Background
On September 14, 2023, the Commission on Journalistic Ethics received a complaint from the director of the information policy department of JSC Ukreximbank Iryna Khymchak about the material on Dzerkalo Tyzhnia online outlet written by Viktoriia Khmilevska “The State-Owned Ukreximbank May Commission Cleaners for Over UAH 30 Million from a Dubious Company of a Kazakhstan Citizen” dated September 6, 2023, available at https://zn.ua/ukr/ECONOMICS/derzhavnij-ukreksimbank-zamoviv-pribiralnits-na-ponad-30-mln-hrn-u-fiktivnoji-firmikazakha.
The material under consideration covers a tender held by Ukreximbank to procure cleaning services for UAH 41 million. The author of the material claims that the tender announcement could contain discriminatory requirements written for a specific participant. This participant is TOV Everest Engineering, which recently had a charter capital of only UAH 200 and is owned by a citizen of Kazakhstan, Oraz Imangaziev. He also owns more than 40 other companies, registered at the same time at the addresses of mass registration of legal entities, which, according to the author, may indicate the dubious reputation of this company.
As part of the context, the journalist cites the news that the National Anti-Corruption Bureau has already exposed state banks, including Ukreximbank, on various schemes for withdrawing state funds by allegedly ordering various services from dubious companies for tens of millions of hryvnias. At the end of the material, the position of the bank’s press service is presented, which states that the cleaning services specified in the procurement must be provided by the winner at four facilities in the main office, in 44 branches and subsidiaries, including additional cleaning of 276 ATMs for 24 months, and purchases are made exclusively through the ProZorro system.
The complainant believes that the statement “The discriminatory requirements in the indicated procurement were likely to be written for a specific participant” are not confirmed by any facts or evidence. She emphasizes that the material does not contain a link to a source to confirm this hypothesis. In her opinion, information about the registration of companies by Oraz Imangaziev at the addresses of mass registration of legal entities does not contain confirmed reasoning or analysis to prove this hypothesis. In her opinion, the bank should have been contacted for an official position even before the publication of the material, instead of publishing it after the bank requested a refutation. In addition, the submitted part of the bank’s response only distorts the situation, and was not used to present the information in a more complete manner.
On October 11, 2023, the Commission asked Dzerkalo Tyzhnia to provide commentary on the material and on the reasoning provided in the complaint. In its response provided on the same day, director of TOV ZN UA A. Silin indicated that the contested sentence contains the word “likely,” which indicates an evaluative judgment under the Constitution of Ukraine, which is also based on facts. He also emphasized that the statements of representatives of Ukreximbank, which have been trying to influence the publication for a long time, are nothing but an attempt to influence the media, with the aim of making the latter silence the socially important topic of the efficient use of funds by a state-owned bank.
Relevant ethical standards
Clause 6 of the Ethics Code of the Ukrainian Journalist: “Respecting the right of the public to full and objective information about facts and events is the primary duty of a journalist. Journalists and editors must take steps to verify the authenticity of all messages, video, and audio materials received from members of the public, freelancers, press services and other sources.”
Clause 9 of the Ethics Code of the Ukrainian Journalist: “Facts, judgments and assumptions must be clearly separated from one another. The dissemination of information containing bias or unfounded accusations is unacceptable.”
Clause 10 of the Ethics Code of the Ukrainian Journalist: “Views of the opponents, including ones who are objects of journalistic criticism, must be presented in a balanced manner. Assessments of independent experts must be provided the same way.”
Regarding violations of the requirements of the Code, cl. 6
Compliance with the requirements of clause 6 of the Ethics Code requires that the media and media workers verify the authenticity of all the facts provided in the material. For publications in online media, this duty also means posting links and screenshots of all facts relevant to the investigation. Their availability guides the consumer of information towards ways to verify this information independently if they feel the need to do so.
The material by Dzerkalo Tyzhnia contains all the necessary references to all the sources used while preparing the material. In particular, the information consumer can go to the ProZorro website and see all the details of the purchase. The complaints about potentially discriminatory requirements described in the material are based on a complaint by one of the procurement participants, which is also posted on ProZorro. The journalist also posted links to company pages on the Clarity Project open data analytics site, which uses open data to create dossiers on private entrepreneurs and legal entities. Following the provided links, the consumer can verify the statement about the registration of multiple companies owned by the Kazakhstan citizen Oraz Imangaziev at addresses where dozens of other legal entities are registered, which may cause doubts regarding their integrity.
A reference to the material of another online publication regarding the context of the procurement is also permissible in such material, as it indicates the context of the likely repetition of the practice of entering into questionable contracts by the bank. In view of this, the Commission believes that Viktoriia Khmilevska carried out proper work on the verification of the data provided in the material and complied with the requirements provided for in clause 6 of the Code.
Regarding violations of the requirements of the Code, cl. 9
Compliance with the provisions of the Code regarding the separation of facts from judgments and assumptions serves as a safeguard against liability for the material on the part of the media and journalists. Evaluative judgments based on reliable facts cannot be refuted or proven true, and those who spread them are not responsible for their distribution. For the consumer, this separation makes it easier to understand the material because with the proper separation of facts from judgments, the consumer can come to conclusions that are different from the conclusions drawn by the journalist or the media.
The journalist of Dzerkalo Tyzhnia regularly uses phrases like “likely,” “may commission” etc. regarding facts connected with the procurement. Although the use of these expressions is not an automatic indicator of the presence of value judgments, in the context of this material, where the reliability of the facts presented is confirmed by references to third-party sources, the Commission takes them as an indication of the separation of judgments from facts. Since Viktoriia Khmilevska’s judgments are based on facts provided without violation of clause 6 of the Code, the Commission does not see any bias in her position regarding Ukreximbank. Therefore, the Commission also concludes that there are no violations of the requirements of clause 9 of the Code in the material considered in this case.
Regarding violations of the requirements of the Code, cl. 10
The requirements for the balanced presentation of information, contained in clause 10 of the Code, are set forth in order to emphasize the avoidance of situations of one-sided coverage of a certain problematic issue. Adherence to this standard requires journalists and the media to record the position of both sides on the main issue of the material by contacting them for comment.
In the material submitted to the Commission, the position of Ukreximbank’s press service is provided. The Commission does not have sufficient data to indicate the time of adding the bank’s position to the material: the cache of the page is only available for October 3, 2023, and it contains the bank’s position. Therefore, the data available to the Commission is not sufficient to assert a violation of clause 10 of the Code by Dzerkalo Tyzhnia.
At the same time, the Commission emphasizes that if the bank’s position was added after the publication of the story, the violation of paragraph 10 of the Code would have occurred. Regarding topics of public interest, the media should contact the perpetrator of violations immediately and either provide an answer or record the fact of its absence in the material. In addition, in the case of later additions to the material with new citations, this should be indicated — either in the material itself by indicating the update or change of the material, or in its title.
Conclusion and recommendations
In view of the above, the Commission believes that the material of Dzerkalo Tyzhnia journalist Viktoriia Khmilevska “The State-Owned Ukreximbank May Commission Cleaners for Over UA 30 Million from a Dubious Company of a Kazakhstan Citizen” of September 6, 2023, does not violate the requirements of clauses 6, 9, and 9 of the Ethics Code of the Ukrainian Journalist.
At the same time, the Commission notes that the material contains statements that may indicate a violation of clause 15 of the Ethics Code of the Ukrainian Journalist.Its provisions, although not at issue in the submitted complaint, prohibit discrimination and unjustified reference to protected characteristics of a person, such as national or social origin, gender and race, etc. The title of the article, which mentions cleaners [female] and a Kazakhstan citizen, both equates cleaning with the female gender, and can create associations with the fact that the legal entities mentioned in the article are questionable precisely because of the ethnicity of the owner. Such indications are unacceptable, and the editors of Dzerkalo Tyzhnia should remove them before publishing the material. The Commission issues a warning to the publication and the journalists for the material.
When working with public procurement and creating anti-corruption materials in this area, the Commission recommends that the media:
- use the entire array of data, including state registers and databases created with the help of open data, to verify the information provided in the material;
- clearly separate facts from judgments and assumptions, avoid biased coverage;
- make sure the material is balanced and provide those facing criticism or accusations with an opportunity to provide an explanation or refute the allegations;
- in case of updating the material, indicate this in its body or title;
- avoid manipulation of sources, which can damage the credibility of future media materials in this area.
However, we remind you that the Commission on Journalistic Ethics considers complaints from citizens and organizations against journalistic materials with the purpose of increasing the level of ethical standards in the media and to help journalists correct their mistakes. Using the Commission’s decisions to punish newsrooms and/or take a case to court is contrary to the purpose of the self-regulatory body.