"The evaluation found that the MFC has made notable contributions to media freedom and journalist safety over the past five years. It has played a role in encouraging some Member States to strengthen their media freedom policies and legislation. The MFC has also influenced state actors through diplo ... matic and advocacy efforts, maintaining high-level political attention on media freedom. Direct interventions, legal guidance, and engagement with embassy networks have contributed to journalist protection efforts at the local level. Furthermore, the MFC has strengthened multi-stakeholder coordination, bringing together governments, civil society, and legal experts. However, the evaluation also identified several areas for improvement. While the MFC provides a platform for dialogue and cooperation, its engagement with members on domestic media freedom policies is voluntary and lacks a structured approach for supporting and tracking commitments. Joint advocacy statements have a greater impact locally than internationally and are often perceived as lacking boldness and clear outcomes. While the MFC has addressed high-profile cases, its focus has sometimes overshadowed broader, systemic media freedom challenges. Engagement with Rights-Holders and organisations working on the ground has been limited, impacting the relevance and sustainability of its strategies. Coordination and collaboration within the MFC are foundational, particularly through diplomatic networks and the development of emergency visa schemes. However, decision-making is often reactive, affecting stakeholder trust. The MFC’s membership is perceived as predominantly Northern-led, and there is potential to leverage its diverse membership more effectively. Knowledge management and information-sharing need strengthening to ensure a deeper understanding of media freedom issues among Member States. The high-level legal expertise of the HLP is underutilised. Clarity around decision-making processes among Member States varies, influencing trust-based collaboration. While engagement at the local level through embassies is effective, it requires more structured guidance and support. Coordination between Member States, the CN, and the HLP remains limited in some areas. In terms of sustainability, the current governance model, particularly the annual rotation of Executive Group co-chairs, can present challenges for knowledge retention and continuity. Funding modalities are complex, leading to perceptions of uneven distribution and impacting trust and coordination. While the MFC has developed working relationships with similar coalitions, more formalised collaboration could maximise resource efficiency. The limited engagement with Rights-Holders influences the visibility and perceived effectiveness of the MFC’s work." (Key findings and conclusions, pages 2-3) more

"The ICT sector is one of few undeniable success stories in Afghanistan’s development over the past 12 years. In 2002, telecommunications services were virtually non-existent, restricted to a very small number of fixed-line connections and satellite communications were unaffordable to the general ... public. In 2014, four GSM operators and two fixed-line and code CDMA operators provide affordable access to telecommunications to 88% of the population, and about 3 million Afghans are connected to the Internet. This has been achieved thanks to commitments of national and international investors as well as a good public and private governance of the sector creating an enabling environment, including but not limited to policies, laws, and a transparent licensing regime." (Abstract) more