AZERBAIJAN’S NEW BROADCASTING LAWS UNDER ATTACK
Clare Doyle: 11/06/02

Independent mass media outlets in Azerbaijan have struggled to overcome government interference in recent years. Now, international bodies and non-governmental organizations worry that a pending overhaul of broadcasting legislation could thwart the development of independent media outlets in the country.

Authorities, in the run-up to 2003 presidential elections, came under pressure from the Council of Europe and other international organizations to create a more open legal framework for independent media. President Heidar Aliyev accordingly endorsed proposals October 11 from the National Television and Radio Council that the administration portrayed as helping to harmonize Azerbaijan’s media standards with Council of Europe’s requirements.

Already, Aliyev has signed a decree on the creation of a regulatory commission, and parliament is discussing a separate law that would make state television into "public television," receiving funding but not direction from the government. However, the government action has generated considerable criticism. There have been calls for substantial changes to the decree, and a Council of Europe delegation publicly criticized the new draft legislation.

At present, Azerbaijani leaders appear to wield far more influence over mass media than those in neighboring states. While Georgia and Armenia have 100 independent television stations between them, Azerbaijan – with the same population as the other two countries combined – has thirteen. In some places, state television is the only viewing option. Elsewhere, officially independent stations are widely believed to have links with the government. Almost all broadcast media appear reluctant to tackle controversial material in any case, fearing official retribution, including the revocation of broadcast licenses.

Critics express concern about the autocratic nature of the new media measures. First, the presidential decree leaves the president in sole charge of appointing commissioners to regulate broadcasting operations. The Broadcasting Commission will have the task of approving regional television stations’ applications for licenses, some of which are years in the making. Some experts fear that the Broadcasting Commission would essentially control the broadcast media by orchestrating the licensing process. "It is not right that only the president appoints the council," parliamentarian Etibar Mammadov told the Turan news agency on October 12.

International organizations agreed. The prospect of a handpicked presidential commission leaves "little chance for a truly independent governing board that would allow independent media to flourish in a fair and transparent manner," the media NGO Internews commented. The European Union commented officially in July that "the proposed non-transparent method of appointment of the membership of the National Television and Radio Council... raise[s] a question concerning its independence with regard to the State authorities."

This lack of transparency began with the Broadcasting Commission decree, which – unlike a related broadcasting bill – became binding without parliamentary review. The authorities maintain that this is a constitutional requirement, but a Council of Europe delegation rejected this explanation in October. "To establish a truly independent regulatory body and public TV company, it would have been preferable to foresee their creation in the laws themselves.
Otherwise, there would always be a risk of presidential interference in the operation of these bodies," the delegation said.

These concerns, though, may seem technical compared with media advocates’ next legislative challenge. "There’s very little difference between the president choosing the members of the commission, and parliament choosing them," Fuad Suleymanov, a lawyer who has worked with the government on media legislation, told EurasiaNet. "In either case, they won’t be independent." Suleymanov says the president’s influence over parliament is so strong that lawmakers would simply endorse his choices. Real reform, the lawyer says, would come with the establishment of a truly independent public television channel, with government money but without government coercion. He is currently on the parliamentary working group that is drafting this legislation. Many believe that the effort to transform state television into a public broadcasting organization will be crucial to the future of independent media in Azerbaijan.

The Council of Europe delegation declared itself opposed to the government’s initial plan of keeping state television intact and simply adding a new public broadcaster to the media roster. "It was underlined that the law would not serve its purpose if a state broadcaster were maintained in parallel to a public one," the delegation reported. "Keeping two separate organizations would not be financially viable for Azerbaijan... and [the system] would never possess international credibility or Council of Europe approval."

If authorities accept this argument, Azerbaijani lawmakers will have to rewrite the broadcasting law to remove references to state television. Some open-media advocates hope authorities follow this course, as rewriting the law and the decree on broadcasting could prompt parliament and the president to address the concerns raised by the Council of Europe and others.

John Boit, country director of Internews, expresses hope that rewriting laws to please the Council of Europe will prompt Azerbaijani authorities to consider making the changes his organization seeks. He believes the influence of the presidential party on the Broadcasting Commission could be limited by reserving some seats on the commission for academics, religious and community leaders, and others. He also believes that parliament must have a role, so that the commission’s composition at least comes up for a public vote.

"The door will be open to make changes and reforms," Boit said, noting that public pressure earlier this year did appear to yield results in the rewriting of a decree on state secrets. "The opportunity for change is there, and the precedent is there. We can only hope."

Editor’s Note: Clare Doyle is a freelance journalist based in Baku.

Email this article | Printer-Friendly Version
Posted November 6, 2002 © Eurasianet
http://www.eurasianet.org

	The Central Eurasia Project aims, through its website, meetings, papers, and grants, to foster a more informed debate about the social, political and economic developments of the Caucasus and Central Asia. It is a program of the Open Society Institute-New York. The Open Society Institute-New York is a private operating and grantmaking foundation that promotes the development of open societies around the world by supporting educational, social, and legal reform, and by encouraging alternative approaches to complex and controversial issues. The views expressed in this publication do not necessarily represent the position of the Open Society Institute and are the sole responsibility of the author or authors.