Over the past several years, Ukrainian press freedom has deteriorated
to such an extent that Ukraine, unlike even neighboring Belarus, now lacks
any genuinely independent major news media. From a barrage of violent
assaults in 1996�97 to relentless bureaucratic pressures and lawsuits
aimed at bankrupting them, media outlets have been forced into the arms
of political patrons in order to survive. In contrast to Russia's powerful
media tycoons, however, nearly all Ukraine's media magnates lack the power
and will to resist President Leonid Kuchma's heavy hand.
Former prime minister Pavlo Lazarenko was one notable, albeit flawed,
exception. President Kuchma's successful struggle to eliminate Lazarenko,
his only potent progressive rival, laid to rest chances for any serious
liberal challenge to Kuchma's increasingly autocratic rule in the presidential
election on October 31. By the beginning of 1999, four media outlets controlled
by Lazarenko's supporters had either been shut down or taken over by the
president's allies. And in February 1999, the president's politically
motivated probe into Lazarenko's apparent self-enrichment during his term
as premier in 1996�97 drove Lazarenko to request political asylum in the
United States.
Although few in Ukraine believe that Lazarenko is completely innocent,
Kuchma's selective use of the legal code to crush his only serious opponent
set a precedent for his approach to weaker rivals, as well as news media
that endorsed them. In the end, the only real threat to Kuchma came from
hard-core leftist candidates, who were supported mainly by pensioners
nostalgic for the Soviet past. But as with former Russian president Boris
Yeltsin's reelection in 1996, nearly all Ukrainian media rallied behind
the incumbent Kuchma when his opponent in the November 14 runoff turned
out to be Petro Symonenko, the leader of the Soviet-style Communist Party
of Ukraine.
Well before the election, the government blocked all television coverage
of the Parliament, which served as an electoral platform for 13 rival
presidential candidates. When the independent STB TV, the first satellite
network in Ukraine, signed a contract with the legislature to air a special
program focused on its activities, state officials nearly put the station
out of business in retaliation. With its large viewership (about 80 percent
of Ukraine's TV audience), STB had been the only nationwide channel to
offer balanced coverage of opposition candidates. In a series of measures
documented by CPJ, government agencies repeatedly harassed STB with hostile
tax audits, along with fire and other technical inspections. In August,
authorities froze STB's bank accounts for alleged tax violations. In October,
the government finally took control of STB by forcing director Volodymyr
Sivkovich to resign after threatening to shut down the network altogether.
President Kuchma also delayed his appointments to the National Broadcasting
Council, the country's top broadcast agency, after the previously appointed
council's term expired in December 1998. In order to ensure politically
balanced decisions on licensing and regulation, Parliament and the president
each appoint four candidates to the eight-member body. The legislature's
choices included the few top media executives known to oppose the Kuchma
administration. But Kuchma refused to name anyone to the National Broadcasting
Council, causing a year of regulatory anarchy. With the president's blessing,
the previous council continued to dole out licenses, whose legitimacy
Parliament refused to acknowledge.
Kuchma also forced officials at every level of government to harass opposition
media. Random hostile tax audits and other costly tactics were used to
frighten sponsors, advertisers, and printing facilities, encouraging them
to withdraw their business from targeted media outlets. CPJ protested
several such cases, although many more cases went unreported by news organizations
afraid of further reprisals.
The pressures on journalists to engage in self-censorship continued even
after President's Kuchma's reelection. The administration has allowed
only "favored" journalists to attend presidential news conferences. Most
recently, it has required journalists who do secure credentials to submit
questions in advance and has even provided lists of approved questions
for them to ask. The credentials come with an implicit warning that journalists
may be excluded from press conferences if they ask questions that "upset"
the president.
By year's end, all major broadcast media either displayed a strong pro-Kuchma
bias or were controlled by his supporters. The two large-circulation opposition
publications, Holos Ukrainy and Silski Visti, were controlled
by leftist parties or the leftist-dominated parliamentary leadership.
Several relatively professional opposition periodicals (Den, Zerkalo
Nedeli) continued to publish, but high subscription prices limited
their influence to a segment of the elite. While the Ukrainian press remained
diverse, subscriptions for all periodicals totaled only 9.2 million, or
around one-fifth of the total population. Meanwhile, over 90 percent of
Ukrainian households watched Kuchma-dominated television.
CPJ included President Kuchma in its 1999 list of the world's 10 worst
enemies of the press. Kuchma threatened to sue CPJ for defamation, but
no such suit had been filed by year's end.
July 26
Chornomorska TV CENSORED
ITV Simferopol CENSORED
Ekran TV CENSORED
Kerch TV CENSORED
On July 26, the Frequency Inspection Agency ordered the state-run Crimean
Radio and Television Broadcasting Center (CRTBC) to halt transmissions
by Chornomorska TV, the largest private broadcaster in the region. The
order also applied to three other Crimean TV stations in the towns of
Simferopol, Dzhankoy, and Kerch.
The agency claimed that the stations were operating without proper licenses
because CRTBC had allocated frequencies within Crimea without approval
from Kyiv authorities. Yet while these four private stations were shut
down, state-run regional and local stations continued to broadcast with
similar licenses. The timing of the inspection agency's order was also
suspect, given that Chornomorska TV had been broadcasting daily news and
feature programs under its current license for eight years.
In an August 6 letter to President Leonid Kuchma, CPJ protested the move
as a politically motivated effort to stifle independent broadcast media
during the run-up to the October 31 presidential election. Previous attempts
by Crimean officials to cut off the station's broadcasts before national
parliamentary elections in March 1998 failed only after public and international
groups protested.
The CRTBC eventually caved in to international pressure and allowed the
stations to resume transmission. Kerch TV started broadcasting again on
September 10, while ITV in Simferopol and Ekran TV in Dzhankoy went back
on the air on October 14.
Chornomorska TV was not allowed to broadcast until November 11, after
the first round of the presidential election. At year's end the station
was suing the CRTBC, with the next hearing set for January.
August 26
STB TV HARASSED
Tax officials froze the bank accounts of STB TV, an independent station
that reaches 80 percent of the television-watching population of Ukraine,
claiming the station had failed to submit tax documents on time.
The move was the latest in a series of official attacks on STB in 1999,
aimed at stifling its coverage of state corruption and of President Leonid
Kuchma's rivals in the October 31 presidential election. On June 8, for
example, the government cited alleged "technical violations" to justify
ordering STB to halt satellite broadcasts to its affiliates around the
country. The real motive was apparently retaliation for STB's investigative
series about high-level corruption. STB defied the order and continued
broadcasting after its protests received broad domestic and international
support.
STB's lawyers said that many of the documents demanded by tax inspectors
had already been requisitioned by the state Radio and Television Broadcasting
Committee, which was also investigating STB. It was thus physically impossible
for STB to comply with the tax inspectors' demands.
With its bank accounts frozen, STB was forced to suspend production of
a new program about the Ukrainian Parliament, a platform for several of
Kuchma's rivals. With no access to operating capital, the station would
have been forced to lay off some or all of its 3,000 employees. And if
STB had failed to pay for transmission services in September, the station
could have been forced off the air altogether.
STB filed suit against the State Tax Administration and the State Frequency
Commission, charging that these two agencies were engaged in coordinated
harassment designed to put the station out of business.
CPJ protested the harassment of STB in a September 23 letter to President
Kuchma. In mid-October, the Kuchma administration forced STB director
Volodymyr Sivkovych to resign from his post and sell his holdings in the
network to other shareholders. Under pressure, STB's owners replaced Sivkovych
with Kuchma adviser Serhii Kutsy.
In exchange, the authorities ended their campaign against STB, which subsequently
dropped its lawsuit. Several STB journalists resigned in protest, claiming
Kutsy had begun censoring the station's programming.
October 2
Kryvoi Rog Vecherny HARASSED
Inna Chyrchenko, Kryvoi Rog Vecherny HARASSED
Ukrainian tax officials subjected the opposition weekly paper Kryvoi
Rog Vecherny to a series of hostile audits, in apparent retaliation
against its endorsement of Oleksander Moroz, a political rival of President
Leonid Kuchma.
The harassment of Kryvoi Rog Vecherny began after authorities accused
Moroz aide Serhiy Ivanchenko of orchestrating a grenade attack on rival
presidential candidate Natalia Vitrenko in a nearby town. Authorities
used this attack as an excuse to clamp down on the paper for its alleged
"ties" with Ivanchenko.
On the night following the grenade attack, police ransacked the offices
of Kryvoi Rog Vecherny and detained one of its editors, Inna Chyrchenko.
Chyrchenko was released after 17 hours of interrogation about the paper's
relationship with Moroz and Ivanchenko.
October 13
XXI Vek HARASSED, CENSORED
Rakurs HARASSED, CENSORED
Nashe Zavtra HARASSED, CENSORED
Kryvoi Rog Vecherny HARASSED, CENSORED
In four apparently separate incidents on October 13�15, local printing
houses refused to print four Ukrainian newspapers that had endorsed President
Leonid Kuchma's rival candidates in the run-up to the October 31 presidential
election.
In one case, a printing company in Luhansk refused to print the October
15 edition of the popular newspaper XXI Vek after its editor, Yuri
Yurov, declined to pull a front-page photo of candidate Yevhen Marchuk
and several articles critical of President Kuchma's administration. XXI
Vek was forced to delay its print run for a day on one other occasion,
when the same printing house claimed technical problems with the press.
After the election, the paper returned to its normal publication schedule.
Two other Luhansk newspapers, Rakurs and Nashe Zavtra, were
also unable to publish that week. Nashe Zavtra was a temporary
newspaper, brought out during the campaign season by supporters of Oleksander
Moroz. As planned, Nashe Zavtra was discontinued after the election.
Rakurs also endorsed Moroz.
The Donetsk company that normally prints Rakurs claimed it was
experiencing technical problems. Mykola Severin, the paper's editor, tried
to hire the printer who publishes Nashe Zavtra. But he found that
tax inspectors had recently shut down the printing house, blocking the
publication of both papers.
Rakurs managed to print its next edition the following week, whereupon
a single, unidentified individual bought up all the newsstand copies.
Since the election, the weekly has been publishing regularly.
On October 15, employees at the city-owned printing house in Kryviy Rih
told the editors of Kryvoi Rog Vecherny that they were breaking
their contract to print the paper. (Kryvoi Rog Vecherny also endorsed
Moroz in the presidential race.) The employees claimed to have acted at
the request of the Askon Company, which owns the paper. Kryvoi Rog
Vecherny's editors believe that their publisher was pressured to submit
this request after tax officials conducted a series of hostile audits
on the paper, while police ransacked its offices and questioned one of
its editors for several hours.
The printing house agreed to resume printing Kryvoi Rog Vecherny in
early December, several weeks after the presidential runoff on November
14. However, random tax audits and fire inspections frightened most of
the weekly's advertisers and sponsors into withdrawing their support.
At year's end, the paper had not resumed publication and was seeking new
financial backing.
|