Hans Väre: Who Decides When the Press Goes Dark?
A new Estonian law allowing authorities to shut down media during crises raises concerns about accountability and censorship, argues journalist Hans Väre.
Journalist Hans Väre has raised concerns about Estonia's new Civil Crisis and National Defense Act, which allows the Consumer Protection and Technical Regulatory Authority, the Police and Border Guard Board, the Internal Security Service, and the Defense Forces to partially or fully prohibit media services and the publication of media outlets during a state of emergency or wartime, if necessary to address the situation.
Väre notes that while the government must first authorize these bodies, the law is vague about what that authorization actually permits. He argues that shutting down a media outlet is the most radical form of prior censorship, blocking not only harmful content but also potentially useful information for residents, such as food availability or safe zones.
Although the law states that publication may only be prohibited to the extent it threatens public order, national security, or military defense, it is difficult in practice to shut down only part of a newspaper. Väre adds that closing a media outlet is a punitive measure, despite being intended as preventive. Censoring authorities would have no way to foresee harmful publication without a large network of censors.
The biggest question, according to Väre, is accountability. Previously, media could only be shut down by order of the government, prime minister, or responsible minister. Now, if the government authorizes an agency, who makes the actual decision? Not the government, which journalists and voters could hold accountable. The decision could fall to the agency's director, commander, department head, or even a sergeant, without court approval.
Väre notes that in Poland, Hungary, and even war-torn Ukraine, media shutdowns are not so easy. Estonia, ranked third in the world for press freedom, now has such powers. He points to several developments that could suggest a desire to control the media but does not believe there is a hidden hand behind them. Rather, he sees superficiality and haste.
Given the constitutional ban on censorship, the president may refuse to sign the law and return it to parliament. Väre hopes the law will never need to be applied but if it does, it should be drafted to the highest standard.
