(RSF/IFEX) – The following is an 8 March 2000 WAN and RSF press release: WAN and RSF condemn the numerous irregularities which characterise the trial of two journalists In two letters to Attorney General Javier Elechiguerra and President of the Judiciary’s Structural Commission Manuel Quijada, respectively, the World Association of Newspapers (WAN) and RSF expressed […]
(RSF/IFEX) – The following is an 8 March 2000 WAN and RSF press release:
WAN and RSF condemn the numerous irregularities which characterise the trial of two journalists
In two letters to Attorney General Javier Elechiguerra and President of the Judiciary’s Structural Commission Manuel Quijada, respectively, the World Association of Newspapers (WAN) and RSF expressed their concern over “a number of irregularities which have characterised” the trial of Faitha Nahmens and Ben Ami Fihman. Nahmens is a journalist and Fihman is the director of the monthly “Exceso”. Their next summons is scheduled for 15 March 2000. The two international organisations asked their addressees to pay attention “to the proceedings” and make public statements “about the irregularities which have occurred during the trial”. WAN and RSF also asked the Attorney General to “cancel the detention order that is still in force” against Faitha Nahmens and Ben Ami Fihman.
On 9 February, during the last summons, the judge illegally ordered the journalists’ detention in order to force them to appear in court. Faitha Nahmens and Ben Ami Fihman did not appear because the summons procedure was not respected. The detention order against them is still in effect.
Furthermore, according to the Code of Criminal Prosecution which was in effect, the judicial proceedings should have been abandoned on 12 February 1999. Effectively, according to the code, since the trial was not terminated by that date, the charge should have been dropped due to the lapse of time. The journalists’ lawyers appealed, but Judge José Luis Irazu, who is in charge of the proceedings, stated that the appeals court must not announce its decision until after the trial is over. On this basis, without waiting for the results of the appeal process, the hearing was slated for 9 February and 15 March, in violation of the Code of Fundamental Penal Procedures.
Another irregularity is the fact that the charges were filed by the plaintiffs outside the period of time alloted, and failed to mention which parts of the article were considered “defamatory” or “injurious”.
The two press freedom organisations called attention to the fact that three of the judges in charge of the proceedings were dismissed by the Judiciary’s Structural Commission for having committed irregularities during previous trials. WAN and RSF were also surprised that judicial proceedings were undertaken against the monthly when the information contained in the article came from police sources or had all been previously published in other media without raising any concerns.
The charge of “defamation” was filed against Faitha Nahmens and Ben Ami Fihman following the June 1997 publication of an article about the death of a businessman, which was perpetrated by paid assassins. Both journalists face a sentence of six to thirty months in prison and fines of 100 million Bolivares (177,000 Euros).
