On the 7th of February 2018, a decision on Zviad Ratiani’s case was appealed in the Board of Trustees of the Public Broadcasting, the decision contradicting requirements prescribed by the ,,Code of Conduct for Broadcasters,, was taken by the self-regulatory authority of the same broadcaster.
In answer to an appealed decision we want to note the following:
- The decision mentioned partially satisfied Zviad Ratiani`s appeal, although, decisions answering separate requirements, contradict each other. The reason of making the decision to take down the contentious footage from every platform of the Public Broadcasting and prevent it from subsequent use in the future is abstruse, if it does violate requirements set by the ,, Code of Conducts for Broadcasters,,
- Argumentations provided in the provision of the self-regulatory authority is contradictive. On the one hand, we see reasoning on legality of taking the video in the course of operative-investigative activities, on the other hand, however, it is mentioned that correctness of making footage depicting Zviad Ratiani’s detention is not for the broadcasting to evaluate. We consider that self-regulatory authority must not discuss about law-correspondence of making the footage during the operative-investigative activities.
- We think that only the acceptance of the disputable footage as an evidence by the court, as well as the high public interest regarding the case, must not become the reason for imparting the material through the media, if it does not fulfill requirements established by the ,,Code of Conduct for Broadcasters,,
- The provision of the self-regulatory authority states that video material was imparted in accordance with the high standards, shots were covered maximally and there were voice signals covering the insulting words towards the policemen. However, the information that exacerbated hatred and violate the right of inviolability of personal life, has been imparted without adding any kind voice signals.
- Self-regulatory body did not discuss on necessity of airing the disputed footage, nor did they reason whether beforehand the audience’s interest of having the immaculate information concerning Zviad Ratiani’s case was preserved or not. One is the fact, in an attempt to prove circumstance, which was dined by neither parties, disputable footage was disclosed.
- We consider the reasoning of the self-regulatory authority, communicating an idea that Zviad Ratiani and his lawyer had not required non-proliferation of materials, which were accepted as an evidence by the court, not right. In the report the journalist was saying that they listened only to the audio version of the footage coming from the court and that they were imparting fragments from materials provided by the Ministry of Internal Affairs (MIA). Besides, the author of the appeal had a legitimate expectation that the Public Broadcasting would fulfill established standards.
The Board of Trustees will dispose Zviad Ratiani`s appeal, on February 22 2018, at 12:00. GYLA will advocate for his interests in the self-regulatory authority of the Public Broadcasting.
