Senator Jan Żaryn is demanding “civic denunciation” from journalists before they publish investigative materials. Meanwhile, the senator’s demands have no legal grounds, as confirmed by lawyers inquired by tvn24.pl and by an article in a trade journal for prosecutors made available by the National Public Prosecutor’s Office.
“Let me reply collectively to all those attacking “Superwizjer” and, in fact, defending the neo-Nazis: journalists inform the society and notify the authorities via their publications,” adds Adam Pieczyński, editor-in-chief of TVN24. “Exceptions to that rule are specified by the Polish law.
Professor Jan Żaryn, senator of the Republic of Poland, historian, member of Law and Justice parliamentary club, deputy chairman of the Senate’s Science, Education and Sports Committee and member of the Senate’s Taskforce for the Education and Upbringing of the Young Generation was the guest of “Kropka nad I” in TVN24 on Tuesday, 23 January. The interview concerned the developments around the famous reportage of TVN “Superwizjer” showing instances of propagation of Nazism and worship of Adolf Hitler by the circles surrounding the leader of the association “Pride and Modernity” (Duma i Nowoczesność).
After the reportage was broadcast, the prosecutor’s office arrested five people, participants of the party in honour of Adolf Hitler organised in a forest near Wodzisław Śląski on the 128th anniversary of the Third Reich’s leader’s birth. The propagation of Fascist ideology was condemned by president Andrzej Duda and Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki. Also among political pundits and politicians demands could be heard to delegalize the association that has connections to Hitler admirers.
“Civic denunciation to the Internal Security Agency, to the prosecutor’s office”
The guest of “Kropka nad I” pushed to move the discussion in a different direction. He was wondering why TVN, before airing the reportage, did not notify the prosecutor’s office about the crime committed. He suggested that journalists should make a “civic denunciation” to the prosecutor’s office or Internal Security Agency. He went on to add that many months passed between filming the excesses occurring on Adolf Hitler’s birthday and the airing of the reportage (once he phrased it as “nearly a year”, and in another part of the interview, as “eight months”). The host Monika Olejnik retorted to those comments that the entire body of materials shown in the reportage also included events from November.
Żaryn’s objection was not incidental in nature, it was not expressed in the heat of emotions. During the interview with Olejnik, Law and Justice senator repeated it five times.
“Why did TVN decide to take up this subject in January rather than submit to the prosecutor’s office, or to the Internal Security Agency, the information on an obviously illegal incident?” he asked.
“She failed to do what she should have, i.e. to make a civic denunciation to the Internal Security Agency, to the prosecutor’s office,” he said about the reporter who infiltrated the neo-Nazi community. “I only criticize that the prosecutor’s office learnt about it eight months later rather than the day after,” he reiterated later in the interview.
“Why didn’t TVN cut out this fragment and didn’t report a crime that happened in April, May last year while it’s January now?” he added.
Date of publication being the editors’ sovereign decision
Meanwhile, cutting out a fragment of the collected material before publication – as expected by the politician – and submitting it to the prosecutor’s office is not required of a journalist, editorial staff or publisher. There is no such duty in legal provisions. This is confirmed by lawyers of different specialisms asked by tvn24.pl – a solicitor, a prosecutor and an academic.
“Why, it's obvious that publishing a journalist material is in itself a report of a crime or a source for launching ex officio prosecution. There is no such thing as a duty of civic denunciation before publishing any material,” points out professor of the Jagiellonian University, Ireneusz Kamiński, the coordinator of Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights’ “Observatory of Media Freedom in Poland” programme.
Solicitor Dariusz Pluta who practices in the area of media affairs emphasizes that the date of publication is at the editors’ sole and autonomous discretion. In his opinion, this is one of the pillars of freedom of the media.
“Journalists wishing to gain an in-depth understanding of the subject must get a complete body of materials and they should be the ones to decide when to publish. We should be just grateful that they documented the events and spoon-fed them to the prosecutor’s office. Questions like: “Why now?” and “Whose interest does it serve?” are always asked but they make no sense. Meanwhile, the recordings made public by “Superwizjer” show how meaningful the mission of investigative journalism is,” emphasised Mr. Pluta.
A representative of the prosecution community, in an interview with tvn24.pl, also concluded that publishing a material is the best way for journalists to report a crime.
“If the editors decided to notify the prosecutor’s office and the society of this incident once they have full material, it has the same value as a report of a crime made in writing to the prosecutor’s office. It's not about formalism. It’s about sensitivity and vigilance,” said the president of the Association of Prosecutors “Lex Super Omnia”, Krzysztof Parchimowicz.
“The right of free and independent media”
Interestingly, the National Public Prosecutor’s Office, headed by MP and Prosecutor General Zbigniew Ziobro, makes available on its website an article from prosecutors’ trade journal “Prokuratura i Prawo”. It contains a fragment referring to the question raised by Żaryn:
“Press materials are published when the editors become convinced that a crime may have been committed. This is an effective method of reporting a crime and to document such conviction is the right of free and independent media,” emphasizes Małgorzata Kędzierska in the pages of “Prokuratura i Prawo” (No 4/2007). The legal situation in this respect has not changed since the publication of the article.
The only types of crimes journalists are obliged to report immediately to law enforcement services, irrespective of the publication date of the material, are crimes set out in Article 240 of the Penal Code, for example homicide, taking away the independence of the Republic of Poland, an attempt to cut off part of the state’s territory, preparing the president’s assassination, removing a constitutional Polish authority by force, high treason, destroying defence facilities, manslaughter, preparing a terrorist attack or deliberately causing a disaster, high-jacking an airplane or ship as well as taking or keeping hostages. Whoever fails to immediately report those strictly listed crimes commits a crime himself.
Standards of the impartial medium
Propagation of Fascist ideology is not listed in this close-ended catalogue of crimes. Journalists revealing illegal actions first in the materials they prepare is the golden standard of freedom of the media in most countries with well-established democracy.
For example, the guidelines for journalists of BBC (considered as a model of impartial and independent medium) do not mention that a journalist has a duty to inform the authorities of crimes documented by the same for the purposes of the material. However, BBC standards caution that investigative journalists’ job may not interfere with the work of law enforcement services and that journalists should be prepared to be called as witnesses after the material is published.
Źródło: tvn24.pl/tłumaczenie Intertext.com.pl
Źródło zdjęcia głównego: tvn24