Journalists are being given back the opportunity to work in parliament, which they lost with the start of the full-scale Russian invasion. About this reported on the VRU website. There was hope that the work of people’s elected officials would become more transparent. And society will receive information about what is happening in the house under the dome not from the emotional posts of people’s deputies active in social networks, but from the publications of professional journalists.
The cautious optimism with which the media met this news is somewhat overshadowed by still unresolved security issues. Hypothetically, the parliament may be considered by the Russian Federation as one of the centers of decision-making, so working under the dome carries certain threats for the media. As you know, the parliament has a rather limited number of places in shelters, which requires a limited journalistic presence. However, journalists have repeatedly raised the issue of people’s deputies moving to a safer place. In particular, media lawyer of the Institute of Mass Information Roman Golovenko for the sake of achieving a balance between security and the duty of people’s deputies to be accountable offered to change Part 1 of Article 2 of the VRU Regulations and to transfer the people’s elected officials to a safer underground facility.
However, the People’s Deputies themselves plan to solve the issue of interaction with the fourth power in a different way. During the round table on the access of journalists to the sidelines of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine and the restoration of online broadcasts of the sessions of the Parliament, Dmytro Razumkov suggested a balanced approach to the number of journalists in the Parliament, paying attention to the rating and influence of mass media. The head of the Apparatus of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, Vyacheslav Shtuchnyi, recalled the practice of the past, when for security reasons, no more than 20-30 media representatives could be inside the walls of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine.
The head of the Supervisory Board of the National Public Television and Radio Company of Ukraine Svitlana Ostapa put forward the idea of creating an association of parliamentary journalists. In her opinion, such an organization, initiated by the media themselves, will provide an opportunity to work in the parliament for about 30 journalists.
And what do the media think about it?
On the eve of World Press Freedom Day, we asked journalists to comment on the parliament’s initiative to return the mass media to the practice of publicizing the activities of people’s deputies.
Natalya Klymenko, journalist of the Gard.City publication, Pervomaisk: In general, I consider this a normal practice. Because everything that happens under the dome today must be covered objectively, impartially and, most importantly, in a timely manner. It is important that such journalists get there who will not hide the truth and will not work for “individual” deputies. It is very interesting who will be offered today to cover the activities of parliamentarians, as well as how and who will determine the rating of the mass media. In my opinion, there are more questions than answers here. But the fact that journalists should be there is a fact. And I was also amused by the fact about the association of parliamentary journalists. From the outside it looks like a separate caste.
Lyubov Vasylyk, media expert at the Pylyp Orlyk Institute of Democracy, Chernivtsi: The access of journalists to the premises of the parliament is a guarantee of freedom of speech in democratic countries. Guarantee of operational information of the society regarding important legislative initiatives. However, war imposes its limitations, particularly those related to media security. Therefore, it is possible to implement the idea of creating an association of parliamentary journalists with a limited number of them. However, it is worth building the selection on the basis of transparency of accreditation, so that some media do not get a monopoly on information, and others feel limited in access. Perhaps it is worth focusing on quality journalism – the “white list” of the media, for example. It would be good, of course, if this list was formed not by officials, but by the journalists themselves in their environment for work in the parliament, who identified the best, that is, those who have the trust and reputation of high-quality mass media.
Rostislav Petrakov, communications expert, Dnipro: The work of media workers under the dome of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine is a completely natural phenomenon. Therefore, their presence in the box of the meeting hall will only positively affect both the state of freedom of speech and the efficiency of coverage of events. In addition, I believe that in this way the objectivity of coverage of certain opinions of deputies will increase. As for the security component, if desired, a media center with live broadcasting could be equipped accordingly. And those journalists who worry about their safety can use it.
Lina Zelenska, parliamentary correspondent from 2017 to 2023 (channels: “Inter”, “Rada”): I fully support this decision. Meetings of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine must be held openly. This is stated in Article 84 of the Constitution of Ukraine. Unfortunately, since the beginning of the full-scale invasion, journalists have not had the opportunity to cover the work of parliamentarians and inform Ukrainian citizens about the consideration and adoption of important bills. Such closure of the legislative body had a number of negative consequences. Of course, it is necessary to remember about security and take into account all possible risks when organizing the work of media workers in the parliament. However, I am convinced that it is absolutely necessary to return journalists to the Verkhovna Rada.
