The full-scale war has influenced Ukrainian politics, society, and media. News about the war has been front and center in the information space. The Commission on Journalistic Ethics acknowledges the role of Ukrainian journalists in informing citizens about important facts, developments, and statements, including by means of journalistic investigations.
The broad discussion that arose after journalistic investigations about procurement of food products for the army (Dzerkalo Tyzhnia) and about MPs and prosecutors vacationing abroad (Skhemy, Ukrainska Pravda) led to critical decision-making at the governmental level. Notably, the parliament passed a law on introducing transparency in defense procurement, and the government banned top officials from traveling abroad on vacation during martial law.
In turn, the authors of some high-profile journalistic investigations have become the object of criticism due to errors discovered after publication. One of such publications was about a MoD official Oleksandr Liiev allegedly owning a Russian passport, and it led to a statement by the CJE.
After the statement, the Commission received two more complaints about the material of journalist Yanina Sokolova about Oleksandr Liiev (the complaints were filed by Oleksandr Liiev and Daria Melkina).
Considering the events connected with investigative journalists in Ukraine, the Commission on Journalistic Ethics states the following:
1. Investigative journalism becomes particularly crucial during the full-scale war. Journalists contribute to solving war crimes and the prosecution of war criminals. An example is the investigation by the international Bellingcat team about those involved in the crash of the Malaysian Boeing 777 in 2014 in Donetsk oblast.
2. The martial law and restrictions imposed on the dissemination of certain information should not lead to the suspension of journalistic investigations. In peacetime, large amounts of open data make abuse by officials or politicians impossible, or at least significantly complicate it. In wartime, when transparency of decision-making and competition are limited, and registries are closed, citizens mostly have no opportunity to learn the truth. Thanks to investigative journalists, the government’s work becomes more transparent to the public.
3. Topics related to possible facts of corruption during martial law draw increased attention and require journalists to check the facts carefully before making them public. During such investigations, media workers must adhere to professional standards, including the following mandatory requirements:
- journalistic impartiality, clear separation of facts from judgments and opinions;
- verification of all hypotheses and facts, without favoring one perspective before or during the verification process;
- careful work with sources, understanding the motives of one’s sources before disclosing hidden information;
- giving those who are subject to criticism the opportunity to provide explanations or deny the allegations made; proper citation of answers;
- transparency in their work, that is, the audience learning not only the conclusions, but also the evidence.
4. Public figures, including politicians, government officials, business owners, high-ranking law enforcement officers, and others, should be ready for increased public interest and a broad range of criticism directed at them. Public figures should not abuse their right to complain to the Commission on Journalistic Ethics in order to retaliate against journalists.
5. The work of the Commission on Journalistic Ethics as a body of self-regulation of journalists and the media is aimed at ensuring that journalists and editors better understand the requirements and adhere to the Ethics Code of the Ukrainian Journalist. The Commission is meant to draw attention to unacceptable violations of journalistic ethics and professional standards, so that newsrooms can avoid them in the future, and citizens can critically evaluate the information they consume. Punishment of the guilty is neither a goal nor a tool of the Commission’s work.
6. The Commission independently evaluates the expediency or impracticality of considering the complaints received and the form of response (decision, statement, recommendations). The Commission studies the content of all complaints without exception, but is not obliged to consider every complaint. Several complaints on a similar topic can be combined into one case because the purpose of the Commission’s activity is to help journalists and editors correct their mistakes and avoid them in the future.
In particular, since the complaint filed by Oleksandr Liiev and Daria Melkina concerns the situation that has already been analyzed in the relevant statement, the Commission on Journalistic Ethics decided to leave both complaints without consideration.
7. The Commission condemns all forms of harassment of investigative journalists for their work, including hateful online attacks on social media. The assumption that the enemy can use the results of a journalistic investigation for their propaganda purposes should not obstruct the journalists’ work.
8. High-quality investigative journalism in times of war creates the necessary control over the actions of the authorities by the public, encourages the authorities to be more accountable, contributes to reducing the level of corruption and making the decisions necessary for the country. The Commission on Journalistic Ethics calls for creating conditions for free development of investigative journalism in Ukraine and ensuring the protection of investigative journalists from pressure in connection with their professional activities.
This publication has been prepared as part of the CJE’s work with the financial support of the Media Development Fund Program of the US Embassy in Ukraine. The opinions and judgments expressed herein do not necessarily reflect the position of the US Government.