Fury over fake news bill
Earlier this week, the fear that journalists could be jailed for what they wrote was very real and Thursday’s decision to review the proposed ‘fake news’ bill has only postponed not killed the threat.
In an already troubled media landscape, the House legal committee was pushing to put an extremely controversial legal amendment to the vote come September. In the face of widespread criticism, the justice ministry instead decided on Thursday that a team of experts would further discuss the proposed legislation.
It is unclear whether the legislation would have been voted through, but the consequences would have had a chilling effect on press freedom on the island, according to press groups both local and international.
The fact that it was even tabled and discussed has already sparked fury, concern and a backlash primarily from within the journalists’ union, journalism ethics committee and publishers’ association.
The debacle took on international dimensions when the International and European Federations of Journalists and the Media Freedom Rapid Response issued statements stressing their concern over the chilling effect this would have on press freedom.
They all warned this would lead to self-censorship.
The discussion centres on what has been informally dubbed as the ‘fake news bill’ but is in fact more blandly named as ‘the amendment to the criminal code.’
It was submitted by the previous administration’s justice minister Emily Yiolitis in 2021. Following the green light from the legal service, it then went to the House legal committee.
Journalism groups were not invited to attend, and only became part of the discussion after they pushed back – intensely.
Though it has been discussed for three years now, the journalism ethics committee was only invited 1.5 years later – after its chairwoman Elli Kotzamani and Ant1 news director raised the alarm.
For those who support the legal proposal, such as Disy MP Nicos Tornaritis who chairs the House legal committee, the aim of this amendment is to put a stop to online harassment.
He argues, along with the legal service, that it has nothing to do with journalists. The aim is to target a gap in the law that offers no legal protection for online harassment.
If someone is sworn at in the street, they can file a report. If this is done in the digital space, then nothing can be done, according to the legal service.
As such, this creates a gap in the law that requires fixing, they say.
“This legal amendment must at some point be brought to plenary. It is for our weak fellow citizens, for the underage who are constantly receiving threats and abusive messages,” Tornaritis said in defence of the amendment.
Current Justice Minister Marios Hartsiotis has said as much, noting this leaves people exposed to bullying and enables keyboard warriors to freely attack without fear of consequence.
While the government and legal service claim the aim of this law “is to protect the average citizen”, both Kotzamani and head of the journalists’ union Giorgos Frangos say this is a way for public figures to make sure they have their backs covered.
Politicians are often subject to criticism, and fake social media accounts in particular have been key to broadcasting information about alleged conflicts of interest to the public.
The government is hard pressed to clamp down on them, as seen by the police’s efforts to shut down the highly popular Jho Low parody account.
Frangos however counters that considering social media platforms do not necessarily hand over information to local authorities – as was the case with Jho Low – this means that ‘the anonymous trolls’ that the law seeks to target are left unscathed.
“It leaves journalists exposed,” he argues.
Press groups ardently support the idea that online harassment needs to be regulated. But as Kotzamani puts it, the text is currently so vague and broad, that it without a doubt runs a risk to journalists.
The bar association has also been opposed to the legal amendment, as it flags concerns over freedom of speech.
Kotzamani highlights there is no question over the fact that journalism in Cyprus has much to improve on. “But it cannot be done by threat of jail.”
Similarly, Frangos says that “prison time is a red line for us.”
Although one of the amendments of the proposal saw the jail time go down from five years to three, Frangos says: “That’s not the point at all.”
The sticking point lies in one of the provisions that specifies “an individual that publishes or posts […] written text or images or anything else, with content which is false with the aim to harm or adversely affect the reputation of another person or expose another person to contempt or ridicule, or adversely affect the rights of another person, is guilty of a criminal offence and, upon conviction, shall be liable to a term of imprisonment not exceeding three years, or a fine not exceeding €10,000 or both.”
A clause stipulates that proof the publication came in good faith and was supported with facts could count as a defence.
But as Frangos notes, the decision on the matter will lie squarely in the hands of the attorney-general.
“It is the job of a journalist to expose,” he says. Inevitably, publishing scandals or exposing secrets will mean that individuals being written about are exposed to contempt or ridicule.
“So how is a journalist supposed to do their job?”
The ambiguity and contested nature of what constitutes fake news “exacerbates the potential for arbitrary enforcement” and runs the risk that those in power will repress legitimate dissent and criticism, the Media Freedom Rapid Response wrote.
Though press groups have received platitudes that this will not affect them and they are not the target, journalism reps want to see the safeguards in the letter of the law.
“No one can guarantee who will step into power and what they might do with it,” one source said.
As of now, the bill is going back to the justice ministry and a team of experts has been set up to discuss it. It has offered some relief to press groups, but the amendment is still very much on the table, Frangos said.
The Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) has been alerted over the matter by Akel MP Irene Charalambides, and is expected to issue a legal opinion.
A country report on Cyprus by the Centre for Media Pluralism and Media Freedom referred to the amendment, saying there was “concern that the approach to what is both a serious and complex issue would lead to the detriment of free speech”.
It documented that “respect for freedom of expression in Cyprus faces critical challenges”. This has affected media pluralism which in turn has been negatively affected.
Cyprus’ dropped 10 points in 2024 on the press freedom index according to Reporters Without Borders. The country currently ranks at 65th out of 180 countries, down from 55th place in 2023.
The latest EU Commission Rule of Law report for 2024 highlighted there had been no further regulatory changes to the framework relating to transparency of media ownership.