OSCE states urge media freedom at 2025 ministerial
If you’ve ever wondered why diplomats talk about journalism at security summits, here’s the simple reason: your right to know is a safety issue. At the 2025 OSCE ministerial, France delivered a joint statement-shared in English by the UK Government, originally spoken in French-on behalf of Austria, Canada, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Greece, Latvia, Lithuania, Montenegro, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, the United Kingdom and France. Together they asked fellow states to protect media freedom and the people who make it possible.
The Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe treats media freedom as part of its “comprehensive” idea of security. That means rights and stability go together: independent reporting supports democratic checks, helps prevent conflict, and builds social resilience. When journalists can work without censorship, intimidation or violence, the public can test claims, challenge power and make informed choices.
OSCE countries have said this many times on paper. Key texts include the Helsinki Final Act, the Copenhagen Document and Ministerial Council Decision 3/18 on the Safety of Journalists. These commitments ask governments to protect free expression, support media pluralism, keep journalists safe, end impunity for attacks and avoid using courts or laws to silence critical reporting.
The statement warns that practice often falls short. Instead of investigating threats and assaults on reporters, some authorities are turning judicial systems on journalists themselves. Calling something “national security” is not a licence to criminalise independent journalism. Normalising that risk, the group argues, would weaken accountability for everyone.
Ukraine is a central case. Since Russia’s full-scale invasion, journalists have been killed, arbitrarily detained, tortured and disappeared, and there are credible reports of direct targeting of media workers and infrastructure. Under international humanitarian law, journalists are civilians and must be protected. The statement calls on the Russian Federation to immediately and unconditionally release all media professionals imprisoned for their work, including in temporarily occupied parts of Ukraine.
Inside Russia and Belarus, the picture described is severe. Independent media have been squeezed by broad “anti-extremism” and “anti-terrorism” provisions, state censorship and organised disinformation-often referred to as foreign information manipulation and interference. The result, the group says, is systematic repression that shuts down independent journalism and narrows what the public is allowed to hear.
Beyond those two countries, there are worrying patterns. Journalists have been arrested, prosecuted or convicted in Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Türkiye and Uzbekistan. In Turkmenistan, space for independent reporting is described as very limited. The thread running through these examples is the use of legal pressure to control what gets published.
Georgia also appears in the statement. Once held up as a regional example on media freedom, it is now cited for steps that undermine independent journalism-harassment, intimidation, legislative and judicial moves, and arbitrary detentions of media actors. For students of civics, this is a reminder that progress can be reversed if safeguards are weakened.
The everyday reality matters too. The group notes rising hostility towards reporters in public spaces, poor protection from security officials, and, at times, deliberate attacks and equipment seizures by law enforcement. When attacks are not properly investigated, it signals that violence against journalists carries few consequences-an open invitation for more of the same.
To counter this, the OSCE’s Representative on Freedom of the Media (RFoM) exists to spot early warning signs, respond quickly to serious breaches and help states improve their media laws and practices. The statement highlights the office’s work on the safety of women journalists, marking a decade of the Safety of Female Journalists Online project in 2025, including a practical resource guide, monitoring guidelines and tailored capacity-building programmes.
What this means for you: when journalism is chilled, you lose reliable information about public money, elections, courts and war. If you see “extremism” or “terrorism” charges routinely applied to reporters, if equipment is seized without clear legal basis, or if attacks go uninvestigated, those are red flags. Ask who benefits from limiting coverage, which oversight bodies are acting, and whether courts are open to scrutiny.
For classrooms and newsrooms, this joint statement is a teachable text. Map the OSCE pledges to real events. Track whether investigations into attacks on journalists are opened-and concluded. Compare laws against the standards named above. And as readers, we can back independent reporting by checking sources, resisting disinformation, and speaking up when we witness harassment of media workers. That is how we translate high-level commitments into everyday accountability.