September 29, 2022

at 11 a.m

In Brussels, they do not trust that the citizens of the EU member states have the ability to judge for themselves what is true and false in the media flow. It is something you have in common with totalitarian communist regimes like North Korea and China. But the supranational decision to block Russian media is criticized for violating national constitutions, including in Sweden.

It drew criticism when the EU Council of Ministers banned the dissemination of the content of the Russian media RT and Sputnik. It was preceded by supranational measures to prevent all EU citizens from accessing these media. Only the image of the war conveyed by Western-backed Ukrainian media would be allowed, despite the fact that these media cannot be assumed to report objectively and have also been seized with Nazi connections.

In Brussels, the national governments and local Internet operators in the member states were persuaded to block the English-language Russian media that could provide a counter-image to the war in Ukraine. This with reference to the fact that these media outlets report in the other direction.

The Council of Ministers in Brussels, which made the decision, can itself read what RT and Sputnik write, but does not consider that the ordinary EU citizen has the same mental ability to distinguish between facts and propaganda when it comes from Russia, only when it comes from the other side.

For the technically savvy, there are ways to bypass the censorship, just like dissidents in North Korea and China do. But like those countries, the authorities in Europe can now crack down hard on whoever does this. The supranational censorship and the ban proclaimed by the Council of Ministers against disseminating what Russian media reports are now also supported by the EU Court of Justice.

Violates the constitutions of the member states
But critics believe that the nomenclature in Brussels clings to domains where there is no supranational jurisdiction. There is no EU directive, they say, which gives the EU the right to put member states' constitutions on freedom of expression, opinion and the press out of play. These civil liberties and rights are cornerstones of a democratic society.

One who speaks after the EU Court's approval of the totalitarian EU decisions is the Swedish freelance journalist Staffan Dahllöf, who is also active in Denmark. In a debate article in SvD, he paraphrases George Orwell's famous dystopia 1984 with what the regime in Brussels says about its decision.

“Control is freedom. Banning dangerous speakers is democracy. Freedom of expression does not include hostile propaganda.” According to Dahllöf, this is how you can summarize the EU court's decision on why ordinary people in the EU should not be allowed to take part in what Russian media reports and why those who violate this should be punished.

Swedish judge among the decision makers
In the EU court that determined this sit judges from, among other things, Sweden, which has had a high profile as the country with the world's oldest press freedom foundation, which expressly states that it is forbidden for the state to obstruct the free flow of the media. The Swedish judge supported the decision just as fully.

This was done by all 15 judges who took part in the decision, where many others also come from EU countries with a press freedom foundation similar to the Swedish one. One chooses here to turn a blind eye to what the individual countries' constitutions say and instead only look at what is said in EU law, which - precisely because freedom of the press is regulated in the member states - is not as clear.

Defines freedom of the press like Fidel Castro
The European Court of Justice believes that freedom according to EU law is not restricted by not prohibiting RT and Sputnik from producing media content. They're just not allowed to publish it. When Fidel Castro's communists seized power in Cuba by force in 1959, a similar decision was made: non-state-controlled opposition media would be allowed to continue operating—only they would not be allowed to buy newsprint.

Dahllöf is surprised that a decision that involves such far-reaching totalitarian restrictions on citizens' basic freedoms and rights has been passed over with such silence in Sweden. One hypothesis is that many do not dare to protest for fear of being labeled as friends of Russia, an accusation that has been widely used in the Swedish election campaign to cast doubt on their political opponents.

Angled journalism also constitutionally protected
In his debate article, Dahllöf states that "Russia's invasion of Ukraine is a violation of international law, a war that goes against the UN Charter and a gross violation of Ukrain