Milan Banov, editor-in-chief of Makedonija Denes, believes that nothing else could be expected from this government. "This is probably the sixth or seventh version of the law, but the way in which these versions are produced indicates that the government definitely does not intend to improve the proposal. On the contrary, everything is going in the opposite direction and they are offering only bad solutions. By the way, there are already legal regulations for this sphere of activities, and they are quite adequate. Article 16 of the Constitution very clearly and precisely regulates public information. However, now the government is proposing a totally restrictive law for the media with sanctions for journalists, which only indicates the degree of democratic changes in the society. These days Serbia has abolished her Public Information Law, and consequently one can come to the following conclusion - Serbia is becoming more democratic, while we are about to enact the law which absolutely violates declared dedication to the freedom of public information and speech and will without doubt produce very negative processes," Banov stated.
Branko Trickovski, editor-in-chief of Utrinski Vesnik, welcomed the proposed law because, according to him, it is so absurd that it will necessarily bring about the collapse of the whole project. "Macedonian transition is full of stupid solutions in different areas, but the offered proposed law for information really tops it all. This amount of destructive imagination and backwardness hasn't been demonstrated so far. This is simply fantastic. The author of the idea that the government should issue work permits for journalists through government appointed council is a self-destructive genius and I could not think of a better or more grotesque way for a political option or a government to fully discredit itself. As a journalist and editor, and also as one of the owners of one of our daily newspapers, I find those solutions irrelevant and will continue to ignore them. No council can limit my right to work. My work is the only work permit I need, and my limits are spelled out in the Constitution and in positive laws. A special law is not necessary, and if someone is determined to enact one, then he should take care not to go below the level of general rights and freedoms," Trickovski said.
Gjorgji Barbarovski, deputy editor-in-chief of Dnevnik, agreed that the law proposed by the government is too restrictive for the media. "It is especially limiting in the part which deals with state sources of information that do not have any obligation to provide information to the public. I am not saying this from the point of view of a journalist but precisely because both the government and journalists work for the public. It would be bad if we had to wait for government's permission to write about certain problems, and this proposal envisages such a system. It seems to me that the chief result of this law would be to turn courts into our most frequent meeting spot for encounters with politicians," Barbarovski said.
Zoran Dimitrovski, editor-in-chief of the daily Vecer, stating that he hasn't seen the most recent version of the proposal but only heard about it through the media, believes that the text should be somewhat modified, above all regarding the regulation of work permits for journalists. "The law must not be rigorous and this particular point should be sorted out in the parliamentary procedure. In the previous versions of the proposal the ministries had the obligation to communicate with journalists; I haven't seen this one, but if it is true, as journalists claim, that in the new proposal there are solutions that impede access to the information, these should be changed. If there is no communication with the state institutions, there will be no true information for the public, only speculation," stated Dimitrovski.
Vera Adzigova, deputy editor-in-chief of Vest said the following: "In Serbia the information law has just been abolished and here we are getting one, which is the best indication of the situation here. There has been so much talk about the need for such a law and in the end everything boiled down to a very restrictive framework. Elsewhere in the world everyone knows who issues work permits. It is totally crazy to establish an official body that will be in charge of that".
Main points of the information law:
Representative Aleksandar Florovski, for example, openly says that it was high time to enact such a law, and sees in that law as means for protection from rude journalists. "Not everyone can be a journalist and write whatever they like. We also have families," said Florovski. His comrades from PDPA-NDP, as well as his coalition partners from the Liberal Party, did not offer immediate reactions to the proposed law. They are waiting to see the text of the law and will then give their reactions.
It seems that only VMRO was satisfied with the mentioned proposed law; reactions coming from the public indicate a general strong criticism and outrage regarding the government's intentions. Besides in the Macedonian public, the proposed law was also criticized by the Council of Europe and the European Journalistic Association. European experts were merciless, insisting that the most questionable solutions, regarding work permits issued by the government and the lack of obligation of the government institutions to provide information to the public, be removed from the law.
Essentially, it turned out that there are still numerous disputes regarding the law for public information, prepared by the Justice Ministry. First, the law has never been assessed by any relevant institution in Macedonia, nor the Council of Europe, as the government's spokesperson Anvonio Milososki claimed. It turns out that Georgievski's spokesperson simply did not tell the truth when he defended the proposed law in front of journalists with so little skill and without offering any arguments in its support. We shall not tell the spokesperson the word used for those who do not tell the truth in this part of the world. It is shameful that Milososki tried to fool both the journalists and the Macedonian public. To makes things even worse, he decided to insult the whole journalistic profession by saying that journalists were "sterile".
Instead is giving advice to the media, Milososki would have done better to keep his mouth shut and do not claim that the new government's proposal includes all the suggestions of the Council of Europe. Now he can only admit that he was wrong. Because the statement by Christopher Piruel from the Council of Europe, given to Vest does not allow for any other reaction. "No one in the Council of Europe has seen the proposed law that was adopted by the government on Tuesday. When we were in Skopje last year, when our expertise was requested, we gave many criticisms and there were negative comments regarding many articles in the proposed law, especially in the part dealing with work permits for journalists," Piruel said.
The goal of the law is under no circumstances to introduce order in the media, as is claimed. Just the opposite, its true goal is to force the journalists to report according to the wishes and needs of the government. And that deeply affects the guaranteed constitutional right to freedom of information. Restrictive solutions such as the government's discretionary right to issue work permits for journalists, release of state institutions from the obligation to provide information to the public, exclusive right of the providers of information to decide when that information can be published, as well as the obligation to reveal the source of information if a court decides that that is in public interest, clearly indicate the intent to introduce an information blackout in Macedonia. Consequently, all elements indicate that the intent of the government is to push the media against the wall, to strike a serous blow at the journalism, which would definitely bring into question democratic processes in the country.
The Forum of Young Journalists also condemned the government's proposal. It assessed that the law is being implemented in a non-transparent and underhanded manner. The Forum could not detect any good intentions in the offered proposal, among other because journalists were not consulted during the writing of the proposed law. The Trade Union of Graphic, Media, Film, Publishing and Newsprint Production Workers of Macedonia also opposed the proposal. The trade union believes that the explanation that the goal of the proposed law is to introduce order in the media is cynical as, on the contrary, the real intent of the lawmaker, to limit the freedom of the media and the freedom of expression, is obvious.
The compatibility of the proposed law with the European legal norms can also be discerned from a statement by Aidan White, from the European Association of Journalists, who was adamant in his statement for the Skopje TV station A1 that the advisory body which issues work permits for journalists cannot be appointed by the government. Actually, members of such a council, if it does exist, should be exclusively journalists. White announced a strong reaction if the Macedonian parliament adopted the law.
The journalists and the Macedonian public have sent their message to the members of the parliament. They have time to once again revisit their decision before pressing the green or red button on the voting machine. And no, the orders of the party leadership do not have to always be blindly obeyed.