Croatia

Croatia is a Central European country which mostly practices Christianity. It was formerly part of Yugoslavia. It is part of the European Union. Censorship is banned in the country, according to the Constitution of Croatia.

General censorship

The Constitution of Croatia guarantees freedom of speech, protects freedom of expression and freedom of the press, bans censorship, and guarantees the rights of journalists to report and to access information. It guarantees the right to correction, if legal rights are violated by published news. Croatia ranked 63rd in the 2016 Press Freedom Index report compiled by Reporters Without Borders, falling by 5 places compared to the 2015 Index.

In May 1990, following Franjo Tuđman's election victory, he and his ruling Croatian Democratic Union party began a takeover of radio and television stations in Croatia. In June 1990, the Parliament of Croatia renamed the country's national broadcaster from Radio Television Zagreb (Croatian: Radiotelevizija Zagreb) to Croatian Radiotelevision (Croatian: Hrvatska radiotelevizija). The HDZ-majority Croatian Parliament soon appointed party loyalists to top managerial and editorial positions at the broadcaster. During this time, government-owned media was used to foment ethnic hatred in the midst of the Yugoslav wars. Publications were closed for political reasons under the pretext of privatization or restructuring. Following Tudjman's death in 1999 and the defeat of the HDZ in the 2000 elections, media began to be liberalized. In the early 1990s, the democratization process was accompanied by the strong role of the Croatian Journalists' Association (HND/CJA) as well as of Europapress Holding, the main publishing group. The latter recently faced a serious economic crisis also due to oversized ambitions. Similarly, cult station Radio 101 lately turned into a standard commercial broadcaster after a murky privatisation process.

The media in Croatia are regulated by the Law on Media, the Law on Electronic Media, the Law on Croatian Radio-Television and the Law on the Right to Access Information. The Croatian legislation, including media law, has been harmonized with EU Law in the process of EU accession. The EU's Television Without Frontiers Directive has been transposed in Croatia within the Law on Electronic Media and the Law on Media; the provisions of the 2007 EU Audiovisual Media Services Directive have been included in the 2009 amendments to the Law on Electronic Media, including licenses for specialised media channels and non-for-profit municipal televisions and radio stations.

The Croatian Criminal Code and Civil Code contain provisions about defamation and libel. The burden of proof about libel has been shifted to the prosecutor since 2005. In 2005, four journalists were convicted to suspended prison sentences for libel; prison sentences for libel were then abolished in 2006.

Hate speech in Croatia leads to a maximum five-year prison sentence. Insulting "the Republic of Croatia, its coat of arms, national anthem, or flag" is also punishable with up to three years in prison.

In 2013 the Croatian parliament passed an amendment criminalizing "vilification", intended as systematic and deliberate defamation of a person, institution or legal entity. This was seen as worrying by media professionals, and later confirmed when an investigative reporter was fined in 2014. As IREX notes, "a journalist can be prosecuted even if reporting only verified facts if the judge thinks that the published facts are not 'in the public interest'". OSCE Media Freedom Representative Dunja Mijatovic characterized the Croatian legal definitions of "insult" and "shaming" as "vague, open to individual interpretation and, thus, prone to arbitrary application", calling for decriminalisation by stating that "Free speech should not be subject to criminal charges of any kind".

Access to information in Croatia is a well-defined right, though limited by proportionality and public interest tests. An independent information commissioner monitors its compliance. There have been concerns about the mindset of the administration tending to reduce the public to a passive recipient of information. Journalists also lack training and resources to access information: only 7% of Croatian journalists ever asked for access to official documents. The right to obtain corrections for all those whose rights or interests have been violated by information is enshrined in the Media Law; liability is upon editors-in-chief. In case of lack of correction, civil proceedings can be started. Media ownership information disclosure is mandatory in Croatia. Yet, nominal ownership often does not equate to control: in Croatia's dire economic situation, several publishing groups are on lifelines extended by few major banks, often foreign ones. Information of basic vital financial data is not yet publicly available.

Media concentration is prevented by the Media Law, establishing a 40% ceiling for ownership of general information dailies or weeklies. Cross-ownership of national electronic media is allowed by the Law on Electronic Media, if it does not trespass a 25% threshold at every territorial (region, county, city) level. Holders of national broadcasting licenses are prevented from owning newspapers with a daily circulation of above 3,000 copies, or more than 10% shares of a news agency, and vice versa. Radio and television licenses are mutually exclusive. Holders of national and regional licences are forbidden from owning more than 30% share in similar media or local dailies in the broadcasting area.

License requirements for the media are deemed minimal, since they apply only to broadcast media making use of a limited public good (radio frequencies). Other media only need to register and declare their ownership structure.

Minority-language media receive subsidies through the Fund for Media Pluralisation (3% of HRT subscription fee). The Italian-language daily La Voce del Popolo has a 70-years history, while Serbian-minority weekly Novosti has a reach that goes well beyond its community.

Despite the good provisions enshrined in the reformed legal framework which built upon existing obligations, the lack of consultation that led to the amendments to the Media Act and the Electronic Media Act resulted in a series of shortcomings especially with regard to monitoring and enforcement of the laws. For instance, in practice, media companies in Croatia do not always comply with their obligation to publish information on indirect ownership and the law doesn't foresee a mechanism for monitoring, checking compliance and apply sanctions. Indeed, the Media act does not provide for effective mechanism enabling the Croatian Chamber of Economy to check that the information received are updated and correct. Given the scarcity of resources assigned to it, the Chamber has to rely on the assistance of other authorities such as the Croatian Competition Agency and the Company Register. Another critical point of the Croatian system regulating transparency of media ownership is that it does not guarantee the full disclosure of information on individuals holding shares of a media company. Indeed, often the name of a company is not enough for providing information on the individuals behind it. For example, on the basis of the information provided under the law regulating transparency of media ownership the media companies Europa digital d.o.o., Slobodna Dalmacija, EPH Media and Gloria Groupa apparently don't have anything in common, but they are all subsidiary companies within the EPH group, owned by WAZ and the businessman Ninoslav Pavić. Additionally, in practice, media outlets do not always disclose information on indirect ownership as required by the law. For example, the only shareholder listed for the media company Vecernji list d.d., which issues the daily paper Vecernji list is Styria Media International AG from Graz. Other relevant ownership information are not disclosed, for instance information regarding the important shareholders of Styra Media International AG or whether that company holds some shares for another person or a company. Furthermore, the publication of data in the Official Gazette is not monitored and since there is not a special issue of the Official Gazette listing the updates occurred during the year the search is complex and time-consuming.

In sum, despite the fact that the laws on transparency of media ownership are well defined, in practice is quite difficult to assess the actual ownership structures and reconstruct the networks of ownership and connected persons. The problem is exacerbated by the fact that, according to the Croatian law, different agencies are in charge of collecting data on ownership – the Council for Electronic media is responsible for online media and the Croatian Chamber of Commerce for print media – without a unique centralised monitoring system working across print, radio, television and online media.

In October 2014, the European Commission organised a consultative conference on transparency of media ownership and Croatia was mentioned as "a good practice" in this context. However, many panellists participating at the conference highlighted that it is important to insist on the improvement of the legal framework but that is not enough as, according to experts, it is more important to know who effectively controls the owners than who nominally owns the media.

Book censorship

General censorship

In print media, the market is dominated by the Croatian Europapress Holding and Austrian Styria Media Group companies, which publish their flagship dailies Jutarnji list, Večernji list and 24sata. Other widely read national dailies are Novi list and the government-owned Vjesnik. The most popular current affairs weekly is Globus, along with a number of specialized publications, some of which are published by government-sponsored cultural institutions. In book publishing, the market is dominated by several major publishing houses such as Školska knjiga, Profil, VBZ, Algoritam and Mozaik; the industry's centrepiece event is the Interliber trade fair held annually in Zagreb and open to public.

Public reputation of press journalists is low: a 2008 survey found 54% of respondents considered journalists to be influenced by political or economic interests.

No license is required to work as a journalist in Croatia, and the government has no way to exclude anyone from practicing journalism. Yet journalists are in a more and more dire professional condition, due to growing job insecurity linked to the degeneration of the general economic conditions in the country. Pressures have been mounting, while respect for ethical standards is in decline. Journalists "have no time, no money, no incentives, and, very often, not even the inner drive required to produce good journalists", as summed up by IREX. Investigative journalism is ever rarer, while most journalism tends to be "superficial, sensationalist, tabloid-style, and copy/paste". Advertorials and infotainment are also on the rise. In lack of specialised journalists, "experts" are often consulted, but they tend to be always the same and to simply confirm the journalist's position, rather than offering a variety of positions.

Journalists in Croatia have salaries in line with other professions, though often not regular, and around 20-20% lower than in 2007/2008. The average salary is of $1,200, but in the local media it can go down to half of that. Freelancing is not enough to earn a living, and young journalists often have to pick up second or third jobs too.

The Croatian Journalists' Association (CJA) has adopted a Code of Ethics. The Ethical Council of the association checks the compliance with the Code and inquires upon its violations, though it can only adopt public statements. The CJA Code of Ethics is deemed one of the best of its kind, and often used as a point of reference in other countries in transition. Yet, defamation and hate speech, particularly online, remain beyond acceptable standards.

The autonomy of journalists is to be guaranteed by individual media's bylaws, but as of 2010 only Jutarnji List has adopted a self-regulation about it.

In its recent history, Croatia has experienced most of the problems which are common in post-socialist states, including self-censorship, threats against journalists, pressure by advertisers and political actors, etc.

A common practice for exerting pressure over journalists in Croatia is to issue transfers, demotions and public warnings to editors and journalists for political reasons. Several distinguished journalists have had to move from one media outlet to another due to these pressures while unemployment among journalists is increasing. Many of these cases occurred in some of the most influential Croatian media outlets, i.e. the Croatian Public Television (HRT) and EPH/WAZ. Journalists that have moved to less prominent outlets have faced fewer restrictions with less pressure and censorship. Also, many journalists have left their profession at all, opting not to work in the field of media due to increasing pressure and restrictions and decreasing professionalism.

According to the organisation Index on Censorship, since 2013 threats and attacks against journalists have been less serious. The Croatian Association of Journalists and the Organisation for Security Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) have asked to end impunity for crimes committed against journalists since they led to self-censorship, one of the primary threat to media freedom. One of the main factor leading to self-censorship in Croatia is libel laws.

Croatia ranked 63rd in the 2016 Press Freedom Index report compiled by Reporters Without Borders, falling by 5 places if compared to the 2015 Index and halting the positive trend since 2009. Freedom House ranks Croatia as "Partly Free", 80th over 199 countries, after Hungary and Montenegro and before Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Republic of Macedonia.

Press outlets in Croatia fight for a small advertising market, thus following a trend towards more tabloid-like media. Commercial pressure discourages investigative reporting, in favour of full-colour layout filled with photographs and ads, and submits media outlets to pressure from advertisers and their business interests, with concerns about self-censorship. Trivialisation of contents pushes trust in media even lower down, leading to a further drop in circulation. Stronger dependence on the main advertisers (retail chains, pharmaceutics companies, and mobile phone operations) hinders the editorial independence of the media, creating a "pyramid of fear": "Journalists fear they will lose their jobs. Editors fear they will lose their position with owners. Owners fear losing advertising income."

The European Federation of Journalists, in cooperation with Croatia's HND and SNH associations, have established in July 2015 the Croatian Center for the Protection of Freedom of Expression to provide legal protection to journalists.

In 2023, the draft of a Media Act, proposed by the Croatian Government drew criticism from the Croatian Journalists’ Association HND. The Media Act would give publishers the right to not publish journalistic pieces without explanation, which the HND fears would lead to self censorship. The Law also drew criticism for the proposed establishment of a Register for Journalist and the need for journalists to reveal their sources of information. The Croatian government also received criticism for the weak protection of journalists against SLAPP lawsuits.

Attacks on journalists

Crimes against journalists have declined in the recent years. Although no Croatian journalist has lost her/his life lately, threats against journalists persist. Yet, courts have lately started taking verbal threats more seriously too. 2015 marked a deterioration of the situation, with 14 cases reported between May and August alone, compared to the 24 cases in May 2014/May 2015. In 2011 the Association of Croatian Investigative Journalists (ACIJ) published a White Paper with 70 stories of censorship and intimidation against journalists since the early 1990s. Impunity remains a big issue, due to lack of follow-up to police reports, prosecutors accusating assailants for minor charges (e.g. disturbance to peace rather than assault), and lack of investigations in the crime orchestrators rather than only in the hitmen. Journalists working on war crimes, organised crime and corruption have been particularly at risk.

• In 2008 two journalists, Ivo Pukanić and Niko Franjić were killed in a car bomb attack. The same year, Dušan Miljuš, an investigative journalist, was subject to an attempted murder.
• In 2010 the far-right Autochthonous Croatian Party of Rights (A-HSP) publicly burned a copy of the minority publication Novosti.
• In March 2014 the effigy of journalist Vinko Vuković was burned at the Omiš carnival after he had reported on corruption in the town. A similar event happened one year later in Proložac, targeting Slobodna Dalmacija reporter Ante Tomić. Tomić had already been attacked for his works.
• In June 2014, journalist Drago Pilsel received a death threat after reporting about Dario Kordić, a war criminal who had recently been released from prison.
• In August 2014, the journalist and activist Domagoj Margetić was assaulted and beaten by a group of persons near his house in Zagreb. The case was characterised by the prosecutor as attempted murder
• In October 2014 a drug dealer in Rijeka was sentenced to eight months in prison for a death threat against a local journalist.
• The same month, Karlovac-based investigative journalist Željko Peratović (winner of the 2014 Croatian Journalists Association award for investigative journalism) was physically attacked at his home and hospitalized with head injuries. Three suspects are investigated. The OSCE Media Freedom representative condemned the events. Peratovic had been sued by the Interior Ministry in 2010-2011 for its reports on war crimes investigations.
• In July 2015, the graphic designer of Hrvatski tjednik was physically assaulted by two men who tried to choke him on a wire and threatened him with a gun to his head within the newspapers' premises in Zadar. The assault led to destruction of the newspapers' premises. The HND head Lekovic decried the event as an attack on the freedom of expression. H-Alter journalist Hrvoje Simicevic was also assaulted.
• Death threats were addressed in 2015, among others not made public, to Katarina Maric Banje, journalist for Slobodna Dalmacija, Drago Pilsel, editor-in-chief of the Autograf website, Domagoj Mikić, journalist with Nova TV, and Sasa Lekovic, president of the Croatian Journalists' Association. All the cases have remained unsolved.

Political and economic interferences

Cases of political pressures, censorship and self-censorship are still reported in Croatia. While physical integrity of journalists is not at stake, more subtle political and business pressures and the lack of job security still hinder the editorial independence of the Croatian media and foster self-censorship among their journalists. The appointment of board members of the public service broadcaster HRT by simple parliamentary majority leaves it vulnerable to political influences and pressures.

• In May 2014, Index.hr was scrutinised by the authorities after it had critically reported on Croatia's financial issues, in a move that was deemed punitive. An Index.hr journalist also had problems receiving information from the Split mayor in May 2014 after he had published critical articles on the town administration.
• In October 2015, the president of the Croatian Football Federation (HNS), Davor Šuker, banned the representatives of Index.hr from a press conference in Zagreb, confiscating one of their mobile phones. Index.hr had already been banned from HNS sport and press events, since the Federation was not pleased with the media reporting on the appointment of Ante Cacic as coach. The HND condemned the behaviour and reiterated the call to lift the ban on Index.hr professionals.
• In October 2015, two op-eds by Damir Pilic, long-time columnist of Slobodna Dalmacija, were dismissed by the editorial board, possibly because of inconsistency with the editorial line of the newspaper, increasingly leaning towards the right in the contest of the upcoming general elections. The op-eds concerned the internal politics of the HDZ party, and Europe's influence on the USA/Russia disputes.

Media ownership in Croatia still carries several issues. Tycoons use editorial policy as a long-arm of their own business interests, while journalists try to anticipate their wishes, thus resorting to self-censorship and partisan journalism.

• In late 2014 a major publisher changed ownership, being acquired by a wealthy lawyer. The leading media company's daily a couple of days ago published a laudatory interview with Zagreb mayor Milan Bandić, omitting that he had just been released from prison on a 4 million dollars bail, paid privately by his lawyer – the publisher's new owner.

The Catholic Church, the war veterans and the biggest advertisers are still deemed "sensitive topics" in Croatian journalism. International politics gets limited coverage – and mostly reactive – while social issues (unemployment, depopulation, lack of use of EU funds) do not receive enough coverage either.

• In January 2016, a journalist from the Novosti magazine was sanctioned by the Croatian Journalists' Association for a satirical version of the national anthem, published a couple of days after the Veterans' Day.

Those local media that are partly owned by local governments receive benefits in kind, such as free office spaces. In turn, they tend not to be critical of the authorities they live off. Local media also benefit from a norm requiring local governments to invest at least 15% of their advertising budgets in local commercial media.

• In October 2015 Journalists have protested against obstruction of their work by police forces in the context of the refugee crisis. The Croatian border police had prevented a number of journalists, including from Al Jazeera, Reuters and Associated Press, from reporting from the border area. Some equipment had been initially confiscated. Two journalists from AFP and Reuters have accused the police of physically attacking them; the authorities claimed they had entered the country illegally.

Civil defamation lawsuits

According to the Croatian Journalists' Association (HND), as of April 2014 there were more than 40 pending criminal cases against journalists for defamation and insult.

• The private RTL television station was sued by Zagreb mayor Milan Bandić after it broadcast an interview in 2013 in which PM Zoran Milanović accused Bandić of corruption. In September 2014 the Zagreb municipal civil court found RTL guilty and ordered it to pay 50,000 kuna (ca. $8,400) to Bandic.
• Slavica Lukić was the first Croatian journalist to be convicted for "vilification" after the new provision was inserted in the Criminal Code in 2013. She had reported that the medical company Medikol faced economic troubles, notwithstanding state subsidies. She was fined 26,000 kuna ($4,700).

Smear campaigns

• In March 2014, government officials publicly tried to discredit journalist Danka Derifaj after she had reported on patronage and nepotism in the local administration of Jastrebarsko.

Internet censorship

General censorship

The Internet country code top-level domain for Croatia is .hr and is administered by CARNET (Croatian Academic and Research Network). Registrants are classified into a number of different groups with varying rules of domain registrations. Some verifiable form of connection to Croatia – such as being a Croatian citizen or a permanent resident, or a company registered in the country – is common to all of the categories except for the .com.hr subdomain. Third level domains (example.com.hr) are allowed to be registered by anyone in the world as long as they provide a local contact. As of 2009, half of Croatian households had access to internet, and 40% to broadband. New regulations plan to provide at least 1 Mbit/s broadband also in the rural areas; initial-level internet packages remain affordable, at around $40/month. 69% of the population used internet in 2014.

As of September 2011 the most visited .hr websites are the Croatian version of Google followed by news websites Net.hr and Index.hr and online editions of printed dailies Jutarnji list and 24sata. As of December 2014, Croatia had 170 registered web portals, although many of them resort to "copy/paste journalism", mirroring contents.

Freedom on the Internet

• A citizen was arrested and fined in July 2014 in Đakovo for offending and patronizing police officers on Facebook. The OSCE Media Freedom representative stigmatised the event, calling for legislative review to decriminalise insult and libel, calling it "unacceptable to arrest, fine or imprison people for their views, regardless of how, when and where they are expressed".

Examples of Internet censorship

• Around 60% of the population is active on Facebook and Twitter. Social media have proved a platform for off-line social engagement in Croatia, with the first "Facebook protests" organised by high school students in Autumn 2008, and other events leading to the removal of corrupted local politicians, e.g. in Sisak. Two of the main appealing political groups for the young voters, the environmentalists of ORaH and the anti-eviction Živi zid, are strongly based on the internet.

• In late 2013, Wikipedia in Croatian (Wikipedija na hrvatskom jeziku, also hr:wiki) received attention from international media for promoting fascist, right-wing worldview as well as bias against Serbs of Croatia and Anti-LGBT propaganda by the means of historical revisionism and by negating or diluting the severity of crimes committed by the Ustaše regime (see Croatian Wikipedia). As of August 2019, this version has more than 200,000 articles, making it the 40th largest edition of Wikipedia

Television censorship

General

In broadcasting, the government-funded corporation Croatian Radiotelevision (HRT) had a monopoly on nationally aired broadcasting until the late 1990s, although a number of local radio and TV stations began to sprung up in the 1980s. In the years following the fall of communism and the subsequent liberalisation of the media market, HRT was reorganised with its infrastructure branch established as a separate company, Transmitters and Communications Ltd (OiV), and a system in which privately owned corporations can acquire renewable broadcast licenses at the national and county levels was adopted. The first national for-profit channel, Nova TV, was launched in 2000, and it was joined by RTL four years later in 2004. Both Nova TV and RTL are foreign-owned.

Video game censorship

This article is a stub. Please help the Censorship Wiki by expanding it.