Kusari butterfly: KPM is aiming to discipline media and critical modifiers to power by threatening them with license and closure

Kusari has said that, along the discussion of the cases, lack of professionalism has been observed during the assessment, which according to her, stems from political influence.

“During the discussion of cases, the level of nonprofessionalism, which, according to my belief and assessment, is the result of political influence or political partiality, was alarming. None of the members had the courage to mention the facts of the cases or names of politicians involved. I have never participated in a decision - making body where the facts are considered without presenting themselves and not mentioning the names of those involved. This is a high level of unprofessionalism, nontransparentity, and a clear signal that this Commission will not act independently and impartially”, it wrote.

Full response:

Today I monitored the meeting of the Hanging Commission against the Media and am deeply concerned with the approach of this institution.

I believe the Commission is aimed at disciplining media and moderators who allow and enable criticism of the powers exercised by the Vetevendosje Movement, under threat of obtaining the license and closing it down.

My concerns, listed below, are based on the legal analysis of sanction decisions issued so far since this composition of the Commission has come to power, monitoring today's meeting and reading of past collection processions written by NGOs.

1. Today, for the first time since I monitor the KPM work, it was discussed closing an information show, respectively, on Debat Plus. Its closure was not established, but it was said that, if the <x0-tracking” was repeated, the possibility of closing the show will be considered.

2. During the case discussion, the level of nonprofessionalism, which, according to my belief and assessment, is the result of political influence or political partiality, was alarming. None of the members had the courage to mention the facts of the cases or names of politicians involved. I have never participated in a decision - making body where the facts are considered without presenting themselves and not mentioning the names of those involved. This is a high level of unprofessionalism, nontransparentity, and a clear signal that this Commission will not act independently and impartially.

3. The Commission is doing overcoming its competencies by deciding what slander is, what is vulgar and what is offensive. This presents a deliberate misunderstanding of his role, to the extent that members of the Commission are now playing the role of judges.

4. The Commission today spoke in detail about how fashionmakers should behave, what they should speak, what they should say and what they should not say. This does not happen even in more undemocratic countries. KAM cannot behave as a training institute.

I advise the KPM to read and understand the European Court for Human Rights jurisdiction in the field of “reporting regimes of others”. If you don't know what I'm talking about, then that means a lot to them.

But I'm good enough to explain:

If a politician tells another politician “thief” in a live debate or interview, the media has only one obligation: to offer space to the person who is referred to as demarine. This is where the media obligation and the competency of the KPM ends.

The rest belongs to the judge, and only the judge. KPM members are not and should not take the role of the court.

I have full confidence in the judicial system and believe that all of these KPM political decisions will fall one by one of the courts, because they are arbitrary, unproportional and contrary to the right to freedom of expression and freedom of the media.

As long as this approach continues, I will monitor KPM with pipe, whether by attending meetings, reading decisions or analyzing its processes and transcripts.

I sincerely beg the media to monitor KPM meetings. This approach has to be documented. /Periscope