(FLIP/IFEX) – The State Council’s third section has ratified a previous ruling against the Administrative Department for Security (Departamento Administrativo de Seguridad, DAS) for having distributed false information to media outlets. The original ruling ordered the DAS to compensate Gilberto Márquez Henao for the impact the erroneous information had on his “personal and social life.” […]
(FLIP/IFEX) – The State Council’s third section has ratified a previous ruling against the Administrative Department for Security (Departamento Administrativo de Seguridad, DAS) for having distributed false information to media outlets. The original ruling ordered the DAS to compensate Gilberto Márquez Henao for the impact the erroneous information had on his “personal and social life.” The State Council held the DAS responsible for the information it provided, while media outlets were absolved of any responsibility for having distributed the information.
On 16 and 17 January 1992, Colombia’s major newspapers and news programmes reported on the contents of a report provided by the DAS in which a reward was offered for the capture of Márquez Henao. He was accused of being involved in a 1991 massacre in Caloto municipality. The information provided by the DAS to media outlets was incorrect as the name of the person the authorities were seeking was in fact Gilberto Márquez Quintero. Márquez Henao’s personal life was, however, impacted as the story was given wide coverage and public opinion was shaped by the erroneous information.
The Valle Administrative Tribunal previously ruled against the DAS and the State Council upheld the decision. The council concluded that, “The DAS acted negligently by providing media outlets with the report, in which Márquez Henao was alleged to be behind the Caloto massacre and which included his photograph. The DAS had access to sufficient information to determine that the arrest warrant had been issued against the wrong person or an individual with a similar name.”
With respect to the media outlets’ responsibility, the State Council asserted that, “The media outlets are not responsible, they simply reported on a news item about which there could be no doubt. They distributed the contents of the report provided by the DAS in response to the public’s interest in the results of the investigation into the Caloto massacre and the reward being offered by the DAS director.”
The State Council made it clear that responsibility does not lie solely with media outlets which distribute information, but that sources also have an obligation to confirm the accuracy of the information they provide.
