Author: Ivana Jelača
HOMOPHOBIA AND SEXISM IN THE WESTERN BALKANS: December monthly monitoring highlight
January 12, 2022
Throughout the month of December, the RDN monitoring team has detected a range of hateful narratives and discourse. During this month there has been a rise in hate speech including homophobia, ethnic discrimination and sexism across the Western Balkan.
Homophobia
A member of the opposition PDP party in Republika Srpska, Ivan Begić, resigned following the release of a private video containing intimate moments. The video was sent to journalists and public figures through private chats, however, it was not publicly shared by the country’s media. The video led to hate speech towards Begić despite the fact that the video was never meant to be public. He was targeted with numerous personal and derogatory comments, threats, and was blackmailed in relation to his sexual identity.
Following derogatory comments and attacks, Begić decided to resign from his role within the PDP party.
As Begić is a close friend and associate of the mayor of Banja Luka, Draško Stanivuković, some media and social media activists involved Stanivuković in the case and accused both men of appearing in the video.
One of the most widespread attacks is a poster based on Titanic movie which was created by self-proclaimed activist Njegoš Tomić which depicts Begić and Stanivuković. Tomić’s homophobic comment on the poster read: “A video of two passionate lovers Ivan Begić and Draško Stanivuković leaked. If this had not seen the light of day, next year we could have had a gay president and a gay prime minister, and like this their careers are over!”
Tomić has over 1,067 followers on his Facebook account which acts as an additional tool of spreading hate speech and homophobia amongst his followers and the population of Banja Luka as well as within Bosnia and Herzegovina. Such humiliating and denigrating comments, blackmailing attempts and composite visual content contributed to Begić’s resignation from his role and position within the PDP party. Media in this case played a role in influencing public opinion and in spreading homophobia. In contrast, their role should have been in informing the public objectively and moderating hateful narratives about this case as well as about the LGBTQ+ community more generally.
In Albania, politician Nard Ndoka appeared on the radio show ‘Ndryshe’ which is broadcast by Top Albania and stated that one of the participants in this year’s Big Brother VIP, Donald, is currently involved in a love triangle. He added that he “will go on to men if he keeps it up this way”, effectively promoting the false prejudiced and homophobic stereotype that links promiscuity to homosexuality.
Such comments promote hatred and misconceptions of the LGBTQ+ community as a whole which further trigger and uphold homophobia and anti-LGBTQ+ hate speech.
Ndoka’s statements were widely reported and shared in almost all mainstream media, however, there has been no evidence of critical headlines or articles whatsoever to counteract such homophobic prejudice.
This highlights the importance and role of the media in informing objectively and counteracting hate speech and homophobia by pointing out the issues and false assumptions which lie behind such opinions and statements.
Ethnic discrimination
In Serbia, there has been frequent negative labelling of Albanians by political figures, referring to them as ‘Shiptars’ – a derogatory term which promotes ethnic discrimination. Serbian minister of Internal Affairs, Aleksandar Vulin, frequently uses the term ‘Shiptar’ when speaking about the Albanian population. He recently said: “The Brussels agreement was signed with the EU; we did not sign it with the Shiptars”.
Such derogatory and inappropriate labelling is highly problematic especially when used by politicians in positions of power who can influence a large part of the population due to their large audience.
The statement was broadcast on TV Happy’s morning show and then uploaded on YouTube, which, at the time of writing, has received over 12,000 views and 100 likes with no dislikes. Both the media and journalists hold a moral responsibility to prevent the spread of ethnic discrimination and derogatory terminology. Such hate speech is normalised by politicians and tabloids as this kind of terminology constantly appears in various headlines and is used with little to no censorship by some political leaders and party members.
Both political leaders and the media hold a responsibility and duty to pay attention to their speech and reporting in order to prevent the reproduction of ethnic discriminatory terminology and dominant narratives which could lead others copying and using such insulting language.
Sexism and sexual harassment
Following a recent verdict relating to the rape incident of a 19-year-old girl in Kosovo, the TV show ‘Justice in Kosovo’ published the investigation related to the verdict of the Basic Court in Gjilan. The incident involved five men who all committed sexual violence and harassment against the young girl who reported the case to the police. In 2013/2014 the first accused individual was sentenced to two years in prison whilst the other perpetrators were given a minimum sentence for rape of nine months. Following an appeal to the Court of Appeals, the case was remanded for retrial. However, in 2017, all the accused were found not guilty. In the text of the acquittal, the judicial body used highly sexist language in relation to the victim, going as far as to say that the first perpetrator was married whilst the other four had no intention of marrying her suggesting that such sexual accusations were unlikely under the circumstances. They even went as far as to suggest that the incident was of her wrongdoing by quoting “the victim agreed to take a taxi with the accused, despite knowing that he was a man.”
Frequently, judicial bodies in the cases of sexual violence and harassment generally hand out minimal or only symbolic prison sentences. According to research carried out by a number of NGOs, such decision are often embedded in sexist and derogatory language in relation to the victims. As a reaction to this research and evidence, many NGOs reacted in outrage especially the organisation Qika who protested in front of the Basic Court in Gjilan.
Such sexist language which is present in society and is promoted by institutional bodies representing the law and order within the country, creates stigma in relation to acts of sexual violence and harassment. This includes frequent victim-blaming whilst the perpetrators gets off with little to no consequences of their unlawful actions. This is only spread and upheld by media with a large audience and followers.
In North Macedonia, following the ‘Public Room’ scandal in which personal photographs were shared on Facebook of young, underage girls, it has recently been revealed that a new group was formed in the city of Gevgelija called ‘GevgelijaHub’. The group was formed on social media and its members have been sharing pictures of local girls without their permission. Some of these girls have indeed initiated a police procedure against those individuals who shared their pictures, however, even a year later, this case has still not been resolved. The prosecution is waiting for Facebook to reveal the IP addresses of those individuals who shared these photos and pictures. Meanwhile, the reputation of these girls within their local town continues to be tainted and hindered. Furthermore, some of the pictures continue to be available online despite efforts to be taken down.
This misuse of personal data and leaked information relating to private photography and pictures of young girls continues to be a problem in North Macedonia in which many actors hold responsibility for such behaviour which has little to no consequence. In this case, Facebook has an obligation to prevent such scandals from occurring by adhering to their Code of Conduct which clearly states that they aim to “keep people safe and protect privacy”.
In Montenegro, Jovana Kikanovića member of the political party ‘Slobodna Crna Gora’ (Free Montenegro), attacked Draginja Vuksanović Stanković who is president of the Social Democratic Party of Montenegro (SDP), called her “mentally ill” and used highly insensitive and insulting language as well as edited photos. ‘Slobodna Crna Gora’ to which Kikanović is a member is led by Vladislav Dajković who plans to run for mayor in Podgorica during next elections. The party members are known for making hateful statements.
Such statements and insults are highly problematic as they promote sexism and hate speech towards women within society. The use of mental health as an insult additionally promotes stigmatisation and negative labelling of individuals with mental health issues. The topic of mental health is already surrounded with harmful prejudices, across the Balkans.
Individuals in such high political positions are responsible for language they use and should be politically correct in order to prevent the spread of hate speech amongst the population.
There is no such thing as transgender ideology
December 28, 2021
Transgender people in Macedonia are effectively second-class citizens. The most important thing to remember is that transphobic narratives in North Macedonia are completely wrong.
Inaccurate and transphobic narratives about trans people are spreading globally and locally in our country (these are people with different gender identity than the gender assigned to them at birth). The narratives are saying that these people are trying to “corrupt children” and impose a “transgender ideology” on the majority. These narratives invert the relations of power, portraying the transgender people as a force that oppresses the “ordinary man”, rather than a marginalized minority that in most parts of the world still lacks basic human rights, such as adequate access to health care services for medical transition and legal recognition of their gender.
Increased visibility
In the last ten years, the transgender community has gained exponentially more media attention and visibility than ever before in history. A survey from 2019 carried out by PRRI (Public Religion Research Institute) shows that 24% of Americans have a close friend or relative who is a transgender person. According to another research of IPSO (Independent Press Standards Organization), the media coverage of transgender issues in the British media increased by 400% in the period 2014 to 2019. The same trend is not present in the Macedonian media, but according to research of the “Margini” Coalition regarding the media coverage of topics related to the LGBT community and gender-based violence published in November 2021, transgender people stand out as a special topic of interest in the media.
This visibility is positive in many aspects, as increased support for the human rights of transgender people and acquisition of these rights in certain parts of the world. However, this visibility is not reflected in a full acceptance and integration of the transgender people into society. To some extent, this very visibility – which was made possible in part by the Internet – has made the transgender community more vulnerable to right-wing attacks, according to the transgender journalist Katelyn Burns.
In her article in Vox, Burns writes about how the visibility of the transgender community increased sharply during the 2010s, but also how that visibility brought with it other dangers for this community. According to Burns, this visibility is largely due to the global reach of the Internet and several major media events such as the public “outing” of the whistleblower Chelsea Manning i.e. her public coming out about her identity as a transgender woman in 2013.
The other big media event was the cover of the Time Magazine in 2014 with Lavern Cox, the transgender actress from the popular Netflix series “Orange is the New Black”, with caption: “A turning point for transgender people: the next front of civil rights in America.” Burns certainly mentions the third major media moment: the public transition of the Olympic athlete Caitlin Jenner who “outed” with a glamorous photo on the cover of Vanity Fair in 2015 through which she told the world that she was a transgender woman.
These high-profile transitions have increased the interest of the media and the public around the trans community, but at the same time there has been a conservative resistance to these changes. In the above article in Vox, Katelyn Burns writes the following about the reaction of the conservative right after the legalization of same-sex marriages in the United States in 2015 by the Supreme Court:
“The biggest LGBTQ [lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer] struggle in the legislature and the courts so far has resulted in a catastrophic loss for the religious and cultural conservatives. However, instead of packing up and going home, the far right has simply shifted its focus to a new, more vulnerable group – trans people.”
In the period after 2015, organized attacks on the trans community at the legislative level increase dramatically, such as attempts to pass various laws that would regulate which toilets could be used by trans people. In recent years, the right has also become increasingly concerned about the participation of trans women in women’s sports and the use of hormone blockers by trans teenagers.
About the Western transphobia imported in Macedonia
Why is this recent US history important to Macedonia? Due to the availability of information on the Internet, the same American and Western European transphobic discourse reached our country as well, endangering the lives and dignity of the Macedonian trans community. The “Od Nas za Nas” association, the “Save the Marriage and Family” Facebook group, and the “Take Responsibility” Facebook page have long been spreading misinformation and fake news about comprehensive sexual education (VSE) largely through transphobic tactics that have been virtually copied by the American right. These groups popularized the contradictory and transphobic term “transgender ideology.” This term is not only transphobic, but it also makes no sense because there is no unified ideology that all trans people believe in. That is, not all trans people experience or understand their identity in the same way and we cannot therefore say that there is a transgender ideology.
Undoubtedly, domestic and foreign transphobes see the very existence of trans people as a kind of ideology through which a minority is supposedly being imposed on the majority. These transphobic narratives generally portray the trans community in a monstrous way, as “deviant” people that “mutilate” their bodies and are trying to “indoctrinate” children. These movements also portray transgender people as powerful political actors, not as a marginalized minority. In that context, in the article written for Sloboden Pechat, Manja Velichkovska writes:
[Anti-gender movements] have the power to create a parallel reality in which LGBTI people, including transgender people in particular, are antagonized and presented as untouchable and corrupt elites who demand more than anyone else. By overturning and perverting their positions, they present them as dangerous and external enemies that are new and imported.
Even a lot of people commenting on the Facebook post on which my article about “transgender ideology” was shared, had exactly these same ideas about trans people, but also about me as a supporter of this community. One of those that commented even assumed that I did not live in Macedonia and wrote: “Elena Gagovska – stay in the west and do not return here”, implying that I am some “Western political actor” who pushes imported ideas.
Other comments (most of which have already been removed due to obscene speech) talked about how the trans people will eventually “wipe out the women” because we are no longer talking about biological sex, but about a socially constructed gender. That is, many of the comments were not only about the “traditional” transphobia originating from the ignorance of transgender issues, but many of those who commented had some “knowledge” of the transgender community and their comments contained “more sophisticated” transphobia based on transphobic narratives constructed in the last 6 -7 years by the right and the anti-gender movements that Velichkovska writes about.
In fact, the comments on the article confirm the fears that Western transphobia, which did not exist before in this region, is being massively imported to Macedonia via the Internet. The trans community in Macedonia has been ignored and marginalized for years (which is now gaining more visibility due to the work of the trans activists, as well as the two pride parades), but it has never been the target of such an organized movement before.
Second-class citizens
The most important thing to remember is that these transphobic narratives are completely wrong: trans people are simply not a deviant Western elite trying to destroy society and corrupt children. The trans community in Macedonia has no basic human rights and is practically unrecognized by the government authorities. A Law on Civil Registry has not yet been adopted, which would clearly define how trans people would be able to change the gender marker on their IDs and they still have inadequate access to health services – these are barriers that have a daily effect on the lives of the trans people.
On 10 December 2021 a transgender man published an anonymous letter at Meduza in which he explains what systemic transphobia he has faced and how trans men in Macedonia have been facing a huge health crisis in the last year since the license of the pharmaceutical company Galenika to import testosterone depot (a drug needed for medical transition for many trans men) has expired. The letter reads as follows:
Given this, and the fact that medical services for trans people are not covered by the fund, medical transitions are almost impossible under “normal” circumstances. Trans people are almost non-existent in the system, and that puts them in a life-threatening position. Even the most basic thing like finding a family doctor, something most people do not even need to think about, is a challenge for trans people, who cannot be sure whether their family doctor will accept their gender identity and be able to offer assistance.
Trans people in Macedonia are effectively second-class citizens. Learning about their existence within the education, changing the Law on Civil Registry and adopting other policies that would make life easier for the trans community is not a pushing for a “transgender ideology”, but a struggle for basic human rights that should be supported by all who advocate for an egalitarian, pluralistic and fair society.
Author: Elena Gagovska, is a writer, researcher, and journalist who graduated from Bard College Berlin and currently lives in Skopje. She is interested in and writes about various political topics such as intersectional feminism, left-wing politics, anti-racism, labor, and LGBTI rights. She regularly publishes articles on the feminist platform “Medusa”, and has been published on many other domestic and foreign media such as Women’s Media Center, Summer of Solidarity, and Jacobin magazine.
Photo: nito/Shutterstock
Hate speech in Montenegro: Looking away from the past
December 15, 2021
Since 2020 there have been nine indictments for the crime of inciting racial, national and religious hatred confirmed in Montenegro. In April this year, two verdicts for inciting hatred and violence due to religious and national affiliation were passed, with seven months and one year prison sentences respectively.
Is that enough to stop “troubling the trouble that is not troubling you”? It is not. Are these the only examples of hate speech? Far from it. But if we remember that in the ’90s, state prosecutors did not pay any attention to this type of crimes, which were legally liable throughout former Yugoslavia, then let this text begin with modest optimism. After all the wars, at least that much has been learned.
However, the decision whether battles will be ruled out this time, will again not depend on us, but on politicians, whose speeches fuel those who are already planning whom they will attack, with what and where. Such planners are among the nine accused ones, but the fact is that there is not a single politician among them.
Montenegro’s current political elite does not differ much from the past. Similar to Slobodan Milosevic they see that war as one of the options for the country’s current tensions. Milo Djukanovic’s promise that Montenegro will “defend itself in the woods ” – meaning that guerillas will take up arms – is rather ominous. Statements by political officials are already on the line of hate speech. This outcome is also the main reason why freedom of expression stops when hate speech is present. Instead of contributing to the debate, the basic engine of democracy, hate speech appears as a source of general danger, which encourages and justifies intolerance and, ultimately, violence. The problem with the speech of influential politicians is that their flirting with hatred, its justification, leads to terrible consequences.
Hate speech includes derogatory names such as “Shiptars”, “Gypsies”, “fagots”, as well as speech that incites violence in the form of expulsion (“move out”) and threats to kill (slaughter, hang) people determined by some personal characteristics. The nine indictments mentioned in Montenegro include cases of this last, most dangerous speech, which can be seen from a far that it has been banned. However, certain countries have no mercy for any hate speech. For example, in France, in 2004 and 2008 the former leader of the right-wing National Front party, Jean-Marie Le Pen, was fined twice with 10,000 euros each for two statements in which he incited hate speech. The European Court of Human Rights in 2010 rejected Le Pen’s claims that his freedom of expression had been violated, explaining that his statements promoted hostility and rejection of the Muslim community in France and that such statements were not protected by freedom of speech. The court said that it was unacceptable that he “set the French against a community whose religious beliefs he explicitly stated, and whose rise in number he portrayed as a latent threat to the dignity and security of the French people.”
Hate speech based on religious and national affiliation has been flaring up in Montenegro since the end of 2019 and the beginning of protests against the Law on Religious Communities. The elections in August 2020 only added fuel to the fire, especially the change of the government after three decades and the fact that the new government was formed under the strong influence of the Serbian Orthodox Church.
The President of Montenegro and the Democratic Party of Socialists Milo Djukanovic, after losing the parliamentary elections, called the Serbian Orthodox Church a “quasi-religious community”, a “clerical-fascist menagerie”, “trying to keep illegally appropriated property”, “responsible for the Srebrenica genocide” and most of the crimes during the wars of the ’90s,’ while he had previously called protests against the law (litije) a “crazy movement.” Due to these statements, at least two criminal charges were filed against him whose outcome is still pending.
The Prime Minister of Montenegro, Zdravko Krivokapić, on the other hand, called the Montenegrin Orthodox Church a “so-called”, “non-governmental organization”, and pointed out “that its only goal was not to establish faith, but to return property”, which, as well as Djukanovic, also promoted, to say the least, “rejection and hostility towards the targeted community,” as the European Court of Human Rights would say.
The Deputy Prime Minister Dritan Abazović was also under a special impact of hate speech, whose parents were insulted both in the parliament and in front of him because of his nationality, and to whom, for example Councilor Milovan Janković (DPS) said that “there’s no place in Montenegro neither for him, nor the Prime Minister Zdravko Krivokapić, nor the Minister of the Interior Sergej Sekulović”. Due to a similar speech, calling for ethnic cleansing, the trial of a man who shouted “Move out, move out” from a car covered with a Serbian flag, in an area where mostly Muslims live, is underway. The prosecution also investigated a similar statement by Bosniak party official Adnan Muhovic: “Were they only to try to destroy Bosnia, we will organize a tractor race to Serbia.”
When one assesses the kind of speech of the above statement – that is whether it’s provocative political speech which is protected under the freedom of expression or hate speech – one should keep in mind that “public officials have a special responsibility to refrain from statements that may to be understood as hate speech” (Recommendation R(97)20 of the Council of Europe Expert Committee on Hate Speech). The European Court of Human Rights has also emphasized that it is crucial for politicians to avoid comments that may incite intolerance. They said this confirming the decision of the Belgian courts to punish the MP and the party president for hate speech against immigrants, with 250 hours of community service with them, and a ban on access to public office for 10 years (Féret v. Belgium).
Hate speech is an overture to physical violence, so everyone in charge, as well as everyone with public influence, would have to oppose it without hesitation.
Author: Tea Gorjanc Prelević, Human rights Action, Podgorica
Photo: Djordje Kostic/ Shutterstock
ETHICS AND THE PUBLIC INTEREST
December 14, 2021
Precisely at one of the ethics roundtables, I asked Magistracy professor Arta Mandro where the media went wrong when reporting on the murder of little Mateo. Immediately placing her hand on her heart, without resorting to words, the professor let me know how, as a citizen who read online or followed the broadcasts, indeed, she as an audience was damaged by so many serious and unnecessary details that she decided to guard herself by not following us.
But for whom do we write, to whom do we tell, and what do we tell, in case the audience feels violated and unable to swallow the detailed facts we convey?
Mateo’s case, which is not the first, and which did not lack the cortège, the place where the body was hid, the way he was killed, how the lifeless child was found, was again a repeated report on violence and crime, or on the sexual abuse of minors narrated by parents with exposed identities, exposing the data of the child victim. After any reporting similar to that of Mateo, we are faced with the question: to what extent are we entitled to tell; and is it ethical or not to be exhaustive in describing the facts?
The Code of Ethics of Albanian Media, which must be taken into account, has placed us between the right to inform and the requirement that the public interest does not justify sensationalism. Why is it so difficult to balance the right to inform with the principles of this code that ‘media products that propagate war, violence, anger, or hurt the feelings of the entire public are strictly forbidden’?!. Violence and brutality should not be sensationalized. Reporting should take into account the need to protect minors.
Reporting from the field on serious events with juvenile victims or abused women requires not only self-conscience, but also experience and professional ethical skills by the journalist. However, this matter is not only in the hands of journalists. The editorial office and relevant media, which seem to have fallen into the trap of clickbaiting, must also be functional and in the service of the public interest. Furthermore, in the live broadcast race, it seems as if the crime reporting competition has taken hostage journalists and reporters, who in the eyes of the public are perceived as “givers” of the event without any filter, including as many details of minors as possible. How to deal with this data is prescribed in the principles of ethics, but is not respected. Filters from the field in relevant newsrooms do not work, this is more than understandable. And, in order to cure this problem, which is not just a phenomenon of Albanian media, we must first speak about the truth regarding the extent of the competition between journalists who tend to be as specific as possible, and what the relationship is between such an element and the influence of the editorial staff to be as porous and exhaustive following the 5 W-s.
Whatever this balance is, the truth is troubling and, despite relevant manuals or training, reporting continues to be increasingly specific.
Should we give so much detail to the public or not, even though any of us can argue based on public interest? In his book “Journalism,” Stephan Russ-Mohl points out that before journalists publish a story, they should ask what harm they can do with it. Likewise, in her article “Waking From a Sound Sleep,” Nora Gallagher mentions Hurricane Katrina, recalling the mission of journalists with the phrase “we got the story because reporters asked real questions, and demanded real answers…”
For Mateo, as for any equally serious event, the reporting lived on for three days after describing the scene and detailing the actions and confessions of the suspected killer. Of course, the public’s anger is rightly directed at the reporters who report on the news, the courts, the police and the prosecution. But a field reporter is just one of the links. The questions we had to ask, the investigation that needed to be done should be put up for public discussion in relation to the protection of children, ranging from the neighborhood where they live to digital security. Does the control of individuals previously logged for similar crimes function, or not? Does the treatment of citizens who need to be cured of mental health disorders function, or not? And many other questions through which such reporting is called journalism. Many investigated this point too, but again, the details on the pit where the child’s body was hidden undo everything that has been reported.
Author: Anila Hoxha, well-known journalist for Top Channel. She has been reporting from the field on developments of the case of the murder of 8-year old Mateo in Fier, which shocked the Albanian public and was accompanied by much debate regarding the media reporting of this case.
Photo: Prath/ Shutterstock
STRUCTURAL VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN IN MONTENEGRO
December 9, 2021
“At first I waited in the hallway for a long time for someone to see me. At home I had a baby less than a month old. And another six-year-old child. The inspector did not receive me on the same day, but the next day”.
“I relayed the event, and the inspector recorded the events completely differently. I asked him to change some sentences in the record which he did in part, but not quite as I told him to write it. The point is that the inspector wanted to show that I was beaten by my husband, because I caused it…That was 17 days after I gave birth…”
This is just one of the nearly 200 confessions that were submitted to the ‘Vijesti’ editorial office, through a questionnaire on trust in legal institutions and the autorities regarding domestic violence, the process in which the Centre for Women’s Rights also participated. The same theme runs through most of the answers – victims do not trust institutions. And how can they when the institutions themselves do not trust them.
Two femicides that took place in less than a month in Montenegro testify to the fact that institutions do not believe women. In both cases, victims reported threats to their lives and both times the institutions failed to protect them. Ilir Dokaj, the murderer of nineteen-year-old Šejla Bakija, was acquitted by the misdemeanour court, because the prosecutor did not understand his threat with the use of the phrase “there will be blood” as gross violence. Shortly afterwards, his threat came true. The institutions said that everything was done “correctly and legally”. Montenegrins did not think so, so they organised two peaceful protests demanding an extraordinary session to be held by the Government in order to examine the action of all institutions. The President’s office never responded to these requests. Progress in this matter will be unlikely even from the new government considering the number of women that are (not) present in the negotiations.
The second murder also passed without any reaction from the authorities. It was committed by a convicted perpetrator, Ahmet Škrijelj, who, in the presence of five minor children, first killed his wife, then seriously injured his underage daughter, and then committed suicide. The violence in that family was known to everyone, from the neighbours to the centres for social work, the police, the prosecutor’s office, and the court. Yet the victim was alone, forced to endure to the very end.
The system does not protect children either, even when they are sexually abused, abducted, forced to coexist with adult abusers. This is evident by the frequent sexual assaults on children, of which the perpetrators are already known as previously convicted individuals.
The latest case of this took place in Plav, a small place where everyone knows everything. In this case the rape and kidnapping of a twelve-year-old girl was kept silent until the case reached the media four months later. According to the reactions on media articles, the public was most disturbed by the fact that the rapist and kidnapper of the child was married.
So, who does the system trust, if it doesn’t already trust the victims?
Judging by the words and deeds of those in the highest state positions, it could be said that the system trusts the perpetrators.
The system trusts the perpetrators even when there are final verdicts against them for domestic violence and in cases where they do not allow their children to have contact with their mothers. There are many such perpetrators, according to the statistics of the City courthouse in Podgorica, in which about 150 of such cases have been active since 2017. Journalist Jelena Jindra wrote about it in Croatia, and Damira Kalač wrote about it in Montenegro. Although in other countries in the region such as Croatia there have been steps in improving the way the legal system deals with domestic abuse, Montenegro has a long way to go.
In Montenegro, the first prison sentence of one such case was handed to Tomaš Bošković after he prevented his children from contacting their mother for three years. However, based on the opinion of the head of the Ministry of Justice, Human and Minority Rights and the decision of the President of Montenegro, Milo Dukanović – Bošković was pardoned.
Such acts represent structural violence against women, that is violence rooted in an unjust cultural, legal, political and social system and structures characterised by gender and other inequalities, reproduced through state policies and institutionalised norms and practices. This is reflected in numerous examples of unpunished misogynistic and sexist remarks of public figures, bloggers, politicians, amongst which the most recent is the statement of the member of Parliament of Montenegro, Slaven Radunović. The MP of the party with a democratic name, flippantly remarked that there is a “thin threat that contributes to the decision whether there was a case of rape or not” , expressing his worry that a “spoiled daughter may be jealous of her boyfriend and report him fom rape, and considering whose daughter she is, that young man ends up as a rapist”, generously brushing over the fact that the number of reported rapes is very low, and the number of convictions is even lower, precisely because his opinion is shared by the majority of those who should act in response to such cases.
On top of this, when we add the hate speech and sexism directed at women in politics and public life, which is so frequent that we do not even get to react to it all, then it is clear why women in Montenegro are not only killed and abused, but also why they are not born. Namely, Montenegro is one of the countries where significantly fewer girls are born than boys (108: 100 in the last three years) as parents and extended family prefer heirs (who will heir who knows what, since about a third of citizens live at risk of poverty, and almost every tenth person lives under the line of absolute poverty). Not even the campaign “Unwanted”, who collected over 6,000 signatures, was able to bring this problem into the focus of the state, who is recording a negative natural population increase this year.
All this is happening during the year of expiration of the four-year deadline for fulfilling the legally binding recommendations sent to the state by GREVIO – Expert Body for Monitoring the Implementation of the Council of Europe Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence against Women and Domestic Violence (Istanbul Convention). And all of this in a country who calls itself the “leader of European integration”.
Author: Maja Raičević, Center for Women’s Rights
Photo: Syr_y/Shutterstock
HATE SPEECH BASED ON ETHNICITY AND SEXISM IN THE WESTERN BALKANS: November onthly monitoring highlight
December 8, 2021
Throughout the month of November, the RDN monitoring team has detected a range of hateful narratives and discourse. During this month there has been a rise in hate speech including sensationalism, ethnic discrimination and sexism across the Western Balkans.
Insensitive reporting in Albania
Recently a headline emerged in Shiqiptarja.com reading “Horror in Fier/A 38-year-old kidnaps the neighbour’s son, kills him with a shovel and buries him in the backyard. The lifeless body of the 8-year-old covered in mud! The perpetrator was previously convicted for taking a minor hostage in 2006”.
The horrific murder of an 8-year-old boy in Fier by his neighbour has left the Albanian public shocked and stunned; not only due to the nature of the crime but especially in reaction to how the crime was represented and reported in the media. Reports included numerous details about the crime as well as highly graphic photographs (such as the spot where the boy was buried) which appeared and were reported in an incredibly sensationalist manner. This had a knock-on effect with various actors calling on media outlets and journalists to strongly adhere and abide by the Code of Ethics.
Reporting inappropriately on such crimes does not only violate the public, but, most of all, completely disregards the suffering and pain of those individuals who are affected by the crime itself. This was seen when all media outlets which reported from the boy’s funeral ignored the family’s current mental state thereby, ultimately worsening the situation for the family.
Various heart-breaking testimonies have been captured on camera from the community and family itself, including statements calling for the ‘hanging’ of the perpetrator, thus revealing and highlighting the suffering that the community and those related to the boy are experiencing.
This incident is an example of a complete violation of the Albanian Code of Journalistic Ethics
in regards to the media’s active participation in the ‘intrusion into private life’, the reporting of accidents and disasters and perhaps most importantly, the protection of children. It must be further highlighted that legitimate public interest does not justify sensationalism and in the spirit of the Ethics Code, it should never be confused with information deemed to be of interest to the public. Such events should not be reported in a manner which results in further distress to both the public, but more importantly, to those falling victims of such gruesome events.
Ethnic discrimination and tensons in Kosovo, Montenegro and North Macedonia
Ethnic tensions between Kosovo and Serbia continue to influence the relations in the Western Balkans. Kosovo Online has reported on the former deputy Prime Minister of Kosovo, Edita Tahiri, who published on her Twitter profile several accusations of Serbia interfering in the region in the pursuit of creating the so-called ‘Greater Serbia’.
In her Twitter profile amongst other things, Tahiri claimed that Serbia, with the help of Russia, has now continued its plan to create a ‘Greater Serbia’ with Bosnia and Herzegovina, as it had previously failed to do so with Kosovo. “Tensions over the partition of Bosnia and Herzegovina has reached a boiling point in the last period, fuelling destabilisation and potential wars. ‘Open Balkans’ project serves as the paravane”, tweeted Tahiri.
Warnings emerged following the debate over the plans of Milorad Dodik – “the current Bosnian Serb member of the three-way state-level presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina – to separate his region from the state”.
The comments made by Tahiri resulted in a number of hate speech comments directed to her and the Albanian public. One of the comments included a direct insult and attack on the Muslim community and Albanian population more general saying that Muslims of Republika Srpska want to take the whole country while Albanians want to do the same in Kosovo and Metohija. ‘’Give the Muslim a finger, he will try to take both hands from you”, reads the same comment.
Such insensitive comments and hate speech are further fuelling tension and division between the Serbian and Albanian population.
In September 2020 in North Macedonia, a video which displayed a policeman beating up a member of the Roma population went viral. The incident itself happened while the police secured the scene of a traffic accident. The video shows the policeman assaulting a bystander by getting him on the ground and kicking him in his body and head.
Earlier this month, the court had decided to sentence the policeman with a one-year prison sentence on the grounds of physical assault. However, following the sentence, a protest was held in Bitola – where the incident occurred- requesting that the policeman’s sentence be revoked. The protestors argued that justice was selective in North Macedonia.
Fokus.mk who published an article about the protest mentioned the comment of the president of the Independent Police Union, Goce Delchev Todev: “someone cannot be sentenced to 6 or 7 months for murder, and someone to one year in prison for nothing” belittling the physical violence against the Roma man and suggesting that that the policeman should not have been prosecuted and punished for his actions.
Comments as such which argue that violence against a marginalised community should not have consequences promote ethnic discrimination towards the Roma population, an already marginalised group within North Macedonia, even more.
An article published in antenam.net in Montenegro, exposed the director of the Piva branch of Hydroelectricity company, Radomir Radonjić, of spreading hate speech against Montenegrins and Albanians on his Facebook account. His comments included labelling two individuals with the derogatory and inflammatory term– ‘ustašice’ – also known as Ustashas relating to a Croatian fascist and ultranationalist organisation active during the early 20th century. He used such language when addressing journalist Tamara Nikačević and Draginja Vuksanović-Stanković, an MP and former president of the Social Democratic Party. Having in mind that he used female forms of this derogatory terms, his statements have elements of sexism along with open ethnic hatred.
He further spread xenophobic hate speech towards Albanians whom he labelled as “aggressive, slimy Shiptars” as well as naming Montenegrins as cattle.
Not only are such comments extremely hateful but they further promote both sexism and ethnic discrimination within society. It also highlights the importance of mechanisms in place on platforms such as Facebook in preventing and reacting to the spread of hate speech.
Following the exposure of Radonjić’s hateful posts, the Higher State Prosecutor’s Office in Podgorica issued an order to the police to collect information on the controversial Facebook posts in question.
Sexism in Bosnia and Herzegovina
This year’s Drama Theatre Festival in Brčko was marked by the waiver of awards from all theatres as the jury this year included Branislav Lečić, whose colleague had accused him of rape. All the theatres came together to make an explicit remark that they did not want to receive the award itself from Lečić following such accusations.
Following this event, several comments and reports by local journalists were published on the official website of the Festival in regards to the incident. In response, Novak Tanasić, a journalist, came out with a statement shaming the Belgrade Atelier 212 protest. Belgrade Atelier 212 is a local theatre located in Belgrade, Serbia which was the first to speak out and reject the acceptance of the award, thereby, initiating the protest.
The language used to refer to the situation and accusation of rape was extremely shameful including Tanasić’s comment: “it does not concern us perfectly who did what to whom, who is who to whom and what is between you…”. It is unacceptable to talk about sexual abuse in that way – such language is a clear indication of the patriarchal and misogynistic society, in which victims of sexual violence are often exposed to public scrutiny and shame. In July, the Belgrade Higher Public Prosecutor’s Office rejected Danijela Štajnfeld’s criminal charges against Lečić. This decision is not yet final.
Sexism and misogyny thrive within the Bosnian society. The website klix.ba recently reported on the case of the murder of a woman in Zenica, who was killed by her ex-husband. The article itself included a comment emphasising: “Locals told us that the murdered woman lived with another man and that the two children were left without a mother”.
The report itself stated that the woman lived with another man and was almost seen to have ‘abandoned her children’. By reporting in such a sensationalist and sexist manner, the article itself resulted in a huge number of comments about how the woman deserved to be murdered. This is a prime example of the role of journalists and media portals in reporting on such incidents in an unbiased manner so as to not promote sexist narratives and further hate speech towards women.
Ethical reporting in Serbia
In celebration of International Day against Fascism and Antisemitism, the Youth Initiative for Human Rights displayed their united front against Fascism by painting over a mural of convicted war criminal Ratko Mladić. The Ministry of Interior announced that it would ban and prosecute such action on the grounds that there was “a high risk of physical altercations”.
This is extremely problematic and raises important ethical concerns regarding the governments’ role in promoting human rights and justice. Such reaction of the government gives the impression that Serbia is not confronting the glorification of war criminals.
Activists Aida Ćorović and Jelena Jaćimović threw eggs at the mural in protest and were laterdetained by the police. Activists and citizens who opposed these arrests took to the streets in protest to show their support for the arrested activists. Various media close to the government reported this incident framing it as ‘’creating chaos’’ including targeting communities that do not have essentially anything to do with the case, but show their support for arrested activists and their cause. Such example could be seen in Informer.rs; “Here is how LGBT members agree to create chaos in Belgrade because of Ratko Mladić’s mural”. The media began to target the activists and citizens with false accusations and assumptions driving the focus away from the real issue at hand.
The comment of the film director and writer Dragoslav Bokan is an example of very dangerous attempts to divide the Serbian society.Commenting on the roadblocks that were organised throughout Serbia in protest against the adoption of the law on expropriation and referendum, Bokan targeted the Vice President of the Party of Freedom and Justice Marinika Tepić, as a national enemy, based on her ethnic background. His comment itself read “Marinika Tepić is a member of a national minority that hates Serbia and the Serbian people. (…) She is from a Romanian family! A Romanian mom, a Romanian dad, worked in a Romanian organisation, and she is our enemy. She is a national enemy, not only ideological and political”.
This statement spreads ethnic hatred towards the Romanian population whilst building further tension in the society. This event was broadcasted on TV Pink which has a national frequency and wide audience. RDN 2.0 reminds Television Pink of the Code of Ethics of Serbian journalists that states:
“A journalist must be aware of the danger of discrimination that can be spread by media and shall do everything to avoid discrimination based, among other things, on race, gender, age, sexual orientation, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origins.”
This further highlights a wider issue at play – the role of media outlets in promoting narratives through various forms of framing thereby influencing who the public perceives to be traitors and enemies. Indeed, this is a mechanism of diverting attention from the real issue at hand by focusing our attention elsewhere, but with potentially very dangerous consequences.
MEDIA (NOT) AS A MIRRORING, MEDIA (NOT) AS A CREATION!
December 7, 2021
… “31-year-old Elton Metaj shot his ex-wife Sabrina Benga to death. Police announced that they have arrested the perpetrator this morning. Sabrina left behind a 2-year-old baby ”…
… “Albania: over 100 women and girls killed in 18 years…”
… “only in the first six months of 2021, there were 1549 requests for protection orders, 2436 cases of domestic violence, 383 cases more than in the same period of 2020″ …
… “From Tirana to Bubq, to kill his wife / Reasons for domestic crime a mystery, investigators: The woman was shot angrily several times by her husband”
… “The woman who died from the sexual abuse by her husband, justice is lacking still 6 years later …”
These headlines are a sad proof coming from the Albanian family. While everyone is quick to express their indignation on social networks or even with protests in the city, when the lights go out, we are all still left wondering where this violence comes from. Someone from the darkness says that it is the culture that breeds such displays, some others call on stage to blame modernity and the abandonment of tradition, while others remain silent in the face of the inability to give an answer or find a solution.
Thank God we live in the age of mass media. The media that informed us about murders, will also give us the answers!
It seems paradoxical, but today we experience reality based on the media we consume. For many authors, the reason why people see the world as a dangerous place lies in the way the media, especially television, reflects reality. But if the effects of many programs can be measured over time and generations, the transmission or high coverage of violence on the front pages of newspapers, major newscasts or through the bombastic headlines of portals, has a direct effect on the emergence of violence and the increase of opportunities for it to multiply in its harshest forms. Based on this theoretical finding, this article aims to address one of the most sensitive problems of Albanian society, that of gender-based violence and how the media can turn into an ally of good or evil, depending on reporting techniques or on the language used by its structures.
Media as a mirroring and the innocent journalist
In the Albanian public space, the thesis that the journalist is to blame for the news has begun to be articulated. Bias, lack of professionalism or the inability to know the circumstances well, seem to force many media people to fall prey to a report, which appears to be based on the principle “I said what I saw.” While such journalists may indeed work in our media, I tend to believe that the truth is not so clear-cut.
The individual does not operate alone, but is rather a being influenced by the anthropological/social trends of the environment. Having said that, the journalist moves within a media system, which nowadays is guided more by the principle of speed than of quality. The slogan “the first for the latest news” sounds ridiculous and at the same time alarms us when it should be reported that a murder has been committed, and details are given for the sake of a feigned truth, details which harm not only the victims, but also the audience.
There are many cases when the media coverage dedicated to murders is a long parade of private details of the victim, her relations with the family or even with the killer himself. Caught by this obsession, media have forgotten that their task is not only to convey information, but to go further with the elements of analysis of the facts, causes and consequences of such events. A person’s privacy should not only be protected by the journalist; it should be guaranteed by the media. The media is the system from which ethical reporting principles should be derived. The media should stop demanding that the journalist provide identifiable details, the location of the accident, photographs or other data. All these not only kill the victim once again, but create a domino effect of pain in the public perception, the reality of which is severely crippled by such displays.
Media as a creation of reality and the journalist as an agent of change
Feminism is one of the most important schools of critical thinking in the media. Numerous scholars have seen in the language of media products the terrain where the symbolic meanings of a culture collide, such as the role of women and men in society, stereotypes, prejudices, and more. All these scholars are united by the belief that language is a masculine construction and, as a social construct, has served men rather than women, who have suffered all the stigmatizations related to their gender on their shoulders.
One of the direct effects of the power of language used by the media is the normalization of violence against women. This effect has been built slowly, but powerfully, by the extraordinary sexualization of the media space, through advertisements, sexist images, roles given to women, and so on. Rigorously enforcing the liberal agenda where the female subject is a powerful quantitative subject, the media has fed audiences with the false idea of an achieved equality, where the reality or chance of being killed is increasingly smaller. The media, aiming to impose a feminist dictatorship, which is in fact a sexist dictatorship, has even left without cover many women, whose protection would come precisely from the essential empowerment of their gender in the public space. Having said that, the media has again created distorted realities, forgetting that this power could also have been used to empower women, protecting their lives more.
A concrete contribution of the media would be the inclusion of a language which accurately shows the problems that women suffer in all television products, news, chronicles, shows, whichever they are. Economic incapacity, psychological or sexual abuse, online bullying, forced marriage or murder, are various forms of violence against women, forms which can be made more apparent by a media that tries not only to report, but also to educate audiences thanks to its power. At this point, the journalist ceases to be a media employee and turns into an agent of change, creating new models of reporting and constructing the news. The role of the media and future media professionals should focus on changing perceptions and behaviors about gender-based violence; only through the improvement of current reporting schemes, by means of a qualitative selection of topics as well as by identifying the sources used for news stories, can a new model of media reporting in society be brought about.
Metacommunication
Truth continues to remain a tempting category for modern philosophical thought. However, its practical possibilities seem to be captured by the post-truth world, where it is difficult to experience truth as an imperative category. The media seems to suffer more from this impossibility of ultimately touching the truth and, consequently, establishes a problematic relationship with it.
Sometimes, the media follows the myth of the mirror, with the idea that the truth will be revealed by it, and other times it strives to have creative power and build sublime realities, where the truth comes as the final value. Whichever path it takes to approach the truth, the media must understand that it is human, and the way it is conducted must also start from the principle of building a human world, where truth should not only be nurtured as a philosophy, but as an attempt by every human being who happens to spend some time on our planet.
Author: Irena Myzeqari
Photo: Bildagentur Zoonar GmbH/ Shutterstock
GENDER-BASED VIOLENCE IN SERBIA: Media are missing the chance to educate the public
December 3, 2021
For a long time now, every November 25th on the International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women, citizens in Serbia have been hearing about devastating numbers that tell us just how bad the situation is when it comes to gender-based violence. It seems that the number of citizens who condemn this situation publicly, on their social media, is gradually growing. But how much can we, as individuals, do on this issue? Where is our role, and what is the responsibility of the state, the civil sector and the media?
In the past ten years, more than 320 women in Serbia have been killed in cases of domestic or partner violence, and these statistics do not even include women who have died as a result of years of suffering violence, or women whose deaths have not reached the media. One in three of the women that have been killed have previously reported violence, and their killers were most often their husbands or (ex)partners. The number of femicides, unfortunately, is not decreasing.
When we talk about femicide – a term that seems to be avoided by the Serbian media- it is important to mention that in Serbia there is no institutional or systemic monitoring of how many women are killed. The data at our disposal are statistics from non-governmental organizations working in the field of women’s rights. The information is collected from the media and is reflective of the important role of the media in the absence of other mechanisms. Since there is almost no education on this problem within the education system, the media spontaneously took over an educational role for the citizens of Serbia.
Until a few years ago, reporting on violence against women was, in most cases, had a strong sensationalist tone, and often harmed victims, their families, as well as other women who face violence. Half of the reports on violence against women revealed the identity of the victim or her family members, and as many as 40 percent of the publications used sensationalist or stereotypical terms for violence, victim or perpetrator (Analysis on the problem of violence against women in 2019). It looked as if there was no interest in improving media coverage. Voices of individual journalists who could not influence editorial policy as well as the work of women’s CSOs, did not have sufficient power to make a change. However, over the last few years, things have started to break free from the deadlock and it is considered more important to consider how gender-based violence is reported.
Regardless of the fact that there are mechanisms and regulatory bodies that are able to sanction unethical reporting, the institutions did not seem to be interested. In recent years, consumers of media content, at least in part, have demanded more professional reporting. This happened precisely because of the appearance of public figures in cases of violence that brought the hyperproduction of content. The woman who was beaten or killed was no longer just discussed in the crime section of the papers; there was a need for greater social analysis from various angles that would explain the context. It’s as if a part of the public suddenly realized that this is a phenomenon, even though feminists have been talking about it for decades. Of course, that did not contribute to the improved media coverage of the subject. Often, populist voices that spread misogynistic views are in the spotlight just because they bring ratings or clicks. Thus, the opportunity was missed to use the educational potential of the topic for the audience that wanted to hear something more.
In a country like Serbia, which ranks very low in terms of media freedoms, these low levels of freedom also apply to topics such as violence against women. The pro-government media was very quiet when the perpetrators of the violence were men who were part of the government, or even used their platform to discredit women who went public with the violence they faced. Sharing private photos of victims dressed in what was characterized as “provocative” clothing, sharing private information, the emotional status of a survivor of violence, information about ex-partners, and making photomontages, were all common responses to reports of gender-based violence. All this was experienced by Marija Lukić, who reported the sexual violence she experienced from the mayor of the city of Brus, Milutin Jeličić Jutka. It has also been experienced by the woman who is considered the initiator of the #MeToo movement in Serbia, actress Milena Radulović, who stated that she was raped by acting teacher Miroslav Aleksić. Aleksić taught at an elite acting school in Belgrade, and many other women who were students there have since come forward to report him for instances of rape and sexual harassment.
Interestingly, the journalist who first reported the stories of these women, Ivana Mastilović Jasnić, was the target of an attack because of her reporting. Insults and threats were sent to her on social media. In addition, the accused and convicted perpetrator sued her for damaging his reputation for every text she wrote – 38 times. As courts in Serbia are slow and bring only stress and fear, they are often the method used by perpetrators not only to silence their victims but also to silence journalists.
The men in positions of power who were accused of violence against women, were often defended through the narrative that the accusations are politicized. This relies on the false notion that behind every accusation there is a political background and the intention to discredit the reputation of these men. However, most of those who were accused, and even convicted, generally continued to lead their lives normally without the fear of being “cancelled”. Politician Dragan Markovic Palma, who was accused of trafficking and prostitution of girls earlier this year, was very present in the pro-government media. He was given a platform in the peak of attention for the case, to sing, talk about himself as a family man, and entertain guests of the TV shows. A few months later, the media very rarely mention the whole case.
The case of actress Danijela Štajnfeld, who shared with the public that she experienced rape, is something that definitely shook media outlets, many of which did not fail to show themselves in the absolutely worst light. Daniela selected the media in which she would speak and each time she used the opportunity to educate the public, to explain the mechanisms that prevent women from reporting violence. She was tireless in trying to send the message for all those who might, despite the unethical media reporting, and despite the attacks they might face, decide to report the violence. That courage was recognized by some. Recently, all theater plays that participated in the theater festival in Brčko decided to withdraw because one of the member of the jury was the actor Branislav Lečić, whom Štajnfeld accused of rape. As a sign of resistance, as an ethical act and condemnation of violence, the artists refused to compete at the festival. It remains to be seen how this will affect the media and the public.
We must not neglect the influence of positive narratives in the media. When we share stories that are not stereotypical, when we see women in a role that goes beyond those imposed on them by society, women have a chance to see themselves as strong enough to speak out about violence.
It is important to mention that the group of Journalists Against Violence against Women formed by UNDP Serbia and Fund B92 is also responsible for the progress in reporting on violence. In addition to the Guidelines for Reporting on Violence against Women, campaigns that shed light on the mechanisms of violence, the group deals with the annual analysis of reporting about gender-based violence, where they map the biggest problems and make suggestions. However, the most important thing is that the group exists in the first place, as a space of solidarity for all those journalists who fight with editorial policies, want to learn, and want to promote a society without violence, because without such support, the fight is impossible.
Author: Jovana Netković, BeFem and member of the group of Journalists Against Violence against Women
Photo: Peter Gudella/ Shutterstock
TROLL OF THE MONTH: Member of the Parliament of Montenegro, Slaven Radunović
December 2, 2021
The Balkan Troll of the Month is an individual, a group of individuals or a media outlet that spreads hate on the internet based on gender, ethnicity, religion, or other diversity categories. The Balkan Troll is selected based on hate speech incidents identified across the Western Balkans region.
Our November Troll of the Month is a member of the Parliament of Montenegro, Slaven Radunović, who spread misogyny and sexist narratives which further undermine cases of sexual harassment and rape towards women on the basis of false accusations and gender discrimination.
Recently, during a discussion regarding chemical castration at the Committee on Political System and Justice, a Member of the Parliament of Montenegro, Slaven Radunović, spread strong sexist and misogynistic comments regarding the issue. Radunović stated: “let’s say a spoiled daughter is jealous of her boyfriend, so she reports him for rape, so considering whose daughter she is, that young man ended up as a rapist, and he gets castrated as well”. He went on to further point out that “sometimes a very thin thread decides in the decision whether there was rape or not”.
Following Radunović’s scandalous statement, there was a sharp and prompt reaction from the public who condemned such an “insolent statement” by the deputies and called on institutions to react and respond to such statements. The Safe Women’s House condemned the speech of MP Radunović, further adding: “we condemn this kind of speech and we wonder how to expect changes in the consciousness of the citizens of Montenegro when we receive such misogynistic messages from public officials”, highlighting the level of misogyny and sexism promoted and spread by an individual of political importance with a platform and large audience.
Furthermore, a number of public reactions appeared online in response Radunović’s statement and comments. This includes the Women’s Rights Center who posted a public statement calling on:
“the Speaker of the Assembly, the Collegium of Speakers of the Assembly, presidents of parliamentary clubs and all deputies to report such statements to the Committee on Human Rights and Freedoms”.
Not only was the incident shared widely given the fact that it was broadcast on numerous TV stations, it was also shared on various info portals and social networks as well. It is even more worrying when we take into account that the Parliament of Montenegro is streamed and was later uploaded on YouTube resulting in over 800 views.
Slaven Radunović, a member of the elected government, holds both a moral and democratic responsibility to be accountable for his actions and words. By using Parliament as public platform to share discriminatory stands regarding cases of sexual harassment and rape, Radunović further spreads sexism in Montenegro, with no consequence for himself.
Furthermore, upholding and spreading such ideas only results in further shame and creates a mechanism of silencing those who are victims of sexual harassment and rape who may fear being called out or accused of ‘lying’ about their experience. Radunović’s statement further supports prejudice against victims of rape and sexual harassment while disregarding the fact that these crimes are already rarely reported due to the pre-existing social stigma, which comments such as Radunović’s only perpetuates and maintains.
According to an article appearing in Antena M, written in response to the recent scandal, it was revealed through research that out of “100 women and girls who experienced sexual violence, as many as 88 did not report the case to the competent institutions”. The reasons for this include public shame, stereotypes, fear of not being believed and condemnation.
When addressing extremely sensitive issues such as rape and sexual harassment, it is vital that public, media and officials understand their responsibility and role in the spreading of messages and narratives to the public surrounding such issues. RDN 2.0 monitoring has uncovered that the perception and representation of women in Montenegro is already quite problematic, and such comments and incidents only fuel further the situation at hand while promoting and upholding misogyny and gender discrimination within society.
The role of the media is not to transmit an individual’s statement, no matter what their position is, without a critical attitude or any form of follow-up statement. This is especially important in the case such as the spread of discrimination and hate speech. The media have an ethical responsibility when reporting on such sensitive topics as sexual harassment and rape, and should therefore actively aim to participate in creating a safe space to talk without prejudice, fear and condemnation. The international campaign, 16 days of Activism against Gender-Based Violence, commencing on the 25 November calls for “the prevention and elimination of violence against women and girls” and reminds us that 1 in 3 women across the globe face gender-based violence once in their lifetime. Individuals need to be held accountable and incidents such as this further highlight the need for exposure and punishment of such comments and ideas.