The Union of Orthodox Journalists has filed a complaint with international human rights bodies over the blocking of Orthodox media in Ukraine

At the end of January 2025, the Union of Orthodox Journalists sent an appeal to international human rights organizations complaining about the violation of freedom of speech in Ukraine due to the unjustified blocking of the websites Spzh.eu, Dialog.tut, Pravlife and Raskolam.net, which cover the life and activities of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church. The Union of Orthodox Journalists emphasizes that the illegal orders of the authorities to block these Orthodox media contradict the Constitution of Ukraine and violate the basic rights of Ukrainian citizens. The appeal is posted on the UOJ website.

THE TEXT OF THE STATEMENT

In July 2024, the company TEAM OF THE ORTHODOX JOURNALISTS (TOJ) LTD was registered in the EU.

The main activity of this company is the publication of journalistic articles on its website covering the activities of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church.

In particular, the articles raise issues of protecting the rights of believers to freely practice their religion, to freely worship and perform ritual rites, and to conduct religious activities.

It also highlights the problems of violations of the rights of believers of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church in Ukraine, such as the violent seizure of churches by representatives of other religious denominations and radicals, and the inaction of law enforcement agencies in connection with crimes committed against believers.

The website of TEAM OF THE ORTHODOX JOURNALISTS (TOJ) LTD is popular among a large number of readers living in Ukraine.

At the same time, Ukrainian state authorities impose disproportionate restrictions on freedom of religion and belief.

In particular, on 12.09.2024, the National Center for Operational and Technical Management of Telecommunication Networks by Providers of Electronic Telecommunication Services issued Order No. 769/2574 on restricting (blocking) access in Ukraine to the domains https://spzh.live/ru/ and https://spzh.live/ua/ used by the Company.

Subsequently, similar orders were issued on 15.11.2024 No. 920/2725 and on 10.01.2025 No. 10/2811 on restricting (blocking) access in Ukraine to the domains https://spzh.life/ru/ and https://spzh.eu used by the Company.

The reason for such actions is the harassment of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church and persecution of Orthodox journalists. In this context, it should be noted that in addition to TEAM OF THE ORTHODOX JOURNALISTS (TOJ) LTD, the official website of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, as well as other resources covering the life of the UOC, are blocked in Ukraine. In particular, Dialog.tut, Pravlife, and Raskolam.net.

Such arbitrary interference in journalistic activities contradicts both the national legislation of Ukraine and international law.

According to Article 34 of the Constitution of Ukraine, everyone is guaranteed the right to freedom of thought and speech, to the free expression of their views and beliefs. Everyone has the right to freely collect, store, use and disseminate information orally, in writing or in any other way of their choice.

According to Article 15 of the Constitution of Ukraine, public life in Ukraine is based on the principles of political, economic and ideological diversity. No ideology may be recognized by the state as mandatory. Censorship is prohibited.

According to Article 4 of the Law of Ukraine “On Media”, media activity is based on the principles of freedom of expression, freedom of dissemination, exchange and receipt of information, freedom of activity of media entities, including free determination of the content of information, freedom of economic activity in the media, guarantee of the right to information, openness and accessibility of information, accuracy and completeness of information, legality of obtaining, using, disseminating, preserving and protecting information, as well as on the principles of freedom of expression. Censorship is prohibited. Unlawful interference in the activities of media entities by state bodies, local governments, public associations, political parties, owners of the relevant entities, and any other individuals and legal entities is prohibited.

According to Article 35 of the Constitution of Ukraine, everyone has the right to freedom of thought and religion. This right includes the freedom to profess any religion or not to profess any religion, to freely worship individually or collectively, and to conduct religious activities. The church and religious organizations in Ukraine are separated from the state. No religion may be recognized by the state as obligatory.

According to Article 10 (freedom of expression) of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right includes freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers.

According to the case law of the European Court of Human Rights (Fatullayeva v. Azerbaijan), in cases of interference with the right to freedom of expression, it is necessary to determine whether such interference was necessary in a democratic society.

The court must determine whether the reasons given by the national authorities to justify the interference were “relevant and sufficient” and whether the measure taken was “proportionate to the legitimate aims pursued”. In doing so, the court must make sure that the national authorities, based on an acceptable assessment of the relevant facts, have applied standards that are consistent with the principles embodied in Article 10 of the Convention (Chauvet and Others v. France).

As follows from the case law of the European Court of Human Rights (Fatullayev v. Azerbaijan, Hendside v. the United Kingdom), in view of Article 10(2) of the Convention, freedom of expression applies not only to “information” or “ideas” that are received favorably or considered unmoved or indifferent, but also to those that offend, shock or disturb the state or any sector of the population. These are the requirements of pluralism, tolerance and broad-mindedness, without which there is no “democratic society.”

In a democratic society, it is important that debate on issues of public interest can take place freely (Fatullayev v. Azerbaijan).

The Court should also exercise the utmost caution if the measures taken or sanctions imposed by the national authorities are such as to prevent the press from participating in the discussion of issues of legitimate public concern (Fatullayev v. Azerbaijan).

There is a violation of the right to freedom of expression when journalists are prohibited from covering issues of general interest (judgment in the case of Makhmudov and Agazade).

The limits of permissible criticism are wider in relation to the government than to a private citizen or even a politician. In a democratic system, the government’s actions or inactions should be subject to scrutiny not only by the legislature and judiciary, but also by public opinion. In addition, the dominant position held by the government forces it to exercise restraint in resorting to criminal liability even in response to unjustified attacks and criticism of its opponents, especially if other means are available (Incal v. Turkey).

The preamble to the Declaration of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on Human Rights and the Rule of Law in the Information Society recognizes that limited or no access to information and communication technologies can deprive people of the full enjoyment of their human rights.

The first chapter of the Declaration states that the freedoms of expression, information and communication should be respected in both digital and non-digital environments and should not be subject to restrictions.

The preamble of the Declaration on Freedom of Communication on the Internet, adopted by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on 28.05.2023, states that prior control of communication on the Internet, regardless of borders, should remain the exception and that obstacles to individual access to the Internet should be removed.

The Declaration stipulates that public authorities should not, through general blocking and filtering measures, deprive society of access to information on the Internet, regardless of borders.

Recommendation 2008/2160(INI), adopted by the European Parliament on 26.03.2009, explicitly states that states should make efforts to create e-democracy based on full access to the Internet. Therefore, the Parliament recommended that member states condemn government-imposed censorship of searchable content on Internet sites and called on them to ensure that freedom of expression is not subject to arbitrary restrictions by the state and to avoid any legislative or administrative measures that could have a restrictive effect on all aspects of freedom of expression.

In its General Comment No. 34 on Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the UN Human Rights Committee emphasized that it is unacceptable to prohibit a website or information dissemination system from publishing material on the grounds that it may contain criticism of the government or a political social system supported by the government.

In connection with the above, we ask you to take appropriate measures within your competence to restore the violated rights.

The UOJ added that the letter had been sent: UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, OSCE Office on Freedom of Expression, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Human Rights House Foundation, Freedom House, Netherlands Helsinki Committee, International Bar Association, American Society of International Law, ARTICLE 19, International Federation of Journalists (IFJ), Access Now, Committee to Protect Journalists, International Media Support, International Partnership for Human Rights, International PEN, Reporters Without Borders, IFEX, International Freedom of Expression Exchange, International Center for Journalists, Electronic Frontier Foundation, and the International Center for Journalists, European Federation of Journalists (EFJ), Free Press Unlimited, International Press Institute (IPI), Advox (Global Voices project), Independent Journalism Center (IJC), Index on Censorship, World Association of News Publishers, SOCIEDAD INTERAMERICANA DE PRENSA, Open Media, US Commission on International Religious Freedom, US Commission on International Religious Freedom, World Council of Churches, International Association for Religious Freedom, International Christian Concern, Open Doors, Christian Institute, ADF International, Christian Solidarity Worldwide, In Defense of Christians, Institute for Religious Freedom.