The servant of the people plans to cut off the functions of the Supreme Council for Freedom of Speech – before transferring it to the opposition.
This "country" became known from the draft document that was available to the publisher. They plan to adopt it at the first working meeting of the Council, which will take place at the end of August.
At the same time, systemic powers to regulate media activities in Ukraine will be delegated to a new Council commission.
"Country" understood this problem.
How to limit free speech
Our information shows that only three functions will remain with the Freedom of Speech Committee:
- Freedom of speech
- Citizens' rights to information
- Protection of the rights and freedoms of media employees
It should be noted that at present two times more are indicated on the Parliament's website – six areas of commission activity:
- State policy in the field of information and information security
- Freedom of speech
- Citizens' rights to information
- Printed, electronic media and the Internet
- Reach of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine
- Basics of implementing promotional activities.
As you can see, the reduced version of the Committee turns it into a "pathetic book" and cuts it off from making strategic decisions about the fate of the media.
More global problems are "draining" now to the humanitarian policy committee – headed by the protégé of the ruling party, General Director "1 + 1" Alexander Tkachenko.
There will also be another "Servant of the People" – political strategist Nikita Poturaev. Which has already confirmed that his commission will deal with utility bills – in particular audiovisual services, press, online publications and press supervision.
"Circumcision" Freedom of Speech Committee "Servant of the People" plans to give opposition, said Poturaev.
Interestingly, one of the main tasks of the "large" humanitarian committee (where the fate of the media will actually be resolved), Poturaev called the media deoligarchization, which will be included in a separate law.
However, he does not mind that the committee will be headed by the long-term supreme manager of the oligarch Igor Kolomoisky.
"Turn the committee into a decoration"
Initiatives of "People's Servants" "Country" commented on both journalists and human rights defenders.
Sergey Tomilenko, chairman of the National Union of Journalists:
"There is a risk that when the powers of the Speech and Information Policy Committee are divided, media deputies from the" Servant of the People "party will go to the Humanitarian and Information Committee. I am afraid that the Freedom of Speech Committee will be small and therefore less powerful to effectively protect Journalists, no matter how bled it is, and it has not changed into ritual decoration.
Europeans are waiting for the new government to protect freedom of speech. There is a risk that initiatives related to media and information space, journalists' rights will be discussed on parallel pages, which should not be. There should be committees in which debates on freedom of expression will be held. Creating multiple parallel sites will highlight the problem.
Information policy is more about creating an economic environment for the media: information acquisition channels, media regulation. All these issues, considered by the Humanitarian and Information Committee, may be contrary to the agenda of the Committee for the Protection of Freedom of Speech. Such issues should be considered on one platform.
Most importantly, the creation of committees should be discussed in public. And it is necessary for the current majority to clearly state their vision of the format of work of the Freedom of Speech committee, so that this committee can clearly defend its position in parliament. "
Vasily Golovanov, the main producer of the NewsOne TV channel:
"Do we really need the freedom of speech committee without authority, even if it is handed over to the opposition, but at the same time the information security functions will be transferred to the new humanitarian and information committee chaired by Alexander Tkachenko. We need to see what powers these two committees will have, although I am skeptical at first. There is no need to create unnecessary committees, especially since the People's Servants party is in favor of reducing the number of committees. It would be better to resume work of the incumbents. "
People's Deputy, member of the current Commission of Freedom of Speech Yuri Pavlenko:
"The committee is intentionally divided, creating a mono-structure for the director general of channel 1 + 1, Alexander Tkachenko, who during the election campaign has already stated that the country does not need many TV channels.
Poroshenko's strength began to work worse than the previous government of Yanukovych, they did not give up the opposition committee, but they themselves moved, taking control of the topic of freedom of speech. The new government decided to completely eliminate the parliamentary concept – control of the protection of freedom of speech and protection of the independent work of independent media.
Now they generally want to destroy a parliamentary instrument in the person of a committee that could defend a journalist or the media.
Once, the establishment of the Speech Freedom and Information Policy Commission emerged from the tradition of European parliamentarism and a certain Ukrainian tradition, which was formed during eight parliamentary assemblies. The Speech Freedom Committee should not be divided into two parts, but rather reinforced with additional control functions such as the ability to influence the law enforcement system.
During the work of the Committee law enforcement officers very often did not respond to the committee's requirements. Law enforcement officers found it difficult to pull a report to the committee; I'm not even talking about forcing them to investigate crimes. And then imagine that there will be a small committee of five or six deputies. They usually stop walking.
The Humanitarian Policy and Information Policy Committee should be headed by Alexander Tkachenko, and therefore perform all the most important functions of the committee in it: impact on ministries, national television and radio broadcasting, issuing licenses for television channels, as well as their termination, a procedure involving information and control this information. All these powers are taken away from the Freedom of Speech Committee and leave only minor functions, such as: protection of freedom of speech and protection of journalists themselves, and it is not clear how.
I have nothing against Tkachenko, but the insolvency and immaturity of the new team's policy manifests itself precisely in the fact that the tasks of the committee are not determined on the basis of the state and national needs of society, but on the basis of professional specialization and the desire of the individual. And his desire is simple: to occupy a beautiful position. The desire of his clients is even simpler – to take control of the entire information market.
Separation of the committee looks unnatural, a hybrid of the committee is created, something that, in fact, cannot be combined, is connected. Social and information policies cannot be combined, because based on this logic, you can eliminate all committees and create one, headed by Dmitry Razumkov. As a result of this chapter, all issues regarding freedom of expression and information security will be subject to double subordination, which complicates and hinders decision making. "