The European Commission released its annual Rule of Law Report 2024, highlighting that there has been no progress in Croatia regarding the framework for fair and transparent distribution of state advertising through the establishment of clear criteria, best practices, and oversight to ensure effective implementation of public tenders for funding local and regional media. This lack of progress raises concerns. The report also noted only partial progress in addressing the issue of SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation), or lawsuits against journalists and media outlets. The Commission remains concerned about the political independence of the Croatian Regulatory Authority for Network Industries (HRT) and the Croatian Radio and Television (HRT), observing that HRT faces criticism related to potential conflicts of interest and issues regarding media ownership transparency.

The Commission reminded Croatia of its obligations under the Recovery and Resilience Plan, recommending that it: intensify efforts to strengthen the legal framework and monitoring mechanisms to ensure fair and transparent distribution of state advertising at the national, regional, and local levels, including through public tender processes. The Commission also recommended that the government continue efforts to address SLAPPs and review defamation laws to encourage broader application of procedural rules that allow for the dismissal of unfounded lawsuits against journalists, considering European standards for the protection of journalists.

On Media Funding and the Croatian Regulatory Authority (VEM)

The 2023 Rule of Law Report recommended that Croatia “progress in strengthening the framework for fair and transparent distribution of state advertising by establishing clear criteria, best practices, and oversight measures to ensure effective implementation of public tender procedures for local and regional media.”

According to the latest available data covering 2022, the registry of the Croatian Regulatory Authority for Network Industries includes information from 41 public authorities and institutions, as well as predominantly state-owned companies, indicating significant reporting deficiencies from these entities. Although the law requires that such funds be distributed based on a public tender with relevant criteria, it does not specify these criteria or any procedural safeguards. Since the introduction of this provision in 2021, stakeholders have expressed concerns about the fair and transparent distribution of these funds. The report notes that stakeholders frequently cite close ties between local authorities and regional or local media, as well as the lack of independent and critical reporting at the local level due to the strong financial dependence of these media on state advertising. In this context, there is a lack of clear criteria, best practices, and oversight measures to ensure effective and transparent distribution procedures.

Furthermore, stakeholders continue to express concerns about the distribution of state advertising to media houses at the national level. In this regard, the Euromedia Ownership Monitor report highlights a lack of transparency concerning state advertising practices at conferences organized by ministries and government agencies, and the associated media coverage.

In January 2024, a criminal investigation into an alleged corruption case involving a public official for the alleged misuse of advertising funds led to the dismissal of the official and the relevant minister. Although the investigation is ongoing, stakeholders have expressed concerns that this may not be an isolated case, raising additional questions about fair and transparent state advertising distribution.

While some municipalities have reportedly adopted good practices proposed by journalist representatives to ensure objective and transparent procedures in public tender processes, the government has not taken measures regarding fair distribution of state advertising. Therefore, there has been no progress in implementing recommendations from previous years.

On Ownership Transparency

Regarding transparent media ownership, the Commission concludes that while media ownership information is available, challenges remain in terms of transparency. The framework for fair and transparent distribution of state advertising raises concerns at both national and local levels, and no steps have been taken to strengthen it. Although media ownership information is publicly available, challenges regarding the transparency of ultimate ownership persist.

The revised Electronic Media Act requires that information about the ownership of electronic media be publicly accessible through the register of the Croatian Regulatory Authority for Network Industries, but reports indicate deficiencies in the registry’s coverage. Additionally, stakeholders continue to point out that in some cases, the basic ownership structures of media may remain hidden, despite the Electronic Media Act’s requirement for information in the registry to be supported by extracts from the register of ultimate beneficial owners, the report states, indicating a medium risk for media ownership transparency, as in previous years.

On HRT

The public broadcaster HRT faces criticism concerning potential conflicts of interest and perceived lack of political independence. An internal audit of HRT conducted in 2023 revealed significant irregularities in dealings with an external service provider, raising questions about the management and accountability of the public broadcaster.

Dealing with the external service provider was the subject of two opinions by the Commission for Deciding on Conflicts of Interest. In March 2024, in the second case, the Commission penalized the HRT Director General due to irregularities in payments related to the Director General himself.

Concerns about the political independence of HRT persist, as the current framework gives the parliamentary majority strong influence over the public broadcaster. The Media Pluralism Monitor’s indicator for 2024 on public media independence shows a medium risk.

On Access to Information

Delays continue to exist regarding access to information and public documents and processing journalists’ requests. A legal framework ensuring access to information and public documents exists. As noted in previous rule of law reports, stakeholders highlight delays in processing requests from public bodies in certain cases. In 2023, the Office of the Commissioner for Information received 24 complaints and 30 appeals from journalists regarding access to information. The Media Pluralism Monitor’s indicator for 2024 on the protection of the right to information shows a medium risk.

On the “Lex AP”

Although journalists are exempt from the criminal offense of disclosing information from ongoing criminal investigations, strong criticism from stakeholders persists, and efforts to address this issue continue, concludes the Commission.

In June 2023, the government submitted amendments to the Criminal Code to the Croatian Parliament to introduce a criminal offense for unauthorized disclosure of information from ongoing criminal investigations. The government deemed these changes necessary to prevent leaks during non-public pre-investigation procedures, the report states, adding that journalistic associations and other stakeholders strongly criticized the proposed changes, expressing concern that they could jeopardize investigative journalism and free media reporting on important public interest issues such as corruption cases. There was also concern that the new criminal offense could expose journalists to investigations and impact the protection of journalistic sources.

In response to objections, the amendments were further revised at the beginning of 2024 to explicitly exclude journalists and disclosures predominantly in the public interest from the scope of the new criminal offense. Despite these changes, journalist representatives continued to criticize the amendments due to potential implications for journalists, the Rule of Law Report states.