(SPP/IFEX) – The following is an SPP press release: Freedom of Speech in Paraguay Report to the Inter-american Commission of Human Rights (CIDH) Presented by the Union of Journalists from Paraguay (SPP), to the delegation of the Inter-american Commission on Human Rights (CIDH) and to the Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Speech of the CIDH, […]
(SPP/IFEX) – The following is an SPP press release:
Freedom of Speech in Paraguay
Report to the Inter-american Commission of Human Rights (CIDH)
Presented by the Union of Journalists from Paraguay (SPP), to the delegation
of the Inter-american Commission on Human Rights (CIDH) and to the Special
Rapporteur for Freedom of Speech of the CIDH, Santiago Canton, during the
mission to Paraguay, April 29 1999
FREEDOM OF SPEECH IN PARAGUAY
The development of freedom of speech and press freedom in Paraguay presents
difficulties that do not allow for full development of these rights, which
are fundamental for the consolidation of democracy at the present time. The
concerns of the SPP in this respect are:
1.- Impunity in journalist Santiago Leguizamon’s murder:
On April 26, 1991, on Journalist’s Day, journalist Santiago Leguizamon was
murdered by the mafia that operates in the city of Pedro Juan Caballero, on
the border with Brazil. In spite of the fact that 8 years have passed since
then and there are 2,400 pages in 6 volumes of File No 70, impunity reigns
in this case, because of the negligence of the Judicial Power and the
Executive Power in clarifying the case.
In recent months, judicial performance was improved as a result of an
investigation presented by the SPP. This investigation pointed out some
important details that had been missing in the judicial process, but the
case had already been negatively affected by the evident and purposeful
neglect that marked the official investigation in the first three years.
This neglect is particularly by the extremely long delay in submitting a
petition to Brazil to capture the material and moral authors of the crime.
We also note that the Executive Power, through the National Police, failed
to submit the police’s official report of an investigation carried out a few
days after the crime occured. The SPP urged different Police Commanders to
present that report, but to this moment it has not been incorporated into
the Santiago Leguizamon file.
We also want to point out the lack of cooperation of the corresponding
Brazilian authorities in detaining and remitting to Paraguay the 14
Brazilians implicated in this case, requested in 1992 via Interpol. The
Brazilian authorities allege that they cannot comply with this request
because Article 5 of the Brazilian National Constitution points out that no
Brazilian citizen will be extradited, except if he/she was involved in
illicit drug trafficking, or committed a crime before being naturalised.
This contravenes the norm established in the Treaty of Montevideo and in the
Iberian-American Convention of Human Rights, regarding the obligation of all
countries to locate and place criminals in the hands of justice of the
appropriate countries – especially those criminals that have attacked
peoples’ fundamental rights, like the right to life.
The SPP requests the support of the CIDH for the clarification of Santiago
Leguizamon’s murder, and your mediation before the Ministry of Justice of
Brazil for the execution of the Paraguayan judicial order previously
mentioned, copies of which are attached herewith to this document so as to
better illustrate the facts to the Commission.
We also ask the CIDH to request from the Paraguayan Executive Power a report
on the investigations carried out thus far, so that the crime can finally be
cleared up.
Likewise, we ask the CIDH to accompany us in a campaign aimed at making
people aware of what we need to do in order to succeed in the capture of
fugitives and criminals in contempt of court. There is an urgent need for
the exemplary sanction of the culprits of the murder and the resolution of
Leguizamon’s case since, according to the new Code of Penal Prosecution, all
pending processes should be concluded by 2003. Otherwise, impunity will be
legally entrenched in the journalist’s murder.
2.- Abuse of judge’s authority against radio journalists:
On June 22, 1999, Judge Norma Jara de Benítez, from the judicial district of
Villarrica, began to harass, abuse her authority, and even censor
journalists Norma Acuña and Secundino Silguero, from Radio Panambí Verá. All
these actions were related to lawsuits against the workers of a sugar
factory for carrying out public protest marches.
At first, Judge Jara de Benítez abused her authority when she issued a
disciplinary arrest sentence of 20 days against journalists Silguero and
Acuña, ignoring the fact that they were not even under trial. This
disciplinary order was given after the journalists criticised on the air a
resolution made by the judge. The judge’s resolution that was criticised
granted only 2 hours to hand in copies of a 7 hour radio programme,
violating legal procedural terms.
The judge applied the disciplinary sanction to Silguero and Acuña in spite
of the fact that these journalists were not involved in the trial against
the factory workers. This is a clear violation of the Code of Civil
Procedures, which states that disciplinary sanctions can only be applied to
the parties that are being tried.
Also, Jara de Benítez acted as the judge and as a party to the matter, since
she should have brought the case to the Criminal Court in the event of a
committed crime. The judge’s decision was questioned by the Attorney
General, Juan Domingo Vera, in his recommendation to the Court of Appeals,
where her decision was appealed. The Attorney General advised the members of
this Court to revoke the decision of the judge, considering that she claimed
discretionary power.
In spite of the recommendation of the Attorney General, on July 28 the Court
of Appeals asked the Supreme Court of Justice to decide whether the judge’s
interpretation contradicts any of the Constitutional guarantees, which will
further prolong the resolution of the case.
Subsequently, on July 2, after a request made by Prosecutor Carlos
Alvarenga, Judge Jara de Benítez authorized the recording of the afternoon
program broadcast by the radio station directed by journalist Silguero, for
three months (from July to September). The judge’s decision, supported by
prosecutor Alvarenga, is an evident form of prior censorship, aimed at
frightening the listeners to not speak, since they will be recorded along
with the program and will afterwards be identifiable. The resolution to
record the radio program from July to September is also a way to put
pressure on Silguero’s journalistic work. This clearly violates Article 26
of the National Constitution, which guarantees freedom of speech and press
freedom, with no censorship whatsoever. This resolution also violates the
right to generate, process or diffuse information, as well as Article 13 of
the American Convention of Human Rights, that guarantees the right to
freedom of thought and freedom of speech and rejects all indirect
restrictions of these rights, such as the abuse of official control.
The judge’s decision also violates Article 27 of the Constitution that
points out that the use of mass media is of public interest and guarantees
pluralism of information.
We should also mention that the attitude of prosecutor Alvarenga is contrary
to his functions, since he should have acted in defense of the interests of
society, in this case, the rights of freedom of speech and press freedom.
The SPP has made a request to the pertinent Justice Supervisory authority
that these magistrates be sanctioned for ignoring national and international
norms, but has not received any news on this point.
3.- Irresponsible journalistic practices by communication companies:
In September 1997, the SPP started to point out its concern over the role of
the press in the construction of democracy in this country. During the
pre-electoral campaign of the government party, some communication companies
began to prioritize the defense of political sectors, forgetting that they
are public service companies whose duty is to serve the majority.
Then, during the May 1998 national election campaign, these media companies
openly supported certain political parties, not only in their editorials,
but by presenting distorted information in order to favor the group they
supported. Earlier this year, some written and radio media companies even
reached the point of encouraging the dismantlement of the State of Law,
proclaimed by those in favor of former general Lino Oviedo. A number of
individuals related to media had lawsuits filed against them for inciting
the institutional break. These trials are currently underway: detention
orders have recently been issued for Alberto Vargas Peña, columnist of the
newspaper The Nation, Juan Carlos Bernabé, director of Radio Nanawa and Raúl
Melamed, from Radio Montecarlo (fugitive at the moment).
After the fall of the government of Raúl Cubas Grau, this situation of
favoritism by some media companies towards certain political parties
continued. Under the current government, the director of the newspaper ABC
Color, Aldo Zuccolillo, was charged after the newspaper published
information on the murder of the vice president of the Republic, Luis María
Argaña. ABC Color pointed out some alleged irregularities in the judicial
investigation, giving names and publishing pictures of witnesses that the
judge wanted to reserve for his use, although he had not explicitly
established this.
This favoritism of the media companies has already lead to a confrontation
among them – between those that support the current government and those
that continue defending Lino Oviedo’s supporters. This confrontation is
apparent in the information each company presents to the public.
The increase in confrontation between the State Powers and the de facto
powers has resulted in individuals, presumably linked to the government,
cutting the phone lines of the radio stations Nanawa and Asuncion, which
supported the dismantlement of the State of Law until March. If these radios
continue inciting violence, they should be sanctioned through the
corresponding legal procedures but they should not be impeded from
broadcasting their programmes.
In a word, the current confrontation is between the media and the
communication companies composed of several members of the Powers of the
State -Executive, Judicial and Legislative. This confrontation has gone far
beyond the media’s function of overseeing public acts, and has entered the
field of bidding for political interests.
The Judiciary is the main authority that can settle the disputes of each
sector within this confrontation. As a result of this situation, there is a
risk that it will become a normal and routine occurrence to have lawsuits
filed against journalists for publications that truly do play a role of
overseeing the Powers of the State and for rigorous journalistic
investigations. If this is the case, a system of prior self censorship will
likely emerge.
Because of these irregularities in the practices of communication companies,
the SPP feels that it is imperative to have a Code of Ethics for
Journalists, so that we have a mechanism that works towards responsible and
ethical journalism, and as a starting point from which to outline to
journalistic companies self-regulation norms for the Paraguayan press.
It is also necessary that journalistic companies become aware of the fact
that their primary goal should be to inform and to be the communication link
between the Powers of the State and civil society; because they do not
contribute anything constructive to the citizens and to the country’s future
when they are the main protagonists of political activities.
4.- Sentences against journalists without supporting evidence.
Up to now, two sentences condemning journalists were issued without giving
them the possibility to have evidence of the truth presented. Both cases are
in the appeal stage. The sentences were passed after charges were filed by a
powerful economic group related to the former president of the Republic,
Juan Carlos Wasmosy, regarding some statements the journalists made
concerning supposed acts of corruption in the construction of the Itaipú
hydroelectric dam. Those journalists facing sentences are:
*. Dolly Galeano case:
When she was a correspondent for the newspaper Ultima Hora in Ciudad del
Este, Galeano was accused of libel and insult causing harm, for an article
published on September 19, 1994, entitled “The earnings: for Conempa or for
nobody”. The action was filed by the directors of the Consorcio de Empresas
Constructoras Asociadas S.A. (Conempa), and on December 22, 1998 she was
condemned by the judge to pay 10 millions of Guaraníes (approximately 2,294
American dollars, according to the current exchange rate).
The sentence against the journalist was appealed, but according to the Law
Nº 14.338 from 1946 that regulates the trial procedures for libel and
insult, one cannot present new arguments to the second stage court to expand
on the appeal nor have more evidence presented; the Tribunal must issue the
sentence according to the evidence that was presented under the previous
judgement.
Once the sentence reaches the level of the Criminal Court, a motion claiming
unconstitutionality can be presented to the Supreme Court of Justice,
highlighting the evident restriction of the right of defense that Dolly
Galeano suffered.
It should be noted that a few weeks after she received official notification
of this ruling, Galeano was dismissed from her work and the lawyer that had
been assigned to her never asked to intervene in the case.
Considering her former employer’s lack of interest in aiding her, she asked
the Public Defender of Poor Offenders for help. The most notable fact about
the action of the defender, Mara Ladan Samcevich, is that she limited
herself to accepting as true the accusations presented in the case, without
using the appropriate legal remedies to obtain further evidence.
The defender should have noted certain public and notorious events in the
journalist’s defense, such as the constitutional motion put forth by one of
the Itaipú unions against the plaintiff, in which the same reputedly
damaging topics, that were mentioned in Galeano’s publication, were covered.
*. Case Ricardo Canese:
He is a columnist, and a specialist on the subject of electric power. In
1992, while he was a pre-candidate to the presidency during the 1993
presidential campaign, he was condemned to 4 months in prison by the first
level court and to 2 months of prison by the second level court, for his
opinions published in an article, where he affirmed that, during the 1993
presidential campaign, “Wasmosy was man of straw for Stroessner in Itaipú.”
During the trial, he was not allowed to prove his statements. A ruling on
the appeal filed before the Supreme Court is expected.
5.- The New Penal Code:
The new Penal Code, in effect since November 28, 1998, establishes some
norms that will affect the exercise of journalism, because it contains
confusing and even contradictory wording. There is not a clear distinction
between private and public figures to defend people’s image, honor, or
reputation, especially concerning official and public individuals. This will
only strengthen impunity in the public environment, because there is already
a tendency in Paraguay to limit criticism and investigative work in official
environments.
The code also discourages journalistic investigations, because it does not
establish a distinction between the responsibility of the public officials
and the responsibility of the journalists regarding the diffusion of State
secrets, as it not only punishes anyone who makes a State secret accessible
to others, but also anyone who reveals it openly (Articles 283 and 284).
Moreover, it also authorizes the seizure of publications when at least one
copy of this publication has been the cause of or the way in which an
unlawful action is committed (Article 87), although the National
Constitution prohibits the seizure of journalistic publications.
6.- Monopoly in the frequencies of radios:
The State, through the National Commission of Telecommunications (CONATEL)
the organism that regulates broadcasting – has been privileging the
managerial sector in the concession of radio frequencies, especially in
Modulated Frequency. They have been leaving aside organized civil society
that, since the promulgation of the new Law of Telecommunications Nº 642 in
1996, is also claiming a space in the distribution of the airwaves, as per
Chapter IV of the aforementioned law, where the operation of Alternative or
Community Radios is outlined.
Since the new Law of Telecommunications came into effect in 1996, there has
been an increase of more than 150% in the number of legal radios qualifying
for entitlement to modulated frequencies. However, the State has been
privileging the participation of the private sector, that has now almost
completely filled the whole electromagnetic spectrum. This leaves no
available space for non-profit organisations to obtain permission to operate
radio stations, since there are currently more than 50 of those kind of
radios broadcasting in the country.
The private sector’s monopoly goes against the National Constitution, the
Pact of San José from Costa Rica and the Law of Telecommunications, all of
which guarantee the use of electromagnetic signals, under equitable
conditions.
In 1998, CONATEL established a regulation for community radios, that instead
of facilitating their operation will actually make them disappear, because
it grants them very low potency – only 3 to 4 places in the radial spectrum
for a demand that is greater than 50 – and prohibits the airing of paid
advertising.
Such a strict and antidemocratic regulation, as the one established by
CONATEL for the Alternative or Community Radios, is just another form of
inexplicit or hidden censorship which violates the prohibition of
censorship as per article 26 of the National Constitution.
Since this regulation came into effect in July 1998, it has only allowed
CONATEL to harass the community radios that are on the air. For this reason,
the SPP and entities that unite community radios and organizations related
to communications have been demanding the urgent modification of this
regulation, in order to make reality the right to information of all
citizens, as guaranteed by the Universal Declaration of the Human Rights.
On April 30, during Journalist’s Week 1999, the SPP asked the president of
the republic, Luis González Macchi, to ensure that CONATEL suspends for a
period of time the enormous amount of bids for frequencies made by
commercial radios. This request was made to the Executive Power in an
attempt to achieve a balance in the right of different sectors to have
access to radial frequencies. The president was also asked to focus his
attention on the modification of the community radios regulation, thus
allowing social organizations to have access to radial frequencies without
any arbitrary restrictions on breadth, reach and economical sustainability.
So far we have not received an official response to these requests.
SPP Directorate
Report writer: Magdalena Riveros, Secretary of Human Rights
Legal advisors: Lawyers José Valiente and Armando Sostoa
