Among recorded facts and trends on the territory of Crimea, the following are of the greatest concern:

 

 

On 25 February, Roskomnadzor intends to hold a competition for the allocation of frequencies, long used by Crimean radio stations. To participate in the competition, one must submit a certificate of registration of mass media (radio), as well as a universal license for radio broadcasting.

 

Equal participation of Crimean broadcasters in the competition, as well as provision of the requested documents is currently impossible for Crimean broadcasters - not all broadcasters registered as mass media. Moreover, none of Crimean broadcasters has a universal license for radio broadcasting.

 

 

One of the most revealing moments in this direction was the approved by the Presidium of the State Council of the Republic of Crimea Resolution №222-1/14, which regulates the Rules of accreditation of journalists, mass media professionals, and workers of news agencies of the State Council of the Republic of Crimea.

 

The analysis of this legal document has identified four points, allowing authorities severely restrict or completely exclude the possibility of media coverage of the State Council of the Republic of Crimea activity.

 

 

The most revealing in this respect is the situation with the refusal to register one of the Crimean news agencies that applied for registration as a new mass medium. In its response, Roskomnadzor reported that registration was denied, but the motivation of the decision is not clear.

 

 

The most telling fact in this direction was a search of the ATR channel property involving a large number of riot police on 26 January, which led to a short-term suspension of analog broadcasting and news services of ATR. Involving a large number of riot police in investigative actions didn't have any reasonable grounds.

 

Another illustrative example was the seizure of the Chernomorskaya TV channel's equipment, which led to a long-term suspension of its media activity. There were no grounds for the removal of the equipment, as the economic dispute does not provide for such measures. In addition, against the decision of the court, the equipment was seized selectively - the most needed for technical maintenance of television work. Besides, the procedure of seizure was carried out with violations (the equipment was not protocoled, inventory numbers were not listed, etc.), which resulted in missing some internal components of the computer equipment and all battery cells to the shooting equipment when the equipment was returned. It is also significant that in spite of the above the courts recognized the actions of the Federal Bailiff Service as legal and appropriate.

 

In view of the above, we state that the processes in the sphere of freedom of speech in Crimea remain negative, leading to a significant reduction of objective information about events and a decrease in the number of independent media on the territory of the peninsula.