I have wondered what the media might get from the good intentions of the Moldovan authorities of becoming a member of the EU or how and to what extent the situation of the media can be changed by the Moldova-EU action plan, the main document which includes Moldova's commitments to the EU. When I read the document it became clear to me that things look very well on paper. Thus, freedom of speech and the press are the priorities which - according to the plan signed six months ago "should have received "special attention." According to the plan, freedom of speech will be guaranteed in the following manner: By ensuring a transparent relationship between the authorities and the media institutions according to the recommendations of the Council of Europe; financial help from the state for the mass media, given according to strict criteria and objectives equally applied to all media institutions, and by designing and implementing an adequate legal framework which guarantees freedom of speech and of the mass media, according to European standards. A pesimistic optimism Moldova has managed to present, on September 14, 2005, the first 6-month report, related to the aforementioned plan. The authorities are pleased with the results and with the way in which the report was evaluated by the European dignitaries. Still, if a report on the situation of the media during the same period were to be made, I believe that there would be less reasons for optimism. By saying this I do not mean the formal side of the matter. Important matters, such as the de-nationalization (deetatizarea) of the press, the improvement of the legislative framework, especially the audio-video segment, or transforming the state-owned audio-video sector were included in the agenda of the new parliament, elected in March 2005. I am referring, first of all, to the essence and effects of these reforms. The denationalization of the press This process started in May-June 2005, when the government decided to step down from the function of founder of the two national newspapers, "Nezavisimaia Moldova" and "Sovereign Moldova". A praiseworthy intention, only that, in reality, both publications are still edited, and have kept their headquarters, without any change in the editorial policy. I would like to remind here that the behavior, during the electoral campaign, of the press financed from state money, was severely criticized by international institutions. And the mechanism through which the two governmental newspapers will be cancelled or transformed has not been made public. It is interesting that the way in which the de-nationalization is made differs from case to case. As opposed to the situation of the two newspapers mentioned above, the journalists of the municipal News Agency "Info-Prim" were literally thrown out on their ear, after the Chisinau Municipal Council took the decision of canceling this press structure. The de-nationalization has not yet reached the approximately thirty newspapers financed by the local authorities from state money. It is not clear how matters will stand with these stations which benefit from financial help from the state and are unfair competition for the private press from the provinces. The legislation and access to information Things do not look much better when it comes to the legislation. Some of the older problems can be found again in the project of the resolution related to the functioning of democratic institutions in the Republic of Moldova, proposed for the session of October 3-7 of the APCE, that is the revision of the legislation related to the state audio-video press - both national and local - and the audio-video press in general; transforming the TRM company into real public television; revising the laws related to libel and the assurance that fines are reasonable. Despite declarations that the civil society is being consulted when laws are drawn up, some important bills are drawn up secretly. Two such examples are the bill of Law regarding the state secret and the work secret, elaborated by the Information and Security Service and proposed for examination before parliament last year, and the bill Law regarding information, elaborated by the Ministry for Information Development in the first half of this year. The process through which the two bills were supposed to be passed was stopped in the wake of criticism from local specialized institutions and international experts. But we do not know if they have completely given up the idea of modifying the legislation related to the access to information. At this point, we should remind you that for five years now the Republic of Moldova has had a law of access to information - a law considered adequate by the Council of Europe but which does not work, since the refusal to offer information is quite frequent. This is also confirmed by the fact that the number of lawsuits filed on the basis of this law keeps rising and has reached about thirty cases, according to "Acces-info" data. The economic conditions The economic crisis, the low potential of the advertising market, the lack of foreign investment condition the dependence of most private press institutions on additional financial sources. As a consequence, we have a press exposed to editorial interferences from political parties and, last but not least, from government officials. The control of the state over the press rises through the assimilation by the Power, through go-betweens, of independent press structures. And the "financial aid from the state for the mass media, given on the basis of strict objective criteria equally applied to all press institutions," mentioned in the Action Plan, has for now been slow to appear. For several years now, starting in 1999, parliament stipulated in the Law regarding the state budget the VAT exemption of printing, a measure which is now no longer being applied. At present, press organizations benefit from no economic facilities. A serious impediment in the development of the private press is the national state monopoly within the press distribution sector, with state distributors getting over 30% of the price of the newspaper for distribution purposes. To the numerous problems mentioned above, one can add the so-called "discreet" pressure: fiscal investigations, the influence exercised over the business sector with the purpose of having economic agents "collaborate" with certain newspapers, the directions for state institutions to subscribe to certain publications "practices which are widely known but difficult to prove. After all this, the answer to the question I was asking at the beginning would be this: one thing leads to another and one could say that the benefits of the press from the Moldova-EU Action Plan are slow to appear, and the quality of reforms is rather poor. Angela Sarbu, Republic of Moldavia, Director, Center for Independent Journalism, Chisinau

Angela SARBU