EU Member States should not

use national security as a

pretext to weaken the Media
Freedom Act

The latest draft compromise text of the EU Council on the

European Media Freedom Act poses serious risks to the
European Union’s core democratic principles and
fundamental rights, notably freedom of expression and the
protection of journalists. The European Federation of
Journalists reiterates its call to EU Member States to
strengthen Article 4 on the rights of media service providers.
The text is due to be adopted on 21 June.

In its latest appeal on 2 May the EFJ together with all

European major broadcasting and publishers organisations
had urged Member States to show more ambition on Article
4 (about the protection of sources from future-proofed
surveillance technologies) being a cornerstone of media
freedom and ever more under attack. It said that “Protecting
media, including journalists and their sources, against any
threat to their independence and security is a non-
negotiable condition for effective journalism and editorial
freedom.”

However, the last draft compromise, dated 7 June, waters

down the Commission’s proposal, providing for a ‘national
security’ exception to the general ban on deploying spyware
against journalists without guarantees for the protection of
sources.

The introduction by France of a new paragraph, which states

that “[t]his Article is without prejudice to the Member States’
responsibility for safeguarding national security”, turns in
effect the protections originally afforded into empty shells.
Such a “national security” exemption without fundamental
rights’ safeguards neglects the important case law of the
Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). The Court
has been clear that the mere purpose of safeguarding
national security cannot render EU law inapplicable and does
not exempt Member States from their obligations to comply
with the rule of law.

“It is indeed shocking and yet another strong blow to

media freedom that EU Member States further water
down important provisions on journalists’ protection of
sources and protection from surveillance technologies,”
said Maja Sever, EFJ President. “While we were already
not satisfied with the Commission’s proposal, we deplore
the new exemption for the protection of national security
 at the expense of media freedom,” she added.

The draft Council position further deletes the exhaustive list

of crimes set by the Commission to replace it with the list
established in the European Arrest Warrant Framework
Decision, which massively expands the scope for justifying
the deployment of spyware against journalists and
journalistic sources.

The Council’s current proposal does not include provisions

for safeguarding fundamental rights, as required by the
Treaty on European Union and the Charter of Fundamental
Rights. The EFJ has insisted, in its position on the European
Media Freedom Act and throughout its advocacy, on a wider
scope of protection, a reference to proportionality and
subsidiarity principles, and a system for ex-ante judicial
authorisation of surveillance measures.

The EFJ together with digital rights, civil society and media
freedom organisations will send a letter to all stakeholders
involved in the ongoing negotiations regarding the use of
spyware against journalists and the importance of protection
of journalists’ sources.