Recommendations for a journalist covering events taking place in a public place. What to do if “Revizorro” came to you: on the issue of the powers of the media and a new form of control of small businesses

Organization of the reference apparatus of an investigative journalist The specific implementation of the reference apparatus is determined by the scale of the tasks being solved and the resources allocated for its maintenance. The reference apparatus should, as uniformly as possible, address at least two

Compromising evidence or life. The story of the disappearance of a Kyiv journalist 1 Journalist Georgy Gongadze disappeared in Kyiv on September 16, 2000. His remains, found a month and a half later, have not yet been buried. There is no end to this story. The death of the journalist became

Chapter V. Rights and obligations of a journalist Article 47. Rights of a journalist A journalist has the right: 1) to seek, request, receive and disseminate information; 2) to visit government bodies and organizations, enterprises and institutions, bodies of public associations or their

§ 1. Legal status of a journalist in accordance with the Law of the Russian Federation “On the Mass Media” In accordance with Art. 2 of the Law of the Russian Federation of December 27, 1991 No. 2124-1 “On the Mass Media”, a journalist is understood as a person engaged in editing, creating, collecting

As a general rule, every person has the right of access to a public place. Public places include: buildings, structures, territories, natural objects or space of potential location of people who can freely interact. In particular, typical types of public places are streets, stadiums, parks, public transport, retail establishments, courtyards, entrances, stairwells, elevators of residential buildings; entertainment enterprises (theatres, cinemas, palaces of culture), beaches. Security institutions do not belong to public places (due to the absence of a sign of public access). Children's children may not always be classified as such. educational institutions and medical institutions, due to the presence in certain cases of special regulation of access to the premises of these institutions (for example, schools or intensive care wards of hospitals), as well as a special regime for the dissemination of information about children (Article 152.1 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, Article 41 of the Law on the Media) and medical secrets.

At the same time, journalists’ coverage of any mass event, especially mass protests (regardless of their agreement with the authorities), is a zone increased danger, it is especially important for a journalist to remember his professional rights and responsibilities. This will not only reduce professional risks, help the journalist navigate a difficult situation, but sometimes also avoid aggression and violence towards himself.

• In all cases, a journalist has the right to visit and film in public places. Any restrictions on the right to access information located in public places, in places where there are large concentrations of citizens, can only be established at the level of the Russian Federation and must be adopted by the Law of the Russian Federation. No by-laws regulations cannot limit the right established by Art. 29 of the Constitution and Art. 47 of the Law on Mass Media. In principle, no orders from the heads of commercial enterprises can limit the right to access information in public place, established at the level of federal law and such restrictions are illegal.
• A journalist has the right visit specially protected places<…>riots and mass gatherings of citizens,<…>attend rallies and demonstrations" ( clause 7 part 1 art. 47 of the Russian Federation Law on Mass Media).
• No accreditation or prior approval from government and local authorities, police, organizers or owners of premises of enterprises related to public places (markets, supermarkets, parking lots, parks, etc.) is required for visiting and its coverage in the press.
• A journalist has the right make recordings, including using audio and video equipment, filming and photography» ( clause 6 part 1 art. 47 of the Russian Federation Law on Mass Media).
• A journalist has the right to film and photograph persons present in a public place and participating in any public event, including at the rally, police officers, private security companies protecting public order. The process of photo and video filming itself is not a violation of the right to integrity privacy, neither the rights to the image, nor is it a disclosure of personal data of the persons depicted in the photograph. A potential violation could be distributing an image of a citizen without his consent if we're talking about about a close-up (portrait photograph) (Article 152.1 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation). Such consent is not required if:

1) the use of the image is carried out in state, public or other public interests;

2) the image of a citizen was obtained during filming, which is carried out in places open to the public, or at public events (meetings,<…>sports competitions and similar events),

• At the request of a citizen, a journalist should stop filming a private person (an ordinary citizen, a visitor to a public place) in order to avoid intensifying the conflict and manifestations of aggression, which may result in the application of appropriate measures to both the citizen participant (especially if he is a participant in the rally) and the journalist.
• Based on the fact that journalists who have editorial credentials and carry out assignments from editorial offices have the full right to cover mass events and visiting public places, including specially protected ones, and “places where citizens gather,” and rallies, regardless of whether they are “agreed” or not with the authorized authorities, then preventing a journalist from carrying out his professional activities is a violation.
• In the case of a rally, a journalist should decide in advance in what status he is going to the rally - as a citizen, or as a journalist for the purpose of covering it in the media. This is important because what is possible for a journalist is not always possible for a participant. ( For example, a journalist has the right to cover, among other things, a rally that has not been approved by the authorities, and actions of participants that go beyond the agreed format of a public event, while participation in such an action is potentially punishable).
• If possible, a journalist working at the site of a mass action should have an identification sign “Press” - either a vest with such an inscription, or a badge for better identification in the crowd and to indicate his status. The question of whether identification will contribute to the fulfillment of the editorial task or not, in specific circumstances, the journalist can decide independently.
• The journalist is obliged " when carrying out professional activities, upon first request, present an editorial ID or other document proving the identity and authority of the journalist"(clause 9, part 1, article 49 of the Law of the Russian Federation on the Mass Media). An identification document is a passport (it is better to have a certified photocopy of the passport with you, which is not prohibited and is fully consistent with the obligation to keep it carefully indicated in the passport). If a journalist does not have an editorial ID in his hands in a situation where he is in danger, there must be a written editorial assignment signed by the editor and with the seal of the media editorial office to certify his credentials as a journalist.
• The journalist, like the participants, should, in order to avoid conflict with law enforcement agencies during a public event, “ observe public order and regulations for holding a public event» ( Clause 2, Part 3, Article 6 Federal Law"On meetings, rallies, demonstrations, processions and pickets"). Therefore, you should not get into trouble!
• Any violation of a journalist’s professional rights (be it a ban on filming, removal from a public place, damage to editorial property (photo and video equipment) requires recording. For each such fact, it is imperative to contact the prosecutor’s office with a request to initiate a criminal case for obstruction of the legitimate professional activities of a journalist (Article 144 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).

And in conclusion. A journalist is a person fulfilling a public duty, guarding public interests, these are the “eyes” and “ears” of our society. His job is to promptly inform the public about ongoing current events. Violations of their rights to access information and the normal exercise of professional activities automatically violate the rights of hundreds of thousands of Russians to receive prompt information about events taking place in the country.

Legislation on the media is not limited only to the Law of the Russian Federation "On the Mass Media", but consists in addition to it of other legislative acts adopted in accordance with the Law of the Russian Federation "On the Mass Media", and also includes legislation on the media of the subjects Russian Federation. Also among the norms of the legislation of the Russian Federation on the media are the rules for the organization and activities of the media established by interstate treaties of the Russian Federation, if they differ from the rules of this Law.

Thus, the total scope of a journalist’s professional rights is determined by the totality of the rights granted to him by Art. 47 of the Law of the Russian Federation "On the Mass Media", other federal and regional legislative acts, international treaties Russia. Moreover, international standards will have priority if they differ from the rules established by this Law.

Let us consider in more detail a number of provisions of Art. 47 of the Law on Media, which states: A journalist has the right:

1) Search, request, receive and distribute information.

The right of a journalist to access information directly corresponds with the right of every citizen to receive publicly available and unrestricted information, enshrined in the Law of the Russian Federation “On Information, Informatization and Information Protection.” However, due to the specific nature of the profession of journalists, the declared right to access information is not enough for them to work efficiently and effectively; a well-developed mechanism for implementing this right in practice is necessary. This mechanism is partly described in this article and is expressed in various forms exercising the right to access information. They are discussed in detail in the first chapter of the work.

When exercising his professional rights, a journalist is obliged to present upon request an editorial ID or other identification document (Clause 9 of Article 49 of the Law of the Russian Federation “On the Mass Media”), as well as to respect the rights and legitimate interests of citizens and organizations.

2) Visit government bodies and organizations, enterprises and institutions, bodies of public associations or their press services.

3) Be accepted by officials in connection with a request for information.

4) Gain access to documents and materials, with the exception of their fragments containing information constituting state, commercial or other secrets specially protected by law.

5) Copy, publish, announce or otherwise reproduce documents and materials, subject to the requirements of part one of Article 42 of this Law.

All documented information that came into the possession of a journalist in the course of fulfilling his professional duty, in any legal way, can be copied by him, published in print media, announced in audiovisual media or distributed in any other way. The only condition for the dissemination of this information is stipulated by the legislator in the form of the inadmissibility of violating copyrights, publishing rights, and other intellectual property rights. The author or another person who has the rights to the work may specifically stipulate the conditions and nature of the use of the work provided to the editors (Part 1 of Article 42 of the Law on the Mass Media and commentary thereto).

6) Make recordings, including using audio and video equipment, filming and photography, except for cases provided for by the Law.

Formulation this provision The article provides a list of possible types of recording that a journalist can make, recording facts, circumstances, events, life phenomena, that is, searching for and obtaining (including by recording) information. In addition to recording using various technical means, of course, to possible types recording also includes regular recording on paper (in a notebook, notebook, etc.), written notes.

The law regulates only a few cases when a journalist’s right to make a recording may be limited. The first and most basic is the production of recordings during the court hearing. As a general rule, legal proceedings in Russia are conducted openly and publicly. Everyone has the right to be present at trials, since, according to paragraph 1 of Article 123 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the proceedings in all courts are open. The principle of publicity of court hearings also means that not only listeners, including journalists, have the right to attend them, but they can also make permitted types of recordings. Some types of recording are expressly permitted by law for everyone present at an open court hearing (recording in a notebook, audio recording); others require the permission of the presiding judge in the case (video filming and photography).

The production of film, photography, and video shooting is accompanied by moving around the hall, installing microphones, lighting devices, etc. And the shooting procedure itself is associated with additional light and sound interference (flash, sound produced by the camera at the time of shooting, etc.) All this creates additional difficulties in maintaining proper order in the hall and complicates the work of the judges. That is why the law requires obtaining their permission to produce film, photography, and video during the process.

7) Visit specially protected places of natural disasters, accidents and catastrophes, riots and mass gatherings of citizens, as well as areas in which a state of emergency has been declared; attend rallies and demonstrations.

8) Check the accuracy of the information provided to him.

Article 49 (clause 2, part 1) contains a similar duty for a journalist - to check the accuracy of the information he reports. In view of the obligation imposed on the journalist to check the accuracy of everything that is disseminated to him, it is quite natural that the journalist has the right not to take his word for it, but to check the information that is reported to him. The obligation to comprehensively verify information and disseminate only reliable information is one of the main pillars of socially responsible journalism.

A journalist can verify the accuracy of the information reported to him by checking this information through alternative sources information, by copying documents, recording and filming, meetings and conversations with officials, using information provided by confidential informants, etc.

9) Express his personal judgments and assessments in messages and materials intended for distribution under his signature.

The right of a citizen to express his opinion is enshrined in the fundamental law of the state - the Constitution of the Russian Federation, Article 29 of which states: “1. Everyone is guaranteed freedom of thought and speech. 3. No one can be forced to express their opinions and beliefs or to renounce them.” In addition to the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the right to freedom of expression is also guaranteed by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, Article 10 of which enshrines the right of everyone to freedom of expression. A similar right is enshrined in Art. 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The right to freedom of expression is one of the fundamental human rights, which can be limited only in cases clearly defined by law, when there is a real need for such a restriction in a democratic society. In particular, as an exhaustive list of the purposes of introducing such a restriction in Art. 10 of the European Convention indicates the interests of: state security, territorial integrity or the public safety, the prevention of disorder or crime, the protection of health or morals, the protection of the reputation or rights of others, the prevention of disclosure of information received in confidence, or the maintenance of the authority and impartiality of justice. Each restriction must be provided for by law.

The commented provision of the Russian Federation Law on Mass Media duplicates the right of every citizen to express his opinion in relation to the professional activities of a journalist, giving him the right to express his personal judgments and assessments in messages and materials intended for distribution under his signature. Judgment, assessment, opinion, position - in this situation are synonyms and express a single concept, which can be characterized as a subjective evaluative statement, an expression regarding facts, circumstances, phenomena, persons, their actions, actions, etc. Opinion is characterized by the fact that it cannot be verified for compliance with reality, since, being subjective in nature, it may differ from person to person. different people regarding the same fact of reality. The European Court of Human Rights, interpreting the provisions of Art. 10 of the European Convention, clarified that the term “expression” includes the expression of creative views. He stated that "Article 10 includes freedom of expression of creative views - especially within the framework of the freedom to receive and impart information and ideas - which makes it possible to participate in the public exchange of cultural, political and social ideas and information of all kinds." However, the concept of “expressing one’s opinion” (translated from English literally as “self-expression”), as used in Article 10 of the European Convention as well as in Russian legislation, refers mainly to expression of opinion in relation to the receipt and dissemination of information and ideas, but not to the physical expression of feelings .

It is precisely because of all of the above that it is impossible to recognize a value judgment (opinion) as inconsistent with reality and to refute it (for example, in accordance with Articles 43-45 of this Law or Article 152 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation), since this will directly violate a person’s right to express his opinion and contradict Part 3 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, which says that “no one can be forced to express their opinions and beliefs or to renounce them.” Refutation of opinion in judicial procedure(i.e. forced) should be regarded as coercion to refuse to express one's opinion or to renounce one's opinion as such.

In the practice of the European Court of Human Rights, there is a rich selection of decisions that have protected the human right to express one’s opinion, including the right of journalists to express value judgments. The European Commission, and after it the European Court, into which it was recently transformed, have more than once interpreted the concept of “the right to express one’s opinion” in relation to specific situations. Now these provisions of the decisions of the European Court are the official interpretation of the text of the European Convention itself.

The issue of distinguishing between facts and opinions is also addressed in ethical codes journalism. Thus, the Code of Professional Ethics of the Russian Journalist in paragraph 3 states the following: “A journalist is obliged to clearly distinguish in his reports between the facts he is reporting and what constitutes opinions, versions or assumptions, at the same time in his professional activities he doesn't have to be neutral."

That is why Article 47 of the Russian Federation Law on Mass Media, while respecting the right of everyone to express their opinion, also recognizes the right of a journalist to express his personal judgments and assessments in messages and materials intended for distribution under his signature. Moreover, an indication that a journalist has the right to express his opinion in those materials that are distributed under his signature represents a certain guarantee that readers (viewers, listeners) will be aware that this opinion belongs to this journalist (citizen). If the distributed material is signed with a pseudonym or has no signature at all, then this material can be considered editorial. That is, responsibility for its distribution will be borne exclusively by the editorial office of the media, being a legal entity, or the founder of the editorial office, if the editorial office is not one. And, as you know, the right to express an opinion belongs only to a citizen, entity cannot express his “personal” opinion. In practice, the ability to disseminate statements of an evaluative, including critical, nature also extends to those materials that are signed with a pseudonym or are published in print (broadcast) without indicating the author.

10) Refuse to prepare under his signature a message or material that contradicts his beliefs.

11) Remove his signature from a message or material, the content of which, in his opinion, was distorted during the editorial preparation process, or prohibit or otherwise stipulate the conditions and nature of the use of this message or material in accordance with part one of Article 42 of this Law.

12) Distribute messages and materials prepared by him under his signature, under a pseudonym or without a signature.

That is, the material can be signed at the discretion of the author either with his real name (in the form specified by him) or with a fictitious name (pseudonym), and can also be distributed without a signature at all - that is, anonymously. A similar right is granted to a journalist not only by law, but also by a document adopted by the professional community - the Code of Professional Ethics of Russian Journalists. Paragraph 3 of this Code says: “The journalist is responsible with his own name and reputation for the reliability of any message and the fairness of any judgment disseminated under his signature, under his pseudonym or anonymously, but with his knowledge and consent”42.

Article 19 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation provides that a citizen acquires and exercises rights and obligations under his own name, including last name and first name, as well as patronymic. Moreover, in the case and in the manner prescribed by law, a citizen may use a pseudonym (fictitious name).

Pseudonym (from the Greek words - pseudos - lie and onyma - name) - "the conventional name of the author or artist, which replaces his real name and surname (or both). The law does not allow the disclosure of a pseudonym without the consent of the author, except in cases where a pseudonym is used to falsify authorship"43.

The current legislation, namely the Law of the Russian Federation “On Copyright and Related Rights” in Article 15 provides for the author’s right to designate a work when it is used by a pseudonym.

"The pseudonym is used at the request of the author. No one can make changes to the pseudonym chosen by the author. Any name or fictitious name can be indicated as a pseudonym. The question of the possibility of using a dissonant or misleading pseudonym (for example, coinciding with the real name of another famous person) is not resolved in the law; in such cases, the author’s demands to use such a pseudonym are often rejected by user organizations. The author may use a pseudonym for all or some of his works; he has the right to disclose or change his pseudonym at any time."44

Also, a message or material can be distributed without a signature, and then it is recognized as editorial. That is, responsibility for its dissemination will lie entirely with the media editors.

In addition to the differences in the options for signing a message provided to a journalist by the Law, there are also differences in legal consequences distribution of materials in various forms. Thus, when distributing material under the real name of the author and in the event of claims for protection of honor and dignity, for example, regarding this message or material, the author of this material and the editorial office of the media that distributed it will be held liable. It will not be difficult to identify the real author, since his name is directly indicated as the author of the controversial message.

But if there is a fictitious signature under the material or there is no signature at all, then the only defendant in the claim for protection of honor and dignity remains the editorial office of the media outlet that disseminated this material. The author of unsigned material is not held accountable on the basis of Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated August 18, 1992 No. 11, paragraph 6 of which establishes that when publishing or otherwise distributing defamatory honor, dignity or business reputation information without indicating the name of the author, the defendant in the case is the editorial office of the relevant mass media. As an example of material that does not include the author's name, Supreme Court RF called "editorials".

Obviously, such legal regulation will also apply to those cases when there is a signature under the material, but this is a fictitious name (pseudonym). The fact is that in order to hold a journalist accountable for material distributed under a pseudonym, this pseudonym must be disclosed either by the editorial office, the editor-in-chief, or the author himself. In accordance with Part 2 of Art. 41 (“Confidential Information”) of the Law “On the Mass Media” “the editorial office is obliged to keep the source of information secret and does not have the right to name the person who provided the information under the condition of non-disclosure of his name.” The only exception to this rule are cases “when the corresponding demand was received from the court in connection with a case pending before it.” In fact, the author of a message or material can be recognized as a “source of information” or “a person who provided information” in the sense of Part 2 of Article 41 of the Law “On the Mass Media”. Referring to this norm, the editors not only can, but are also obliged to refuse the request to disclose the pseudonym of the author of the article, who submitted it under the condition of non-disclosure of his real name45. Disclosure of a pseudonym is possible only at the request of the court, formalized by a reasoned resolution or court ruling. The demand of a prosecutor’s office employee in this situation will be illegal.

It should be noted that the situation when law enforcement agencies turn to media editors with a demand to provide information about the author of an article “hiding” under a pseudonym is extremely common. In the case of the prosecutor's office, the basis for such a requirement is the Law "On the Prosecutor's Office of the Russian Federation". Paragraph 2 of paragraph 1 of Article 22 (“Powers of the prosecutor”) of this Law establishes: “The prosecutor, when performing the functions assigned to him, has the right to demand from managers and other officials: the submission of necessary documents, materials, statistical and other information, call officials for explanations on regarding violations of laws." Thus, as follows from the cited norm, the prosecutor may demand that the editorial office of the mass media, represented by its editor-in-chief, provide the necessary information. Often such necessary information is information about the name of the author of an article published by him under a pseudonym or anonymously. And yet the Law on Mass Media is categorical - the editors have the right to disclose the name of the author only at the request of the court, but not the prosecutor.

The journalist also enjoys other rights granted to him by the legislation of the Russian Federation on the mass media.

This is said in part 2 of Art. 47 of the Law of the Russian Federation on Mass Media, which means that the list of rights of a journalist is not limited to the 12 points that are specified in Part 1 of Art. 47 of this Law.

Additional rights of journalists can be enshrined both in legislative acts and in departmental and by-laws, as well as at the level of an agreement between the journalist and the editorial office of the media. The law prohibits restricting human rights, but it naturally does not prohibit expanding them. The main thing is that the implementation of a particular right does not violate the rights and legitimate interests of other persons.

An example of other rights of a journalist is the right to be accredited. This right follows from Art. 48 of the Law of the Russian Federation on the Mass Media, which states that “state bodies, organizations, institutions, bodies of public associations accredit declared journalists, subject to the editorial staff observing the accreditation rules established by these bodies, organizations, institutions.”

This article will not be about traditional inspections of small businesses by regulatory authorities, because so much has already been written about the “anti-inspection” law (meaning Federal Law dated December 26, 2008 N 294-FZ) that it is already indecent to raise this topic. We would like to draw attention to a new wave of inspections carried out by other entities that have arbitrarily assumed such powers: inspections of the media and the public. And let’s look at this difficult issue using the example of inspections of HoReCa industry establishments (hotels, restaurants, cafes). All this will be useful to read not only for the owners and managers of such a business, but also for the service personnel, because, first of all, those who first came to hand are subject to pressure: reception staff, hostesses, maids, bartenders, cooks, etc.

Yulia Verbitskaya, expertCenter for Legal Practices, Master of Private Law, HoReCa lawyer

Many of us have seen the infamous TV show “Revizorro”, which airs on the “Friday” channel. For those who haven’t watched, here’s a brief summary of her idea: TV presenter Lena Letuchaya and her film crew visit various catering establishments and hotels, conducting inspections there – mainly looking for dirt and garbage. The scandalousness (and therefore the high rating) of the program is that the film crew acts not just like restaurant critics: they came, ate quietly, assessed the quality of service, filmed something in the hall, and left to write a devastating article. No, here everything happens in a much harsher version: the presenter and the cameramen break into not only the common room, but all office premises, mainly in the kitchen. The program has been accused more than once of being a staged show, and most establishment owners know about the visit in advance, but after the incident in Anapa, when the owner of the establishment did not tolerate uninvited guests and started a row, there is no doubt that the film crew is visiting without warning. there are none left (you can read more about this in the material Komsomolskaya Pravda– “The journalists beaten up in the Anapa cafe can be prosecuted for arbitrariness” http://www.kuban.kp.ru/daily/26294.5/3171578/).

No less scandalous is the program “Control Call” on another TV channel - NTV, where several seemingly very strong men, two meters tall, walk around officials in an attempt to get a comment on some high-profile case. This program increasingly features scenes of fights between the film crew and security guards from various state and municipal bodies.

Moving away from the large scale of federal channels, let us turn to similar practices at the local level. You shouldn’t hope that only some very well-known establishment can come under attack; on the contrary, it’s easiest to “make a nightmare” of the small owner of some eatery on the outskirts of the city or a little-known night club. In our city, this practice, with the help of some friendly media, is carried out by Dmitry Chukreev, assistant to deputy Anatoly Petrovich Sukhov (deputy chairman of the Legislative Assembly of the Sverdlovsk region, ran for “ United Russia"). Mostly given public figure catches gambling establishments, but periodically visits nightclubs, bars, and sometimes even strip clubs. Here are just some of the establishments that have survived control activities from these public figures: Night Club “Lift-12”, Disco Bar “Marusya”, Night Club “Eldorado”, “Sandals”, “Ramada”, “Pushkin”, Cabaret CHANCE, Night Club “ The White house", Bar "Culture" and many others. It is worth noting that law enforcement agencies did not find violations in all of them during inspection activities.

He told us what it looks like in practice owner of one of the nightclubs in Yekaterinburg, Andrey Vasiliev:

“Yes, we actually encountered this problem. When one enterprise’s alcohol license was in the process of being reissued, they came twice, while the second, recently opened club was in the process of obtaining it – once. All this was organized by the same group of people, quite well known in the city. Where does the data come from, who to catch? Public organizations looked through the register of licenses, if it was confirmed that it was missing, they wrote a statement to the internal affairs bodies (department for combating economic crimes). At the same time, they applied to hold a picket near the doors of the establishment, but this was denied due to a violation of the notification procedure. They actively attracted media that were friendly to them and went to test purchases. During the inspection, the security forces, unlike the public activists, behaved politely. The latter filmed on video on the territory of a private establishment without permission, broke into office premises, the artists' dressing room, where people were changing clothes at that moment. When asked to stop, they laughed sarcastically and insulted me. Walking around as if at home, they entered the sink and kitchen and made comments to the camera as if according to a template: “Dirty, not cleaned, close everything.”

All requests to leave and stop were answered rudely, the employees of the establishment were intimidated, one of the public activists told the DJ: “If you don’t turn off the spotlight, I will kill you and your lamps... (unprintable expression - editor's note) I’ll break it,” but when the administrator came close, he immediately fell silent.

In the previous establishment, this was all a surprise to us; none of the staff was prepared. Note that you get alcohol license Only a few succeed within the prescribed period of 1 month; in practice, it takes an average of 3 months. However, this does not mean that the establishment has been selling “burnt alcohol” all this time - everything that you buy in the store is sold. Unfortunately, this is a common practice among restaurateurs, and not only in our city.”

To illustrate: how it later looks in TV stories (an example with a recent check of one of the bars):

It is not my task to condemn journalists or other people who simply hide behind the necessary excuses. After all, for a certain audience - the audience of our fellow lawyers, we ourselves talk about how you can use the powers of a journalist in legal activity(on a journalism course for lawyers). Everyone does their job for certain purposes (even just to gain publicity by dancing on other people’s bones). Whether this is good or bad, immoral or not, we will not discuss. This is not a matter for lawyers, because a lawyer can find himself on either side of the barricades, for example, in criminal law: today he defends a criminal, tomorrow he defends a victim, today he is a tax inspector lawyer, tomorrow he is a legal adviser to a taxpayer and is looking for an antidote to the actions that he once did. then myself.

The purpose of this material is to tell entrepreneurs - owners of catering establishments and hotels, as well as their employees, how to counter the reputational risks associated with visits from uninvited guests.

It is worth noting right away that the legislation on the media will not provide comprehensive answers to all our questions. Many rules on the powers of journalists can be interpreted both in favor of journalists and against them. Alas, already regretting the situation of the mass media in general, the law “On the Mass Media” was adopted already in 1991, and most of its provisions are rather declarative in nature: on the one hand, it seems to guarantee freedom of the media, and on the other hand, to dig deeper – practically nothing can be applied to its full potential. All this was very well demonstrated by the various riots during the election period. Or take at least the same procedure for providing information upon an editorial request - there is a right to demand information, but there is no normal mechanism for holding people accountable for failure to provide it (only recently have they begun to think about introducing criminal liability for violating the procedure for providing information to a journalist).

That is, it all comes down to who can make the most compelling arguments in favor of necessary interpretation of one norm or another, who can remember more established rights and obligations, prohibitions from a variety of regulations, who, in the end, will be more convincing and bolder.

Let us examine in detail the question of the very possibility of admitting (or not admitting) journalists, social activists and other persons to the establishment.

How do media representatives justify the opportunity to enter the establishment? The standard phrase: “We are representatives of the media, we have an editorial task, we have the right to enter any public place.” Let's sort it out in order.

Journalist status

Firstly, it is necessary to establish whether this is really a journalist, whether such a media outlet exists.

In accordance with Art. 52 of the Law of the Russian Federation dated December 27, 1991 No. 2124-1 “On the Mass Media” (hereinafter referred to as the Law “On the Mass Media”), the professional status of a journalist established by this Law applies to full-time editorial staff involved in editing, creating, collecting or preparation of messages and materials, as well as for authors who are not connected with the editorial office of the mass media through labor or other contractual relations, but who are recognized by it as their freelance authors or correspondents, when they carry out instructions from the editorial office. So confirm official status a journalist can: a) with an official ID issued by the media; b) an editorial assignment (for freelance journalists), c) in addition to this, there are also certificates of the Union of Journalists of Russia and international professional journalist cards (International Press Card), issued by the International Federation of Journalists (through the Russian Union of Journalists).

You can check whether the media outlet of which a person claims to be an employee actually exists in the Roskomnadzor register - http://rkn.gov.ru/mass-communications/reestr/media/. Although there may be a situation when the media is not registered - this is allowed, for example, for newspapers with a circulation of less than 1000 copies. But the vast majority of well-known media are, of course, registered. It will be more difficult to check a journalist’s ID issued by the Union of Journalists - there is no similar register. Unless you have to contact the regional office http://www.ruj.ru/_about/regional_offices_of_journalists_of_russia_soyuz.php. On the other hand, if we doubt and consider the newcomer an impostor, then we have the right to ask to wait until the credentials are verified. After all, we were all taught to check police officers in this way - before letting him into your home or office, you need to call the department and check whether there really is such an officer and whether he was sent to you.

Contrary to popular belief, in order to be recognized as a journalist and have the appropriate status, it is not at all necessary to have specialized education journalist.

Do journalists have the right to visit any establishments?

Let's say we have decided on the status - yes, indeed, the uninvited visitor has the credentials of a journalist. But how far do these powers extend? Does a journalist really have the right to go wherever he pleases? Especially considering that, as we just learned, almost anyone can obtain the status of a journalist: for this you do not need to have any special education, no official employment in the editorial office, but only an editorial assignment from a friendly media outlet is enough.

Yes, indeed, a journalist has the right to visit government bodies and organizations, enterprises and institutions, bodies of public associations or their press services (Clause 2 of Article 47 of the Law “On the Mass Media”). But nowhere is it stated in what order he has the right to do this. In general, a journalist must obey the law when performing his official duties; accordingly, there is a general procedure for visiting these same government bodies and organizations. In the same way, any citizen has the right to visit government bodies, enterprises and institutions, there is no difference. Visitors are accepted taking into account the organization’s opening hours, access control, visiting rules, etc. This norm should not be viewed as an opportunity to break in anywhere without hindrance. It is the operational workers of the Ministry of Internal Affairs who have the authority to freely enter any premises of enterprises and institutions. But do not confuse the powers of law enforcement agencies and persons not endowed with such rights.

Thus, a journalist must follow the same procedure for visiting an organization as any other citizen (there are certain bonuses in the status of a journalist, but this applies more to a reduced period of time in providing information). Next, the question may arise: to what extent can we generally deny access to certain premises to any citizens (whether journalists or our visitors).

In such cases, visitors often use the concept of “public place”. They say there should be unhindered access to a public place. However, there is nothing like that in the Law “On Mass Media”. The concept of “public place” is used in the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, and is explained in detail only in Art. 20.21 (Appearing in public places while intoxicated: these are streets, stadiums, squares, parks, vehicles common use, as well as some other places). A similar list is contained in Art. 20.20 Code of Administrative Offenses (Consumption (drinking) of alcoholic beverages in prohibited places or consumption of narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances in public places). It is clear that it would be absurd to add bars, restaurants and other catering establishments here. Otherwise, where else if not to appear in a state of alcoholic intoxication.

What conclusion can be drawn from all this: firstly, the special right of a journalist to conduct his activities is not directly established anywhere, depending on whether this or that place is public or not (they act general rules established for all citizens), secondly, a catering establishment or hotel does not fall under the definition of a public place.

The public may be indignant at all this: but how? civil society, freedom of the media, and who, if not them, will check all this.

If not them, there are the relevant authorities: Rospotrebnadzor, Fire Safety Inspectorate, Rosalkogolregulirovanie, and they, believe the experience of a lawyer who has worked in this area for more than five years, check very well. Even any kindergarten has never been fined for any inspection, and they know SanPiN better than any restaurant owner.

Well, to the question of freedom. Above I provided a link to the Komsomolskaya Pravda article about the beaten employees of the Friday TV channel. Yes, it feels like the author of the material showed shop solidarity and sided with the reporters. But for interest, read the numerous comments to the article. Most readers do not encourage their actions in any way, and give a lot of examples where, using this logic, the reporters of the Revizorro program could still penetrate:

To the operating room (suddenly they sew something wrong or in the wrong place);

In a cash vault or cash collection vehicle: suddenly our money is stolen or stored incorrectly;

For hazardous production: check whether safety precautions are followed correctly;

Into the cockpit - what if the pilot is drunk;

To a nuclear power plant;

In the dressing room of the theater - suddenly there are actors smoking and swearing in violation of all laws.

How is the kitchen different from all this? Moreover, not every employee of the establishment has the right to enter the kitchen; for this, a lot of requirements must be met. Read more about these requirements in the comments. restaurateur Max Kovalenko (Moscow):

“The public place to which the presenter refers is only the dining room. The service hall is a service place, and admission to it is permitted only after passing safety instructions, in the presence of a medical book with a mark on the passage of a periodic medical examination for catering employees and permission to work, and in the presence of sanitary clothing. I would like to note that the use of sanitary clothing is only possible if there is an agreement with the laundry for the processing of textiles for catering establishments. Robes brought with you without accompanying contracts are not allowed. The exception is disposable gowns in packaging. Also, admission to the catering unit is allowed only after an external examination (the well-known “pustule log”). In addition, the controller of the supervisory authority is obliged to inform the production manager about the presence of gastrointestinal diseases in himself and his family members. So I consider this lady’s appearance in the kitchen completely illegal.”

So how much such actions meet the public interest is a big question.

Is it possible to prohibit a journalist from entering an establishment?

Let's say we've sorted out the office space. We should not allow any strangers into the office premises, especially into the kitchen, even if they have TV channel IDs or even an international journalist card. Any material should be prepared on the basis of mutual understanding and cooperation - please come to the director during office hours, he will answer all your questions. And checking Sanitary Regulations is, after all, the job of specially trained people from Rospotrebnadzor, and visual inspections alone with shouts of “Dirt, close everything” or the use of sophisticated equipment in the form of a white glove will not do. In general, when they work competently, journalists act secretly and conduct a real journalistic investigation (similar materials could often be found in the Russian Reporter magazine).

This is how he comments on the situation Dmitry Voynov, Director of SoftBusiness (Omsk):

"My company is engaged in complex automation restaurant business, and because of this we very often communicate with restaurant owners, managers and directors. I would like to note that the example given with “Revizorro” is not the most objective. It is worth reading only reviews of past programs. I am sure that some of the issues were custom-made. As for the expulsion of such figures, I see one obvious way out - calling security and the police. Plus, you can refer to Art. 40 of the Law “On the Mass Media” (Refusal and delay in providing information). Until the arrival of the above-mentioned structures, I would not let anyone in, even if I would have to use force to do this.”

What should we do if we don’t want to allow people with cameras not only into the office premises, but also into the hall? And this is not a whim of the owner of the establishment, but to a greater extent a concern for the visitors themselves. Let's say this is a nightclub or, even more piquant, a strip club. It’s clear that most guests don’t even want to be included in the establishment’s photo reports, much less in the news broadcasts of TV channels.

Let us again proceed from the thesis that in this case journalists enjoy the same rights and responsibilities as other visitors. In general, the issue of face control requires a separate detailed analysis. In short, the relationship between the guest and the establishment is regulated by the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, because when entering a cafe, restaurant and ordering food there, we always enter into an agreement for the provision of paid services (even if we do not sign any document). As a general rule, the establishment does not have the right to refuse service to a visitor because he “failed to show his face” (again, contrary to the common misconception about the legality of face control). After all, all this is regulated by Art. 426 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation on a public contract - services must be provided to everyone who contacts the organization. That is why competent restaurateurs, in order to somehow resolve the issue of admission to the establishment, initially reserve all the tables and refuse an unexpected guest (drunk, in dirty clothes and in other cases when this may cause inconvenience to other guests) due to the lack of free ones. tables. After all, paragraph 3 of the same article 426 states that a refusal to provide a service is unlawful only if there is an opportunity, and if there is no such opportunity (all tables are occupied or reserved), then the refusal will not be a violation.

The second reason why we may refuse admission to the establishment is the holding of a closed event (special service).

The success of communicating with aggressive public figures and media representatives largely depends on how competently the instructions were given to the staff and, in particular, to the security guards, who should be the first echelon on the path of uninvited guests.

In future articles we will look at more complex cases: when social activists and media representatives came to the establishment accompanied by law enforcement officers: who and where should we let them in, who and what has the right to film on camera, and other questions.

Is Lena Letuchaya breaking the laws by showing up in restaurant kitchens and ransacking hotel rooms? We decided to understand the legal intricacies. And lawyer Oleg Pavlovich will help us with this

Is Lena Letuchaya breaking the laws by showing up in restaurant kitchens and ransacking hotel rooms? We decided to understand the legal intricacies. And lawyer Oleg Pavlovich will help us with this.

— Why does someone consider Letuchaya a malicious violator, and someone considers her to be a guardian of the law?

— The fact is that most Russian laws, unfortunately, are formulated in such a way that they can be interpreted in favor of both parties. Let's take, for example, Article 47 of the Law “On the Mass Media,” which defines the rights of a journalist: a correspondent has the right to collect information. And - period. Where is the line that a journalist should not cross?

— What are the main arguments of defenders and opponents?

— Supporters of Lena Letuchaya believe that a journalist has the right to freely enter the place where the food that is fed to people is prepared and make sure that this process is taking place in a civilized manner. Opponents of Letuchaya recall such a concept as a “public or public place” where a journalist has the right to freely collect information. And they ask a completely reasonable question: is the kitchen of a private establishment that engages in catering a public place? There is no single and clearly formulated legal opinion on this matter. This is where many questions arise.

— Let’s assume that the kitchen is still a public place...

- Yes, let’s say that the correspondent can go into the kitchen. Let's say he can use video recording, communicate with kitchen staff and inspect it for cleanliness and other sanitary standards. However, we cannot talk about rummaging through refrigerators and cabinets... There is another fine line here. For example, I think that this is more like either an inspection or a search. Having studied the law “On the Mass Media”, you will not find there “permission” for a journalist, who has the right to receive information from a citizen, to reach into someone else’s pocket and check the contents of his wallet. Or study, excuse me, the cleanliness of his socks or the degree of holes in his shoes.

— Important point: The film crew comes in wearing overalls.

— Having a robe, a cap and even a medical book is not an indulgence to enter the kitchen.

— You mentioned a video camera... Does it play some role?

— There is such a thing as the “right to personal image.” TV crews can film catering staff, even if the cooks and waiters don’t want to. But their images can be published and replicated only with their consent.

— What if Letuchaya comes into a hotel and picks up the receptionist?

— The hotel is not a government agency, not a press service. A hotel is, as a rule, a private organization; it has no obligation to provide information that, for example, civil servants are required to voice. If a person is being filmed and he says: “I am against it!”, you are obliged to respect the rights of the interlocutor. I would also note that the decor of every restaurant or hotel is, to one degree or another, a subject of copyright. As a designer, I can prohibit the reproduction of photographs of my interior. For example, because I think: someone will take and use my design move.

— Let’s summarize: does the Revizorro program violate laws or not?

— It is definitely impossible to say that the authors of the project are wrong or are breaking the law. Personally, I take a compromise position. I believe that a journalist has the right to access the kitchen, since it is not a sensitive facility. A merchant who manufactures products cannot classify information regarding the sanitary and epidemiological situation or other regulations. On the other hand, the concept of “trade secret” remains; any person has the right to private property and its inviolability. Also, as a lawyer, I believe that rummaging through cabinets, touching food, smelling it, picking at it with your fingers and taking it out of refrigerators and freezers is not entirely legal.

— What advice would you give to the producers of “Revizorro”?

— A representative of the supervisory or inspection body must be with them at all times. If, for example, he takes a representative of Rospotrebnadzor with him, then let this comrade climb through the cabinets, and let the film crew record the process.

— How can you explain such a meager number of Revizorro vessels? Either one lawsuit, or two...

— The transfer itself has no legal significance. This is an information product for consumers. The program is not a reason to be held accountable. In addition, having entered into a fight with any federal channel, the restaurateur finds himself in a losing situation. A person does not have the opportunity to answer adequately. Yes, perhaps in a year or two the TV people will admit that Revizorro was wrong, and the TV channel will be obliged to publish a refutation. And they will write about it in small print in the corner. Restaurateurs and hoteliers are well aware that the final effect will be small. If the broadcast of the program did not affect the profitability of the establishment, the owner will simply give up. The trial is a long, difficult and quite expensive procedure. It's easier to survive a moment of shame.

It’s official: “Fridays!” guide:

— The channel has a team of lawyers that deals only with the Revizorro project. Even before the start of filming, they worked out all the legal issues and carefully instructed the film crew. In addition to the law “On the Mass Media,” Lena Letuchaya is guided by Russian Government Decree No. 1036 “On approval of the Rules for the provision of public catering services,” obliging the contractor to “provide the consumer with the opportunity to familiarize themselves with the terms of service both in the hall and outside the service hall.” And the consumer has the right to receive " Additional information about the basic consumer properties and quality of the offered catering products, as well as about the conditions for preparing dishes.” In fact, the conditions for preparing dishes most often become the main reason why establishments do not pass the “Revizorro” inspection.

Another opinion: Sergey Zhorin, expert of “Revizorro-show”:

— In accordance with the Law “On the Mass Media,” a journalist has certain rights to visit organizations, institutions and obtain information by any means not prohibited by law. It must be understood that a journalist’s rights are somewhat expanded compared to the rights of an ordinary citizen. Usually restaurateurs say that a journalist is an outsider and is prohibited from entering the kitchen. If we follow the logic of restaurateurs, then in order for firefighters to get into the kitchen in the event of a fire, they must become part of the organization’s staff. The journalist performs his work as provided for by law and specified by the editorial assignment. He didn't just come to look into the pan.

Additionally, I looked at how the courts evaluate who is an outsider and who is not, and whether a person must be on the staff of the organization. I found many court decisions and rulings. In particular, unauthorized persons in the kitchen are employees of organizations that are not properly equipped. That is, equipment and the presence of a health book are primary.

I can say with confidence that it is clear and impeccable. She is not an outsider. She obtains information in accordance with the law “On the Mass Media”. Does not violate the rules and regulations governing access to the kitchen.

Court and case

A couple of months ago, the fast food chain Royal Burger (operating in the Amur Region, Khabarovsk Territory and Primorye) won a lawsuit against Revizorro. The cause of the litigation was an episode that aired on January 2, 2015. Letuchaya, having descended on the Vladivostok Royal Burger restaurant, said that the workers there were “poisoning people with machine oil,” “all the cakes have gone bad a long time ago,” and the markings on those they sell to guests have been removed. The Infinity FF company, which owns the Royal Burger chain, considered that all these words greatly influenced the reputation of its establishments. And she appealed to the Moscow Arbitration Court. He, in turn, ordered that all unflattering phrases be refuted, as well as the recording of the ill-fated program be deleted from the channel’s website. Having erased the video, the TV people and their lawyers continue to insist that they are right.

“We believe that there were no violations on the part of the film crew and the TV channel either in the specified episode or in subsequent ones. In this regard, we are not afraid of lawsuits from the organizations and enterprises mentioned in the stories of the program.

“I advise all restaurateurs to study the laws more carefully,” Flying, in turn, told the TV program. - And instead of justifying yourself, it would be better to clean up the kitchen of your establishment!

The wrong ones were attacked

Some people prefer to “solve cases” in court, while others prefer to use their fists.

Yaroslavl

The presenter visited a restaurant on the embankment. The employees of the establishment received the presenter, to put it mildly, inhospitably. They tried to kick her and the film crew out of the production workshop. Both sides had to call the police.

Anapa

Letuchaya and her film crew were attacked by employees of one of the restaurants, trying to take away the video camera at any cost. Anapa investigators refused to open a criminal case against the owner of the cafe. However, the Prosecutor General's Office personally took control of the investigation into the attack.

Murmansk

A security guard at the Yunost cafe attacked her after she discovered expired dumplings in the kitchen of the establishment during the filming of the next episode of the program. A police squad arrived at the scene of the incident. However, in the end, the regional department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs told journalists that they never received a statement from the film crew.

Omsk

Employees of the “Old Omsk” restaurant blocked the film crew’s path with a table. As a result, two cameras and a microphone were broken. Moreover, Letuchaya was doused twice cold water from a bucket.

Salekhard

Of course, this can be called a mere coincidence, but some are urban for visitors. Among those still working is the Victoria cafe. Despite the obscenities and threats from the owners of the establishment, Letuchaya, accompanied by two operators, began an inspection. When the film crew reached the foul-smelling toilet, the café workers' patience ran out. Cooks, security guards, the restaurant owner and even his wife literally kicked the TV crew out into the street, after which they attacked them with their fists, trying to take away the cameras.

Text: Mikhail Ryabikov and Anton Araslanov (Radio “KP”)

"Revizorro"
Wednesdays/18.00, Friday!

« »
Wednesdays/19.00, Friday!