. We are the first, but after us, they’ll come to your house next. Except, we won’t be around anymore to report about it. This is not a threat that we will leave you out to dry, it’s a realistic prognosis. Changes to the law are not being adopted in order to regulate public space, but in order to shut down or tame wayward media. If you don’t understand how this will be done, just think about how criminal proceedings are conducted. If someone (and everyone has the right to do this) files a report against a media outlet alleging slander or libel, the judicial authorities can confiscate all the equipment from the media outlet’s offices, as well as all documents, in order to conduct an investigation. This means all computers, cameras, dictaphones, notebooks… The entire office can be laid waste to in just one day and be left without everything it had spent years working to attain. Knowing how long court proceedings last in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and that you can be brought to trial even ten years after the offence was committed, in practice this means the media outlet will be left without the resources it needs to continue working. Almost no one in Bosnia and Herzegovina can afford to re-equip its offices and smoothly continue operating after something like this. Of course, if the investigation finds no fault with the media outlet, the equipment will be returned. But what about the damage already done and the activities that had to be suspended in the meantime, which could be as along as several years?
Monetary fines and prison sentences are not the worst that can happen. It is the years of drawn-out mistreatment and harassment of people at police stations, prosecutors’ offices and courtrooms. And what good is an acquittal in the end if you have been molested out of any desire to continue your calling?