“I think it’s crucial that if a nation wants to be a part of the European Union and wants to abide by European values, then that nation must obey the rule of law and ensure that there is freedom of the press,” the MEP said
Ukrainian government must behave responsibly as a government that wishes to be part of Western values and ensure that there is freedom of the press and that they do not use the excuse of a conflict as a reason to suppress TV channels. The member of the European Parliament from Britain Nathan Gill said this in Strasbourg.
“I think it’s crucial that if a nation wants to be a part of the European Union and wants to abide by European values, then that nation must obey the rule of law and ensure that there is freedom of the press. For me, it is just unbelievable that any nation would think that it’s acceptable to allow journalist to prosecuted in a way that they are in Ukraine, without absolutely using every instrument available to the state to make sure that the perpetrators are called and brought to justice, that journalists would feel unsafe in their own country doing their jobs, is a disgrace in 21st century in Western democracy,” he said.
“I’ve been to the Ukraine several times and I’ve been following the whole freedom of the press issues well over a year now and in my view, things are actually getting worse, they are not getting better in Ukraine. And I have spoken to many journalists in Ukraine from various TV channels and also here in Brussels who’ve been assigned over here. And I think the message is very clear: the Ukrainian government must behave responsibly as a government that wishes to be part of Western values and ensure that there is freedom of the press and that they do not use the excuse of a conflict as a reason to suppress TV channels. You know, during WWII, it was our nation’s greatest moments of peril, but during that Winston Churchill did not close down newspaper outlets, he didn’t do a way with democracy, he allowed the media to criticize him, criticize what the government was doing. And if we were able to do it during our moments of greatest peril, then using the Donbas conflict as an excuse for closing down TV channels, I think is an absolute disgrace,” he stressed.
Earlier, Nathan Gill made a statement on freedom of speech at the EU-Ukraine Association Parliamentary Committee meeting.
As it was reported earlier, on September 26 the National council on questions of television and radio broadcasting deprived TV channel “112 Ukraine” of digital licenses for broadcasting.
The channel continues to broadcast and is available to its viewers on satellite, cable and the Internet.
The decision of the National Council has already been condemned in the European Parliament, who promised to pass this information to European officials.
The journalists of the 112 Ukraine, NewsOne and ZIK TV channels held a rally of solidarity against censorship. Three TV channels go off the air for 30 minutes.
The move is an answer to the Ukrainian authorities and their attempts to oppress freedom of speech in Ukraine.
(c) 112
And if we were able to do it during our moments of greatest peril, then using the Donbas conflict as an excuse for closing down TV channels, I think is an absolute disgrace,” he stressed.
This disgusting piece of slime needs to brush up on his history, and what happened with the British media during WW2.
Here is a brief outline:
Censorship in the Second World War
Press censorship in the Second World War worked on a principle of self-enforcement. Newspapers were issued with guidance about topics that were subject to censorship and invited to submit any story that might be covered by these so-called ‘Defence Notices’. Submitted stories would be scrutinised by the censor and redacted in accordance with the guidelines. Any information of potential military significance – from weather reports, to the exact location of troops – would be removed.
If a story were suitable for publication, it would be returned to the newspaper bearing an official stamp, with any changes marked in blue pencil. Any story that was not ‘Passed for Censorship’ was liable for prosecution if it were found to contravene the guidelines. Reports directly issued by the Ministry of Information were censored before release.
The system was designed to strike a balance between press freedom and national security.
He loves the ‘media freedom’ in the Russia.
Soon he will be an ex MEP, then he can join RT as a “journalist”.
Ukip vermin. I’d like to have a quiet chat with him. In a deserted back alley.
Hopefully guns involved… 😂
I don’t like guns. And I don’t much like violence. But when it’s someone from my own country, I feel a sense of responsibility at least to mete out some proportional punishment to a person that is gloating at the pain of innocent people who are the victims of the worst fascist power since that other squalid, sick little dictator.
Another of his comrades you might want to meet in that dark alley. Shaffaq Mohammed was spouting the same drivel on 112, and he is also on a sub committee for human rights on the ECHR. No doubt one of the trash that helped Russia back into PACE.
I hadn’t heard of that fuck. Assume you mean the LibDem MEP? I looked him up. He’s from the arsehole of the world (or at least second to putlerstan) Kashmir, which tells us a lot.
Yeah he’s a Pakistani from Sheffield. Just managed to scrape 5% of the vote in the 2017 election.
“I think it’s crucial that if a nation wants to be a part of the European Union and wants to abide by European values, then that nation must obey the rule of law and ensure that there is freedom of the press,”
European values are exactly what? Just because “European values” values filthy Ruskie propaganda, it doesn’t mean that Ukraine must do the same. And, a certain amount of censure is normal for any nation at war. Perhaps the European jellyfish are trying to make it sound as if the nation is not at war? On the same note, I know that German media is performing a propaganda campaign in favor of Merkel and the leftist-green parties. Is this better?
Pathetic hypocrites!