Police send me a List of Property they stole. They also boast they violate Journalist Confidentiality.
Meanwhile the EU publishes an impotent Media Freedom Act!
On 9 August the European Commission proudly made the following announcement replete with Commissioners avowing journalists and their sources have extra protection. Is it worth anything? In my case police entered my property without any proper legal authority (as I found out). They not only seized my computers with drafts of articles and books on human rights laws and citizens’ freedoms under European laws, but then police proceeded to read and analyse my files in total violation of these laws.
Today, the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA) enters into application across the European Union. The EMFA brings many benefits for media companies, journalists, and citizens, offering media service providers greater legal certainty and enhancing their independence.
The EMFA is designed to strengthen media freedom, independence and pluralism within the EU’s internal market. It provides, among others, stronger protection for journalists, ensures adequate funding and editorial freedom for public service media, prevents unwarranted removal of media content by very large online platforms and establishes the European Board for Media Services.
Henna Virkkunen, Executive Vice-President for Tech Sovereignty, Security and Democracy, said: “EMFA’s entry into application marks a milestone in our efforts to foster a stronger and safer media environment in the EU. Media providers can enjoy more legal certainty, journalists will have greater protection, including from spyware and divulging their sources, and citizens will be able to enjoy a more pluralistic, independent media across the EU.”
Michael McGrath, Commissioner for Democracy, Justice and the Rule of Law, said: “Independent media are the backbone of any democracies. With the European Media Freedom Act entering into application, media and journalists across the EU gain unprecedented safeguards, and citizens can trust that the news they receive is driven by facts, not by business or political agenda.”
UK Foreign Secretary Letter
Just a week earlier I sent a letter to UK Foreign Secretary David Lammy with a copy to the police unit identified as responsible for the journalistic outrage. The next day the police sent me the following message:
English translation
PJFGP.Bru.Blanch-Witwas
Aug 1,
Hello Mr. Price,
On June 24, 2025, two searches were carried out at the following two addresses:
- rue xxxx - 1040 Etterbeek
- rue xxxx - 1040 Etterbeek.
These searches were carried out based on warrants issued by Investigating Magistrate HEUSGHEM.
Attached, you will find a copy of the various items seized during these searches. Once these items have been analyzed, the Investigating Magistrate will make a decision regarding their possible return.
Yours faithfully,
PJF Brussels - ECOFIN - Money Laundering Service
French Original
PJFGP.Bru.Blanch-Witwas
Aug 1,
Bonjour Monsieur Price,
En date du 24/06/2025, deux perquisitions ont en effet été réalisées aux deux adresses suivantes:
- rue xxxx - 1040 Etterbeek
- rue xxxx - 1040 Etterbeek.
Celles-ci l'ont été sur base de mandats délivrés par le Juge d'Instruction HEUSGHEM.
Vous trouverez en pièce-jointe une copie des divers biens qui ont été saisis lors de ces perquisitions. Une fois que ceux-ci auront été analysés, Madame Le Juge d'Instruction prendra une décision quant à leur éventuelle restitution.
Bien à vous,
PJF Bruxelles - ECOFIN - service blanchiment
Violations of European laws
Lawyers have checked about the mandate of the Investigating Judge Laurence Heusghem. It cooks the goose of whoever organized this raid!
The mandate was identified. The judge assured a Belgian legal official that the mandates in question refer to one person only — and it is not me.
I need the police or the judge to explain how then am I supposed to be the target of an armed police raid on my office and the police theft of my computers and papers. Do the police have freedom to raid all citizens without proper authorisation now if they say the magic word ‘money laundering’ about someone else? Where’s the money?
Thus the mandate for a raid is without foundation.
The police letter also roasts the prosecution’s goose further. It admits that the Judge or someone in the prosecutor’s office has authorized the police to be able to analyse my computers, backups and papers as long as they want. This is in total violation to the Europe-wide laws that protect the confidentiality of Journalists’ sources.
The police say that they are happily violating these laws and won’t even give me a date when they will return my property! They don’t answer my questions about legality or anyone else’s. Are they a State within a State?
Dysfunction and Dissonance
Let’s now turn to the European Union’s European Media Freedom Act, Regulation 2024/ 1083. It was activated today.
What does it say?
The protection of editorial independence is a precondition for exercising the activity of media service providers and their professional integrity in a safe media environment. Editorial independence is especially important for media service providers which provide news and current affairs content, given its societal role as a public good.
And
Journalists and editors are the main actors in the production and provision of trustworthy media content, in particular by reporting on news or current affairs. Sources are tantamount to ‘raw material’ for journalists: they are the basis for the production of media content, in particular news and current affairs content. It is therefore crucial that journalists’ ability to collect, fact-check and analyse information be protected, in particular information imparted or communicated confidentially, both offline and online, which relates to or is capable of identifying journalistic sources.
Media service providers and their editorial staff, in particular journalists, including those operating in non-standard forms of employment, such as freelancers, should be able to rely on a robust protection of journalistic sources and confidential communications, including protection against undue interference and the deployment of surveillance technologies. Without such protection, the free flow of sources to media service providers could be deterred and, thus, the free exercise of the economic activity by media service providers could be hindered to the detriment of the provision of information to the public, including on matters of public interest. As a result, journalists’ freedom to exercise their economic activity and fulfil their vital ‘public watchdog’ role could be jeopardised by such obstacles, thus affecting access to quality media services negatively.
The Belgian prosecutors also sent orders that my bank account should be blocked. I couldn’t pay my bills including utilities like electricity, gas and telephone. Did they also listen to my phone conversations? If so, on what authority?
Journalists as ‘public watchdogs’, have a duty to say when national and European laws are violated.
In this case the laws have no teeth. Some Belgian authorities not far from the EU’s headquarters are violating the basic protections of journalists with total impunity.
Is anyone doing anything about it?
What are journalists going to do about it?
What is the European Commission going to do?