Editors change candidates’ election programmes to avoid punishment
A Brest regional newspaper “Zarya” has refused to publish the election programme of a presidential candidate Vital Rymasheuski the way it was presented to the editorial staff. The editor of the state edition had a lot of remarks about the contents, certain notions and wording of the programme of the BCD’s candidate. However, the secretary of the Central Election Commission Mikalai Lazavik did not agree that the editorial staff had refused to publish the programme. According to him, the CEC did not register any refusals to publish programmes. There were only requests to change the presented text so that it would correspond to the legislation.
Lazavik: "As far as I know, the demand concerning Rymasheuski’ programme is simple. There is an appeal urging electors to come to October Square on December 19 at the end of the text. They told Rymasheuski: “If the meeting is allowed and if you sent an application for the meeting according to the law “On mass actions” and if the City Executive Committee has allowed it to you, will you please show us the document proving that the meeting is authorized? Then we will publish your programme”.
However, Lazavik says that Minsk City Executive Committee had not received any application of the kind and the meeting has not been allowed. That is why the editor’s demand is legal, he thinks. Furthermore, editors have to read candidates’ programmes attentively and to look for “sedition” there. It is done to avoid being punished.
Lazavik: "He will be responsible for it together with Rymasheuski. He will be subjected to responsibility according to the law. Why should he risk in the name of some other person’s ideas? He is simply forbidden to publish materials violating the law – there is an appeal for illegal actions”.
The editor may lose his job because of the inadvertence.
On the whole, Lazavik thinks that the fact that editors ask candidates to revise their programmes is a sign of liberalization and democratization. He says that editors changed programmes or removed extracts from them without a preliminary notification when they were dissatisfied with something in the past. Now they ask authors to do it.
Lazavik: "As far as I know, the demand concerning Rymasheuski’ programme is simple. There is an appeal urging electors to come to October Square on December 19 at the end of the text. They told Rymasheuski: “If the meeting is allowed and if you sent an application for the meeting according to the law “On mass actions” and if the City Executive Committee has allowed it to you, will you please show us the document proving that the meeting is authorized? Then we will publish your programme”.
However, Lazavik says that Minsk City Executive Committee had not received any application of the kind and the meeting has not been allowed. That is why the editor’s demand is legal, he thinks. Furthermore, editors have to read candidates’ programmes attentively and to look for “sedition” there. It is done to avoid being punished.
Lazavik: "He will be responsible for it together with Rymasheuski. He will be subjected to responsibility according to the law. Why should he risk in the name of some other person’s ideas? He is simply forbidden to publish materials violating the law – there is an appeal for illegal actions”.
The editor may lose his job because of the inadvertence.
On the whole, Lazavik thinks that the fact that editors ask candidates to revise their programmes is a sign of liberalization and democratization. He says that editors changed programmes or removed extracts from them without a preliminary notification when they were dissatisfied with something in the past. Now they ask authors to do it.
