WHO CAN APPEAR ON TV

Privatization of Media

AIM Sarajevo, 4 December, 1996

The forthcoming privatization in the Federation of B&H is expected to significantly change the existing situation in the ownership structure in the society in general. And while privatization "fever" is spreading among managers and their workers who are already calculating possible profits and losses, employees of the media have no great cause for excitement.

According to the draft law on privatization which should soon officially enter into force, mass media are excluded from privatization, together with public enterprises operating in various spheres, special purpose industries and similar.

In principle, their privatization is planned, but when and how it will be effectuated has not been explicitly said yet. The final list of exceptions shall be established by the federal assembly at the proposal of the Government. When their privatization will actually begin will depend on the decision of the Government.

It is clear that the state and the current authorities find it extremely difficult to part with media, especially the electronic ones. Future destiny and the status of the state-controlled and certainly most influential Radio-Television B&H is still uncertain. Transformation of B&H pursuant the Dayton accords brought the key question - that of the founder, or the owner of this company - into the focus. Theoretically speaking, it is the Assembly of B&H, the legal successor of the Assembly of the former Republic of B&H. Starting from the present political reality, it is however difficult to expect that the deputies in the Assembly of B&H from the Serb entity would accept to finance it as the only joint RTV station.

Transferring the RTV B&H to the federal level, that is, to be financed from the budget, would imply previous agreement between the Bosniac and the Croat representatives about division of leading posts, as well as adequate national structure of the employees. In that case, the Party of Democratic Action (SDA) would practically make an enormous concession to its federal partner, the Croat Democratic Community (HDZ) which would have to be compensated for by an equally big counter-service. The decision on exclusion of the enterprises in the sphere of information from the process of privatization, therefore, shows best the intention of the current authorities to maintain influence on the souls of their subjects for as long as possible.

As a counter argument, the state is abundantly using data on the number of local radio and TV stations, which cannot be denied, as well as data on the existence of privately-owned RTV stations. However, when one looks at the territory reached by privately-owned RTV stations, it is clear that the state-controlled media have unquestioned priority. Until the existing small RTV stations do not show any ambitions to step out of their backyards, everything will be all right. If their ambitions start to grow and when they seriously begin threatening to become real competition to the existing state-controlled RTV networks, there should be no doubt that administrative measures will be reached out for, such as refusal of channels and "market" prices for using them. All controversies between TVIN and B&H Government show that this fear is not unfounded.

And while all the officials among the loudest advocates of the need of total privatization emphasize all advantages of private ownership, it seems that this refers only to the existing remains of B&H economy, while some other criteria seem to apply to large, profitable systems such as the Post,the Electric Company and RTV.

The Constitution of the Federation states that information is one of the spheres of jurisdiction of the cantons. It is interesting that among the first decisions of the newly established cantonal authorities, those on foundation of cantonal RTV stations are almost inevitable. Investment of state money into RTV stations is an obvious indicator that the state will not quit claim of the media. From the aspect of the current big and small leaders, state-controlled media are a very good thing. First, you can always appear in them or have your picture taken by them, and second, they never ask embarrassing questions.

That things concerning ownership of media are not quite clear is shown by examples of pre-war journals. Immediately before the war, pursuant the then "Ante Markovic's law" on internal shares, all employees set out on their way to "capitalism on credit". The workers "subscribed" shares of their enterprises which they mostly paid back in installments during many years. Depending on the value of an enterprise and the interest of the employees, the share of workers' internal shares formed from ten to 90 per cent of the value of the enterprise.

After the state, by a decree enacted in 1994, transformed the existing social ownership into state ownership, the question of internal shares became topical. The state passed a special regulation pursuant which it was compulsory to revise the existing internal shares. This practically meant that participation in the ownership of an enterprise was recognized only for the part of shares which was fully paid for. The difference between the "booked" and effectively paid off shares became property of the state again.

That is how it came about that the employees in newspaper publishing enterprises experienced an unpleasant surprise. In the beginning of the war, pursuant the law in force at the time which took into account "subscribed" and not just paid off shares, the employees were majority owners in their enterprises and in proportion with the share of their shares exercised their right to control the enterprise. Thanks to this fact, the state in majority of newspaper publishing enterprises did not have the opportunity to directly participate in nominating the management, which enabled these journals to preserve their independence. This happened to Sarajevo daily Oslobodjenje, for instance. However, in the beginning of the process of revision and implementation of the new regulations it turns out in the end that the majority owner is the state after all, which is certainly making the authorities happy but brings no joy to the journalists.

Thanks to the fact that their enterprise is much smaller than Oslobodjenje, employees in Sarajevo daily Vecernje novine, gave up about 30 per cent of the ownership to the state, while the rest, or the majority, is still beyond the control of the state.

The state managed to increase its share in the capital of enterprises, and therefrom to control them, by using a few tricks. The most efficient was the one of adding to the value of the enterprises the value of housing units which have not been privatized yet, and are therefore directly property of the state.

The initiated but interrupted revision of internal shares just additionally complicated the situation when speaking of who is the owner of media in the Federation of B&H. The final picture of the media and the ratio between state- and privately owned media will depend on the manner in which the destiny of the existing internal shares will be resolved, and their invalidation or transformation into "real", external shares.

According to the current situation, majority of journalists and other employees have no reason for great agitation. Most of the newly founded RTV stations and journals are from the very start privately owned, so the forthcoming privatization will not affect them. Those employed in state media will also not be affected much, but for other reasons. It is clear that the state has no intention to hand over "its" media into private hands and they will be among the last, or even the very last, to come under the privatization hammer.

DRAZEN SIMIC