Washington, DC, USA
January 24, 2012
Your Excellencies:
The World Press Freedom Committee —an organization bringing together 45 press freedom groups from throughout the world— urges you to reject the three recommendations made by the government of Ecuador, which would gravely endanger or even eviscerate one of the most prestigious OAS institutions: the Office of the Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR).
The recommendations, included in the report of the Special Task Force charged with analyzing the future of the IACHR, are to be submitted tomorrow, January 25, at this year’s first meeting of the Permanent Council of Ambassadors of the OAS. The international press freedom community has unanimously rejected these recommendations calling them a deliberate attack on these fundamental freedoms of expression and of an independent press in the Americas.
The initiative proposes the following:
1. For the Office of the Rapporteur to cease publishing its independent annual report on freedom of expression in the region.
2. To bar the Office of the Rapporteur from raising its own funds.
3. For the Office of the Rapporteur to be subjected to a “code of conduct” dictated by the member countries.
The annual report of the Office of the Rapporteur has become the inter-American standard regarding freedom of the press and of expression, which includes both attacks on this fundamental right and the press freedom progress in the region. To try to do away with this fundamental document would be tantamount to silencing the messenger.
In recent years, thanks largely to the efforts of Rapporteur Catalina Botero, her office has consolidated its financial base and raised the necessary funds to fulfill the obligations set forth in its 1997 founding charter. Without this autonomous ability to maintain sound financing, the Office of the Rapporteur would be relegated to ostracism.
And finally, to force the Office of the Rapporteur to obey a code of conduct dictated by the very same member states it is required to monitor would establish an unacceptable conflict of interests that would end up gagging this indispensable institution.
International press freedom organizations are in general agreement that Latin America and the Caribbean are experiencing a recession regarding this fundamental human right. Attacks on the news media —censorship, judicial and physical intimidation, physical attacks or assassinations— have experienced an alarming increase in the region.
One of the countries that has exemplified this trend is precisely Ecuador, where the offensive led by the government of President Rafael Correa against media outlets that he perceives as critical of his acts and decisions has reached unprecedented levels in that Andean country. The Office of the Rapporteur has both recorded and denounced these attacks as it is required by the founding principles set forth when it was that established 15 years ago.
Therefore, our Committee urges Your Excellencies to reject this unacceptable attempt to silence an institution whose existence and vitality is essential for the respect of freedom of the press and of expression in the Western Hemisphere. Weakening those basic freedoms would seriously undermine continued observance of the other human rights in the Americas.
Respectfully,
Javier Sierra
Projects Director
World Press Freedom Committee
jsierra@wpfc.org
(IFEX-TMG) - 16 January 2012 - On the anniversary of the revolution, the International Freedom of Expression Exchange Tunisia Monitoring Group (IFEX-TMG), a coalition of 21 IFEX members, including the World Press Freedom Committee, urges the Tunisian government to revoke its recent controversial appointments giving media personnel close to the deposed President key posts in the public service media. The IFEX-TMG also further reiterates its call for journalists to be allowed to freely carry out their work, after another journalist was attacked during a demonstration last week.
A year ago when they swept the dictatorship of President Zine Abidine Ben Ali from power, Tunisian people set an extraordinary precedent throughout the region and beyond. By supporting free and independent media, the country's leadership would live up to the society's genuine aspirations and send a strong signal to other Arab Spring countries.
Tunisian journalists today won't accept the revival of either old corrupt practices or of patronage appointments of cronies of the former regime. A truly democratic and transparent media must be based on genuine consultations with all stakeholders.
On 9 January, the National Syndicate of Tunisian Journalists (SNJT) organised a demonstration in the Casbah protesting the controversial announcements. A number of civil society organisations and political parties also condemned the appointments made by Prime Minister Hamadi Jebali.
According to the Tunis Centre for Freedom of the Press, which also denounced the appointments, Sadeq Al-Bou'ban was appointed manager of the National TV Channel 1 after having managed the "purple" (or pro-Ben Ali) La 7 station. Amongst the other posts announced, Adnan Khathar, who engineered Ben Ali's 2009 "election" campaign, was appointed general manager of Tunisia's public television.
One of the key recommendations put forth by Tunisian free expression stakeholders during a conference organised by the IFEX-TMG in December in Tunis emphasised the importance of an independent public media and "the non-alignment" of those managing it.
"Rather than transform the public media into free, independent and professional institutions after it had served for years as merely a tool in the hands of the Ben Ali regime, the government's appointments has honoured Ben Ali's men in the media sector by awarding them key posts in the public service media. Many have perceived these appointments as the authority's attempt to instate individuals it can control in its effort to domesticate the media," said journalist Fahem Boukaddous of the Tunis Centre for Freedom of the Press.
"The government's decision is flawed and disturbing. Public service media exist to serve the public rather than political agendas, and those who lead public media must be nominated for their very ability to develop and defend independent information and programming," said Virginie Jouan, IFEX-TMG Chair.
The IFEX-TMG last week protested about assaults by plainclothes police on two women journalists during a demonstration on 4 January. The IFEX-TMG is further alarmed to hear reports that on 11 January, Sofiane Bin Hmida of Nessma TV was attacked by Ennahda activists while covering a sit-in at the interior ministry, according to the Agence Tunis Afrique Presse (TAP). Protesters wanted the head of internal security, another person associated with the former regime, to be fired.
For more information:
IFEX Tunisia Monitoring Group
Virginie Jouan, Chair
on behalf of the World Association of Newspapers and News Publishers (WAN-IFRA)
jouanvirginie@gmail.com
http://www.facebook.com/IFEXTMG
http://ifex.org/tunisia/tmg/
Arabic Network for Human Rights Information
ARTICLE 19
Bahrain Center for Human Rights
Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies
Canadian Journalists for Free Expression
Cartoonists Rights Network International
Egyptian Organization for Human Rights
Freedom House
Index on Censorship
International Federation of Journalists
International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions
International Press Institute
International Publishers Association
Journaliste en danger
Maharat Foundation (Skills Foundation)
Media Institute of Southern Africa
Norwegian PEN
World Association of Community Radio Broadcasters (AMARC)
World Association of Newspapers and News Publishers
World Press Freedom Committee
Writers in Prison Committee, PEN International
(IFEX-TMG) - 11 January 2012 - Despite promises by Tunisia's new government to uphold free expression, the International Freedom of Expression Exchange Tunisia Monitoring Group, a coalition of 21 IFEX members including the World Press Freedom Committee, is concerned that not enough is being done to effectively uphold this right in light of recent attacks on journalists and academics.
On 4 January, two women journalists Sana Farhat and Maha Ouelhezi were physically assaulted by plainclothes police in Tunis as they were covering a demonstration organised by university teachers outside the Ministry of Education. The teachers from Manouba University were protesting the month-long sit-in organised by Salafists campaigning for the right of niqab-clad women students to attend classes at the university. The month-long sit-in was lifted on 6 January with the niqab-wearing women vowing to continue their campaign.
While the prohibition on the hijab, the headscarf, was reversed after the revolution, the niqab, the face veil, remains prohibited in universities and public institutions.
Fatma Jegham, a professor at the Faculty of Fine Arts in Tunis was also assaulted for teaching a subject deemed by them "offensive to God." The professor was also targeted online and labelled immoral and an atheist. This follows a number of attacks by a group of Salafists who previously targeted Nessma TV for screening the film Persepolis and the debate that followed it, which was regarded as offensive.
"The series of attacks at universities and in public spaces remind us of the dark days of Ben Ali. As the Tunisian government takes strides towards consolidating democracy and open government, we urge them to exert efforts at also implementing their promises," said IFEX-TMG Chair Virginie Jouan, representing the World Association of Newspapers and News Publishers.
The National Syndicate of Tunisian Journalists (SNJT) organised a demonstration in the Casbah on 9 January to protest the attacks on the journalists, as well as controversial appointments by the government of public media heads.
While fully supporting the recommendation to enshrine freedom of expression in the new Constitution, the IFEX-TMG urges the relevant authorities to take immediate and concrete measures to protect freedom of expression, whether the right to carry out one's job as a journalist or through the right to express oneself freely during peaceful demonstrations.
The IFEX-TMG campaigns to raise awareness of free expression violations in Tunisia and to support independent journalists, writers, and civil society activists in their struggle to end censorship in the country.
IFEX Tunisia Monitoring Group
Virginie Jouan, Chair
on behalf of the World Association of Newspapers and News Publishers (WAN-IFRA)
jouanvirginie (@) gmail.com
http://www.facebook.com/IFEXTMG
Arabic Network for Human Rights Information
ARTICLE 19
Bahrain Center for Human Rights
Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies
Canadian Journalists for Free Expression
Cartoonists Rights Network International
Egyptian Organization for Human Rights
Freedom House
Index on Censorship
International Federation of Journalists
International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions
International Press Institute
International Publishers Association
Journaliste en danger
Maharat Foundation (Skills Foundation)
Media Institute of Southern Africa
Norwegian PEN
World Association of Community Radio Broadcasters (AMARC)
World Association of Newspapers and News Publishers
World Press Freedom Committee
Writers in Prison Committee, PEN International
Washington, USA, Dec. 23, 2011 — The World Press Freedom Committee of Freedom House (www.wpfc.org) —an organization bringing together 43 press freedom groups from throughout the world— protests adoption yesterday by the Argentine Congress of a law to regulate the manufacturing, commercialization and distribution of newsprint as a clear violation of the American Convention on Human Rights.
The Aug. 27, 2010 Bill, passed yesterday by the Senate following the House of Representatives’ approval, declares “the manufacturing, commercialization and distribution of newsprint as a matter of public interest.” The measure allows the State to become the majority stockholder of Papel Prensa S.A. —the only company of its kind in Argentina— and, unprecedentedly, to take over a private entity without previous consultation with its stockholders or owners.
“This initiative is a violation of Art. 32 of the Argentine Constitution and of Art. 13.3 of the American Convention on Human Rights,” said Javier Sierra, WPFC-FH’s projects director. “The measure, as part of years of official harassment against the news media perceived as critical of the government, will clearly allow the State to influence arbitrarily the distribution of a material essential to the existence of a free and independent press in Argentina.”
Art. 13.3 of the American Convention establishes that, “The right of expression may not be restricted by indirect methods or means, such as the abuse of government or private control over newsprint […] or by any other means tending to impede the communication and circulation of ideas and opinion.”
Also, the Declaration of Principles on Freedom of Expression, an inter-American document Argentina has also signed, holds that, “Prior censorship, direct or indirect interference in or pressure exerted upon any expression […] must be prohibited by law.”
In its 2010 Annual Report, the Office of the Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression, aware of the severity of the bill at the time being debated in the Argentine Congress, expected that, “Given their notable importance for the exercise of freedom of expression, the matters mentioned herein are resolved in keeping with international standards on the subject.”
The hopes of the Office of the Special Rapporteur and those of the world press freedom movement were dashed yesterday by the Argentine Congress. Under these circumstances, our Committee urges the government of President Cristina Fernández, the promoter of this legislation, to exercise extreme caution so that these new State powers do not turn into a toll of censorship.
Diario Clarín of Buenos Aires, the world's second largest Spanish-language newspaper and one of the most influential in Latin America, has published an op-ed article by WPFC-FH's Javier Sierra about the state of press freedom in Argentina.
Because of President Cristina Fernández's recent landslide re-election victory, we fear her government harassment against independent media will only increase. Therefore, we feel wide distribution of this article will somehow help deter this temptation to aggravate an already disturbing situation.
An English translation follows.
A Failing Grade
Special for Clarín Newspaper
By Javier Sierra
As Europe peers into the abyss and the US deals with the worst recession since the Great Depression, Argentina has been able to maneuver so far through the global tempest. At least for now, the Argentine ship has made it to port safe and sound.
Thanks to this economic performance, President Cristina Fernández won re-election in a landslide victory of historic proportions. But amidst the euphoria, we should recall that her government must still deal with a failing grade: the regression of press freedom in Argentina.
According to Freedom House's 2011 annual report on press freedom in the world, at the beginning of the presidency of Néstor Kirchner, Argentina was ranked No. 35. Now its score is down to No. 51. This 16-place drop is one of the steepest falls in the global index over this period of time.
Freedom House identifies four main causes of the decline:
Since 2008, Grupo Clarín, owner of Clarín newspaper, has recorded more than 300 cases of government harassment against them. Perhaps the gravest took place March 27 when workers in a union sympathetic to the Fernández administration blocked distribution of that day's editions of both the Clarín and La Nación newspapers. Just a few days ago, journalist Jorge Lanata was insulted and rocks were thrown at him by government sympathizers at a public meeting; and Minister of Economy Amado Boudou accused Clarín of being “an enemy of the Argentine people's common interests.” This long list goes on.
Throughout this obfuscation and permanent feuding with the independent media, the Fernández government ignores a fundamental aspect of the controversy: Its members chose to enter public life, implicitly accepting that they would be major targets of criticism by the country's news media and the rest of society. It is a basic tenet of democracy that public officials, especially heads of state, must grow a thick skin and accept that criticisms will be hurled at them.
The inter-American justice system, in which Argentina takes part, considers this principle a basic element of transparency and good governance. The Inter-American Court of Human Rights, in the Herrera Ulloa vs. Costa Rica case, ruled that, “In a democratic society, public officials are more exposed to the rest of society's scrutiny and criticism. This different protection standard is explained by their voluntary acceptance of a more demanding scrutiny. Their activities, therefore, fall outside the private sphere and enter the public debate sphere.”
Further, in its 1994 Annual Report, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights said, “Freedom of expression and opinion is the touchstone of all freedoms to which the United Nations is consecrated and one of the soundest guarantees of modern democracy.”
In the climate of hostility toward news media considered critical of the government, those who suffer most are not Clarín or La Nación. It is the Argentine public, whose right to be fully informed on issues of social relevance is thwarted. A supine or spineless press could not fulfill that obligation to society.
That is why President Fernández and her government need to improve their failing press freedom grade, so that they can guide the Argentine ship of state into a safely democratic harbor.
Javier Sierra is Projects Director of the World Press Freedom Committee of Freedom
Washington, USA, Nov. 14, 2011 — The World Press Freedom Committee of Freedom House —an organization bringing together 43 press freedom groups from throughout the world— has submitted an amicus curiae brief to Ecuador's Constitutional Court in support of a motion of unconstitutionality originated by Fundamedios of Ecuador against criminal defamation laws.
The brief, written by press freedom expert Kevin Goldberg, esq. puts forward a detailed legal analysis that contests any need to criminalize defamation sanctions. The amicus brief is based on broad international jurisprudence - especially that of the inter-American justice system- that holds that such sanctions must be dealt with by civil, not criminal, courts.
According to the brief, “Laws punishing speech that reports on, comments about or criticizes public officials have no place in a democratic society. They are intended only to punish news media, journalists or other persons who may seem to have insulted or disparaged a public leader or official.”
Fundamedios decided to submit its motion of unconstitutionality (case #0026-11-IN) in view of the alarming regression of press freedom currently in Ecuador.
“In recent years, there has been a historic growth in cases of criminal defamation charges against Ecuadorian journalists,” said Javier Sierra, WPFC-FH's Projects Director. “The current tide of judicial harassment cases that takes advantage of these criminal laws has intensified repression and self-censorship of the country's independent media.”
In Freedom House's 2010 press freedom report, Ecuador has increased its negative rating by 11 points since 2007, and now it is rated “partly free,” in 52nd place of world rankings.
WPFC-FH's stand is based on the Draconian conditions in which Ecuadorian independent journalists must work to fill their obligations to inform the public on matters of social relevance.
The brief also focuses on another fundamental press freedom principle supported by the inter-American jurisprudence: That public figures should receive less, not more, protection from alleged insults than ordinary citizens. Special protection, often exclusively for a select few public officials, dates back at least to the Roman Empire, which instituted it to shield the Emperor from criticism.
The climate of hostility against independent media and its source at top of the Ecuadorian government is reaching dangerous levels even for the physical integrity of press freedom advocates. Recently, after denouncing abuses against press freedom in his country, before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights in Washington, Fundamedios' Executive Director César Ricaurte received death threats.
This is yet one more reason why Ecuador's Constitutional Court should make a clear reaffirmation of democracy, transparency and press freedom by upholding the motion of unconstitutionality of Article 230 of Ecuador's Criminal Code.
The World Press Freedom Committee of Freedom House is an international umbrella organization that brings together 43 journalistic groups -print and broadcast, labor and management, journalists, editors, publishers and owners on five continents- united in the defense and promotion of press freedom. Among other advocacy activities, WPFC-FH focuses on the reform or elimination of insult and criminal defamation laws, which are powerful censorship tools used to stifle the news media throughout the world.
(IFEX-TMG) - As Tunisia is preparing to hold historic elections on 23 October, the profound reform of the media sector is yet to take place, despite genuine initiatives taken and valid recommendations made by competent groups and voices. Yet, time is of the essence to effectively support freedom of expression by adopting a series of positive measures and setting high standards for the future.
In this context, the International Freedom of Expression Exchange Tunisia Monitoring Group (IFEX-TMG), a coalition of 21 free expression groups, including the World Press Freedom Committee, urges the interim government to authorise without any further delay the 12 radio and five television services recommended by the National Authority to Reform Information and Communication (INRIC), respectively on 29 June and 7 September, to start broadcasting.
In its April mission report, the IFEX-TMG had already recommended "the rapid assignment of frequencies for new services that can add to the plurality, diversity and independence of services available" in the run-up to elections. This process, which is critical in the extraordinary times Tunisia is living through, needs to be unlocked.
In the course of a two-day strategy workshop held in Tunis on 27 and 28 September, Tunisian media and civil society participants invited by the IFEX-TMG shared their assessment of the media landscape nine months after the revolution and formulated recommendations and action plans to guide the reform of the media sector, create the legal and institutional framework on freedom of expression, promote the development of the broadcast and print media sectors, and protect the Internet from the resurgence of censorship.
Among the priorities highlighted by the participants were:
• the promotion of strong constitutional and legal guarantees for freedom of expression rights, and access to information,
• the establishment of an independent regulatory body that can effectively promote the independence and growth of a public service, private, commercial and community broadcasting sector,
• the adoption of positive measures that support the development and reach of independent print, broadcast and online media,
• the promotion of a digital culture, by supporting blogging, online activism and citizen journalism,
• and the empowerment and protection of journalists dedicated to quality journalism that can serve and inform the public at large.
The IFEX-TMG members wish to acknowledge the outstanding dedication of media professionals, civil society groups and consultative bodies in reforming the media sector and achieving reforms and professionalism after decades of repression and hardship. Their ambition and vision for their profession and society can no longer be held hostage by those whose only desire is to stall the reform process to protect their own interest.
Among the civil society groups leading sessions at the workshop were the Association tunisienne des femmes démocrates (ATFD), the Centre de Tunis pour la liberté de presse, l'Observatoire pour la liberté de la presse, de l'édition et de la création (OLPEC), le Syndicat national des journalistes tunisiens (SNJT) and le Syndicat tunisien des radios libres (STRL).
The workshop was led by the World Association of Newspapers and News Publishers (WAN-IFRA) in cooperation with the World Association of Community Radio Broadcasters (AMARC), Index on Censorship and ARTICLE 19.
IFEX Tunisia Monitoring Group
Rohan Jayasekera, Chair
c/o Index on Censorship
London
United Kingdom
rj (@) indexoncensorship.org
Phone: +44 20 7324 2522
Arabic Network for Human Rights Information
ARTICLE 19
Bahrain Center for Human Rights
Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies
Canadian Journalists for Free Expression
Cartoonists Rights Network International
Egyptian Organization for Human Rights
Freedom House
Index on Censorship
International Federation of Journalists
International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions
International Press Institute
International Publishers Association
Journaliste en danger
Maharat Foundation (Skills Foundation)
Media Institute of Southern Africa
Norwegian PEN
World Association of Community Radio Broadcasters
World Association of Newspapers and News Publishers
World Press Freedom Committee
Writers in Prison Committee, PEN International
The Plaintiff Invoked the Repressive 1966 Press Law, a Relic from the Franco Dictatorship
Washington, DC, USA, Sept. 29, 2011 — The World Press Freedom Committee of Freedom House (www.wpfc.org) — an organization bringing together 43 press freedom groups from throughout the world — applauds the decision by a Madrid First Recourse Tribunal declaring null and void an honor protection lawsuit against Leer Magazine, a literary publication. The Committee regrets that the plaintiff has decided to appeal the decision.
Judge Eduardo Fontán Silva, in his decision released on Sept. 20, rejected the lawsuit brought forward by Juan Cotarelo García for alleged defamatory statements expressed by deceased author Pablo Lizcano. The writer, in his book titled “The 1956 generation: College Students against Franco,” first published in 1981, quoted press reports from that era stating that the plaintiff’s mother, who passed away in 2002, had an affair with an infamous chief of police during the Franco dictatorship.
The lawsuit was filed in February 2008, two years after Leer Magazine’s publishing arm, Leer/Documentos, published a second edition identical to the original one. The plaintiff demanded 100,000 euros in reparations, the publication of the sentence in four different newspapers and the recall of the book.
Invoking the 1966 Press Law — still in force even though it dates back to Franco’s Spain — Cotarelo demanded sanctions against the author’s widow, Rosa Montero, and against the publishing house, taking advantage of the law’s abusive “cascade effect.”
The plaintiff, however, waited for almost three decades after the original edition was published to sue the defendants and did not take advantage of the author’s offer to correct any possible mistakes before the second edition was released. Also, he invoked one of the most backward and repressive laws in Spanish legislation.
In his decision, Judge Fontán Silva rejected the lawsuit because the statute of limitations had expired 27 years after the first original edition was published.
“Our Committee believes the lawsuit is not the only thing that has expired but also the very law that was used to try to silence Leer Magazine,” said Javier Sierra, WPFC-FH’s Projects Director. “The 1966 Press Law, also known as Franco’s Press Law, is a repressive statute created in a repressive time that ignores the most basic international postulates of press freedom.”
The 1966 Press Law — as well as the 1982 Honor, Privacy and Right to a Respectful Image Law — stain the Spanish society’s exemplary democratic advances by impeding the free flow of ideas and thoughts. They also foster self-censorship among journalists and authors who fear being forced to pay devastating fines because of just doing their jobs.
These two laws were also invoked in 1995 to indict José Luis Gutiérrez, the current editor of Leer Magazine, for alleged crimes against the honor of the King of Morocco. The Moroccan Crown brought the charges forward because of an article published in the no longer existing Diario 16 newspaper, of which Gutiérrez was editor-in-chief. The lawsuit cost him 14 years of unjust judicial harassment that culminated last year when the European Court of Human Rights ruled that the Spanish state had violated Gutiérrez’s fundamental rights.
The Committee, therefore, urges Spanish lawmakers to abrogate these two statutes to bring the country’s legislation up to international press freedom standards and to provide an example to the many other nations that preserve these kinds of repressive laws in their books.
Sept. 2, 2011
His Excellency Hullanta Humala Tasso
President of the Republic of Peru
Presidential Palace
Jirón de la Unión s/n Primera Cuadra
Lima, Peru
Your Excellency:
The World Press Freedom Committee of Freedom House —an organization bringing together 43 press freedom groups all over the world— respectfully urges you to sign into law Bill 4581/2010, that eliminates prison sentences in defamation proceedings involving freedom of expression. Such a measure would not only be an important step in strengthening press freedom in Peru, but would send an important signal that the commitments to human rights and democracy in Peru, which you expressed so passionately in your campaign, will indeed be a hallmark of your leadership.
Furthermore, WPFC-FH urges you to consider this positive first step as just the beginning of a reform process that completely decriminalizes defamation, libel and slander statutes, in conformity with the decisions and recommendations of the inter-American justice system.
In July, the Peruvian Congress reformed Art. 132 of the Criminal Code by eliminating prison sentences, but it retained other punitive sanctions, such as up to 365 days worth of salary in fines and 156 days of community service, which we consider exorbitant.
Also, Articles 130 and 131 —which establish sanctions for slander and libel as crimes, respectively— were left intact for all types of cases, including those related to press freedom.
Based on the decisions and recommendations of the inter-American system, we believe the reform of Art. 132 is necessary but that is clearly only the first step.
The Inter-American Court of Human Rights, in its May 2, 2008 Kímel vs. Argentina decision, by which it ordered the State to reform its criminal laws dealing with slander and libel, ruled that, “The Criminal Code is the most restrictive means to establish responsibilities in any illicit behavior (…) The ample interpretation of libel and calumny may attempt against the principle of minimum intervention and the ultima ratio concept in criminal law.”
In the July 2, 2004 Herrera Ulloa vs. Costa Rica case, the Court ordered the State to declare the criminal sentenced null and void and to pay compensatory damages to the journalist because his free exercise of freedom of expression had produced “a deterrent, chilling and inhibiting effect on all those who practice journalism.”
In recent years, Peruvian officials and other public figures have notably increased the recourse to the afore-mentioned Criminal Code articles, which has subjected several journalists not only to intense judicial harassment but also to prison sentences for simply fulfilling their duty to keep the public informed. The list of these victims of the abuse of these laws is too long to cite in this letter.
In any case, and also according to the inter-American justice system, defamation, slander and libel must be dealt with in civil courts. Furthermore, sanctions for those offenses must avoid abusive or exorbitant fines or compensatory damages, which clearly constitute a gagging mechanism against press freedom.
Therefore, Your Excellency, we reiterate our urging that you sign Bill 4581/2010 into law as soon as possible and, by means of your legislative influence, that you work with Congress so that Peru can join other Latin American nations that have already reformed their defamation laws to meet the standards of a modern, transparent and participative democracy.
Respectfully,
Javier Sierra
Projects Director
World Press Freedom Committee of Freedom House
August 17, 2011
The Rt. Hon. David Cameron
Prime Minister
10 Downing Street
London SW1A 2AA
Great Britain
Dear Prime Minister Cameron:
The Committee to Protect Journalists is gravely concerned about the steps to curb recent riots in the United Kingdom that are under consideration by your government. These measures would set alarming precedents that hinder press freedom and the free flow of information.
During the August 10 House of Commons debate to address riots in the U.K., you stated that the British government would investigate new ways to stop and control communications on websites and social networks and, in response to a question, you declared that media organizations had a responsibility to hand over raw footage to the authorities.
CPJ, an independent, nonpartisan organization dedicated to defending the rights of journalists worldwide, urges you reconsider this position. As repressive states around the world, including China and Iran, take solace in your expressed intent to restrict communications, it is vital that you continue to uphold high standards of freedom.
There is no shortage of examples that demonstrate how repressive governments have seized on the riots as an opportunity to rebuke Britain. As soon as riots broke out, Iranian officials demanded that the U.K. government exercise "restraint" in dealing with rioters, offered to send a delegation to investigate human rights violations, and complained that the U.N. had been silent about the situation. In Russia, there have been comparisons between the riots and the protests in Libya. An opinion article in China's official People's Daily newspaper referred to the riots as a case in which the West is "tasting the bitter fruit" after championing Internet freedom. Syria has also accused your government of hypocrisy.
In light of such defiance of the U.K.'s moral authority on human rights, we urge you to clarify the intent behind your statement, spell out any planned actions you may take, and reaffirm your government's commitment to protecting free expression. Failure to do so would gravely undermine global efforts to defend human rights and would provide authoritarian regimes with arguments they will use to justify censorship and surveillance.
Video footage demonstrates that journalists in Britain already face physical danger and intimidation when covering public disorder. As both the BBC and commercial television outlets have stated, the proposal that media companies hand over raw footage creates a further and immediate risk to journalists' safety. To declare that journalists have a responsibility to effectively act as the eyes and ears of law enforcement profoundly compromises their status as independent observers.
New controls on online expression with the misguided aim of deterring social unrest further risk hampering the work of journalists. Social media and mobile services are vital tools in reporting current events and in providing the knowledge that citizens badly need in uncertain conditions. CPJ's experience defending press freedom around the world indicates that censorship is an ineffective means to address social upheaval which can directly impact the flow of information.
For example, censorship of email and social networking sites was pervasive in Tunisia under Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali, as it has been in many repressive states. But in 2010, the Tunisian Internet Agency took the effort one step further, redirecting Tunisian users to fake, government-created login pages for Google, Yahoo, and Facebook. From these pages, authorities stole usernames and passwords. When Tunisian online journalists began filing reports on the uprising, the state used their login data to delete the material.
You have indicated that you are including police and intelligence services in consultations about these potential restrictions, but we ask that you also include journalists, news organizations, press freedom advocates, and Internet users, whose work could be affected either by their sources of information being limited or by them being subjected to censorship themselves.
We believe additional laws are unnecessary. There are already laws on the books that criminalize incitement to violence, including expressions online. The police also have at their disposal a clearly delineated process for obtaining evidence from media organizations in response to a judge's order. In the wake of this deplorable wave of violence, your administration should target those who are alleged to have engaged in criminal activity and stand firm in your protection of accepted principles of freedom of expression, due process, and editorial independence.
Your government should also take into account that any new measures to control social media or the Internet may be in violation of Article 10 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights, to which the U.K. is party and which strictly defines the scope of any restriction to freedom of expression.
We urge you to consider these issues as a matter of urgency. The U.K. should distance itself from responses taken in repressive countries to social unrest and instead, at this moment, reaffirm its historical commitment to freedom of expression and of the press. Such a commitment would inspire those who fight for democracy around the world while undermining the arguments of authoritarian rulers who seek to squelch freedom of expression in moments of crisis.
Sincerely,
Joel Simon
Executive Director
Washington, USA, July 27, 2011 - The World Press Freedom Committee of Freedom House —an organization bringing together 43 press freedom groups from throughout the world— expresses its concern over the alarming attempt of Ecuador's President Rafael Correa to seek prison terms for news media executives involved with criticisms of him. This is a central feature in a new court case, in which El Universo newspaper has also been fined an astounding $40 million over a critical opinion piece.
On July 20, Judge Juan Paredes ruled for President Correa, who had sued El Universo, its three publishers —brothers Carlos, César and Nicolás Pérez— and columnist Emilio Palacio for insulting the office of the President in an opinion piece published Feb. 6. All four have been sentenced to three years in prison.
The piece did indeed include tough language, and even unsubstantiated allegations. Palacios wrote that President Correa ordered to open fire on "a hospital full of civilians and innocent people." He also accused Correa of "crimes against humanity." Correa's all-out legal offensive against El Universo threatens to put the newspaper, with its hundreds of media workers, out of business.
The Pérez brothers offered a public apology to President Correa and asked him to set its terms. President Correa rejected that offer and vowed to appeal the sentence to demand the full $80 million in damages he had originally sought.
“In the midst of this judicial obfuscation and apparent obsession over what others think or say about him, President Correa is neglecting a fundamental aspect of this controversy,” said Javier Sierra, WPFC of FH Projects Director. “He himself chose to immerse himself into public life and tacitly accepted to be the main target of the slings and arrows of the country's news media and the rest of society. This is a basic tenet of democracy: public officials, especially heads of states, must grow a thick skin and accept the criticisms that are hurled at them —even if they may, of course, seek reasonable civil damages for libelous statements.”
President Correa's general inability to withstand criticism has turned him into a regular of the country's courts of law. In May 2007, he sued a member of the board of directors of La Hora newspaper because he had the audacity to call the President's actions “shameful.” In March, Correa sued two investigative journalists who wrote a book titled “Big Brother” revealing alleged murky schemes by his brother. And in 2010, Correa arbitrarily got involved in yet another criminal suit against columnist Palacio, seeking the stiffest available penalty against the journalist.
By suing El Universo under Art. 230 of the Criminal Code, also known as desacato law, President Correa has joined the list of some of the region's most autocratic leaders, who often and painfully invoked this undemocratic statute turning expressions of opinion into crimes. Desacato, or insult, laws were exported by the Spanish empire to Latin America and the Caribbean, and dictatorial regimes in the 1970s and 1980s updated and brandished them with gusto.
President Correa's actions contravene the rulings of the Inter-American justice system and the spirit of the American Convention on Human Rights, of which Ecuador is a signatory. The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights has commented that desacato laws “conflict with the belief that freedom of expression and opinion is 'the touchstone of all freedoms to which the United Nations is consecrated' and 'one of the soundest guarantees of modern democracy'.”
And the Commission added: “The desacato laws are an illegitimate restriction to freedom of expression” and their use “to protect the honor of public functionaries acting in their official capacities unjustifiably grants a right to protection to public officials that is not available to other members of society. This distinction inverts the fundamental principle in a democratic system which holds the government subject to controls, such as public scrutiny, in order to preclude or control abuse of its coercive powers.”
President Correa's chronic inability to deal with criticism, even misguided or inaccurate, reveals a stubborn rejection of some of the most basic tenets of democracy. His fondness of jousting with his critics and all-out offensives to put them out of business and out of the public arena denotes unwillingness to accept democratic rules of the game.
WPFC of HR urges the Ecuadorian justice system to respect the country's inter-American commitments and, in dealing with the presidential appeal to aggravate this already excessive sentence, to recall that President Correa is a public official who must be willing to accept criticism without abusive resort to his country's court system. It is one thing for him to seek reasonable civil damages for false or exaggerated allegations, but it is quite another for him to invoke the criminal code in an attempt to imprison critics who, in this instance, were prepared to apologize.
The International Freedom of Expression Exchange Tunisia Monitoring Group (IFEX-TMG), a coalition of 21 IFEX members including the World Press Freedom Committee of Freedom House, is urging action to prevent any repeat of recent violent crackdowns on demonstrators and journalists in the run up to scheduled constitutional elections in October.
The IFEX-TMG's concerns deepened after a statement by Interim Prime Minister Béji Caïd Essebsi in which he accused journalists of stirring up trouble.
Security forces allegedly assaulted demonstrators protesting government policies on 15 July, and journalists from a variety of media corporations covering the incidents were also allegedly targeted. Blaming journalists for violence and protests is a dangerous accusation and is a dark reminder of the tactics used by the former regime to penalise the independent media.
The assault, as well as the subsequent statement by the Prime Minister, contrast greatly with the many promises the Prime Minister and the interim government have made to ensure free expression in the run up to the constitutional elections, currently scheduled for 23 October.
"When IFEX-TMG members met Prime Minister Essebsi in April, he stated his conviction that a free press is key to a successful democratic transition in Tunisia. Yet a free press cannot be achieved, nor can a successful democratic transition, when journalists are attacked with impunity," said Virginie Jouan, representing the World Association of Newspapers and News Publishers (WAN-IFRA).
"As we did in April, the IFEX-TMG today urges the government to guarantee the safety and security of all media professionals. The perpetrators of the latest attacks against journalists must be brought to justice," she added.
According to journalist Fahem Boukadous, the attacks this month - as well as in May when journalists were assaulted on Avenue Habib Bourguiba - point to what he termed a "counterrevolution and an attempt by the old guard to return to the media and thereby do away with the gains of the revolution." Boukadous, imprisoned under the former regime until the revolution, is co-founder of the Centre de Tunisie pour la libèrté de la presse, which monitors attacks on the press.
Last month, the IFEX-TMG published its report "The Scars of Oppression Run Deep: Assessing the Critical Requirements for Freedom of Expression in Tunisia's Democratic Transition", which asserted the need for a free and independent media as well as a strong and democratic civil society to ensure a smooth and successful transition towards democracy. The report was the culmination of the IFEX-TMG's eighth mission to Tunisia, led by WAN-IFRA, and its first formal mission after the fall of deposed President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali.
"Tunisians have been consciously scrutinising the interim government's policies as the date of the constitutional elections approaches. The media have a vital role to play in ensuring that the revolution bears fruit. We urge the government to make good on its words, and respect the justified demands of the Tunisian people for freedom, equality and dignity," said IFEX-TMG Chair Rohan Jayasekera of Index on Censorship.
Washington, USA, July 18, 2011 — The World Press Freedom Committee of Freedom House (www.wpfc.org) —an organization bringing together 43 press freedom groups from throughout the world— denounces the unrelenting judicial harassment that for many years has been inflicted on the Paraguayan daily ABC Color, including the recent criminal defamation case against journalist Sandra López.
The new attempt to silence ABC Color seemed to culminate on June 30, when Judge Manuel Aguirre acquitted López in the criminal defamation suit brought forward by celebrity politician and entrepreneur Zunilda Castiñeira, who had felt her honor insulted by an opinion article published by the journalist in 2009. The plaintiff had demanded two and a half years in prison and the payment of US$100,000 in reparations.
The article linked Castiñeira with several allegedly corrupt initiatives, including a preferential treatment of her telecommunications company by state regulators and her family ties to two alleged drug traffickers, including her former husband, who was murdered.
Judge Aguirre finally ruled that the López article was based on “truthful information that the defendant’s attorneys have corroborated” and added that the journalist “had not overstepped the limits [of press freedom] because she had not affected Castiñeira’s honor or reputation.”
The plaintiff, however, has vowed to appeal the sentence and threatened López by saying, “I have the wisdom of a snake” and “when it comes to defending my honor […], my venom can be lethal.”
“The charges against Sandra López are a new example of the abuse of Paraguay’s Criminal Code by officials and other public figures who feel attacked by the news media’s scrutiny,” said Javier Sierra, WPFC-FH’s projects director. “This judicial harassment is taking a very heavy toll on the news media’s capacity to fulfill their obligation to keep the public informed about matters of social relevance.”
ABC Color, Paraguay’s largest and most influential daily, has been the favorite target of the country’s public figures. In 2010 alone, the newspaper and its staff were the subject of at least eight criminal defamation suits, according to Freedom House’s Freedom of the Press Report. This abuse has reached such extremes Paraguay is just one single point from falling into the “Not Free” category of the Freedom House ranking, right next to countries such as Pakistan, Liberia and Cambodia.
Also, this judicial harassment against ABC Color and other news media violates the standards and jurisprudence of the inter-American system. The Inter-American Court of Human Rights has ruled the following:
In a democratic society, public officials are more exposed to the rest of society’s scrutiny and criticism. This different protection standard is explained by their voluntary acceptance of a more demanding scrutiny. Their activities, therefore, fall outside the private sphere and enter the public debate sphere. The reason for this more demanding standard has to do with his or her public activities and not with personal qualities.
Castiñeira and a long list of officials and public figures who have taken ABC Color to court need to understand that by accepting to be part of the country’s public life, they also need to agree to the news media’s scrutiny into their behavior.
WPFC of FH urges the court that would preside over the possible appeal of the decision to again declare the case null and void and the Congress to follow the example of several other Latin American countries and the recommendations of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights to decriminalize defamation sanctions.
June 24, 2011
His Excellency Ilham Aliyev
President
Republic of Azerbaijan
19 Istiglaliyat St.
370066 Baku, Azerbaijan
Your Excellency:
The World Press Freedom Committee of Freedom House —an organization representing 45 press freedom groups from around the world— welcomes the long-overdue release from prison of Azerbaijani journalist Eynulla Fatullayev and urges you and the pertinent judicial authorities to immediately free two social media users, Bakhtiyar Hajiyev and Jabbar Savalan, who were unfairly imprisoned earlier in the year.
Messrs. Fatullayev, Hajiyev and Savalan have all been the victims of the same abuses of authority and judicial harassment Azerbaijani officials have historically used to silence their critics. In all instances, and many others in the past, concocted charges have been leveled on dissidents and critical journalists who have demanded transparency and truthfulness from public officials. It’s high time for Azerbaijan to acknowledge that in the absence of press freedom and freedom of expression, democracy will continue to suffer.
Mr. Fatullayev was charged with criminal defamation and given a combined 10-year prison sentence in 2007 stemming from controversial articles he wrote about the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. After several international press freedom groups, including WPFC of FH, put pressure on the Azerbaijani government for his release, in April 2010, his case went before the European Court of Human Rights, which ruled in favor of the journalist and ordered the State to free him “immediately.”
Although the Court determined that “the severity of the penalty imposed on him had constituted a grossly disproportionate restriction of his freedom of expression,” Azerbaijani authorities refused to obey the order, charged him with drug possession and added two and a half years to his original sentence. The new allegations were widely viewed by the international press freedom community as a fabrication to keep Mr. Fatullayev behind bars.
The defiance of Azerbaijani authorities re-ignited the resolve of local and international organizations to free Mr. Fatullayev, including a mission to Baku led by Article XIX, Freedom House and others on September of 2010, and a more recent global amnesty Twitter action that flooded the country’s bureaucracy with calls for his immediate release. Finally, on May 28, he was freed as part of a general amnesty for political prisoners coinciding with Azerbaijan’s Republic Day.
Freedom of expression, however, continues to be a dangerous practice in Azerbaijan. At least two social media users remain in prison because of their defiance of the government.
On May 18, pro-democracy activist Bakhtiyar Hajiyev was sentenced to two years in prison on the charge of alleged evasion of military service, but which we believe is a purely political attempt to silence him. Mr. Hajiyev, a Harvard-graduate who returned to his country a year before his arrest to fight for democracy, had declared his candidacy for parliament, and strongly criticized the authorities via his Facebook page, which he used to try and organize a mass pro-democracy protest.
Under similar circumstances, on Feb. 25, 20-year-old activist Jabbar Savalan was arrested on his way home from a political rally in Sumgayit and charged with narcotics possession with intent to supply. Local press freedom groups have described the charges as a plot to silence him after Mr. Savalan also used his Facebook page to call for a “Day of Rage” in Baku coinciding with the historic pro-democracy demonstrations in Egypt. On May 4, he was found guilty of drug trafficking and sentenced to two and a half years in prison.
Mr. President, we urge you to use your powers of influence to gain the release of Messrs. Hajiyev and Savalan and to undertake the necessary legal reforms to guarantee the members of the media the necessary environment to keep the public informed without risking their freedom or bankruptcy.
Respectfully,
Paula Schriefer
Director of Advocacy
Freedom House
Javier Sierra
Projects Director
WPFC of FH
Enclosure:
CC: Vivian Reding, Commissioner; Justice, Fundamental Rights and Citizenship; European Union
Ambassador to the United States of America Yashar T. Aliyev
Members of Azerbaijan’s independent media
The International Freedom Exchange
Members of the Coordinating Committee of Press Freedom Organizations:
Committee to Protect Journalists
Commonwealth Press Union Trust
Inter American Press Association
International Association of Broadcasting
International Press Institute
North American Broadcasters Association
World Association of Newspapers
World Press Freedom Committee of Freedom House
If Tunisians are to play an informed part in the transition phase and beyond, they need a free and independent media and a strong, democratic and open civil society to hold power to account, according to the new report from the International Freedom of Expression Exchange Tunisia Monitoring Group (IFEX-TMG), a coalition of 21 IFEX members, including the World Press Freedom Committee of Freedom House.
"The Scars of Oppression Run Deep: Assessing the Critical Requirements for Freedom of Expression in Tunisia's Democratic Transition" was presented on 16 June to national and international media and local civil society groups at a press conference held in Tunis. [The final version can be downloaded here.] It provides a sample of opinions gathered from a broad cross-section of over 80 media professionals, civil society advocates and authorities interviewed in Tunisia during the course of the IFEX-TMG mission that took place from 9 to 16 April.
The IFEX-TMG has been working since 2004 to campaign to raise awareness of free expression violations in Tunisia and to support independent journalists, writers, and civil society activists in their struggle to end censorship in the country.
The latest mission, the eighth formal mission, was designed to respond to the immediate needs of stakeholders, old and new, in their efforts to sustain freedom of expression in a post-Ben Ali Tunisia.
"In stark contrast to previous missions, the IFEX-TMG delegation was able to meet and talk openly with civil society groups, human rights activists, journalists, bloggers and representatives from across the political spectrum," said Virginie Jouan, representing the World Association of Newspapers and News Publishers (WAN-IFRA), the mission's lead organisation.
The report documents the key concerns and immediate challenges regarding censorship and freedom of expression in Tunisia. Recognising the advances that have already been made since 14 January, it also addresses the fundamental issues raised by key stakeholders with regards to maintaining the momentum of change and ensuring the widest participation for the democratic transition to succeed.
"Revolutions are living things, evolving day by day, and if they are to thrive participation is the key," said Rohan Jayasekera of Index on Censorship, Chair of the IFEX-TMG. "Democracy needs the widest possible engagement and the broadest range of opinion, and while citizen journalists and web activists still have a job to do as guarantors of the Tunisian revolution, Tunisia's interim government and much of the mainstream media still have to prove themselves to the people."
In a detailed set of recommendations, the report outlines the work required by the transitional government, civil society groups, the media and consultative bodies in order to guarantee freedom of expression in the country. The most immediate concerns include:
• To redress the lingering effects of the former regime that are having a negative effect on the transition process across many areas of society, and in particular the media.
• To ensure plural voices are heard and informed debates undertaken so that the people of Tunisia can continue to effectively engage and shape their own futures.
• To support Tunisian journalists in their ongoing efforts to strengthen professional skills and standards, particularly in view of the forthcoming elections.
The report is only a starting point for the campaign to end censorship. Further IFEX-TMG activities are planned throughout the year as part of the coalition's ongoing support to the Tunisian media and its continued monitoring of freedom of expression
Arabic Network for Human Rights Information
ARTICLE 19: Global Campaign for Free Expression
Bahrain Center for Human Rights
Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies
Canadian Journalists for Free Expression
Cartoonists Rights Network International
Egyptian Organization for Human Rights
Freedom House
Index on Censorship
International Federation of Journalists
International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions
International Press Institute
International Publishers Association
Journaliste en danger
Maharat Foundation (Skills Foundation)
Media Institute of Southern Africa
Norwegian PEN
World Association of Community Radio Broadcasters
World Association of Newspapers and News Publishers
World Press Freedom Committee of Freedom House.