PRESS RELEASE Journalists' Appeal Against the Ministry of Culture and Information Dismissed by Court

The Astana City Court has dismissed the appeal of nine journalists challenging the provisions of the order by the Ministry of Culture and Information (MCI) that approved the "Model Rules for Accreditation of Journalists". The journalists argue that this regulatory act violates their constitutional rights to freedom of speech and dissemination of information.

Of particular concern to the journalists is the provision prohibiting accredited journalists from sharing information obtained from state bodies through any media outlets other than those that accredited them. A journalist who violates this requirement twice may have their accreditation revoked for up to six months.

In its decision, the court of first instance stated that the disputed provision of the Rules does not constitute a "prohibitive norm restricting freedom of speech". However, the journalists contend that the conclusions of the first-instance court are inconsistent with the circumstances of the case and the actual content of the disputed provision. They argue that the court failed to adhere to Article 6 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, which stipulates that the provisions of civil law must be interpreted in accordance with their literal wording.

The plaintiffs also believe that the lower court did not adequately consider the violation of Article 20 and Paragraph 1 of Article 39 of the Constitution of Kazakhstan, which specify that citizens' rights and freedoms, including methods of disseminating information, may only be restricted by law. The Rules adopted by the Ministry of Culture and Information are subordinate legislation and, therefore, cannot impose restrictions on journalists' rights to disseminate information.

Additionally, the journalists are challenging Clause 4 of the Minister of Culture and Information's Order dated August 20, which concerns the effective date of the Rules. The order came into effect six days before its official publication. The lawsuit pointed out that this violated Paragraph 4 of Article 4 of the Constitution, which requires official publication of normative legal acts concerning citizens' rights, freedoms, and obligations as a mandatory condition for their application.

The first-instance court did not effectively examine this argument but concluded that "enforcing the Rules prior to official publication does not violate the rights, freedoms, or legitimate interests of the plaintiffs". The court provided no justification for this conclusion in its ruling.

At today’s hearing, the journalists' representative, Sergey Utkin, a lawyer of the Adil Soz Foundation, filed a motion for a linguistic forensic examination to eliminate ambiguities in the interpretation of Clause 1 of Article 11 of the Model Rules for Accreditation of Journalists. The aim was to establish a clear and accurate interpretation of the disputed provision. However, the court rejected the motion, stating that such an examination was unnecessary.

The decision of the first-instance court remains unchanged, and the journalists’ appeal has been dismissed.

Despite this outcome, the plaintiffs are determined to continue their fight and intend to challenge the decision in the cassation instance. The Adil Soz Foundation expresses its disappointment with the court’s decision and reaffirms its commitment to supporting journalists in their efforts to protect their rights to free dissemination of information and journalistic independence.