Media businesses cannot be the final beneficiaries in the election process. The time is ripe for the legislative reforms on media in the context of electoral campaigning and other issues. This came as a message from Olga Aivazovska, Chair of the Board at the Civil Network OPORA, during the round table on “Law on Media and Changes to the Electoral Code: Challenges and Opportunities” on October, 27.
Olga Aivazovska reiterated that the electoral component in the law on media has been developed over the past year with an inclusive approach engaging all stakeholders.
“Certain products pertaining to media and electoral process have been finalized upon large systemic and recurrent consultations with all stakeholders. I also mean media businesses who are quite active in lobbying their own business interests in that process, as well as civil society and international expert community. The process was absolutely open for MPs, for representatives of all political forces who have been joining at different times, where available. Nevertheless, we need the law on media and the regulations in general to balance the elections as a certain stage of political cycle and the role of media therein, especially when it pertains to the everyday communications between the political sector and the audiences. However, the dedicated Committee on the Organization of State Power, Local Self-Governance, Regional Development, and Urban Planning, is not functioning, disappointingly. It is another challenge during a long period of the Parliament’s functioning after February, 24, and partially, before that day,” said the expert.
She also highlighted the Facebook post by the Committee member, Roman Lozynsky who is currently in the combat. In his post, he also referred to the fact that the Committee was not functioning for the moment, although it is in charge of many tremendously important affairs.
“The NGOs and international entities, the same as society at large, need to find the ways how not to hinder the reforms that are long overdue. That is why it is important not to have the media as final beneficiaries in the political and election process. Business must not earn on politics during the election process. However, to avoid the situation during the next political cycle when the “government is shrugging their shoulders and the people are complaining” we need to find the solution now and account for the interests of businesses, society, and political groups, both from the government and the opposition. Because, unlike russia, Ukraine is a state that still cherishes democracy, even under the martial law. Regardless of the fact that our partners in Brussels and in Washington, as well as in many other capitals, ask non-public questions about the shrinking democracy during the martial law, which is unacceptable for many and partially legal, but it needs to account for the specificities of the competitive political environment in Ukraine rather than reduce it all to political interests only.
As the non-governmental organizations, we have achieved a lot, indeed. We shall not, therefore, decrease the impact to gain the EU candidate status, with direct communication with decision-makers on the highest level. In fact, democracy, the stage of democracy development, the integrity of election process, although it might always appear unattractive, but compared to many other countries, also to EU MS, Ukraine is a sequence higher. Political election process is competitive. It is an integral precondition for the organization of free and fair elections. However, free elections cannot be held when there is no freedom of shaping political will. It requires every voter to have access to truthful, relevant, well-informed, fact-based information about the process actors. We need to be open and frank to admit that the platform Ukraine stands on to find support and preferences, such as the candidate status, is made up of democracy. It is a much higher prerequisite than even the anti-corruption effort, rules of law, a.o. We certainly need to keep it.
I am convinced that all experts and international organizations who have been sustainable partners to Ukraine, rather than simply implementing international technical assistance projects here, have the interest to strike the balance between the interests, rights and freedoms, and to build certain settings for responsibility. After all, democracy is not about chaos, it is about the absolute of freedom. It implies the absolute of freedom, in the settings when there are accountability instruments for the infringement of freedom of other actors.
That is why in 2019, OPORA, as an organization that has systemically observed the elections, lodged complaints and also informed the National Council for Television and Radio Broadcasting about recurrent violations when TV shows, or TV series, for example, that had no formal signs of election campaigning but still impacted the audiences, could not be identified as a system or structure of the election campaigning tool. Nonetheless, it is not about regulations. It is about the roles that must be determined, because each authority must act within the framework and in a manner set by the law. This is the position we uphold. We must not offer any impact tools that might be abused, but rather define the roles, instruments, sanctions, and actors that would be acceptable for all but primarily not for the media as beneficiaries or businesses, but for society as electoral actors, and citizens on the highest level,” she emphasized.
Aivazovska also provided a case from Ukraine and how the developments in global media may impact the Ukrainian electoral processes.
“If we refer to other practices, Ukraine might seem to be rather unique, but it is not true. Whenever we talk even about some politically non neutral TV channels present in Ukraine, it has been noticeable at least before February, 24, it is hard to compare them to Fox News or some other TV channels. To be more specific, those who get deep into the international заглиблюється в міжнародний context and check the political rhetoric of other leading democracies, they can see a huge difference. It does not mean that we are better or worse. It means that today, after some good progress in the organization of elections in the recent years, we must find the proper formula. On the one hand, we must not abuse the concept of freedom, propelling it to the absolute, but on the other hand, we should not create a monster that would not allow us to run the process with the free building of political will. However, that freedom can only be possible when all actors have free access to voters through the media.
In this regard, I would like to emphasize that in terms of electoral processes, the draft law takes the first progressive step as to the shared access international platforms. Because we absolutize the impact of TV channels but we live in the digital era, when the impact of international media platforms will be larger than that of another Tv channel or marathon. The audiences of such platforms will be much deeper than those at certain TV channels. The case of Elon Musk’s buying Twitter, if Twitter policies change, will have much more impact on the next elections in Ukraine than absence or presence of certain other media in the country. We need to realize that this discussion must be shifted to the higher level, when Ukrainian politicians and society could communicate with global scale businesses, with shared access platform owners,” said she.
In addition, Aivazovska also highlighted the new challenges related to the 6+ mln voters in overseas constituencies. “We need to realize today that the challenges related to campaigning, informing, and awareness-building, which is no less important, for Ukrainian people staying abroad, must also be included onto agenda,” she said.
Eventually, the expert summarized: “We, as an organization that has been ongoingly involved in the development of ideas that have not come out of the blue but are based on practices from previous election processes and present-day challenges, we are interested in bringing the process to the logical end. In other words, we need to have the provisions enabling the protection of lawful interests of election process actor, whether they are representing a pro-government party, or an opposition party, or a non-partisan candidate. We must create the preconditions when the media will have clear rules and regulations, on the one hand. On the other hand, they must not lose any freedom to implement their tasks in Ukraine as mass media and mediators between the society.”
She insists that voters need to receive truthful information and all process actors must have access. That is why election beneficiaries are not businesses but citizens.
Full video recording of the discussion is available to view at the link. You can read the quotes from the inputs of experts here. You can see the presentations of speakers here.
The event was organized by the Verkhovna Rada Committee on Humanitarian and Information Policy, in partnership with the National Council of Ukraine on Television and Radio Broadcasting, with the International Foundation for Election Systems (IFES) in Ukraine, and the Civil Network OPORA, as supported by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), Ministry for International Affairs of Canada, and the UK aid from the UK Government. Any opinions expressed during the event shall pertain to their authors and will not reflect the views of USAID, US Government, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Canada, Canadian Government, British Embassy to Ukraine, or the UK Government.