A law came into effect in Russia on March 29, 2019, according to which people who share ‘fake news’ would be held responsible. The law, in particular, has outlined the fine to be between $400 and $20,000. The legislators of Russia consider fake news to include, for example, “open disrespect towards the state.” In my opinion, the commentary on that can be extremely arbitrary.
The law went into effect one day after it was passed. A social activist was the first to be fined. She was protesting in Arkhangelsk against the construction of a waste dump. She wrote on social media that she would be staging a protest on a particular day. The police decided that this was ‘fake news.’ Why? Because, although the protest took place, it was not authorized by the state, and according to the police’s logic, that is why it can be considered false information.
What do I want to say? In non-democratic, authoritarian countries (such as Russia and Armenia), any legislative drafts that have to do with such problems become a club in the authorities’ hands. That even takes place in cases where the problems that the authorities claim to seek to resolve actually exist. But theoretically, accurate concerns in the case of authoritarianism have one goal: the ability to strengthen themselves.
The last two initiatives of My Step, which could limit freedom of speech, should be viewed from this perspective. On the surface, everything seems logical. The real owners of the media must be ‘visible’ to the public, and thus, in theory alone, the media and the ‘non-media’ must be distinguished. But it is very likely that such a law (if passed) will be applied to opposition TV channels, and the same ‘invisible owners’ who are loyal to the government will remain invisible. Or, citizens, of course, need to be protected from insults and defamation. But in real life, these legal restrictions will be interpreted as the authorities trying to protect themselves from any harsh criticism.
Read also
Why do such ‘distortions’ take place in authoritarian countries? Very simple. When law enforcement and investigative bodies are in the executive branch’s pocket, any law on democracy and freedom of speech is applied to restrict them. By the way, the judiciary in Armenia (unlike Russia) is partially independent, but the Minister of Justice and the My Step majority will soon ‘fix’ this ‘mistake.’
The deeper issue is that, according to the prevailing view in Armenia, our society is ‘not yet ready’ for democracy and freedom of speech. But that’s another topic of conversation.
Aram Abrahamyan
