STILL OFF THE AIR

Transitions Online
June 27 2008
Czech Republic

An Armenian broadcaster wins an important case in the European Court
of Human Rights. But the fight may not be over.

If you’re the big man in charge and you don’t like what the media are
reporting, just shut them down. That’s what Russia’s government did
earlier this month with the irreverent, somewhat smutty, but ever
intrepid Exile biweekly in Moscow. That’s what Mikheil Saakashvili
did in Georgia last November, sending riot police into the pesky
Imedi television station to force it off the air during a period of
sustained political protest.

In Armenia, President Robert Kocharian temporarily barred all but
"official" media from reporting on post-election demonstrations in
March. After watching security forces fire on demonstrators in central
Yerevan, many journalists took the cue and complied with the gag order.

It was by no means the first time that the Armenian authorities used
their power to restrain the country’s marginally free media. Take
the case of A1 Plus, the nation’s first independent broadcaster. A1
Plus developed a reputation as a reliable and – by the standards of
Armenia’s highly partisan journalism – relatively neutral source of
news when it went on the air in the early 1990s.

Mesrop Movsesian, who runs A1 Plus, opened his own journalism training
center to improve the standards of his own reporters, photojournalists
and technicians, as well as those outside the station. "They were
doing what we wished we could do, and still wish we could do," says
one prominent journalist for the government-run TV network.

But A1 Plus’s aggressive reporting was not popular in the corridors
of power. During the convulsive 1995 presidential election season,
the broadcaster opened its airwaves to all candidates, rather than
bending to political pressure to only broadcast what the government
wanted. A1 Plus paid the price for its audacity by temporarily losing
its broadcast license.

In April 2002, the National Television and Radio Commission suddenly
gave the A1 Plus frequency to a company that, according to Movsesian’s
lawyers, had limited experience and no broadcasting equipment. Since
then, the commission has repeatedly denied A1 Plus a broadcasting
license. The NTRC, whose members at the time were appointed by the
president, refused to explain its decisions, and Armenia’s courts
dismissed the broadcaster’s complaints against the commission.

The company and its journalists have survived through its Internet
site, despite lost advertising revenues and a significantly smaller
Internet audience. Years after the station went off the air, loyal
listeners still turn out on occasion to protest the government’s
treatment of A1 Plus and to demand that it be given a broadcast
frequency.

JUSTICE AT LAST

The broadcaster finally got justice this month when the European Court
of Human Rights ruled that the Armenian government had violated A1
Plus’s rights under the freedom of expression clause of the European
Convention on Human Rights. The court also ordered the government to
pay the broadcaster 30,000 euros in damages and legal costs.

"I am happy that we have won," A1 Plus lawyer Tigran Ter-Yesayan
said on 17 June, the day the court decision was announced. "The A1
Plus staff knew that their rights had been violated but the problem
could have been solved in the local court. I am sorry to have involved
the European Court in this matter. Being in the judicial process the
company lost much. So did the society, as getting information is one
of its rights."

Armenia is hardly the world’s most brazen offender of free
expression. In fact, by the standards of the former Soviet Union, the
media market is relatively vibrant. The Yerevan Press Club lists more
than 60 television companies and even more newspapers in a country
of barely 3 million people.

But many media have limited reach and the advertising market is too
small to sustain that much competition, and news operations are
expensive. The "news" too often constitutes shots of government
ministers cutting ribbons, dreary politicians rattling on with
little context, and reports "sponsored" by businessmen or people with
important connections. Some Armenian journalists readily acknowledge
taking payments to slant their reports, while others complain that
their managers care little about quality and neutrality.

The human-rights court’s decision gives Armenia’s new president,
Serzh Sarkisian, the chance to enable a stronger media environment. He
could start by working with the parliament to build on changes made
last year to the broadcasting law, which divided responsibility for
appointing the broadcasting commission between lawmakers and the
president. As the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe
and other watchdogs have noted, the change was a positive step, but
with Armenian politics dominated by the Republican Party, independent
commissions still remain open to undue political influence. Further
revisions, perhaps with members chosen equally by the president,
parliament and media watchdog groups, could reduce partisan influence.

More immediately, the government should rectify the injustice done
to one of the country’s more determined media operations and return
A1 Plus to the airwaves. That would be a victory for free speech. It
would also allow Sarkisian to break with his predecessors’ penchant
for trumpeting democracy to outsiders while placing a lock on pluralism
at home.