(FLIP/IFEX) – The following is an abridged version of a 5 February 2007 FLIP report: On 1 February 2007, the Second Criminal Court of Barranquilla (Juzgado Segundo Penal de Barranquilla), which had previously issued a temporary gag order forbidding “El Heraldo” to continue reporting on alleged links between a local company and paramilitary groups, ruled […]
(FLIP/IFEX) – The following is an abridged version of a 5 February 2007 FLIP report:
On 1 February 2007, the Second Criminal Court of Barranquilla (Juzgado Segundo Penal de Barranquilla), which had previously issued a temporary gag order forbidding “El Heraldo” to continue reporting on alleged links between a local company and paramilitary groups, ruled that the newspaper can now report on the matter.
On 21 January, “El Heraldo” and the civil society organization Protransparencia had published a report about the alleged links of the company Métodos y Sistemas to regional paramilitary groups, and about the apparent misuse of public funds to finance the election campaign of Barranquilla’s mayor, Guillermo Hoenigsberg Bornacelly. Métodos y Sistemas, which had been hired by the municipal government to collect taxes, asked for a permanent injunction forbidding both the newspaper and Protransparencia to publish any further news on the issue, which the company claimed violated its constitutional right to a good reputation. On 25 January, Judge Hernando Estrada Peña imposed a temporary gag order while the company’s request for an injunction was being considered. FLIP opposed this decision, considering it constituted prior censorship.
On 1 February, the company’s request for the injunction was ruled inadmissible. However, the judge decided that the temporary gag order on “El Heraldo” had not constituted prior censorship, but was necessary to prevent the potential violation of the company’s fundamental rights while the company’s request for an injunction was before the court. Nevertheless, and most importantly, the judge also decided that the information disseminated by “El Heraldo” did not violate the company’s privacy or its right to a good reputation. According to the judge, “El Heraldo” only provided a summary about the initiation of a contract entered into by the municipal government, without making any criminal accusation that would affect the reputation of Métodos y Sistemas. This was the key basis for the ruling in favour of “El Heraldo”.
FLIP agrees with the court’s ruling, but notes that, even when a media outlet makes concrete accusations, so long as it does so in good faith and meets its obligation to be honest and impartial, the media outlet is protected by the right to press freedom. Journalistic truth cannot be put on the same level as judicial truth, and media outlets cannot be expected to function like courts.
