PRESS FREEDOM 

1. Is it fair that the US Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) included President Leonid Kuchma in the list of "ten enemies of the press"?

2. Was his (to be more exact, his spokesman Martynenko's) reaction adequate, when he did not rule out a possibility of suing that non-governmental organization?

  Natalia KONDRATIUK, Ukrainian bureau, Russian Public Television:
1. First of all, I do not like it when a foreign organization, rather than Ukrainian representatives, passes judgment on what is happening to the Ukrainian press. I am one of the people who do not much trust such committees. I do not think they have enough necessary information. And I think all of us know what American "freedom of the press" is. It is not so ideal as to judge about us.

I do not think we must always blame the President that a certain official or a specific press mogul wants to curry favor with him and cracks down on the press. One should not shift all the blame to the President in this topsy-turvy world.

2. Any person would probably have done so after finding himself on a list like this. And I think all state leaders, who got into this list, will do just that.

  Vyacheslav PIKHOVSHEK, 1+1 Studio:
1. The appraisals of the press in Ukraine by various organizations differ greatly. Freedom House has published a different report talking about partial freedom of the press in Ukraine. I do not think this assessment is the final truth, for it is obviously one-sided. I do not think the Ukrainian press is less free than in other post-Soviet countries. Ukraine does not have a problem with freedom of expression. We have the problem of the freedom of professional expression. It is not only Mr. Kuchma but also many "oligarchs" who bear the blame for our clan-based distribution of the press among various financial groups. In particular, I would like to see the first unbiased article on Yevhen Marchuk in The Day. (Editor's note: We try. Our opinion of impartiality and of Mr. Marchuk seems to differ from that of Mr. Pikhovshek. But this is both his and our right).

By the way, the closure of two newspapers in Las Vegas last year is also an instance of crackdown on the press in the US.

2. Mr. Kuchma's reaction is inadequate. Each can express his/her point of view. I do not think legal action worthwhile, but it is worth taking all this into account.

  Serhiy NABOKA, UNIAR and Radio Liberty:
1. On the one hand, it is painful and unfair for Mr. Kuchma to find himself in the company of dictators and terrorists. On the other hand, this could be regarded as a worthwhile warning. The actions of his closest entourage display some elements of a negative attitude toward a free press. But not to the extent of including Mr. Kuchma in the list of enemies. I know that committee and its highly professional experts, and I dare say they were guided by a sincere desire to help Ukraine and its press. But it came off rather wrong.

2. It is difficult to speak about the reaction, for it is not his but his spokesman's. But the reaction itself does confirm there is a grain of truth in this rating - it worked! In an undemocratic country, the leader would not have reacted to this kind of list.

  Mykola KNIAZHYTSKY, member, National Television and Radio Board:
1. This committee to protect the rights of journalists is one of thousands of similar non-governmental organizations, and each of them has a right to air its opinion. Some items on the hit list are, let us say, quite true. But the very existence of a newspaper like The Day in the countries of other leaders, who also made the list, would have been altogether impossible. So it is an exaggeration to call Mr. Kuchma enemy of the press.

2. It does not befit a head of state to react to such opinions of non-governmental organizations. The more so that the leaders of any country more often come under incessant critical fire than other mortals. One should act so that nobody entertains such opinions.

  Serhiy RAKHMANIN, Zerkalo nedeli:
1. Unequivocally yes.

2. This rating expresses the right to a free opinion of a specific non-governmental organization , and the Ukrainian President's reaction to it is, to my mind, inadequate.

  Mykola KANISHEVSKY, Vikna Television Information Agency:
1. That Mr. Kuchma got on this rating as an enemy of the press is, to a very large extent, the fault of his entourage, advisors, and assistants, who try to control the press in a crude and uncivilized way.

2. As to a probable lawsuit against the rating organizers, this is the reaction of the President's spokesman, and not his own. We do not yet know Mr. Kuchma's reaction.

  Ihor LUBCHENKO, Chairman, Union of Ukrainian Journalists:
1. I have not seen the text of this rating, but, judging by the quotes I have heard, Mr. Kuchma seems to have nothing to do with this. The text deals with tax pressure that stifles the free press. But taxes are the prerogative of Verkhovna Rada. I myself always criticize him, but in this case it is a raw deal. If Mr. Kuchma were criticized for Ukraine having excellent conditions for newspaper closures, heavy fines, and assaults on journalists, I would then absolutely agree to it.

2. It is nonsense to sue an American non-governmental organization. This is its opinion. Could you imagine, say, the Kyiv Pechersk district court taking up a suit like this? I am deeply convinced the New York court will also reject it. In general, it is very difficult to sue journalists under US law. You cannot prosecute anybody for his opinion.

And this is how members of Ukrainian Parliament comment on the inclusion of the President of Ukraine in the list of the enemies of the press, according to an UNIAN report.

In the opinion of Vitaly Shevchenko, deputy chairman of the legislative Committee on the Freedom of Expression and Information, "Ukraine has state-sponsored freedom of expression" and "we do not have freedom of speech in the normal sense of the word." He thinks the notes of speakers at the Council of Europe meeting about the freedom of expression in Ukraine "are absolutely well-founded." And as to the rating of the US Committee to Protect Journalists, Mr. Shevchenko believes the President should not go to court.

"He will show his true face even more!" objects Leonid Kosakivsky, member of Verkhovna Rada standing delegation to the Council of Europe. In his opinion, if the President "wants the situation to become an object of discussion in the world, he will achieve this, for he will never prove his case in any court. What Mr. Kuchma must do is change the situation concerning  freedom of expression, and then he will not need to go to court."

By Anatoly LEMYSH, The Day
 
 
  FROM THE EDITORS It is not so important, in principle, whether the President is one of the ten most notorious enemies of the press or holds a place somewhere much lower down the list. What is obvious is that all is not well with the freedom of the press in this country, and it is very difficult to dispute Tetiana Korobova's arguments that there is a "general atmosphere of fear and self-censorship" (one of the accusations leveled against Mr. Kuchma by the CPJ). And in this situation it is better to overdo it by protecting freedom than to underdo it defending the country's honor.