Croatia: indicators on the Level of Media Freedom and Journalists’ Safety Index 2024

The analysis is conducted by the Croatian Journalists Association (CJA), with the support of the European Commission and the platform Safejournalists.com. The author used a clear and solid methodology in order to fully understand the status of Croatian journalists and media in 2024. Firstly, three indicators have been used relying on qualitative data gathering focused on : a) legal protection; b) journalists’ position in the newsroom; c) journalists’ safety. Then, the Journalists’ Safety Index has resorted to  quantitative data collection, in order to “measure” changes that have – directly or indirectly – an impact on how journalists perceive themselves when practicing their job. The Journalists’ Safety Index is composed of four indicators: i) Legal and organisational environment; ii) Due prevention; iii) Due process; iv) Actual safety.

The first chapter is dedicated to the introduction. The author summarizes the development of Croatian media in the last decade and briefly describes the national legal context in which media work daily.

The second chapter focuses on analysing the three qualitative indicators: a) legal protection; b) journalists’ position in the newsroom; c) journalists’ safety.

Regarding a) legal protection, the report explains which national and international legal instruments are relevant to media freedom and journalists’ protection. Even if recognised and covered by the Croatian Constitution and laws, there are still concerns about freedom of expression and information in practice. As mentioned in this chapter, the exercise of these rights is often difficult. Public authorities often refuse to provide all the necessary information to journalists. Another critical point is that Article 38 of the Croatian Constitution – referring to freedom of expression – does not fully apply to online media. The report highlights the lack of full independence of the Croatian public broadcasting company (HRT), despite the legal protection provided by the Croatian Radio-Television Act. In addition, it finds that – even if state advertising in the private media sector is regulated by laws – “clear and fair criteria for the distribution of state advertisements to the media are still lacking.” Freedom of expression is also influenced by the broad definition of defamation in Croatian legislation, which exposes journalists to both criminal prosecution and civil proceedings. Moreover, there are no specific legal protections against SLAPP lawsuits, because SLAPP is not yet defined in Croatian legislation. However, in 2024 the European Parliament adopted the Directive on the Protection of Journalists and Activists from SLAPP Lawsuits, which Member States will have to transpose  within their legislation by May 2026.

Analyzing the second indicator – b) journalists’ position in the newsroom – Croatia stands out as  one of the worst countries in Europe for journalists’ working conditions. Wages are low for young journalists and opportunities for advancement are often rare. Furthermore, the report highlights the insecurity of contracts.  To be sure, only 20 media outlets achieve or exceed the average salary in Croatia. Moreover, there is a lack of collective agreements – they exist only in three national media outlets. On the other hand, there is no full independence in private media. CJA reports highlight weak respect for ethical standards in Croatian journalism. According to some interviews, journalists also emphasize the lack of full independence in public service media. Indeed, there is “a systematic and long-term influence” of the Government on journalists’ work.

The third indicator – c) journalists’ safety – presents some concerning issues. In particular, journalists who report threats are discouraged by the process of reporting. Journalists are extremely exposed to serious threats because – once a threat is reported – “the person against whom the report has been filed can gain access to the personal data of the journalist who filed the report.” Thus, journalists are discouraged from reporting threats. This issue is amplified by the lack of public condemnation of threats and attacks against journalists by public authorities. Moreover, the Croatian police stressed the need for additional education in the application of various protocols – the Protocol on the Conduct of the Police when Learning of a Criminal Offence Committed to the Detriment of Journalists and Other Media Workers in the Performance of Their Work Tasks and the Protocol on the Conduct of the Police, Journalists and Other Media Workers at Public Gatherings of Public Interest. However, according to CJA, police officers accepted every report filed by journalists, and there were no cases of unjustified detention of journalists.

The third chapter is dedicated to conclusions and recommendations.

Regarding a) legal protections and implementation, Croatia should:
(i) decriminalize provisions  against honour and reputation;
(ii) increase communication between journalists and the public;
(iii) increase transparency and fairness in the distribution of state advertising;
(iv) adopt laws against SLAPP lawsuits;
(v) increase support for independent and non-profit media, including minority media.

Regarding b) journalists’ position in the newsroom, Croatia should:
(i) encourage collective agreements and better protection of freelancers;
(ii) improve working conditions and salaries of journalists;
(iii) impose sanctions for non-compliance with editorial statutes and ethical norms;
(iv) ensure real editorial independence in public and private media;
(v) strengthen awareness of censorship and pressure in reporting.

Regarding c) journalists’ safety, Croatia should:
(i) restrict access to journalists’ personal data in proceedings to ensure their safety and encourage the reporting of threats;
(ii) improve additional education for the police and the media;
(iii) improve (and, where it does not exist, introduce) the education of officials and competent authorities on the safety of journalists;
(iv) introduce systematic public condemnation of attacks by state authorities;
(v) make statistics on attacks against journalists publicly available.

The last chapter is dedicated to a comparison of the data related to the four dimensions of the Journalists’ Safety Index in 2024 (3.19) and 2023 (3.41):

2023:
a) Legal and organisational environment: 3.59/7;
b) Prevention: 3.68/7;
c) Process: 3.27/7;
d) Actual safety: 3.34/7

2024:
a) Legal and organisational environment: 3.20/7;
b) Prevention: 3.65/7;
c) Process: 3.27/7;
d) Actual safety: 3.02/7

As shown by these data, the conditions of journalists’ safety have worsened in 2024. Overall, the state of media freedom in Croatia has been characterized by stagnation, marked by some deterioration in the four dimensions.