"Partnership for Open Society" initiative congratulates all the media on the World Press Freedom Day.
Having analyzed the media situation in Armenia, we state:
1. In 2003 the RA National Assembly passed two laws that directly relate to the media sphere-"On Freedom of Information" and "On Mass Communication". The two documents were adopted as a result of public dialogue and are mainly compliant with international standards. At the same time it is a source of much concern that amendments to the RA Law "On Television and Radio", criticized by the journalistic community and international organizations, were shallow and inessential, failed to solve the main problem-ensuring the independence of the two regulatory bodies, the National Commission on Television and Radio and the Council of the Public Television and Radio Company. In the legislation another concern-provoking fact is that the implementation of the RA Law "On Freedom of Information" is in fact delayed, as the government to this day has not fulfilled the provision of the law: it has not defined the procedure for provision of information or its duplicate (copy) by the state structures and local self-governance bodies, state institutions and organizations. And, finally, having adopted legislation containing rather progressive clauses that regulate the media activities, the authorities must amend other laws to make them correspond to international standards and the newly passed bills. This calls, in particular, for the removal of libel and insult provisions from the Criminal Code passed in 2003 (Articles 135, 136, 318) that endanger the freedom of expression and can induce media to exercise self-censorship.
2. The consistent refusal to provide license to "A1+" TV company by the results of the broadcast licensing competitions in 2003 came to reconfirm that the National Commission on Television and Radio is not guided by the principles of objectivity and impartiality. Moreover, the National Commission declined the proposal of non-governmental organizations to involve an independent experts with a right to consultative vote at least in one of the competitions, although this procedure is provided for by the law and the presence of experts would have ensured the transparency of the tender.
3. The Public Television of Armenia remains an addendum to the executive power and serves as its rostrum. This TV company has adopted the policy of praising the authorities and relegating the opposition, it does not provide objective and impartial information, diversity of opinion.
4. The press mostly fulfils its function of disseminating diverse information, however, the newspaper circulations are small, they are mostly sold out in the capital and the regional centers. The press remains polarized and entangled in the controversy of authorities and opposition.
5. On April 5 and in the early morning of April 13, 2004 violence was exerted on the journalists covering the opposition rallies. If in the former case those who beat the journalists and broke their photo and video cameras were people dressed in civilian clothes, on the latter occasion the attackers were policemen. These offenders have not as yet been found and punished, and the damages to the media have not been compensated.
6. The reputable international organization "Freedom House" qualified the Armenian media in 2003 as not free.
We, the representatives of non-governmental organizations of "Partnership for Open Society", again demand the law enforcement bodies to find and punish the individuals who violently attacked journalists on April 5 and April 13 as strictly as the law stipulates.
We demand that Armenian authorities ensure the free and unimpeded activity of media and journalists, remove Articles 135,136 and 318 from the "Criminal Code" as being dangerous for the freedom of expression, refraining from their application till this is accomplished.
We state that we will continue to advocate the improvement of the media-related legislation, the establishment of real freedom of expression and truly independent media.
