Printer-friendly versionSend to friendPDF version

Mikheil Saakashvili's credibility has taken a huge blow today (20 November) with the publication of a new report from Transparency International which shreds his claims about freedom in Georgian media and says that his proposed changes for the public brodcaster will make things worse not better.

"Television in Georgia - Ownership, Control and Regulation" does not mince words:

Today, Georgia's media is less free and pluralistic than it was before the Rose Revolution in 2003 and the ousting of President Eduard Shevardnadze. While the country enjoys a pluralistic, albeit small print media, Georgia lacks a truly pluralistic television sector. Television remains the dominant source of information for most Georgians.

The report rubbishes Mikheil Saakashvili's claim, made on CNN last month (see video), that Georgia has a plethora of independent TV channels, saying:

Georgia's current regulation of the broadcasting sector has proven insufficient to ensure a transparent media ownership regime and to promote a competitive, pluralistic television market. This problem could be addressed by an amendment of the broadcasting law, in order to ensure that sufficient information about the shareholder structure of license holders and their indirect owners is reported to the GNCC and also made accessible to the general public. The GNCC is not perceived as a truly independent regulatory body. Thus, an effort should be made to depoliticize the regulator and increase its credibility by revising the process of how its commissioners are appointed.

But it warns that the President's current plans may just take Georgia further away from what it needs:

There is also an urgent need for a comprehensive reform of the GPB, which currently operates more like a state broadcaster rather than a real public service institution. President Saakashvili's plan to enlarge the broadcaster's board from nine to 15 members, allowing opposition parties to appoint seven of the board members, is likely to lead to increased political influence on the GPB's programming. A strengthened Channel 1, showing informative and critical news and reports, could provide important momentum and contribute to a more pluralistic television landscape in Georgia. Financially, the independence of the broadcaster is not ensured either. Currently, the government decides on the GPB's annual funding which comes from the national budget. Intensive thought should be given to the idea of funding the GPB with an obligatory fee to be paid by each household or to reintroducing the previous financing system, under which the broadcaster received at least the equivalent of 0.15 percent of the Georgian GDP.

More analysis to come.