Ro
En
Рy01 March 2016
1999 reads
At the meeting of the Supervisory Board (SB) of GRT on February 26, 2016, technical downtime of public television was announced for a period of three months[1]. We consider that this decision of the SB of GRT has been made in violation of article 80 of the Labor Code of Moldova, as no clear justification of the need to send public television into technical downtime was presented.
We believe that this decision is part of the confrontation between the SB and the GRT chairman, which caused the long-running crisis at the public broadcaster.
The actions of some Gagauz officials, which contribute to deepening the crisis at the company, are worrisome. It is also worrisome that attempts are made to use the situation in order to amend the local Gagauz legislation on broadcasting, which might lead to limitation of the freedom of expression in Gagauzia and to central Gagauz authorities spreading their political control over GRT.
Briefings and press conferences organized by the leadership of the People’s Assembly of Gagauzia (PAG) in the person of PAG chairman Dmitri Constantinov[2] and of the PAG’s legal commission chairman Ivan Burgudji[3] failed to clarify the situation around GRT. On the contrary, they deepened the crisis, because:
We believe that this decision is part of the confrontation between the SB and the GRT chairman, which caused the long-running crisis at the public broadcaster.
The actions of some Gagauz officials, which contribute to deepening the crisis at the company, are worrisome. It is also worrisome that attempts are made to use the situation in order to amend the local Gagauz legislation on broadcasting, which might lead to limitation of the freedom of expression in Gagauzia and to central Gagauz authorities spreading their political control over GRT.
Briefings and press conferences organized by the leadership of the People’s Assembly of Gagauzia (PAG) in the person of PAG chairman Dmitri Constantinov[2] and of the PAG’s legal commission chairman Ivan Burgudji[3] failed to clarify the situation around GRT. On the contrary, they deepened the crisis, because:
- The above-mentioned officials did not specify whose position they represent at the press conferences/briefings regarding the situation around GRT: their personal positions or the position of the authorities they lead. Because declarations referred not to the legislative process or the work of the authorities led by these officials, but referred to the situation around the company, whose founder is the People’s Assembly, we believe that a declaration of that kind should have reflected the position of the PAG, and it could be adopted only at a PAG meeting, which was not the case. Given that, we suppose that the statements made by Mr. Constantinov and Mr. Burgudji reflect their own positions, instead of the position of the PAG as an authority. Thus, Mr. Constantinov and Mr. Burgudji, by using the PAG platform and speaking up as officials, have blurred the line between themselves and the offices they occupy;
- At the press conference organized on February 24, 2016, Mr. Burgudji referred to a report of the Court of Accounts of Gagauzia, which had not yet been published in the official gazette “EKSPRESS KANON”, so it was not an official document that could be referred to;
- In their statements, Mr. Constantinov and Mr. Burgudji mostly criticized the company’s management, drawing attention to the mistakes it made in its work, but never mentioned the decisions made by the SB of GRT that were annulled by court and caused material damage to the company. Thus, PAG leadership in the person of Mr. Constantinov and Mr. Burgudji took the position of one party in the conflict, worsening the crisis at the company.
Since its appointment, the current team of the SB of GRT has been susceptible to political influence from PAG leadership and has become a conductor of that influence over the activities of GRT. It is contrary to the role that, according to the principles set in the local and national broadcasting legislation, has been given to the company’s supervisory board, i.e. ensuring the editorial and managerial independence/autonomy of GRT. The susceptibility of the current team of the SB of GRT to political influence is confirmed by the following facts:
- The district court of Comrat established that in 2013 the SB of GRT dismissed GRT interim chairman Ekaterina Jekova based on a conclusion of the specialized commission of PAG, which was approved by its chairman Mr. Burgudji himself in violation of the law regulating the works of the People’s Assembly of Gagauzia[4];
- On November 17, 2015, Sofia Surnina, chairman of the Supervisory Board of GRT, sent a letter to the People’s Assembly of Gagauzia, asking for a decision to be made regarding the situation around the “Gagauziya Radio Televizionu” public company[5];
- At the 30th meeting of the PAG on December 22, 2015, PAG chairman Dmitri Constantinov said that he had been lately receiving a lot of complaints about the work of GRT from the Supervisory Board, the company’s employees and residents of Gagauzia.
The above facts are indicative of a clear desire of some officials to use their position in order to influence GRT in its activities.
It is also worrisome that the agenda for the PAG meeting of March 1, 2016 included the draft law on the television and radio of Gagauzia[6], proposed by the PAG standing commission on legal issues, which, if adopted, will limit GRT’s independence by giving to the PAG the power to directly control the company’s activities. It is contrary to the principles of operation of public broadcasters. It should be noted, that in this case the PAG failed to ensure transparency in decision making, as it did not employ specialists to conduct consultations regarding this draft law. We find that the public hearings organized by the PAG regarding the draft law on the television and radio of Gagauzia do not ensure proper compliance with the legislation on transparency in decision making.
Considering the above:
We welcome Mrs. Anna Harlamenko’s decision to resign from the position of chairman of GRT;
We urge the SB of GRT to resign for the reason of susceptibility to political influence and inability to ensure the company’s independence, and then we urge the PAG to organize a transparent contest for the vacancies in the SB of GRT;
We urge the PAG to postpone examination of the draft law on the television and radio of Gagauzia and to organize consultations with the participation of journalism professionals in order to ensure the draft law’s compliance with good practices in mass media.
In case the draft law on the television and radio of Gagauzia is adopted without proper compliance with the Moldovan law on transparency in decision making, we reserve the right to appeal to a court for its annulment.
The declaration is supported by:
It is also worrisome that the agenda for the PAG meeting of March 1, 2016 included the draft law on the television and radio of Gagauzia[6], proposed by the PAG standing commission on legal issues, which, if adopted, will limit GRT’s independence by giving to the PAG the power to directly control the company’s activities. It is contrary to the principles of operation of public broadcasters. It should be noted, that in this case the PAG failed to ensure transparency in decision making, as it did not employ specialists to conduct consultations regarding this draft law. We find that the public hearings organized by the PAG regarding the draft law on the television and radio of Gagauzia do not ensure proper compliance with the legislation on transparency in decision making.
Considering the above:
We welcome Mrs. Anna Harlamenko’s decision to resign from the position of chairman of GRT;
We urge the SB of GRT to resign for the reason of susceptibility to political influence and inability to ensure the company’s independence, and then we urge the PAG to organize a transparent contest for the vacancies in the SB of GRT;
We urge the PAG to postpone examination of the draft law on the television and radio of Gagauzia and to organize consultations with the participation of journalism professionals in order to ensure the draft law’s compliance with good practices in mass media.
In case the draft law on the television and radio of Gagauzia is adopted without proper compliance with the Moldovan law on transparency in decision making, we reserve the right to appeal to a court for its annulment.
The declaration is supported by:
“Piligrim-Demo”
Association of Independent Press
Independent Journalism Center
Association of Electronic Press of Moldova
Center of Journalistic Investigations
“Acces-Info” Center
Association of Independent TV Journalists
Committee of Press Freedom
Gagauzmedia
[1] http://gagauzinfo.md/index.php?newsid=23604
[2] http://halktoplushu.md/index.php/novosti/1253-spiker-dmitrij-konstantinov-provel-press-konferentsiyu
[3] http://halktoplushu.md/index.php/novosti/1258-press-konferentsiya-o-tekushchej-situatsii-i-problemakh-v-ok-teleradio-gagauzii
[4] Решение районного суда Комрат от 11 ноября 2013 г. Дел Екатерина Фёдоровна Жекова против Наблюдательного Совета Общественно Компании “GRT”, №2-592/2013, 23-3-1059-12072013
[5] http://gagauzmedia.md/index.php?newsid=5321
[6] http://halktoplushu.md/index.php/zakonodatelstvo/proekty-zakonov/1256-o-teleradioveshchanii-gagauzii-otredaktirovano
