Ro
En
Рy
The conflict between journalists and Members of Parliament regarding the separation of MPs from the press continues raising comments from both sides. On the one hand, MPs say that such practices are common to the majority of countries of the world. On the other hand, however, journalists are concerned by the fact that they are isolated from the meeting room and have no control over the video materials selected for the media.
Adrian Candu, MP, invited to the “În profunzime” talk show on Pro TV television, hosted by Lorena Bogza, made contradictory declarations on this issue. He mentioned that in fact the media can participate in Parliament meetings, since there is free space on the balcony. “There is a balcony intended for the press, and journalists can stay there. Cameras physically do not fit there. That is why it has been decided to give the press 5–6 video materials through a special system. But the press as such, you as a journalist or anyone else, can enter that balcony and follow the events,” Candu said to the host’s remarks.
Also at that show Candu mentioned that this practice of separation of journalists from the law making process is common to the majority of the world’s parliaments. The MP gave the example of the UK Parliament and of the US Congress, but Lorena Bogza contradicted him in this issue.
Ziarulnațional.md quoted Maria Ciobanu, an MP representing the Liberal Democratic Party of Moldova (LDPM), who mentioned yesterday’s edition of “In Profunzime” on her Facebook account, saying that Lorena Bogza “played the prosecutor.” In addition, she expressed her dissatisfaction with the clothing of some journalists accredited to the Parliament: “I was shocked by her argument that journalists must be present in the meeting room to film MPs picking their noses, playing on computers, … [...] We, MPs, didn’t feel quite right either when some journalists with 40–50 cm skirts used to lean to supposedly pick some thread from the floor, but thus showed us the threads or lace on their lingerie,” Maria Ciobanu wrote in the social network.
Earlier, Igor Botan, expert in politics, said for europalibera.org that this Parliament decision is “abnormal and reprehensible.” He says that media organizations should appeal to the country’s leadership to remedy this situation. “I believe that journalism organizations in Moldova should show a minimum of solidarity and, by using accessible methods, appeal to the Parliament leadership and, if necessary, to specialized international organizations, so that globally accepted standards, including constitutional norms, be respected in Moldova,” the expert said.
Previously, a number of journalists announced their dissatisfaction with the new working conditions for reporters and cameramen accredited to the Parliament. Journalists believe that such changes can be qualified as an attempt to restrict press freedom.
