The new internal regulation of the Special Court against Corruption and Organized Crime, which is expected to enter into force on September 1, introduces restrictions on the media’s reporting of court proceedings.
The regulation includes new measures on security and conduct inside the court, aimed at protecting judges, court administration staff, lawyers and the parties involved in the proceedings.
However, the provisions that have sparked debate are those related to the work of journalists in the Court’s daily activities. One of the most restrictive provisions is the ban on journalists using mobile phones during court hearings.
This has led to reactions from journalists’ organizations. According to them, this measure makes real-time reporting and communication with newsrooms more difficult, limiting transparency in cases of high public interest.
According to concerns raised by Albanian media organizations and the European Federation of Journalists, some provisions of the regulation could limit journalists’ access and their ability to follow and report on court proceedings on time.
The regulation provides for annual and individual accreditation for journalists, but it does not clearly state whether a journalist without permanent accreditation can attend a public hearing. Requirements to provide proof of professional activity could also create difficulties for freelance, independent or early-career journalists.
There are also concerns about the ban on using phones, laptops and other electronic devices during hearings. While restrictions on unauthorized recording or broadcasting may be justified, a general ban could make it difficult for journalists to take notes, communicate with their newsrooms and report in real time.
The regulation also sets procedures for filming, taking photographs, making audio recordings and broadcasting hearings. According to media organizations, these restrictions should be justified and proportionate to the specific circumstances of each case, while avoiding general restrictions on the presence of journalists.
There is also criticism of provisions that allow measures to be taken against journalists, including the suspension or withdrawal of accreditation. Although the regulation provides some procedural guarantees, concerns have been raised that there is no quick mechanism for challenging a denial of access or a measure affecting accreditation.
The Albanian Journalists’ Association (AGSH) has argued that the regulation departs from the 2023 guidelines of the High Judicial Council, which allow the recording and broadcasting of court hearings as long as the normal conduct of the proceedings is not affected.
According to AGSH, Albania does not need new restrictions, but rather the implementation of existing rules and reasoned decisions in each individual case.
AGSH has called on the Special Court to postpone the entry into force of the regulation and open a consultation process with the Albanian Journalists’ Association, the journalism community and media organizations.
The European Federation of Journalists (EFJ) has also joined these concerns, calling for the entry into force of the regulation to be postponed and for a consultation process to be opened with journalists’ organizations.
According to the EFJ, any restrictions on reporting from court proceedings should be based on law, be proportionate and comply with European standards on media freedom and the public’s right to information.
Following this debate, Exit.al looked at how reporting is regulated in the rules of similar courts in European countries. A quick review showed that Slovakia, Croatia and Romania have similar specialized justice structures.
A comparison between the new regulation of the Special Court in Albania and the rules of Slovakia’s Specialized Criminal Court and Croatia’s USKOK, the Office for the Suppression of Corruption and Organized Crime, shows that the Albanian model is more restrictive when it comes to limitations on journalists.
In Albania, the Special Court’s regulation requires annual accreditation and written authorization 24 hours in advance for each hearing. In Slovakia and Croatia, accredited journalists have free access, without prior notice, including to hearings that have not been declared closed to the public.
In Albania, the new regulation completely bans phones and laptops during court hearings. In Slovakia and Croatia, these devices are allowed for real-time reporting of the proceedings, although video or audio recording may be prohibited in certain cases.
The draft regulation presented by the Special Court also limits the number of journalists who can attend hearings held in courtrooms with limited capacity, because seats are reserved for the parties involved in the proceedings and their family members.
In such cases, Slovakia’s Specialized Criminal Court has addressed the issue by creating separate rooms with audio and video feeds for journalists who want to follow the proceedings. In Croatia, the solution has been simpler: when there is high public interest in a case, the specialized court has moved the proceedings to larger courtrooms or increased the number of seats where possible.
The Special Court against Corruption and Organized Crime has so far not provided explanations about the objections raised by journalists’ associations. However, on Friday, it removed the draft of the new regulation from its website.
Shpërndaje te miqtë
