Police raided several Turkish cities on Tuesday and detained 11 journalists linked to pro-Kurdish media for their alleged links to Kurdish extremists, foreign media report. The detentions come only days after the ratification of Turkey’s controversial new media law, which provides for prison sentences for people deemed to be spreading “disinformation” with the aim of causing “public concern, fear and panic.” Critics of the law are worried that it will be used to suppress social media, which sounds quite comparable to the situation we currently have in Slovenia. Namely, this is similar to what happened here with the establishment of the Anti-Hate Speech Council within the Peace Institute (Mirovni inštitut), under the leadership of none other than the presidential candidate Nataša Pirc Musar.
“Turkey and Erdogan?! Let’s not forget what happened in our country under the left-wing government (of Miro Cerar) in the area of media control. The Anti-Hate Speech Council was introduced, and it was chaired by – let’s not forget: Nataša Pirc Musar!” psychoanalyst Roman Vodeb wrote on Twitter, commenting on the arrests of journalists in Turkey over the controversial new media law. Given that the Golob government’s priority goal is to subjugate the public media outlet Radio-Television
Slovenia, it seems that our country is not far behind Turkey, especially if we go back a few years and remember the attempt at “censorship” that had been introduced by the government of Miro Cerar, under the leadership of Nataša Pirc Musar. Prime minister Robert Golob has also announced that one of his priorities will be the prosecution of hate speech.
With the controversial new law on social media, the Turkish authorities now have the right to control and, if necessary, restrict online free speech in ways that would have been unthinkable in any democracy – or even in Turkey just a few years ago. The government of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has long been criticised for silencing dissident voices and exerting control over the mainstream media – but social media in Turkey, with its high penetration rate, has been a relatively open forum for independent journalism and debate. Critics of the law have said they fear it will be used by President Erdogan’s government, which already controls most newspaper companies, to further suppress social media and independent reporting as the country heads towards its next election.
Imprisonment for publishing what is deemed to be “disinformation” according to government criteria In true Orwellian Turkish “disinformation” style, the aim of the law is to criminalise the dissemination of what is deemed to be disinformation according to government criteria, and to regulate content. But critics fear that in the run-up to the 2023 elections, the new rules could be used to silence opposition campaigns and limit the already narrow space for public debate. Worse, the bill allows the government to block Twitter or Facebook whenever it deems it necessary or force them to share data with the authorities. The new legislative package, which was passed by parliament this week, amid protests and international criticism, provides for four to five years in prison for stories and publications that “spread inaccurate information” in order to “create fear or panic” or “disturb Turkey’s internal and external security,” “public order” or “public health.” This practically criminalises any misinformation that is not sanctioned by the local authorities.
Under the new law, Turkey can ban official institutions for sharing information that is “inconsistent” with government data Let’s take inflation, one of the hottest topics in the country right now, as an example. Turkey’s official statistical agency has reported that the country’s inflation rate is 83.45 percent, although many, including economists and journalists, question the official figure, claiming that the year-on-year price has increased almost twofold. The independent watchdog ENAGrup (an inflation research group), however, notes that annual consumer inflation in September was 186 percent. Under the new law, ENAG’s regular updates and social media posts could be banned – and those who share its content could face the same penalties. Similarly, any suggestion that the official death toll from COVID-19 in Turkey is actually higher than what the authorities claim, that energy prices are likely to rise, or that the government is mishandling forest fires, could also result in people being punished.
A similar attempt at “censorship” took place in Slovenia a few years ago It is worth noting that in Slovenia, as part of the project “Speaking Out Against Hate Speech” (“Z (od)govorom na sovražni govor”), which was run by Soros’s Peace Institute, the Anti-Hate Speech Council was established just a few years ago. The Council, which was chaired by Nataša Pirc Musar, wanted to respond to cases of
hate speech with public statements, arguing that this was the best way to confront them. The Anti-Hate Speech Council was conceived as an independent body, bringing together a wide range of interested individuals working in civil society, the media, education and the government. It was composed of nine individuals, “independent” from any interest group or institution, who worked on a purely voluntary basis. As we can see, we have once again encountered the word “independent,” which is a contradiction recurringly being used by non-governmental organisations and leftists. “Turkey and Erdogan?! Let’s not forget what happened in our country under the left-wing government (of Miro Cerar) in the area of media control. The Anti-Hate Speech Council was introduced, and it was chaired by – let’s not forget: Nataša Pirc Musar!” psychoanalyst Roman Vodeb wrote on Twitter, reminding his followers of the situation that happened a few years ago.
The Chair of the Council was none other than lawyer and current presidential candidate Nataša Pirc Musar, and to make matters even worse, rapper Zlatan Čordić – Zlatko was also a member of the Council. It is rather ironic that someone who has become known to the Slovenian public as a bully in the last two years and has even been arrested could be lecturing us about hate speech. According to members of the Council, we should warn against hate speech through public debate, which is hypocritical, given that Nataša Pirc Musar did not even consider warning against hate speech when it came to public threats against Janez Janša, but when it comes to some of “her own” people, there is instant uproar. And let’s not forget the “usual behaviour” of Zlatan Čordić as a defender of condemning hate speech.
The project “Speaking Out Against Hate Speech,” which is partly funded by the Norwegian financial mechanism, is implemented by the Peace Institute, in cooperation with the Faculty of Social Sciences of the University of Ljubljana, the Human Rights Ombudsman, and the Multimedia Centre of Radio-Television Slovenia. As part of the project, those involved have planned various networking and awareness-raising activities, and they also focused on the establishment of an Anti-Hate Speech Council, which they also presented at a press conference at the time.
Is Slovenia the next Turkey? A few months ago, the Party of Alenka Bratušek (Stranka Alenke Bratušek – SAB) wanted to do something similar when its President, Alenka Bratušek, sadistically published a countdown of days remaining before the next election to the National Assembly, as she was supposedly planning to “persecute the fake media” after the elections. Back then, she was supported by the Constitutional Arch Coalition (the left-wing parties of the then-opposition), and today, her work is continued by the Golob government.
The one and only priority of the current government, apart from the biggest staff purge in history, is the battle for Radio-Television Slovenia. The new government is doing everything in its power to bring our public media outlet back into the hands of the loving mother – the Communist party. In order to achieve their goal, they have mobilised their activists at Radio-Television Slovenia, who call themselves journalists, and they would certainly also introduce strict censorship after the takeover, and maybe even a prison sentence here and there: the criterion of which side the offender is on would suffice, because that is the only thing that counts in this government.
Tanja Brkić
