[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 156 (2010), Part 9]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 12742]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




         UKRAINIAN GOVERNMENT SHOULD MAINTAIN FREEDOM OF MEDIA

                                 ______
                                 

                         HON. ALAN B. MOLLOHAN

                            of west virginia

                    in the house of representatives

                         Thursday, July 1, 2010

  Mr. MOLLOHAN. Madam Speaker, I rise today to draw your attention to a 
troubling situation occurring in Ukraine. Less than 100 days ago, 
President Victor Yanukovich assumed leadership of the Ukrainian 
government. During this short period of time, there have been alarming 
reports that many of the democratic achievements of the 2004 Orange 
Revolution are being rolled back--including the freedoms of speech and 
media.
  Some of the reported actions occurring include the Ukrainian Security 
Service's, SBU, agents approaching university deans to warn them 
against their students' participation in pro-opposition rallies, as 
well as instances of the new government intimidating journalists. 
Furthermore, two TV channels with a history of independent coverage--
Channel 5 and TVi--are under threat of imminent closure due to reported 
pressure from executive bodies, including SBU.
  These troubling instances of pressure against Ukraine's beleaguered 
opposition and independent media outlets are arguably part of a 
disturbing, coordinated effort by the executive to squelch a healthy 
political debate and assure an uncritical coverage of the government's 
policies. In fact, these reports are so widespread that the United 
States Ambassador to Ukraine, John Tefft, even recently expressed his 
concerns about the increasingly difficult climate for Ukraine's 
independent media and stressed that ``it is essential to protect and 
even expand the media freedoms that emerged'' after the country's 2004 
Orange Revolution.
  I understand that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will visit Kiev, 
Ukraine on July 2, as part of her five-day, five-nation tour of Eastern 
Europe. I would encourage Secretary Clinton to raise these issues with 
President Yanukovich and reiterate the importance of not returning to 
Ukraine's old system of government pressure on journalists and media 
companies.
  I am including a copy of an article titled, ``Ukraine channels cry 
foul as frequencies pulled'' that appeared in the June 8 issue of The 
Financial Times, Europe. As such, I urge my colleagues to follow and 
engage in this vitally important issue.

                [From the Financial Times, June 8, 2010]

            Ukraine Channels Cry Foul as Frequencies Pulled

                      (By Roman Olearchyk in Kiev)

        Two Ukrainian television channels cried foul on Tuesday 
     after a high court pulled crucial broadcasting frequencies 
     away from them, sparking media freedom activists to reiterate 
     concerns of an organized attempt to block objective news 
     coverage.
       The development follows weeks of growing complaints by 
     journalists about the resurgence of censorship and heightens 
     fears that a Kremlin-styled crackdown on media freedoms could 
     be in the works five months into the presidency of the 
     Moscow-friendly Viktor Yanukovich.
       Management and journalists from channels 5 and TVi pledged 
     to appeal against the controversial ruling and hope to remain 
     on the air in the near term. But during a press conference 
     held after Tuesday's regional administrative court ruling, 
     they openly expressed fears that media freedoms and 
     democratic gains made by Ukraine since 2004 could be at risk 
     under Mr. Yanukovich. He is accused by oppositionists of 
     setting up an authoritarian regime.
       ``We lived through 2004,'' said Channel 5 director Ivan 
     Adamchuk, recalling attempts by authorities to muzzle the 
     channel ahead of the pro-democracy Orange Revolution, which 
     overturned a fraud-marred presidential vote for Mr. 
     Yanukovich. ``We could not imagine that those times would 
     return, but they have,'' he added.
       Oleh Rybachuk, a former presidential administration chief 
     turned civic activist, said ``censorship is re-emerging, and 
     the opposition is not getting so much coverage. There are 
     similarities to what [Vladimir] Putin did when he came to 
     power. We are seeing Putin-style attempts to monopolise 
     power.''
       With Mr. Yanukovich's coalition having swiftly consolidated 
     control over the nation's legislative, executive and judicial 
     branches of power, the channels could face an uphill battle 
     if he opposes their survival.
       Mr. Yanukovich's administration on Tuesday repeated denials 
     of cracking down on free press. But media watchdogs warned 
     that if stripped of the frequencies, the two channels--seen 
     by media watchdogs as rare sources of reports critical of Mr. 
     Yanukovich's coalition--would be blacked out from much of the 
     country.
       Such a scenario would preserve the strong grip over 
     Ukraine's television airwaves held by Mr. Yanukovich's 
     billionaire business backers.
       One of them is Valery Khoroshkovsky, currently head of 
     Kyiv's SBU spy agency and owner of UA Inter Media Group, the 
     nation's largest television holding. The latter filed the 
     court appeal asking for the frequencies to be pulled on 
     grounds that they were wrongfully issued in January.
       Both 5 and TVi have repeatedly accused Mr. Khoroshkovsky of 
     abusing his power and influence to preserve his monopoly 
     control over Ukraine's media airwaves and limit objective 
     news reporting.
       Mr. Khoroshkovsky denies wrongdoing and insists his wife 
     manages his media empire as he dedicates his time to public 
     service.
       But on Tuesday, Mykola Knyazytsky, director of TVi, which 
     was set up by exiled Russian businessmen, blamed Mr. 
     Khoroshkovsky for the crack down on the two channels and 
     described his simultaneous role as a presidential backer, 
     intelligence chief and media mogul as a ``huge and blatant 
     conflict of interest.''

                          ____________________