FLASH
Shkruar nga Pamfleti
The proposed draft for amendments to the Criminal Code continues to generate reactions and opposition. Most recently, the international network "Safe Journalists" has sounded the alarm about the danger that journalists in Albania face if such a Code is approved.
The organization underlines that the adoption of the new draft Criminal Code in the form it was presented would weaken the oversight role of the media and would severely damage transparency in a functioning legal state.
According to them, the failure to recognize journalists as a specially protected category further exacerbates the risks associated with their professional duties, potentially increasing the intimidating effect on independent reporting.
Full statement
“We, the Safe Journalists Network, partners of the Media Freedom Rapid Response Initiative (MFRR) and civil society organizations in Albania, express our deep concern regarding the proposed amendments to the Criminal Code. Several provisions of the draft published by the Ministry of Justice, specifically articles 865 (Defamation), 863 (Insult) and 536 (Impact on the Independence of the Court), pose direct threats to media freedom, the safety of journalists and the fundamental right to freedom of expression.
As we continue to closely follow developments and prepare a detailed legal assessment, based on our initial analysis of the published Draft Criminal Code, our main concerns are as follows:
Article 865 (Defamation) significantly increases penalties, especially when information is disseminated through media channels or online platforms, as well as against holders of public office. Removing the element of knowledge that the disseminated information is false introduces ambiguity and allows for disproportionate interpretation, thus increasing the risks for journalists, whistleblowers, public watchdogs and the media. Broadly worded clauses could lead to the prosecution of journalists and have a chilling effect on investigative reporting and public discourse. The amendments fall short of fully decriminalizing defamation as demanded by civil society, the media community and as envisaged in the Roadmap for the Rule of Law of Albania in light of the EU accession process.
Article 863 (Insult) for serious insults introduces vague criteria such as “disturbing public opinion” and “good customs”, lacking clear definitions and leaving room for subjective interpretation and selective application. The proposed sanctions, including the possibility of imprisonment, are disproportionate and contradict the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), which, among other things, underlines higher levels of permissible criticism of public figures and state officials.
Article 536 (Impact on the Independence of the Court) is particularly concerning as it broadly prohibits the making or publication of comments on judicial proceedings, thus directly interfering with the essential oversight role of the media and undermining transparency. The wording is too general, leaving room for the authorities to misuse it and suppress journalistic oversight and public discourse, which is particularly important given the ongoing judicial proceedings against prominent political figures. The sentence is also disproportionate. Therefore, such a provision conflicts with Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and the case law of the ECtHR, which emphasize the public’s right to be informed about judicial matters.
Article 852 (Violation of Freedom of Thought and Expression) positively recognizes the right to freedom of expression and protection of the media, but lacks clear definitions of terms such as “unjustified denial or restriction,” potentially limiting its effectiveness as a protective mechanism.
Failure to recognize journalists as a specially protected category further exacerbates the risks associated with their professional duties, potentially increasing the intimidating effect on independent reporting.
Call for institutions to act in accordance with European standards
We emphasize that the proposed provisions are incompatible with basic European standards, in particular:
Article 10 of the ECHR, which protects freedom of expression, including the freedom to receive and impart information without interference by public authorities.
Council of Europe Recommendation Rec(2003)13, which affirms the right of the public to be informed about judicial proceedings and the right of the media to report freely on judicial activity.
Council of Europe Resolution 1577 (2007) which calls for the decriminalization of defamation.
The jurisprudence of the ECHR, which affirms the right to publicly discuss and comment on judicial cases before the court's final decision.
Recommendations:
Considering the above, we urgently call on the Ministry of Justice, the Council of Ministers and stakeholders involved in the process of adopting the new Criminal Code to:
To substantially revise Articles 865, 863 and 536 to fully align with Council of Europe standards and best European practices.
Ensure clarity and specificity in the formulation of criminal provisions, thus avoiding ambiguity and the possibility of selective application.
Decriminalize defamation and insult, addressing them through proportionate civil measures in line with Council of Europe standards and EU recommendations, and as provided for in the Rule of Law Roadmap and as requested by civil society and the media community.
Clearly protect journalists, media workers, whistleblowers and public watchdogs from disproportionate punishments and criminal liability for their legitimate oversight and reporting roles.
Engage in meaningful consultations with journalists, civil society and media freedom experts to ensure that legal changes strengthen rather than undermine freedom of expression and democratic governance. It is important to clearly specify the consultation period and clarify the methods for collecting comments and suggestions, especially given that the draft Code has not yet been published on the Electronic Platform for Public Consultation.
We reiterate our commitment to support Albanian institutions in improving legislation related to media freedom and freedom of expression, emphasizing that strong protection for journalism and freedom of speech are essential for Albania's democratic development and the path to EU integration.
Signed
SafeJournalists Network
Journalists' Association of Bosnia and Herzegovina
Kosovo Journalists Association
Macedonian Journalists Association
Croatian Journalists Association
Independent Journalists Association of Serbia
Media Union of Montenegro
Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) Initiative Partners:
Trans-European Balkan Caucasus Observatory (TBCO)
Free Press Without Restrictions (FPU)
European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
International Press Institute (IPI)
Reporting Diversity Network
Civil society organizations in Albania:
Science and Innovation Center for Development (SCiDEV)
Albanian Women in Audiovisual (AWA – Albanian Women in Audiovisual)
Albanian Media Institute (AMI)
Journalists' Association of Albania (AGSH)
Albanian Media Council (KSHM – Albanian Media Council)
Citizens Channel (CC)
Amfora.al
Union of Journalists and Media Workers (SGPM)
Institute for Democracy and Mediation (IDM)
Balkan Investigative Reporting Network – Albania (BIRN Albania)
Albanian Center for Quality Journalism (ACQJ)
Center for the Study of Democracy and Governance (CSDG)
Factoje.al
Albanian Center MediaLook
Association of Professional Journalists of Albania (APJA)
Union of Journalists of Albania (UGSH)
Civil Rights Defenders – Albania
Civic Resistance (QQ – Civic Resistance)
Albanian Helsinki Committee (AKHH – Albanian Helsinki Committee)
Partners Albania for Change and Development
Public Res Center
Lini një Përgjigje