Showing posts with label freedom of the press. Show all posts
Showing posts with label freedom of the press. Show all posts

Sunday, February 2, 2014

Killing The Messenger: The Deadly Cost of News









February 2, 2014 – North American broadcast premiere on Al Jazeera America – America Presents – 9:00pm Eastern/6:00pm Western.

About the Film

Murder is the leading cause of work related deaths for journalists as censorship increases worldwide. In addition to those who have been killed, dozens have been attacked, kidnapped, or forced into exile in connection with their coverage of crime and corruption.
Journalists reporting from Mexico, Russia and Iraq tell their own stories of kidnapping, intimidation, and beatings. They’ve experienced the loss of colleagues in the field and have been close to death themselves. Their stories are heartfelt, captivating, engaging and at moments – unbelievable.
In December 2006, the UN Security Council unanimously passed landmark Resolution 1738 which demanded greater safety for journalists in conflict areas and called for an end to impunity for their killers. Since the UN resolution was passed, over 300 news media workers have been killed, while more have been imprisoned or have simply disappeared while on the job. Countless others have been intimidated into self-censorship or have gone into exile. If no story is worth a life, then why is murder the number one cause of journalists’ deaths worldwide?

Wednesday, October 2, 2013

Comprehensive investigation of threats to press freedoms under the Obama administration




"The fact that the Committee to Protect Journalists felt compelled to investigate the U.S. government's treatment of the press is a remarkable statement here in the home of the First Amendment"

Via The Committe To Protect Journalists


The Committee to Protect Journalists will release its first comprehensive report on press freedom conditions in the United States. Leonard Downie Jr., former Washington Post executive editor and now the Weil Family Professor of Journalism at Arizona State University's Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication, is the author. The report will be released at the Newseum in Washington, D.C., on October 10.

WHAT: The Obama Administration and the Press in Post-9/11 America - a CPJ special report

WHEN: October 10, 2013 - 10:00 a.m. EDT

WHERE:

             Report: www.cpj.org
  • Press conference with Len Downie and Joel Simon: The Knight Studio at the Newseum (555 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W., Washington, DC 20001). Please use the Group Entrance on C Street.
  • The press conference will be live streamed on www.cpj.org

Sunday, June 23, 2013

Public photography is not a crime



Police officers tackle and detain a National Post photographer while he was photographing protesters demonstrating against the G8/G20 summits June 26, 2010 in Toronto, Canada. Photo: Scott Olson/Getty Images

Via o.canada.com

PEN Canada responds to a series of arrests and other police actions aimed at deterring photography in public spaces


The June 2, 2013 arrest of Toronto Star photographer Alex Consiglio for trespassing in a Toronto railway station is the latest in a series of events that has PEN Canada’s National Affairs Committee concerned about the interpretation of certain Charter rights pertaining to public photography and filming.

In particular, we wish to state that it is not a criminal offence for individuals to photograph or film police officers as they go about their duties, and that police officers are not allowed to confiscate a person’s camera or recording equipment (including phones), force them to delete images, or otherwise prevent them from taking photographs or filming in public places. We also wish to clarify the law when it comes to taking pictures or filming on private property that is open to the public.

We are especially concerned about the way recent trends in enforcement of non-existent prohibitions on photography and filming are affecting members of the press.

This document is not intended to be an exhaustive examination of all laws as they pertain to photography and filming. The issue is complicated and depends to some extent on laws that vary from province to province and municipality to municipality.

Subject to certain very limited constraints, it is not a crime in Canada for anyone to do any of the following things, and it is a violation of their Charter rights to prevent anyone from doing so:
  • photographing or filming in any public place, or in any private place to which the public is admitted, and publishing those pictures and films,
  • taking pictures of or filming in any government site other than “restricted access areas”*
  • photographing or filming police officers in public, as long as the photographer/filmmaker does not obstruct or interfere with the execution of police duties. While everyone has a reasonable expectation of privacy in certain circumstances, police officers have no reasonable expectation of privacy as they go about their duties.
A police officer does not have the right to confiscate cameras or recording equipment (including phones), unless the person in possession of such equipment is under arrest and such equipment is necessarily relevant to the alleged offence. A police officer cannot force anyone to show, unlock or decrypt cameras or recording equipment, or to delete images, even when that person is under arrest, unless the police officer has a warrant or a court order permitting him to do so.

At no time, and under no circumstances, is anyone in Canada subject to arrest for the simple act of taking a photograph or filming, although he or she can be arrested if he or she is breaking another law in the process, such as, for example, trespassing or breaking or entering.

Other laws and legislation, including the Criminal Code, the Copyright Act, the Security of Information Act, the Youth Criminal Justice Act, and the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act, the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA), must be obeyed while taking or publishing pictures.

Statement

PEN Canada affirms that the rights of people to make photographs and films in public places and in private places open to the public, and publish them, are hallmarks of a transparent democracy, and that arbitrary restrictions upon photography and filming or on the publication of photographs and films is a characteristic common to repressive governments.

The rights of people to make and publish photographs and films in public places, and in private places open to the public, are hallmarks of a transparent democracy.

Not only do all people in Canada have the right to make images and publish them, but in the age of ubiquitous photography, amateur photographs and films are proving to be an important tool in fighting crime – including crime committed under colour of authority.

We also affirm the value of photography and film in securing law enforcement officers from false accusations.

This application has already been widely recognized by law enforcement departments across the country, and it’s partly for this reason that video dashcams are now standard issue in law enforcement vehicles.

History

In the past several years, many cases have come to light in which police officers sought to confiscate cameras and delete images, even though (a) they have no legal authority to do so and (b) this may actually constitute a crime in itself. The following incidents point out the need for all citizens to be informed of their rights, and for all law enforcement officers to be aware of those rights.

The most glaring example is the case of Robert Dziekanski, a Polish man who died after being tasered by RCMP officers at the Vancouver airport in 2007. Dziekanski’s tasering and subsequent collapse was filmed by Paul Pritchard, who surrendered the video to police with the understanding that they would return it to him in 48 hours. When they did not do so, Pritchard initiated a lawsuit against them. The video was ultimately returned. Partly as a result of its existence, the RCMP eventually admitted that they had misled the public in several statements about the Dziekanski incident. They issued an official apology for their actions and agreed to a financial settlement with Dziekanski’s mother. All four officers involved were formally accused of having lied in notes and statements about what happened that day.
At no time, and under no circumstances, is anyone in Canada subject to arrest for the simple act of taking a photograph or filming
Without the existence of the Pritchard video, it is certain that the outcome of the investigation would have been different.

Last year, lawyer Karen Selick published an opinion piece in the National Post concerning an incident at the home of one of her clients. During the incident, police confiscated numerous cell phones, deleted images, and made threats of arrest to various people for photographing police activity. Selick contends that the behavior of the police was not only out of bounds but was also criminal.

Most recently, on June 2, 2013, Alex Consiglio, a Toronto Star photographer, was arrested at Toronto’s Union Station, put into a headlock by a police officer, and ticketed for trespassing. This came after Consiglio had been asked at least twice to stop taking pictures, including pictures of police officers, and to leave the premises.

Consiglio’s case is significant because photography on private property that is open to the public is not an offence and is not civilly actionable unless posted signs specifically prohibit it, or photographers are informed by security guards, owners, or other personnel that they may not take photographs. The owner of Union Station, the City of Toronto, apparently stipulates that members of the public are free to take photographs at any time, but members of the press must first sign a liability waiver. In the opinion of PEN Canada, this requirement for a waiver creates a stifling effect upon the ability of members of the press to do their work effectively, and the requirement should be rescinded by the owner of Union Station.

In the past three years there have been four other incidents that PEN believes are worthy of examination:
  • National Post photographers Brett Gundlock and Colin O’Connor were arrested during the G20 protests that took place in Toronto in 2010. These protests were notable for the police tactics used in crowd control and dispersal, including mass arrests, the apparently random arrests of innocent onlookers and passers-by, and the controversial and now-discontinued practice of kettling. Gundlock and O’Connor were attacked by police while attempting to photograph aggressive crowd dispersal tactics.They were arrested and held in a temporary detention center for 24 hours, where they were strip-searched, denied water for 12 hours, fed almost nothing, and experienced the loss of some of their camera equipment. They were never accused of any crime. Instead, they were simply accused of being “amongst violent people”. Their camera equipment and press ID should have exempted them from any police attention whatsoever, and as soon as it became clear that they were members of the press, they should have been free to go about their business.
  • On March 26, 2013, a Montreal student named Jennifer Pawluck, 20, an active protester with no criminal record, discovered some graffiti depicting police spokesman Ian Lafrenière with a bullet hole in his head. She took a picture of the image and posted it on Instagram. On April 3, Pawluck was visited at her home by police officers and arrested without incident.She was charged with uttering threats against Lafrenière. In the warrant, it was stated that she gave Lafrenière cause to fear for his safety, and one of the conditions of Pawluck’s release was that she must not come within one kilometre of police headquarters or Lafrenière’s home. It is notable that Pawluck was never accused of having created the original image, only of taking a picture and distributing it. PEN Canada considers this to be a particularly egregious violation of the Charter right to self-expression.
  • In September of 2012, 16-year-old Jakub Markiewicz was detained by security guards and arrested by police after filming the violent takedown of a man by security guards at Metrotown shopping mall in Burnaby, B.C. Markiewicz was ordered by the guards to delete his footage, but since he was using a film camera, he could not comply. Although the guards were in their right to order Markiewicz to stop filming, they were not legally authorized to order him to delete the image or to destroy the film. After Markiewicz took a second picture of arriving RCMP officers, he was physically attacked and restrained by security guards. At their request he was then handcuffed by police and taken to an RCMP cruiser, where security guards again demanded he delete the photos. RCMP officers cut Markiewicz’s backpack off with a utility knife in order to search it, and Markiewicz was ultimately arrested for causing a disturbance. He was never officially charged.
  • A Niagara police officer is facing criminal charges of assaulting a photographer outside a bar in May of 2012. Constable Paul Zarafonitis allegedly assaulted Michael Farkas after Farkas refused to stop photographing police during an incident at the Kool Kats Caribbean Restaurant in Niagara Falls. Farkas suffered a broken nose, a fractured orbital socket, and a fractured cheekbone.

In The United States

While American federal and state law differ from Canadian law in many important respects, two incidents have taken place there that we believe are worth mentioning in this context.
After the terrorist bombings in Boston last April, citizen photography played a significant role in establishing the identity of the bombers
On May 14, 2012, the United States Department of Justice wrote a letter to the Baltimore Police Department asserting that the right of people to photograph and film police officers is protected by the First, Fourth, and Fifteenth Amendments to the Constitution. The DOJ also stated that the ability to photograph and film police officers does much to enhance the appearance of transparency of law enforcement organizations and is therefore a way of building public trust and goodwill. PEN Canada believes that the DOJ is entirely right in this assertion, and we wish to uphold and adopt it as our own.

After the terrorist bombings in Boston last April, as noted in this Washington Post article, citizen photography played a hugely important role in establishing the identity of the bombers. Investigators received hundreds of still and moving images from cell phones and handheld cameras that allowed them to piece together a timeline and ultimately to find images of the suspects, resulting in the death of one and the capture of another.

Often police officers seem willing to use violence to stop photographers, as if photography itself were a form of assault instead of a right.

We believe these instances offer additional evidence that public photography should ultimately make for a more transparent, open, and free society, provided standards of privacy and decency are adhered to. It also fosters a more law-abiding culture.

Analysis and Recommendations

The incidents mentioned above show that police officers are sometimes prepared to deprive people of the rights set out above in this memo. Neither photography nor filming in and of itself constitutes obstruction. Often police officers seem willing to use violence to stop photographers, as if photography itself were a form of assault instead of a right.

This state of affairs must not be allowed to continue in Canada. PEN Canada calls upon law enforcement officials to recognize that photographing and filming in public places is in the public interest, and to ensure that their personnel are familiar with the laws concerning public photography/filming and photography/filming of police officers. We encourage people to continue to exercise their right to take photographs and make films in public, to photograph or film actions committed by law enforcement that may be worthy of concern, and to publish these images public, secure in the knowledge that they are within their rights to do so.

* Examples as currently defined by the government of Canada include Operations Zones – areas where access is limited to personnel who work there and to properly-escorted visitors, which must be indicated by a recognizable perimeter and monitored periodically; Security Zones – areas to which access is limited to authorized personnel and to authorized and properly-escorted visitors, which must be indicated by a recognizable perimeter and monitored continuously; and High Security Zones – areas to access is limited to authorized, appropriately-screened personnel and authorized and properly-escorted visitors, which must be indicated by a perimeter, monitored continuously, and to which details of access are recorded and audited.

PEN Canada is a nonpartisan organization of writers that works with others to defend freedom of expression as a basic human right, at home and abroad. PEN Canada promotes literature, fights censorship, helps free persecuted writers from prison, and assists writers living in exile in Canada. Republished with permission.
© COPYRIGHT - POSTMEDIA NEWS

Friday, March 1, 2013

"unprecedented rise in the number of journalists killed and imprisoned in the past year






Via The Committee to Protect Journalists

CPJ launches 2013 edition of Attacks on the Press


An unprecedented rise in the number of journalists killed and imprisoned in the past year coupled with restrictive legislation and state censorship is jeopardizing independent reporting in many countries, according to Attacks on the Press, CPJ's yearly assessment of global press freedom released on February 14.

Launched at a live-streamed press conference at the U.N. Headquarters in New York, CPJ's flagship publication was covered by media around the world, including The New York Times and the U.K.'s Guardian. The newest edition of Attacksalso features CPJ's new Risk List, which identifies the 10 places where the organization documented the most significant downward trends in 2012.

The publication features timely analyses by CPJ and global experts on media conditions, press freedom violations, and emerging threats in every corner of the world, along with regional data and a snapshot of conditions in close to 60 countries. The online edition of the book includes essays that focus on the weakening of the inter-American human rightsand press freedom system; the looming media vacuumin Afghanistan; China's relationshipwith the foreign press; mobile security; and the prospects of a global press freedom charterin times of increasing challenges.

The expanded print edition of the book includes essays on the Taliban by world-renowned author Ahmed Rashid; citizen journalists in Syria, by prominent freelance correspondent Oliver Holmes; jailed Ethiopian journalist Eskinder Nega, by multiple award-winner Charlayne Hunter-Gault; and the risks involved in covering the news, by CPJ Honorary Chairman Terry Anderson, who was once held hostage for almost seven years in Lebanon.

Regional sections of Attacks on the Press are available in Arabic, French, Russian, Spanish, and Portuguese. The print edition is published by Bloomberg Press, an imprint of Wiley, and is available for purchase here.

CPJ will host events around the world to promote the 2013 edition of Attacks on the Press. For more information on upcoming events, click here.

Wednesday, December 5, 2012

New report, to be released on December 11: Global jailing of journalists reaches record-high


Global jailing of journalists reaches record-high
Via Committee to Protect Journalists

New York, December 5, 2012-- The threat of imprisonment has become a reality for a record number of journalists in 2012, the Committee to Protect Journalist found in its annual prison census. The report, to be released on December 11, records and analyzes the imprisonment of journalists globally, underlining the ongoing crackdown against critical reporting.

A breakdown of the charges, regions, mediums and the number of freelance journalists imprisoned will be available. CPJ's census, first published in 1990, is a snapshot of those incarcerated at midnight on December 1, 2012. It does not include the many journalists imprisoned and released throughout the year.


WHAT: 2012 Imprisoned Journalists, a CPJ yearly census
WHEN: December 11, 2012 - 12:01 a.m. EST / 4: 01 a.m. GMT
WHERE: WWW.CPJ.ORG


Advance copies of the report are available upon request and interviews may be arranged prior to launch date. The report will be published in Arabic, English, French, Russian, Turkish and Spanish.

Thursday, November 15, 2012

“I’m tracking these journalist arrests because I’m concerned about the state of the First Amendment, and our willingness as a public and a democracy to defend it.”




Via freepress.net

Why I Won't Stop Tracking Journalist Arrests


One year ago today I published a blog post entitled “Why I'm Tracking Journalist Arrests at Occupy Protests.” The next day, police raided New York City’s Zuccotti Park, where they arrested 12 journalists and blocked many others from documenting the raid.

Police had previously detained or arrested 13 journalists in the two months since the Occupy Wall Street movement began. By the end of 2011, that number grew to 60, and it now stands at roughly 100.

When I began tracking these arrests, it was an effort to bear witness, to make sure each of these stories was documented. But over the past year it has become much more than that. Through this work I have developed an incredible community of journalists, lawyers, press freedom advocates, organizers and a whole range of people who felt riled up and got involved. This network of friends and allies has been instrumental in tracking these arrests — sending tips, spreading the word, helping with research and supporting one another.

In working with people across the U.S. to chronicle journalist arrests, and in many cases advocate on behalf of journalists who’ve been detained, I’ve come to understand that expanding this community is critical to protecting the First Amendment. As journalism grows more networked and participatory, we need a system for supporting press freedom that builds on those same principles.

Traditionally, press freedom has been protected by institutions, like media companies, whose business interests depended on it. These companies had the legal resources and the clout to push back on First Amendment violations. But the arrests of the past year have illustrated the dwindling influence of these stakeholders and the need for new ways of defending press freedom.

With a few notable exceptions in New York and the Bay Area, commercial media didn’t weigh in on the journalist arrests. Those that did intervene tended to be newsrooms whose journalists were arrested or otherwise harassed. First Amendment groups, journalists’ professional organizations and local press associations have fought admirably, but they, like so many nonprofits, are stretched thin.
While some of the arrests I documented were relatively short detainments, other reporters were held for days and suffered rough treatment during and after their arrests. Some charges were dropped right away, but other journalists are just now being acquitted, almost a year after their arrests. A number of journalists are still waiting to hear the outcome of their cases while police drag out the process.
The arrests received some national attention, but most people are still unaware of how extensive the problem is and no one is tracking the impact of these year-long legal battles on the journalists themselves. In a piece for the Columbia Journalism Review last February, Carla Murphy (who herself had been arrested and is still facing charges) examined how arrests chill speech, especially for independent journalists.

While journalists rarely discuss this openly, many of these arrests were traumatic experiences, especially for those who were detained for extensive periods. Most of the research on post-traumatic stress disorder in journalists focuses on war correspondents, but I have heard from journalists arrested this past year who are struggling with similar symptoms. And I’ve talked with a number of journalists who approach their work very differently than they did before their arrests. These arrests are not just about our universal rights, but also about people’s individual lives.

A year ago I wrote “I’m tracking these journalist arrests because I’m concerned about the state of the First Amendment, and our willingness as a public and a democracy to defend it.” That worry continues today.

We need commercial media institutions to continue fighting to protect the First Amendment. We need strong nonprofit advocates to support citizen and independent journalists. We need journalists to stand up for each other on city streets and in the halls of power. But more than anything, we need to understand that we all have a stake in the First Amendment — and a role to play in defending it.
That’s why I’m going to continue tracking journalist arrests — to bear witness, to broaden the community of concern and to use the tools of media making to empower more people as advocates of our shared First Amendment rights.

Timeline: One Year in the Debate Over Press Freedom
Sept. 17, 2011: Occupy Wall Street begins in New York City

Sept. 24, 2011: John Farley of WNET/Thirteen is the first journalist arrested while covering Occupy Wall Street.

Oct. 1, 2011: The Occupy Wall Street movement crosses the Brooklyn Bridge, leading to mass arrests, including the arrests of three journalists.

Nov. 15–17, 2011: The New York Police Department raids Zuccotti Park right before the two-month anniversary of Occupy Wall Street. Twelve journalists are arrested, with two more arrested on the actual anniversary two days later.

Nov. 18, 2011: The NYPD admits to arresting journalists with NYPD press credentials.

Nov. 21, 2011: New York media demand a meeting with NYPD Commissioner Raymond Kelly and Deputy Commissioner Paul Browne about abuses of press covering Occupy Wall Street.

Nov. 23, 2011: The NYPD issues a formal memo ordering officers to avoid “unreasonably interfer[ing]” with journalists. (Ten days later the NYPD arrest another journalist.)

Dec. 1, 2011: Forty-thousand people send letters and call their mayors, asking them to defend press freedom in their cities.

Dec. 8, 2011: The Committee to Protect Journalists releases its 2011 global census of journalist imprisonment, and finds that “the number of journalists imprisoned worldwide shot up more than 20 percent to its highest level since the mid-1990s.”

Dec. 9, 2011: Rep. Jerrold Nadler of New York calls on the Justice Department to investigate the NYPD’s raid on Zuccotti Park and its treatment of protesters and journalists.

Dec. 12, 2011: The NYPD arrests nine independent journalists, livestreamers and photographers at the Winter Garden in New York City. Video also reveals officers blocking a New York Times photographer as he tries to cover the arrests.

Dec. 13, 2011: A series of “Who is a Journalist?” posts appear here, here and here.

Jan. 3, 2012: The NYPD raid the Brooklyn studio of Globalrevolution.tv, one of the central livestreaming groups covering Occupy Wall Street, and arrest six citizen journalists.

Jan. 18, 2012: The SOPA Internet Blackout spreads across the Web in protest of a piracy bill with broad First Amendment implications.

Jan. 25, 2012: Reporters Without Borders releases its yearly press freedom ranking. The U.S. plummets 27 spots to 47th in the world.

Jan. 28, 2012: Oakland police detain or arrest nine journalists when Occupy Oakland attempts to take over an empty building.

Feb. 2, 2012: Some cities respond to journalist arrests with apologies and police reprimands. Documentarian Josh Fox is arrested while trying to film a public hearing in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Feb. 9, 2012: Sixteen-thousand people send letters of support to journalists who have been arrested.
March 3, 2012: Bay Area journalists and press organizations meet with Oakland Mayor Jean Quan about ongoing press suppression and arrests in the city.

April 30, 2012: A coalition of elected officials and members of the press file a civil rights lawsuit against the NPYD seeking redress for police misconduct during Occupy Wall Street protests. The National Press Photographers Association joins the lawsuit later in the year.

May 3, 2012: On World Press Freedom Day, a coalition of press freedom and digital rights groups send a joint letter to Attorney General Eric Holder calling on the Justice Department to protect all people’s “right to record.”

May 14, 2012: The Justice Department releases a lengthy memo providing guidance to police departments and asserting that people’s right to record is protected under the First Amendment.
May 20, 2012: Four journalists are arrested while covering the NATO summit in Chicago. Other journalists and livestreamers complain about being targeted and harassed by police.

June 8, 2012: NYPD Deputy Commissioner Paul Browne tries to rewrite history and denies the NYPD arrested journalists the department had earlier admitted to arresting.

July 25, 2012: Researchers at NYU and Fordham law schools release an eight-month study which finds the NYPD “consistently violated basic rights” by using aggressive force and obstructing press freedom.

July 31, 2012: Twitter bans journalist Guy Adams for revealing an NBC executive’s work email address during the opening ceremonies of the Olympics. (Adams was later reinstated.)

Aug. 27–Sept. 6, 2012: The Democratic and Republican conventions included a significant police and security detail, but there are relatively few incidents of press suppression.

Sept. 15–17, 2012: Eight journalist arrests occur on the one-year anniversary of Occupy Wall Street. This leads to another set of letters from the Society for Professional Journalists, the National Press Photographers Association and 13 other media organizations.


Related: NYC Sued for Systematic Civil Rights Violations During Occupy Protests
     
             Here we go again: Occupy Wall Street Arrests Photographers

Suppressing Protest: Human Rights Violations in the U.S. Response to Occupy Wall Street
 

Monday, October 22, 2012

Photojournalists Stephanie Keith, Charles Meacham; the National Press Photographers Association Sue NYC for violated their First, Fourth, and Fourteen amendment rights during Occupy Wall Street protests in 2011



Via pdn

NYC Sued for Systematic Civil Rights Violations During Occupy Protests


Occupy Wall street protesters, New York City council members, and several journalists have filed suit against the City of New York, the Metropolitan Transit Authority, JP Morgan Chase and other defendants, alleging widespread civil rights violations during the Occupy Wall Street process in 2011. The lawsuit was filed today in Federal District Court in New York City.

The plaintiffs--including photojournalists Stephanie Keith, Charles Meacham, the National Press Photographers Association, several citizen journalists and five New York City council members--allege that the New York City Police Department .

"The City of New York in concert with various private and public entities have employed Officers of the New York City Police Department (NYPD) and others acting under color of state law, to intentionally and willfully subject Plaintiffs and the public to, among other things, violation of rights of free speech, assembly, freedom of the press, false arrest, excessive forces, false imprisonment, and malicious prosecution and, furthermore, purposefully obstructing plaintiffs carrying out their duties as elected officials and members of the press," the lawsuit asserts.

It goes on to say that police conduct was intended to obstruct, chill, deter and retaliate against the plaintiffs for engaging in "constitutionally protected activity." It accuses the NYPD of unreasonable search and seizure of the individual defendants (a Fourth Amendment violation) and deprivation of due process (a Fourteenth Amendment violation.)

The plaintiffs are seeking an unspecified amount of "compensatory and monetary damages," as well as injunctions to force the NYPD to allow citizens to protest peacefully in public spaces, and to prevent the police from barring the access of journalists to protests.

The suit includes allegations of specific acts of police misconduct against each individual defendant. More generally, it alleges that police prevented citizens from gathering lawfully and peacefully in public spaces; that police violated privacy by retaining photographs of protesters who were arrested then released without charges; that police detained people for extended periods without charges; that police charged the plaintiffs without probable cause, and for crimes not committed; that police used excessive force to discourage people from exercising free speech and other constitutional rights; and that police justified the use of excessive force under false pretenses.

It also alleges that police barred journalists from covering the eviction of protesters from Zuccotti Park on November 15, 2011. "The NYPD's use of force in general, and against journalists in particular is on-going and well-documented," the lawsuit alleges, with references to many reports about police conduct.

It also paints a picture of the NYPD as an unaccountable, insular organization that covers up the misconduct of individual police officers. "These practices, policies and customer engender perverse incentive for officers to commit acts of misconduct against civilians without consequences," the lawsuit alleged.

The lawsuit goes on to say, "by employing the NYPD in its present condition to police protests while failing to provide meaningful avenues of police accountability, the [City of New York] chills each plaintiff, and indeed each citizen, from engaging in Constitutionally protected speech by setting up the NYPD, in effect, as the arbiter of the content of speech in a democratic society."

Related:

Here we go again: Occupy Wal Street Arrests Photographers

 Suppressing Protest: Human Rights Violations in the U.S. Response to Occupy Wall Street
Report issued by The Global Justice Clinic (NYU School of Law) and the Walter Leitner International Human Rights Clinic at the  Leitner Center for International Law and Justice (Fordham)

Monday, September 17, 2012

HERE WE GO AGAIN: OCCUPY WALL STREET ARRESTS




"One officer repeatedly shoved photographers with a baton and a police lieutenant warned that no more photographs should be taken. “That’s over with,” the lieutenant said."

Arrests Near Stock Exchange Top 100 on Occupy Wall St. Anniversary

UPDATE: One Year of Occupy. One Year of Journalist Arrests

UPDATE: NYPD Caught on Video Violently Shoving Photographer

NYPD Continues Arresting Photogs at Occupy Wall Street Anniversary Protest

UPDATE: The detention of journalists again brought back memories of last fall, when the NYPD on occasion arrested journalists wearing NYPD credentials.

Dozens of Occupy Wall Street arrests in NYC

Two Photogs, One Journalist Arrested as Activists Descend Upon Wall Street for Anniversary

Student editor arrested while covering Occupy Wall Street anniversary protests
Ironically, the arrests take place on Constitution Day, a day which Congress has set as a day to celebrate, study and discuss the United States Constitution, including the Bill of Rights.

Civil Rights and Press Freedom One Year After Occupy

In Pictures: Occupy Wall Street protesters hold rally in New York to mark anniversary


A New York City Police Department officer pushes photographer Craig Ruttle during the Occupy Wall Street protestPicture: STAN HONDA/AFP/GettyImages


Mickey Osterreicher, general counsel for the National Press Photographers Association, gave the following statement:
NPPA has been receiving reports from a number of our members who are covering the OWS demonstrations in NY. We are deeply concerned and troubled by the aggressive and indiscriminate manner in which officers and command staff are allegedly treating those exercising their First Amendment rights to photograph and record matters of public concern on the streets of NY. These acts of intimidation, detention and sometimes arrest continue to occur despite Commissioner Kelly's Finest message (reminding 'members of the service of their obligations to cooperate with media representatives acting in a news-gathering capacity at the scene of police incidents'), issued last year in response to the arrests of journalists covering the events in and around Zuccotti Park, as well as specific directives in the NYPD Patrol Guide regarding the rights of "Observers at the scene of Police Incidents."

It should also be noted that whereas the Tampa and Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Departments chose to work with NPPA and other organizations in order to prevent these incidents during the recent political conventions held in those cities (where no journalists were arrested), the NYPD has declined to accept similar offers of training. While NPPA appreciates the fact that NYPD has adopted the above referenced guidelines, without proper training and appropriate disciplinary action, those directives are just pieces of paper.


Related: Tracking Journalist Arrests at Occupy Protests Around the Country, Part Two

Wednesday, September 5, 2012

FreePress: Journalists in Need of a Safety Net





Via FreePress

September 4, 2012


More and more independent journalists and citizens are putting themselves on the front lines to cover city halls and city streets, politics and protests — and they’re doing so without the support or protection afforded staff at established newsrooms.

Indeed, these journalists undertake incredible personal and legal risks to do their work. The Committee to Protect Journalists found that of the 179 journalists imprisoned worldwide in 2011, 86 were digital journalists and 78 were freelancers. Here in the U.S., nearly 90 journalists — many of whom are independents or freelancers — have been arrested or detained in the past year, and in state after state people have scuffled with police over their right to record.

We cannot build a bright future for news if we cannot create ways to protect and support the independent and citizen journalists who are trying to create that future.

Some of these journalists are building new networks of support to expand their reach and insulate them from legal threats. Learn more about these ad-hoc support networks in my post on PBS’ Media Shift site.

Original photo by Flickr user P. Weiskel

To support our journalism campaign, please consider a donation to the Free Press Action Fund.

Friday, August 17, 2012

"Topic that concerns me the most in recent years is law enforcement’s misconceptions regarding the legality of a person’s ability to photograph in a public space"






Via The Baltimore Sun

Public spaces are fair game for photographers – a right protected under the First Amendment as free speech. But in recent years that right has come under attack by law enforcement and officials, who are challenging the constraints of what can and cannot be filmed in a public space. Now, more than ever, photographers would be well-advised to learn their rights.

The one topic that concerns me the most in recent years is law enforcement’s misconceptions regarding the legality of a person’s ability to photograph in a public space. Photography in a public space is free speech protected under the First Amendment.

People believe that the press is granted special privileges because they have credentials. This is not the case. The press has no greater access then the average person in a public space, and certainly no less access. So a photographer standing in a crowd at a crime scene should not be singled out to move back unless everyone else is asked to do the same.

When confronting a photographer who is taking pictures in a public area such as a train station, police and other officials will often site the Patriot Act as forbidding photography. The Patriot Act does not forbid photography.

In May 2011, Baltimore Sun reporter Michael Dresser wrote about photographer Christopher Fussell, who was detained by three MTA police at a Baltimore City light rail stop while taking photographs.

Dresser wrote, “The right of photographers to take pictures in public places has been a point of contention virtually since the invention of the camera. But the disputes have become more frequent — and more contentious — since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, which prompted police to challenge individuals who take photos or video of public infrastructure as potential security risks.”

“Civil libertarians and rights advocates say police have been given no new powers to curb photography since 9/11. In many cases, they say, police are making up laws and rules on the spot and issuing orders they have no right to give,” he added.

Continue reading full post here.


Related: "Literally every day, someone is being arrested for doing nothing more than taking a photograph in a public place"

Tuesday, August 14, 2012

"Literally every day, someone is being arrested for doing nothing more than taking a photograph in a public place"





Today's must read, via The New York Times Lens Blog

Mickey H. Osterreicher is the general counsel for the National Press Photographers Association and edits the organization’s Advocacy Committee blog. He spoke with James Estrin. Their conversation has been edited.

"It’s not just news photographers who should be concerned with this. I think every citizen should be concerned. Tourists taking pictures are being told by police, security guards and sometimes other citizens, “Sorry, you can’t take a picture here.” When asked why, they say, “Well, don’t you remember 9/11?”
I remember it quite well, but what does that have do to with taking a picture in public? It seems like the war on terrorism has somehow morphed into an assault on photography.

Q.What’s caused this?
A. It’s been a perfect storm. There’s 9/11, and now photojournalists who traditionally worked for newspapers are losing their jobs and becoming freelancers who may not have the backing of their news organizations. You have Occupy Wall Street, where police didn’t want some of their actions to be photographed. And now everybody with a cellphone is capable of recording very high-quality images. And everyone has the ability to upload and share them almost instantly. There is no news cycle — it’s 24/7 with unlimited bandwidth."
Legal Issues
Photojournalism v. Law
DESCRIPTION

A Lens blog guide to knowing one’s rights of photography.


Related:

Why Is It So Hard to Get Press Credentials?


New York Times photographer arrested while covering arrest

Photographer's Rights: NYPD's Backwards Policy on Photography at Occupy Wall Street

 NYPD 'consistently violated basic rights' during Occupy protests – Report by NYU and Fordham law schools

“That the First Amendment right to gather news is . . . not one that inures solely to the benefit of the news media; rather, the public’s right of access to information is coextensive with that of the press"


Tracking Journalist Arrests at Occupy Protests Around the Country, Part Two


"You got that credential you’re wearing from us, and we can take it away from you.”






Monday, August 6, 2012

Tracking Journalist Arrests at Occupy Protests Around the Country, Part Two



Via John Sterns

Since September 2011 83 people have been arrested in 12 cities around the United States while trying to report on Occupy Wall Street protests. This list is part two of that tracking effort and begins on May 1, 2012. For a quick list of arrests and a break down of their affiliation and occupation see this spreadsheet.

Full post here.


About Josh Sterns: "I have been tracking, confirming and verifying reports of journalist arrests at Occupy protests all over the country since September. Help me by sending tips and tweets to @jcstearns and tagging reports of press suppression and arrests with #journarrest"

Related: New York Times photographer arrested while covering arrest

Friday, July 27, 2012

"It is a dangerous time to be a journalist"




In case you missed this yesterday:

Committe to Protect Journalists' Deputy Director Robert Mahoney testified before the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission in Washington on Wednesday, highlighting global attacks on press freedom and, in particular, assaults on the press in Honduras, Russia, and Turkey.

Mahoney's testimony highlighted the overwhelming number of local journalists "who are targeted and censored, whether with violence or intimidation or by the use of laws meant to punish and silence critical information." He also referred to CPJ's work in documenting journalist attacks, imprisonments, and murder around the world.

The hearing included testimonies by Michael Posner, U.S. Assistant Secretary for the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, and Vladimir Kara-Murza, the Washington Bureau Chief of Russian Television International, among other witnesses. The commission was founded to inform, advocate, and develop U.S. congressional strategies that recognized the human rights values stated in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Below is Mahoney's full testimony, which can also be viewed on the commission's page:

(Meanwhile, two reports were independanty released that found evidence the  New York Police Department 'consistently violated basic rights' during Occupy protests:

"Obstruction of press freedoms and independent legal monitoring, including arrests of at least 10 journalists, and multiple cases of preventing journalists from reporting on protests or barring and evicting them from specific sites.")


Testimony before Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission Hearing
Worldwide threats to media freedom

By Robert Mahoney
Deputy Director
Committee to Protect Journalists


It is a dangerous time to be a journalist. Over the past five years, the Committee to Protect Journalists has seen an unprecedented diversification in the range of attacks and challenges faced by journalists in many countries around the world. Violence and repression have morphed into impunity and exile. Meanwhile, sophisticated online censorship tactics are coupled with punitive laws that suppress the reporting and dissemination of news and fact-based commentary.
An unwelcome development in the past year is the surge of press freedom violations and attacks on journalists covering conflict and political unrest. CPJ has documented this phenomenon particularly in the Middle East and North Africa. Libya was among the deadliest places for journalists in 2011. CPJ research shows that at least 16 journalists have been killed since November 2011 while covering the Syrian conflict, at least nine in circumstances that raise questions about government culpability. More than half of those killed are citizen journalists, who play a key role in covering the conflict and whose footage is used by international news organizations.
As clearly shown in the case of Syria, the use of technology, which has been transforming the ways that information is gathered and disseminated, means journalism itself is changing, giving more people the ability to participate. Consequently, CPJ has also seen that many of the journalists under attack are freelancers and online journalists, who are responsible for their own preparation, equipment, and safety. Anti-state charges and "terrorist" labels have become commonplace and are used to intimidate, detain, and imprison journalists. Media blackouts and limited access to war and conflict zones have become routine, along with the uninvestigated killings of journalists.
Regardless of the medium or circumstance, one thing is certain: It is overwhelmingly local journalists working on local stories who are targeted and censored, whether with violence or intimidation or by the use of laws meant to punish and silence critical information.
Since 1981, it has been our mandate to take action when journalists are censored, harassed, threatened, jailed, kidnapped, or killed for their work, without regard to political ideology. In doing so, we document cases, publish in-depth reports, conduct high-level advocacy, and provide individual moral and material support. CPJ's work is based on its research, characterized primarily by the following areas, which provide a global snapshot of obstructions to a free press worldwide.

Killings
On average, more than 30 journalists are murdered every year, and the murderers go unpunished in nearly nine of 10 cases. Among the countries leading in journalist killings that evade justice are established democracies where the rule of law should function yet a culture of impunity prevails. The absence of justice in journalist murders deters the rest of the press from critical reporting and leaves the public with a shallow understanding of their world. Journalists reporting on corruption, organized crime, conflict, and politics are the most targeted for exposing vital truths.
The reality is that the combat/crossfire casualties have long been a relatively small subset of all journalists killed (about 1 in 6 cases). The leading causing of death is targeted murder.
These murders do not take place in a vacuum. They occur in societies experiencing war and conflict, although many of them--like Russia, Colombia, and the Philippines--have democratic forms of government.
The generalized violence and the breakdown of law and order provide the backdrop for criminal, militant, sectarian, and paramilitary forces to carry out these killings. Most journalists killed in conflict zones are not covering war--they are local journalists covering local issues like human rights and corruption. In about a third of the cases, according to CPJ research, government links are suspected, thus reinforcing the cycle of impunity.

Imprisonment
In 2011, the number of journalists imprisoned for their work reached a 15-year peak. Their continued imprisonment sends the same silencing message as the murder of journalists. CPJ research points to a general trend: Where journalists are being silenced through imprisonment, they are often not being assassinated, but the result is the same--the perpetuation of fear leading to self-censorship or to exile, particularly in countries where it is clear that the rule of law barely exists.
Despite the release of 70 journalists with CPJ assistance in 2011, our research shows that the number of journalists in jail has remained persistently high. To put it starkly, 81 journalists were in jail around the world at the end of 2000. By the end of 2001, that number shot up to 118. Today, there are 179, most held on state security charges. Abusive use of national security was the single greatest charge invoked to justify journalist imprisonments in 2011, followed by violation of censorship rules. The vast majority of those jailed were local journalists held by their own governments. Sixty-five journalists, or over a third of those included in the CPJ census, were being held without any publicly disclosed charge.
Iran, consistently among the world's leading jailers of journalists, maintains a revolving prison door with furloughs and new arrests; subjects prisoners to inhumane treatment; and targets their legal counsel. A relentless crackdown on the press has led 68 journalists to flee Iran since 2009, CPJ research shows.

Exiled
Journalists facing imprisonment and other threats for their work are being forced into exile worldwide, with more than 450 fleeing their countries in the past five years, CPJ research shows.
In the past year, more than a quarter of the 57 journalists who fled their homes came from East Africa, reinforcing a trend from previous years, CPJ researchshows. This has resulted in a journalist refugee crisis in East Africa that has drastically affected the region's ability to maintain media institutions that provide reliable, vital information. After enduring violence and threats, these journalists fled abroad, only to land in a state of prolonged uncertainty as governments and the U.N. refugee agency process their cases.
During the past five years, the greatest number of journalists fled violence in Somalia, where six journalists have been killedin 2012 and no journalist murdershave been prosecuted since 1992. Eritrea and Ethiopia, East Africa's worst jailers of journalists, also lost many to exile. Journalists also sought refuge from targeted attacks and threats in conflict-ridden Syria and Pakistan.
CPJ's annual survey of journalists in exile counts those who fled due to work-related persecution in the past 12 months and provides an overview of the past five years. Dozens of journalists seeking asylum without the legal right to work nor access to basic services live in desperate, insecure, and impoverished conditions, CPJ research shows.

Online Censorship & Surveillance
As journalists increasingly use social media to report breaking news and the number of people with Internet access explodes worldwide, governments are employing sophisticated new tactics to suppress information, according to CPJ's 2011 special report "The 10 Tools of Online Oppressors."
CPJ's assessment of the prevailing strategies for online oppression and the leading countries utilizing such tactics shows that traditional mechanisms of repression have evolved into pervasive digital censorship. The tools utilized include state-supported emails designed to take over journalists' personal computers in China, the shutting down of anti-censorship technology in Iran, monopolistic control of the Net in Ethiopia, as well as synchronized cyberattacks in Belarus.
The techniques go well beyond Web censorship. The Internet is being used to spy on writers and sabotage independent news sites where press freedom is most threatened. The aim is not only to censor but also to block or disrupt the reporting process and the dissemination of news and information.

The digital offensive is often coupled with physical intimidation of online journalists. Recent developments in Honduras, Russia, and Turkey, which we shall focus on below, demonstrate the broad range of repression, coerced censorship, impunity, and outright violence faced by journalists today.

Honduras
The Honduran press continues to suffer from the violent fallout of the 2009 coup that ousted President Manuel Zelaya. Due to political and drug-related violence as well as widespread impunity, Honduras, a nation of 7.5 million people, is one of the most dangerous countries in the region for journalists, CPJ research shows. It is also important to note that Honduras is one of the world's most violent countries. A 2011 United Nations report found that it has the world's highest per capita homicide rate, with 82.1 murders per every 100,000 inhabitants.
At least 14 journalists have been killed since President Porfirio Lobo took office in January 2010. The systematic failure of Honduran authorities to investigate these crimes has frustrated any attempt to solve the murders, CPJ said in a letter sent to President Lobo in December 2011.
A 2010 CPJ special report, "Journalist murders spotlight Honduran government failures," found that the government has been slow and negligent in pursuing journalists' killers. As a result, many journalists fear the murders have been conducted with the tacit approval, or even outright complicity, of police, armed forces, or other authorities.
The climate is so intimidating that reporters told CPJ that they don't dare probe deeply into crucial issues like drug trafficking or government corruption. Many print reporters have removed their bylines from their stories. Tiempo, a San Pedro Sula-based daily newspaper that consistently criticizes the government, has shut down its investigative unit due to safety concerns. Some reporters claim the only safe way to tell the truth about Honduras is to write a novel.
Besides damaging the country's democracy, the June 2009 military-backed coup that ousted leftist former President Zelaya fractured the national press corps into opposing camps. Journalists in favor of the coup or who work for media outlets that supported Zelaya's ouster are known in Spanish as "golpistas" or "coup-backers," while those who opposed it have been pigeon-holed as "resistencia," or part of the political resistance. Local journalists state that when "resistance" journalists are attacked or killed, the news receives scant attention or comment from pro-coup media--which includes most of the country's major television, radio, and print outlets.
By contrast, the May 15 killing of Ángel Alfredo Villatoro, a prominent radio host and close friend of President Lobo, was headline news for days.
If the Honduran government is to be treated as a responsible international partner, it must move immediately and aggressively to correct these failures. It must assign disinterested and trained investigators to these cases; investigations must be transparent and free of conflicts of interest.
President Lobo and top officials in his government must begin to speak out, in a forceful and timely way, against anti-press violence. His government must respect its obligations to the Organization of American States and enforce orders of protection for journalists.
The international community must demand that the Honduran government immediately undertake these meaningful, measurable, and lasting steps.

Emblematic Honduras Case
NAHÚM PALACIOS ARTEAGA
TV Channel 5
March 14, 2010, in Tocoa, Honduras
Hit men lay in wait at the home of Palacios, 34, a well-known anchor for Channel 5, the main TV station in the Tocoa area, according to news reports and CPJ interviews. Palacios arrived at about 10 p.m. with a cousin in the backseat of a double cabin 4-by-4 pickup, and his girlfriend, a doctor, in the passenger seat. Neighbors told local reporters that a few shots were initially fired, apparently by a lookout, followed by a fusillade of gunfire as other assailants joined in. Palacios died at the scene. Dr. Yorleny Sánchez, badly injured, died two weeks later. Palacios' cousin was not injured, local press reports said.
Several work-related motives emerged in a July 2010 CPJ investigation. Palacios had opposed the 2009 military-backed coup that ousted President Manuel Zelaya, and he had turned the TV station into an openly opposition channel, his colleagues said. Military personnel appeared at his house and detained him and his family for several hours in June 2009. That episode, along with other threats from the military, was strong enough that the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights issued an order to the government of Honduras to protect Palacios. According to the commission, it was one of more than 400 such orders issued for journalists and activists in Honduras in 2009 and 2010.
The Honduran government was required by an international treaty to follow the directives, but it appeared to have ignored most of them. The government asserted that it never received an order in the Palacios case, although the Inter-American Commission noted that it had a signed receipt from the Honduran Supreme Court.
In the months before his slaying, Palacios campaigned on behalf of a group of several thousand peasants who had been demanding vast tracts of land they said rightfully belonged to them. They claimed that a few large landowners, in violation of agrarian reform laws, had greatly underpaid them for land many years earlier. Some of the land was retaken by the peasants--simply stolen, according to the landowners--and there were occasional armed encounters. Peasant activists said some of their leaders had been abducted and disappeared, or singled out and killed.
Aside from the wide belief that Palacios' killing was politically inspired, some CPJ sources said he could have angered a local drug gang with a recent news story about a cartel-linked kidnapping. Sources also said that Palacios, like other Tocoa journalists, had been accused of extorting money from sources. Palacios' father, José Heriberto Palacios, denied that his son could have been dishonest. "They killed him because he was honest and was not corrupt," he told CPJ.
The case was marked by a series of investigative failures. Almost three months after Palacios was gunned down, a team of investigators came to his grave in his hometown of Rigores, dug up his body, and at the graveside, in the open, conducted an autopsy. The coroner never examined the body after the murder; it had gone straight from the murder scene to the funeral home.
Investigators also started asking news photographers if they had any pictures of the crime scene because police had no photographs of their own. The prosecutor in charge of the case, Arody Reyes, conceded to CPJ that although the gunmen had lain in wait for hours at Palacios' house, police had not been able to retrieve any evidence from the scene.
Reyes said the exhumation and autopsy were suddenly important because the Honduran government had enlisted the help of the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation. Local investigators, Reyes said, needed to show their U.S. counterparts something.

Russia
As Russia enters into a third term of government under President Vladimir Putin, a convergence of violence, impunity, and constraining legislation severely limits the space for public debate, dissent, and press freedom in Russia.
Impunity in attacks on the press remains high in Russia, CPJ research shows. Despite high-level promises of justice, including by former President Dmitry Medvedev, Russian investigators have yet to apprehend those responsible for vicious attacks. A CPJ delegation met with Aleksandr Bastrykin, chairman of Russia's Investigative Committee (a body responsible for probing serious crimes), to discuss this record of impunity in September 2010. Most recently, Bastrykin made headlines for threatening the life of a journalist and subsequently apologizing. He remains in charge of the country's chief investigative body.
Failure to prosecute the masterminds perpetuates impunity, even in cases where significant initial progress is made. The heart of the problem is a lack of political will and an apparent link between political power and criminality.
With 16 unsolved murder cases, Russia's rating is stagnant in CPJ's Impunity Index, a list of countries where journalist's murderers evade justice. The most recent victim was Gadzhimurad Kamalov, founder of the independent Dagestani weekly Chernovik, who was gunned down while leaving work in December 2011. The newspaper had received frequent threats for its coverage of government corruption, human rights abuses, and Islamic radicalism.
Authorities have made modest progress in some cases: Several suspects have been indicted in the 2006 killing of Anna Politkovskaya, but authorities have yet to bring the case to trial or identify the mastermind. "The impunity the masterminds enjoy--this is the main part of the mechanism, which breeds new murders," said Sergey Sokolov, deputy editor of Politkovskaya's newspaper, Novaya Gazeta.
Russia's parliament moved quickly this month to pass a new Internet bill that will create a blacklist of websites. The law is one in a recent slate of repressive measures, all rushed through the State Duma, aimed at reining in dissent. The steps call into question President Putin's commitment to democracy.
A key pending bill would re-criminalize defamation, while two other ones--just approved by the parliament's upper house--impose limits and labels on NGOs and enable the government to block websites. These bills follow the introduction last month of excessive fines for unauthorized protests.
The Internet statute Duma Bill 89417 is one of several provisions that would create a blacklist of websites which all Russians Internet service providers (ISPs) would have to block and refuse to host. Internet technologists had warned that 436-FZ was too broad, and would require individual comments and home pages to be marked with age-appropriate ratings in the style of American movies.
The defamation bill is a step backward for Russia. In November, parliament voted to decriminalize libel and insult in a move widely perceived as part of then-President Dmitry Medvedev's liberalization policies. According to the independent news agency Regnum, the new bill allows for imprisonment of up to five years, and a fine for moral damages up to 500,000 rubles (US$15,300) for those found guilty of defamation. The restrictive NGO bill requires that organizations receiving money from international sources carry the label "foreign agents"--a particularly negative term in a society where the Kremlin sustains and nourishes deep suspicion of foreigners. At the time of this writing, all three bills were awaiting President Putin's signature.
To stem the escalation of media repression and counter impunity, U.S. legislators should immediately consider an expansion of the "Magnitsky Bill"--which would place Russians connected with human rights abuses on a blacklist, denying them U.S. visas and freezing their assets--to include officials implicated in the murders of journalists.
The United States and the international community should continue to engage with Russian leaders on press freedom and hold authorities publicly accountable for crimes against those who expose misdeeds, as journalists regularly do.

Emblematic Russia Case
NATALYA ESTEMIROVA
Novaya Gazeta, Kavkazsky Uzel
July 15, 2009, in between Grozny and Gazi-Yurt, Russia
Four men forced Estemirova, 50, into a white Lada sedan in Grozny, the capital of Chechnya, as she was leaving her apartment for work, Reuters reported. Witnesses said the journalist shouted that she was being kidnapped as the car sped from the scene, according to press reports. Later the same day, her body was found in the neighboring region of Ingushetia, according to international news reports. She was shot in the head and the chest; no belongings were reported missing.
Estemirova was a frequent contributor to the independent Moscow newspaper Novaya Gazeta and the Caucasus news website Kavkazsky Uzel. She was also an advocate for the Moscow-based human rights group Memorial and a consultant for the New York-based international rights group Human Rights Watch (HRW). She was the fifth Novaya Gazetajournalist killed since 2000. Estemirova's colleagues told CPJ that her relentless reporting on human rights violations committed by federal and regional authorities in Chechnya put her at odds with regional officials.
Three years after Estemirova was abducted and found murdered, her killers walk free. The investigation into the July 15, 2009, killing started off on the right track only to get derailed, her colleagues at Novaya Gazeta and Memorial told CPJ. At a July 2011 press conference i in Moscow, they presented the results of their independent investigation, which revealed numerous apparent flaws in the official inquiry.
At the time of the murder, Estemirova was investigating the possible involvement of Chechen police officers in the July 7, 2009, public execution of Rizvan Albekov in the village of Akhkinchu-Borzoi. She was the first journalist reporting on the case. The Investigative Committee initially focused on the story as the likeliest reason Estemirova was murdered, colleagues said. In their report, "Two Years After the Killing of Natalya Estemirova: Investigation on the Wrong Track," Novaya Gazeta, Memorial, and the International Federation for Human Rights found that lead investigator Igor Sobol had sought information from the local prosecutor's office about Albekov's killing and local police abuses.
But investigators inexplicably stopped pursuing the lead in early 2010. The current inquiry, the report's authors said, has focused on Alkhazur Bashayev, a rebel leader whom Chechen authorities say was killed in a 2009 special operation. Bashayev was allegedly angered by Estemirova's investigation into accusations that he and other separatists were recruiting young men in a Chechen village. But the report by Estemirova's colleagues raised dozens of questions about the official theory.
How could the car allegedly used to kidnap Estemirova contain no sign of a struggle? How was the unsophisticated suspect able to falsify the police identity card that Chechen police claim to have found in the Bashayev home, along with the murder weapon? What happened to the genetic material collected from under Estemirova's fingernails that likely contained the DNA of her killers? The material, the report said, showed that Estemirova struggled with at least three attackers, one of whom was a woman. But investigators ordered only one type of DNA testing, which could neither categorically confirm nor disprove the involvement of Bashayev. In the process of testing, the report's authors said, the DNA samples were depleted, making further testing nearly impossible. It is possible, however, to compare the completed test results against other potential suspects--such as the police officers implicated in the Albekov execution. Why hasn't this been done?
The Investigative Committee did not respond in detail to the report, instead issuing a statement that said the findings "are not based on facts but are simply the subjective opinion of persons who do not possess the necessary competence, do not have information, and do not have access to all of the materials of the criminal case." The Investigative Committee did not explain what it found concerning the possible link to Estemirova's reporting on the extrajudicial killing of Chechen resident Albekov. The committee did not respond to CPJ's written request for comment on the Estemirova investigation. In July, CPJ learned through a source at the Investigative Committee that the Estemirova case was being transferred from lead investigator Igor Sobol--who had been in charge of the probe since the beginning--to another, yet to be named, investigator, due to Sobol's "heavy workload." In Russia's context, this translates into burying the case for good.

Turkey
A critical journalist in Turkey these days needs a lawyer on standby. The press is laboring under a creaking judicial system and a panoply of antiquated and vague legislation that officials and politicians of every stripe find irresistible as a weapon against muckraking reporters and critical commentators.
The extent of journalist imprisonments has been disputed by the Turkish government, which asserts that independent assessments have been exaggerated. CPJ is currently carrying out exhaustive research on individual cases, legislation, and online censorship, all of which are choking press freedom in Turkey. Our research thus far indicates that there are dozens of journalists imprisoned in direct relation to their work. A report with our findings and assessment will be published in the fall of 2012.
After several years of legal and constitutional reform prompted by Turkey's application for European Union membership, moves to lighten the dead hand of the law on journalists are running out of steam. The United States seems wary of calling out Turkey on its human rights and press freedom record. Turkey, a NATO member and crucial U.S. ally in the region, is a progressive, secular democracy and a model of free speech compared with its neighbors Iran, Iraq, and Syria. But for journalists, particularly Kurdish and leftist ones, progress in freedom of expression has not kept pace with political and economic advances.
Journalists and press groups estimate there were up to 5,000 criminal cases open against reporters at the end of 2011. The cases involve charges such as criminal defamation, influencing the outcome of a trial, and spreading terrorist propaganda. The bulk of these cases have not resulted in convictions historically, but the endless court proceedings and legal costs have had a severe chilling effect, according to reporters, media analysts, and lawyers interviewed by CPJ throughout 2011. Prosecutions have intensified since authorities in 2007 first detailed the "Ergenekon" conspiracy, an alleged ultra-nationalist military plot to overthrow the government.

Emblematic Turkey Case
AHMET ŞIK
Freelance
Imprisoned: March 2011-March 2012
Şık, a prominent reporter who had written for the dailies Cumhuriyet and Radikaland the weekly Nokta, was charged with aiding the Ergenekon conspiracy, an alleged nationalist military plot to overthrow the government.
Şık, co-author of a 2010 book on Ergenekon, had been known throughout his career for his critical writings about the "deep state," the purported secular, nationalist forces operating within the army, security agencies, and government ministries. Before being arrested, Şık was writing a new book with the working title, The Imam's Army, which was to allege the existence of a shadowy organization operating within police and other government agencies and said to be populated by members of the Sufi Muslim religious community known as Fettullah Gülen.
A draft of the new book was deleted from the computers of his publishing house and that of a colleague during police raids, Hürriyet Daily News reported. The interrogations of Şık focused almost exclusively on the unfinished book, according to the paper. The government's indictment, which appeared months after the arrest, focused on Şık's journalistic activities, especially in regard to the book, the local press freedom group Bia said.
"Criticizing the government and drawing attention to the dangerous network of people in the police and judiciary who are members of the Gülen community is enough in today's Turkey to become an Ergenekon suspect," Şık told CPJ. Amid international outcry, authorities granted temporary release to Şık in March 2012. However, the charges against him remain and he can be rearrested upon conviction.
In a disturbing development, Special Authority Public Chief Prosecutor Muammer Akkaş launched a new investigation against Şık shortly after his release. The new investigation accused Şık of allegedly "threatening and identifying judges and prosecutors as targets for terror organizations" in his statement to journalists upon his release from prison, the independent news portal Bianet reported. Şık had told the press that day: "Incomplete justice is not going to bring justice and democracy. About 100 journalists are still in prison. The police officers, prosecutors, and judges who plotted and carried out this complot will go to prison. Justice will come when they enter this prison," according to news reports.
In July, an Istanbul prosecutor demanded that Şık serve up to seven years in prison for "insulting" and "threatening" state officials, the Dogan News Agency reported.