Activities of Francis ZAMMIT DIMECH related to 2017/2209(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
Media pluralism and media freedom in the European Union (A8-0144/2018 - Barbara Spinelli) MT
Shadow opinions (1)
OPINION on media pluralism and media freedom in the European Union
Amendments (18)
Amendment 3 #
1. Emphasises that access to quality, free and independent information is a fundamental human right, that media pluralism is the pillar of democracy and that the media’s independence from political and economic powers and influences must be guaranteed accordinglyforms part of freedom of expression as enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, and is a pillar of democracy and that the media’s independence from political and economic powers must be guaranteed accordingly; recalls that the independence of media should be guaranteed by such powers in order to avoid any harassment or intimidation in such a way that influence the editorial content;
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1 b. Having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents;
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1 c. Whereas journalists require direct, immediate and unencumbered access to information by public administration to properly hold authorities to account;
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 d (new)
Paragraph 1 d (new)
1 d. Whereas information obtained both by right of inquiry as well as through whistle-blowers are complementary to each other and both essential for journalists' ability to fulfil their public interest mission;
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 e (new)
Paragraph 1 e (new)
1 e. Whereas journalists require fullest legal protection to use and disseminate such information of public interest in their line of work;
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 f (new)
Paragraph 1 f (new)
1 f. Whereas the right to demand and receive information from public administrations remains scattered and incomplete across the European Union;
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Recalls that Member States should find ways to support media, by ensuring for example VAT neutrality as recommended in the resolution of the European Parliament of 13 October 2011 on the future of VAT , and by supporting initiatives related to media;
Amendment 35 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Is perturbed about the recourse by powerful commercial entities to SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) practices in an attempt to silence journalists from carrying out their work or otherwise interfere with their content. Calls upon the European Commission to take note of this trend and to propose legislation that would curtail these abusive practices.
Amendment 37 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2 b. Reaffirms that in line with the European Charter of Human Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights, freedom of expression is one of the most fundamental values to safeguard democracy and to enhance our European identity. Freedom of expression is not only meant to protect journalists and their sources but above all is meant to protect the right of society as a whole to receive information about all issues of interest to it.
Amendment 41 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that online media pluralism is under serious threat from the excessive concentration of corporate power; asks the Commission and the Member States, therefore, to overcome regulatory deficiencies in order to create legal clarity and consistency to ensure media freedom and prevent the abuse of their dominant position by web giants since this would also run counter to the very concept of media pluralism; stresses in this regard that media ownership structures must be transparent and that national regulatory authorities shall monitor this aspect in particular;
Amendment 58 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Highlights the fact that freedom of information in Europe is being jeopardised by increasing intimidation of and acts of aggression against journalists, as proven by the recent murder of Daphne Caruana Galiziaassassination of Daphne Caruana Galizia; reiterates in this regard that Member States have to safeguard the fundamental human right of freedom of expression of journalists to impart information by ensuring the protection and the facilitation of their work, as well as the fundamental right of the general public to receive that same information; emphasises the particular situation of investigative journalists, as well as the protection of the sources of all journalists;
Amendment 61 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Moreover, emphasises that Member States must ensure that whistle- blowers must be given equal protection on a non discriminatory basis. Such protection must also adequately and effectively cover workers in the public sector and be administered independently of the government.
Amendment 69 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Underlines that media professionals often work in precarious conditions with regard to their contracts, salaries and social guarantees, which compromises their ability to work appropriately and thus hampers media freedom; is therefore concerned by the replacement of professional and trained journalists by less expensive freelancers and its negative consequences on quality journalism;
Amendment 75 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Emphasises that a criticaldeveloping a sense of critical appraisal and analysis with regard to the use of media content is essential to people’s understanding of current issues, to being able to recognise professional and responsible journalism, and to their contribution to public life; calls, therefore, on the Commission and the Member States to promote and support media literacy projects and in particular to ensure that media literacy will be an integral part of the European Union’s education policy.
Amendment 79 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Reiterates the need to maintain strong and vibrant independent public broadcasting service that is impartial from political interference, to ensure that the public is duly informed; emphasises that in this context, this need is more important than ever before to safeguard media pluralism and freedom in the European Union as well as democracy.
Amendment 91 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 d (new)
Paragraph 5 d (new)
5 d. Notes the attempts by public officials to restrict the dissemination of information by journalists by the abuse of secrecy or intellectual property legislation; Calls on the Commission to propose broader safeguards for journalists to freely access, use and re-use information obtained in their course of work;
Amendment 93 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 e (new)
Paragraph 5 e (new)
5 e. Calls on the Commission and Member States to ensure that journalists are given the proper tools to inquire and receive information from EU and Member State administrations;
Amendment 94 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 f (new)
Paragraph 5 f (new)
5 f. Calls on the Commission to urgently review Regulation 1049/2001 and to propose improvements to the public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents;calls on the Commission to abstain from any more efforts to prevent or deter journalists and members of the public from seeking and obtaining information held by the Commission through arbitrary hurdles; Notes with indignation any attempts to deny access to information by the use of delay tactics, bogus reasons for dismissal or unjustified narrowing of the scope of information that was requested1b; _________________ 1b In several cases, Member States have invoked copyright in order to prevent journalists from disseminating information of public interest (most famously: Unterrichtungen des Parlaments - a series of reports by the German Government to members of Parliament regarding the ongoing military deployments, such as Afghanistan). One of these cases is currently pending at the ECJ after local courts ruled in favour of the government and granted an injunction against a newspaper who published these reports. Regulation 1049/2001 - Access to information to EU documents has not been improved since 2001. On the contrary, the Commission introduced new interpretation in 2014 to the Regulation to introduce bureaucratic hurdles in order to discourage people from seeking documents via Regulation 1049/2001. The Regulation is in dire need of an update to properly account for the possibilities or proactive publication and internet mediated access (which was not taken into account in 2001). On a practical level, the access to information to Commission documents is often thwarted by misapplication of the Regulation and the systematic use of delay tactics. The Commission uses an overly narrow definition of what constitutes information unless the requester specifically asks for all information. Even then important documents such as drafts and comments are often discarded and remain undisclosed. The EMIS committee of inquiry recommended several changes to access to information in the EU, including: "83. Calls on the Commission to improve its capacities to handle document requests from committees of inquiry as well as from journalists and citizens under respective applicable document access rules, in a timely manner and with an acceptable level of quality; urges the Commission to release these documents in their native format and refrain from time-consuming and potentially content-altering format changes and format conversions; further instructs the Commission to make sure that information that is stored in a machine-readable format, e.g. a database, is also released in a machine-readable format".