A public debate on the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA) was organised by the Centre for Media Sociology and Digital Society (CEMEDI) of the Institute for Development and International Relations to create a participatory and inclusive exchange of knowledge on the possible implementation process of this regulation in Croatia. The meeting was attended by representatives of the Croatian Journalists’ Association (HND), the Croatian Journalists’ Union (SNH), the Croatian News Agency (HINA), Jutarnji list, Gong, Faktograf, the Ombudsman, the Agency for the Protection of Market Competition (AZTN), Croatian regulatory authority for network industries (HAKOM) and the Ministry of Culture and Media.
Dr Iva Nenadić, scientific coordinator of the Centre for Media Freedom and Media Pluralism (CMPF) of the European University Institute (EUI) in Florence, gave the introductory presentation. She highlighted the broader European framework of the regulation, and the role of the Media Pluralism Monitor project. She concluded that EMFA is not a technical issue but a basis for the structural reform of media legislation and creating a framework for media and journalism in the service of public interest and democracy. In his presentation, Dr Paško Bilić emphasised that the problems of Croatian media policy result from long-term unplanned processes and that EMFA implies the creation of minimum standards in all EU members. By looking at the five selected articles (Articles 4, 5, 7, 18 and 22), he pointed out that there are either no similar standards in Croatian legislation or, in some important elements, they are below EMFA’s expectations.
In the ensuing discussion, stakeholders highlighted the problem of transparency of media ownership in Croatia, which stems from the company law that allows for secret owners, making regulation more difficult. The Agency for Electronic Media is developing a platform financed by the EU NPOO, but doubts are raised about the effectiveness of this platform, given that it will rely on already existing registers. The problem of unregulated state advertising was also highlighted. Additional challenges include the lack of oversight and sanction mechanisms for implementing media statutes and institutional support for implementing media statutes within individual media organisations. There was critical discussion about the insufficient implementation of existing laws, the independence of regulatory bodies and the financial stability of public media. According to EMFA, the public service broadcaster (HRT) and the media regulator (Council for Electronic Media) should be depoliticised, but there are concerns that political influence will be retained through formal changes. It is, therefore, necessary to discuss a model that can ensure real political independence. The need for a systematic approach was also highlighted, including tax policy reform, ensuring the financial independence of HRT and the protection of editorial freedom. Funding models for independent media, including potential digital tax revenues, should be planned to ensure pluralism and protection of journalism. The delay of Croatia, i.e. the Ministry of Culture and Media, in preparations and discussions on EMFA was criticised, and the importance of transparent management of the process and adequate legitimisation of the process through assessments of the effects of regulations on the market and human rights was highlighted to avoid formal implementation without real adaptation.
Towards the end of the discussion, it was emphasised that the academic community would continue to offer detailed analyses and interpretations of individual articles of the EMFA and possible implications in the national context. The need to maintain a broad perspective to understand all aspects of the information environment and political economy was also emphasised. Special emphasis was placed on the independence of financing of HRT and the Agency for Electronic Media, noting that the financing models of both institutions defined in the existing legislation must not be changed as this would undermine their financial independence. It was concluded that the implementation of the EMFA requires an active role of the Ministry of Culture and Media and broad cooperation of all relevant stakeholders while ensuring transparency and public debate to prevent negative consequences for media pluralism and democratic standards.
At the end of the discussion, Nives Zvonarić, the representative of the Ministry of Culture and Media, announced that it is planned to unify the Law on Media and the Law on Electronic Media and establish a single regulatory agency. At the same time, she points out that the key challenges are ensuring a flexible legislative framework, preserving existing reasonable solutions and solving the problem of ownership transparency in the media, where regulatory authorities currently do not have the mechanisms to investigate real owners. She points out that the analysis of the national legislation in the context of the EMFA will be completed within a few weeks, followed by an assessment of the impact of the regulations and the development of proposals for changes. A public presentation of the analysis results and consultation with stakeholders is planned. Given the short time frame, until EMFA comes into force in August, readiness for cooperation and appreciation of comparative analyses by the academic community and civil society was clear.
