The International Foundation for the Defence of Free Speech "Әділ сөз" has conducted a legal analysis of the situation surrounding the FBCC (FBRK) and concluded that holding journalists accountable for publishing information from official government sources contradicts the law. Experts believe the case could set a dangerous precedent for all Kazakhstani media.
For context, first Sunkar Eavision International LLP filed a complaint with the police against the editor-in-chief of the FBCC, then administrative proceedings under Article 456-2 of the Administrative Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan ("Dissemination of false information") were initiated against the founder of the publication Kirill Pavlov. The company accused the journalists of lying for publishing the fact that the firm had offered drones for 7.1 million tenge, but entered into a contract for 8 million tenge per unit.
However, this information was taken verbatim from a scanned letter by the Acting Chairman of the State Inspection Committee in the Agro-Industrial Complex S. Kanybekov, numbered 18-18/1602-vn dated 10.12.2024, which was posted on the official public procurement portal in the section for contract No. 070440005532/240218/00.
Lawyers from the "Әділ сөз" foundation emphasise that, according to paragraph 1 of Article 68 of the Law "On Mass Media", a media outlet, its editor-in-chief, and its journalist bear no responsibility for the dissemination of information that does not correspond to reality if it was contained in official communications. All information posted by state bodies on the public procurement portal, according to paragraph 34 of Article 1 of the Law "On Mass Media", is considered official communications.
"Consequently, neither the editor-in-chief nor the owner of the media outlet can bear administrative or any other responsibility for the dissemination of information that does not correspond to reality, since the said information was contained in an official communication on the public procurement portal," the foundation's conclusion states.
The experts explain: if the information posted on the public procurement portal indeed does not correspond to reality, responsibility for its publication can be borne exclusively by the state bodies or officials who provided the official information, but not by the media and journalists who used that information.
The "Әділ сөз" foundation recommends that the authorised bodies cease the proceedings on the administrative offence due to the absence of a violation in the actions of the editor-in-chief and the media outlet. Furthermore, the lawyers consider it necessary to conduct a review of the lawfulness with which Sunkar Eavision International LLP obtained the journalist's personal data.
"This case requires the closest attention from the Prosecutor General's Office to prevent the suppression of freedom of speech under the guise of combating false information," the "Әділ сөз" foundation emphasises.
For context, it should also be noted that the complainant - Sunkar Eavision International LLP - is represented by a lawyer who previously represented the Ministry of Agriculture in legal proceedings against Kirill Pavlov. In that instance, the expert was fined for a publication about a locust infestation, based on data from international organisations which contradicted official statistics.