Commentary
from the Moscow Media Law and Policy Center, March 2000
Do journalists have the right to work in Chechnya without accreditation?
What's the problem?
From the very beginning of the Chechen campaign in 1999, journalists began to experience serious problems connected with the search for and acquisition of objective information regarding the state of affairs in the armed conflict zone. In the fall of last year, a government resolution along with the participation of almost all power agencies created the Russian Information Center. The Center serves as the mass media's main source of information - information that is selected and administered by military and state officials. A further step taken by the executive branch of government aimed at regulating and channeling information flows in the needed direction was the publication by Vladimir Putin of Order #82 on January 20, 2000. The Order created the position of a presidential aide with functions including "coordination of the informational-analytical work of federal executive bodies taking part in the counter-terrorist operations in the North Caucasus region of the Russian Federation, and cooperation with mass media." Sergei Yastrzhembsky was the official appointed to the position. One of the first statutory acts he passed was the Accreditation Rules for Mass Media Representatives with the Apparatus of Presidential Aide Yastrzhembsky.
This documents seems to be an attempt to place a legal block on the activity of those journalists who have been working in Chechnya only semi-legally up to this point, constantly at risk of being caught by Chechen separatists or federal forces.
What are the Rules?
The Accreditation Rules allow journalists to "take part in coverage of military activity in the Chechen Republic," only if they "are included in the group formed by the Apparatus in agreement with the heads of Russia's power structures and the United Military Group in the North Caucasus." A journalist can conduct photo and video filming in the battle zone or at the locations of military formations or garrisons only "under the protection and control of representatives of the power (military) structures of the Russian Federation." In addition, the Rules prohibit accredited journalists from "independently traveling in Chechnya."
Thus, the freedom of professional activity, and particularly the freedom of movement, of accredited mass media representatives in Chechnya is seriously restricted. As concerns journalists that have no accreditation, as the Rules are formulated, they are completely deprived of the right to be present on the territory of Chechnya. This is confirmed by the numerous cases in which unaccredited journalists have been detained by military personnel and sent out of the battle zone.
Are such requirements legally valid?
The Constitution stipulates that "everyone legally located on the territory of the Russian Federation has the right to move freely and choose a place to reside." (Article 27, Part 1). It is obvious that the ban on journalists' "independently moving in Chechnya" crudely violates this constitutional guarantee of one of the fundamental rights of citizens.
In accordance with Article 56 of the Constitution, such a restriction is possible "during states of emergency to ensure the safety of citizens and protect constitutional order," when "in accordance with federal constitutional law, separate restrictions of rights and freedoms can be established with prescribed limitations and periods of validity." Another exception is stipulated by Article 55 of the Constitution: "citizens' rights and freedoms can be restricted by federal law only to the extent necessary in the aim of protecting the fundamental elements of constitutional order, i.e. the rights and legal interests of other people, assurance of national defense, and state security."
The federal law that contains separate restrictions on freedom of movement and residence is the law "On Citizens' Right to Freedom of Movement and Choice of Place of Residence in the Russian Federation." The law allows for the following restrictions: border areas, closed military cities, closed administrative-territorial enclaves, ecologically troubled areas, cases where there is danger of the spread of infectious diseases, cases of non-infectious mass epidemics and poisonings, and also on territories where military or emergency situations have been declared.
It should immediately be noted that the reference to restrictions connected with states of emergency has no relationship whatsoever to the Chechen conflict. At present, in Russia as a whole and in the Chechen Republic in particular, such a regime has not been introduced. The other causes for restriction of the right to movement stipulated by the given law are also not applicable to the situation in Chechnya.
Military officials, it is true, insist that citizens' right to freedom of movement is also restricted by the law On the Fight Against Terrorism, and it is no accident that the conflict in Chechnya is more and more often referred to by officials as a counter- or anti-terrorist operation. This law gives those people carrying out counter-terrorist operations extremely broad authority, including the right "to take measures for temporary restriction or prohibition of movement of means of transportation and pedestrians on streets and roads, and to take measures for removing citizens from certain areas." (Part 1 of Article 13).
However, the military's point of view that such a norm is sufficient legal grounds for "removal" of journalists from Chechnya is extremely arguable.
Article 3 of the law On the Fight Against Terrorism defines a zone where counter-terrorist operations are being conducted and on which freedom of movement can be restricted as "individual localities or areas of bodies of water, means of transportation, buildings, structures, enclosures, and surrounding territories in which the indicated operation is being carried out." The definitions used in this article imply that the provisions of the law allowing for "temporary restriction of the movement of means of transport and pedestrians on streets or roads" or "the removal of citizens from specific areas" are mostly aimed at getting outsiders out of small, localized areas where, for example, operations to free hostages are being undertaken, and are not aimed at keeping people off of the territory of thousands of square kilometers.
The possibility of a widened interpretation of the term "individual locality," as, for example, the territory of an entire administrative-geographic entity of the Russian Federation, as military officials suggest, poses a very serious threat. In this case, it would be possible to seriously restrict the rights and freedoms of citizens to a level comparable to a state of emergency. However, for a state of emergency to be declared, it is necessary for the president to publish an appropriate order that includes the circumstances serving as grounds for the declaration of a state of emergency, the justification for its necessity, a detailed list (including limits) of the restrictions on citizens' rights and freedoms, and a specific delineation of the area and period during which the restrictions are valid. Such an order must then be approved by decision of the Federation Council. The complicated procedure aims to minimize restrictions on citizens' rights and freedoms.
For a counter-terrorist operation to begin, the government needs only to order the creation of a tactical team that receives the right to establish (in the zone of the counter-terrorist operation) a special regime allowing for serious and practically unhindered restriction of citizens' rights and freedoms. It is therefore obvious that the law On the Fight Against Terrorism cannot be considered as the basis for establishing a legal regime for wide territories such as an entire administrative-geographic entity of the Russian Federation or an armed conflict zone.
In addition to conflicting with many Russian legislative statutes, the Rules also contradict themselves. For example, their preamble states that the goal of accreditation is the "full and objective coverage of the counter-terrorist operation being carried out by Russian power structures in the Chechen Republic." However, it is obvious that the power agencies fighting with the separatists are the interested party. The opportunity for one of the sides in an armed conflict to lead journalists along pre-planned routes, forbid them to film and interview unless "under the guard" of representatives of that side, can not possibly facilitate "full and objective coverage" of such a conflict.
Commentary is prepared by the Moscow Media Law and Policy Center with the assistance of Internews. We welcome your use of material from the commentary in your own publications and programs on condition that it is attributed to the original source.