RIGHT TO INFORMATION AND OBLIGATIONS OF JOURNALISTS

The concept of the right to information. As we have already seen, the rights of a journalist are not priorities in comparison with human rights. On the contrary, even some privileges granted to media employees in connection with their professional duties are derived from the personal and social freedoms of the citizen. Consequently, firstly, as a member of society, a journalist has full civil rights and freedoms, in particular, access to information. Secondly, by the nature of his activity, he serves as a representative of citizens in their relations with sources of socially significant information. Thirdly, this role of media workers, in order to be successfully implemented, must be reflected in the legislation. In the Law "On Mass Media" we read: "Citizens have the right to promptly receive reliable information on the activities of state bodies and organizations, public associations, and their officials through the mass media."

The right to information is genetically related to the concept of so-called natural human rights. It has a deep history and has passed a difficult path of evolution. From the philosophy of Plato and Socrates, from the thinkers of the Enlightenment, the idea of ​​natural rights was accepted by modern advocates of liberal views on society. Our tasks do not include a detailed analysis of these views and the scientific controversy they cause. But still, we will not sin against the truth, if we say that democracy implies the legal consolidation of a number of fundamental rights of a citizen, and that in the civilized world as a whole there is agreement on this. This refers to the recognition of the right to life, personal freedom, security, etc.

In the spiritual field, one of the fundamental assets of the individual is the freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas by any means and regardless of state borders. So says Article XIX of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the United Nations in 1948, perhaps the most famous article. Similar language has been incorporated into the domestic legislation of many states. In our country, the operation of this international standard is guaranteed by the Constitution of the Russian Federation: “Everyone has the right to freely seek, receive, transmit, produce and disseminate information in any legal way” (Article 29).

We make a few explanations. One should not identify the right to information with freedom of thought and word in its entirety, as is sometimes done. We are now considering only the legislative regulation of access to information, that is, their search and receipt, but not production and distribution. Consequently, if you project the right to information to journalism, it covers only certain aspects of media activities - mainly the collection of facts by journalists and the receipt of information by the audience through mass communication channels. The rest of the editorial practice is governed by the laws of a different profile. Further, for citizens, the right to information has a much richer content than reading newspapers or listening to radio programs. It means freedom of access to government and other repositories of a variety of information. Finally, the mode of life without secrets conflicts with the existence of secrets and with the reluctance of specific people, organizations, associations to let outsiders into their information economy.

The latter circumstance creates considerable difficulties for legislators, public figures and journalists. It is impossible to completely eliminate the contradiction - it belongs to the category of eternal social problems. However, it is possible to get closer to its resolution in actual practice. First of all, it is necessary to be guided by the general principle laid down in our constitutional legislation: the exercise of human rights and freedoms must not violate the rights and freedoms of others. In addition, freedom of speech and information is among those rights that are not absolute - it is customary to limit it to certain limits, exceptions, and private prohibitions. Thus, the Constitution of the Russian Federation emphasizes that information activities are conducted only by legal means. Finally, extensive legislation is required that reflects the diversity of interests in the world of information and helps to balance them. We will find a regulation of this kind in the largest agreements adopted by the international community. For example, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights refers to restrictions necessary to respect the rights and reputations of others, as well as to protect state security, public order, public health and morals. But in all international legal sources it is emphasized that restrictions are established only by relevant laws.

The complexity and ambiguity of the use of the right to information can be observed on the issue of covering the lives of public figures. In world practice, common approaches have been developed to address this issue, but not precise instructions for each individual case. On the one hand, politicians, managers of high rank, pop stars, popular writers have the same right to protect themselves from the idle curiosity of the crowd, like other citizens. On the other hand, in world social practice and in legislation, it has long been recognized that their private life can influence the solution of public, including state problems, and therefore should be transparent. It is no accident, for example, that the Law of the Russian Federation “On State Secrets” prohibits the classification of information about the state of health of top officials of the Russian Federation. The Declaration on the Media and Human Rights, adopted by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, gives the following interpretation of the problem: “The thesis“ where public life begins, personal life ends ”is not adequate to cover this situation. The personal life of public figures should be protected, except in cases where it can have an impact on socially significant events. The fact that a person appears on the news does not deprive him of the right to respect for his personal life. ”

The regulatory framework of the right to information. In addition to the norms we have already mentioned, the Constitution of the Russian Federation has a special provision concerning the right of citizens to receive the necessary information. The bodies of state power and local self-government are obliged to ensure that everyone has the opportunity to familiarize himself with the documents and materials directly affecting his rights and freedoms, unless otherwise provided by law (Art. 24). The question is what exactly is included in the concept of "other" and what kind of law.

Prohibiting or restrictive provisions are scattered across numerous documents and not consolidated in a single, internally consistent list. The RF Law “On Information, Informatization and Protection of Information” refers to information with limited access to state secrets and confidential information. In turn, the content of state secrets and the procedure for working with them are determined by the Law on State Secrets, as well as by a number of regulatory documents ensuring its implementation. The list of confidential information was approved by a special Decree of the President of the Russian Federation (1997). These include, in short, information about the facts, events and circumstances of the private life of a citizen; secrecy of investigation and legal proceedings; official information, access to which is restricted by state authorities in accordance with the Civil Code and federal laws (official secrets); information related to professional activities (medical, notarial, attorney’s secret, confidentiality of correspondence, telephone conversations, mailings, telegraph or other messages), commercial secrets; information about the invention of the model or industrial design before the official publication of them. It is obvious that each secret should receive a clear description in the regulatory sources, otherwise it is impossible to exclude the arbitrariness in the "assignment" of certain data by a secret that is not subject to disclosure. There is no doubt that we need a special document that would establish a clear procedure for applying for and submitting information, as well as appealing against unlawful refusals.

Useful material for developing the necessary order gives foreign practice. A description of media legislation in Europe, America and Australia is presented in the book “The Laws and Practice of the Media in Eleven Democracies of the World (Comparative Analysis)” prepared by the international non-governmental organization of lawyers Article XIX. We turn to the experience of two states - Sweden and the United States.

Sweden is known as a country where, as early as 1766, the first ever law on press freedom was adopted [3]. Later, it was repeatedly changed and supplemented, and today there is a very harmonious system of media law in this country. In the aspect of interest to us, its fundamental feature is the maximum openness of official institutions to the public. Any citizen of the country can get acquainted with the documents of any state or municipal institution, regardless of whether they are related to him, without presenting an identity card and without explaining the purposes of the request. The few restrictions relate to the protection of state secrets and personal secrets, there are some procedural details, but the main thing is that the authorities must provide all materials within 24 hours, without reference to the laboriousness of the operation. Equally free for public access to parliament meetings. There is also strict control over the implementation of the law.

If Sweden demonstrates the experience of the oldest and stable legal system, then the United States made a relatively recent attempt to overcome the old isolation of the authorities from society [4]. In 1966, the federal law “On Freedom of Information” came into effect, and after that several more legal acts appeared, developing it and supplementing it. Prior to this, the public had to be content with either publishing the official press, or accidental leaks of information, or with materials from court cases and investigation commissions. Closeness of administrative institutions led to the fact that a citizen became more accountable to the government, but it did not become more accountable to citizens. In general terms, the mechanism of access to information created by Americans is like the Swedish version. True, the term for providing information on request here is increased to ten days. Special attention is attracted by such a rule as the regular publication of a whole complex of information in a special edition - the Federal Register, widely available to the public. It describes the structure of the institution, the functions of its divisions, the normative acts developed by it, as well as the places and procedure for providing information on citizens' requests, etc. Thus, using reference books and pointers, the task of finding the necessary information is greatly simplified. We add that most of the institutions for this purpose created reading rooms for acquaintance with documents.

In Russia, the most complete document of such a plan is the Law “On Information, Informatization and Protection of Information”. Here is the interpretation of the basic concepts from this area, introduces the division of information into open and public (state information resources) and with limited access. It also determines the range of information, access to which is prohibited to restrict:

Ø legislative and other normative acts establishing the legal status of government bodies and public organizations, the rights, freedoms and duties of citizens;

Ø information on emergency situations, environmental, meteorological, demographic and other, affecting the safety of human settlements, production and citizens;

Ø documents on the activities of government and self-government bodies, on the use of budget funds and other resources, on the needs of the population;

Ø documents accumulated in open collections of libraries, archives, authorities, public associations of public interest or necessary for the realization of the rights, freedoms and duties of citizens.

There is a special chapter in the Law “Using Information Resources”. It establishes the equal right of access of all users to public resources, formulates the obligation of owners and owners of information to determine the procedure for obtaining it and to provide users with free information about the content of resources, services provided and the conditions for access to them. It also introduces guarantees for the provision of information , including the possibility of appealing a refusal through a court. This provides for liability under criminal and civil law and legislation on administrative offenses.

The usefulness of the rules, which we briefly met, no doubt. But no less obvious is its inadequacy - as, incidentally, the fact that foreign experience also does not cover all aspects of the issue. For example, Swedish law provides for free access only to documents of state or municipal institutions, while in the US the range of sources is narrowed down to federal authorities (state and local governments do not include it; however, most states have their own laws of similar content). Private entrepreneurship, public associations and associations and other non-state sectors are not covered by freedom of access to information. The effect of the Russian law also actually applies only to state information resources. Further, in Sweden a citizen of this country has the right to familiarize themselves with the documents; in the United States, access is also provided for foreigners if they permanently reside in the States. This means that privileges and significant restrictions are introduced. Finally, a serious obstacle to open access is the institution of the owner of information resources. According to the Law “On Information, Informatization and Protection of Information”, the owner himself determines the mode of operation with his property and can use information resources as a commodity, that is, set a price for their use - it is possible that it is excessive for a citizen or editorial staff.

To remove these and other contradictions, we need a universal, basic for all cases law that describes the fundamental principles and procedure for obtaining information. In Russia, a draft law “On the Right to Information” was drafted, which was examined in repeated public hearings and is among the priorities for consideration in the State Duma. Conceptually it is built as follows. First, the authors proceed from the right to information of a person and citizen - anyone, not just a resident of Russia. Secondly, it provides for the general accessibility and openness of the whole society and, accordingly, the obligation of all legal entities (not only state institutions) to provide information. Thirdly, the information disseminated must be reliable, otherwise sanctions are applied (which, by the way, applies to the media). Fourth, the conditions for obtaining information, including the cost of providing it, are subject to general standards and do not exceed a reasonably necessary level. Naturally, for example, a person who has requested a copy of a multi-page protocol pays the cost of its production - but does not pay frivolous, fantastic amounts. The price list for services must be officially approved and communicated to citizens.

Access to information for journalists. Despite the fact that, in principle, journalists have the same amount of powers as ordinary citizens, the legislation contains special rules that ensure the activities of the media. The circumstances and channels for collecting facts for the press are diverse and specific, the types of relationships that a journalist enters in the process of work are just as specific, and the law provides for standard interpretations of standard situations. General provisions on the right to seek information to regulate reporter practices are not enough.

The problem of access of journalists to their information is divided into at least two separate topics: firstly, to what extent it is fully and consistently interpreted in current regulations and, secondly, how in reality media representatives enjoy their rights.

The answer to the first question will also be ambiguous. On the one hand, the legislation reflects all the main stages and forms of gathering information for the media. On the other hand, individual laws and especially bylaws are poorly coordinated with each other, and as a result, what is allowed, for example, by information legislation, is often prohibited by departmental orders and instructions. More on this will be discussed in the section on the system of media law. In addition, not every duty of officials in relation to the press is supported by measures to control its implementation.

Consider specifically the possibilities of a journalist in terms of access to information. According to the Law “On Mass Media”, he has the right to:

Ø to visit state bodies and organizations, enterprises and institutions, bodies of public associations or their press services. One of the mechanisms for the implementation of this right is the accreditation of a journalist with these organizations. An accredited media representative receives additional guarantees of access to information: he is previously notified of meetings and other events, provided with transcripts and other documents, and favorable conditions are created for the recording;

Ø to be accepted by officials in connection with the request for information. True, the law does not impose on the official a counter-obligation to accept a journalist upon his request;

Ø get access to documents and materials (with the exception of information relating to the category of secrets);

Ø copy, publish, announce or otherwise reproduce documents and materials (except for exceptions specified in the legislation);

Ø to make recordings, including using audio and video equipment, film and photography (again, with a number of exceptions);

Ø to visit specially protected sites of natural disasters, accidents and catastrophes, riots and mass gatherings of citizens, as well as areas in which a state of emergency has been declared; attend rallies and demonstrations. This right has limitations related to the preservation of public safety;

Ø check the accuracy of the information provided to him.

As we see, there are rights, as they say, for all occasions. And most of them do not duplicate, but complement each other. What, say, would be worth the right to visit a disaster site if it were forbidden to make notes in a notebook or record events on tape? Or: access to documents loses meaning if copies cannot be removed from them, etc.

It is not difficult to guess that the exercise of the powers of journalists faces many obstacles. The business community has not yet reached such a degree of moral excellence to voluntarily and willingly disclose its secrets to the public. However, it would be wrong to look for the perpetrators only among the owners of information resources or bureaucrats of various kinds. Often the correspondents themselves are guilty, their tactically incorrect behavior in the information space.

The Glasnost Defense Foundation conducted a survey of sources most often approached by correspondents. As it turned out, regional and local media are especially characterized by bureaucratic peace. And vice versa: if 57% of federal media journalists regularly turn to private individuals, then among the local press employees, only 35% practice it. Representatives of business, especially its non-state branches, are even less popular as permanent sources of information. Such attachment to the same source (more specifically, to a manager from a regional or district administration) is fraught with unpleasant consequences. First, the journalist loses his independence in studying, understanding and evaluating events, which, as they say, pilots-officials lead. Secondly,he falls in direct dependence on the desire or unwillingness of the usual partner to tell him information. The only way to avoid such enslavement is to create a network of alternative sources of information for yourself. Then there will be a chance to verify the accuracy of the information received, which, by the way, relates the law not only to rights, but also to the duties of a journalist.