(WPFC/IFEX) – The following is a WPFC press release: WPFC Challenges Latin American Journalists to Oppose Insult Laws SANTIAGO, Chile — Anachronistic laws designed to shield public officials from public scrutiny have no place in a modern democracy and should be eliminated, World Press Freedom Committee Executive Director Marilyn Greene said today in remarks to […]
(WPFC/IFEX) – The following is a WPFC press release:
WPFC Challenges Latin American Journalists to Oppose Insult Laws
SANTIAGO, Chile — Anachronistic laws designed to shield public officials from public scrutiny have no place in a modern democracy and should be eliminated, World Press Freedom Committee Executive Director Marilyn Greene said today in remarks to the Inter American Press Association, meeting here for its 56th General Assembly.
Greene called on Latin American editors, publishers and reporters to oppose insult laws — known as desacato laws in Spanish-speaking countries — in courts and in legislatures throughout Latin America. A copy of her remarks is attached [see Annex].
More than five years ago — in its 1994 Annual Report for the Organization of American States — the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights declared these desacato laws to be in contradiction to the American Convention on Human Rights.
Nevertheless, 18 Latin American countries still cling to insult laws and in the intervening years only one, Paraguay, has eliminated its desacato provisions. Argentina revoked its insult law earlier, following journalist Horacio Verbitsky’s landmark legal battle with that country’s courts.
“It would seem self-evident,” Greene said, that “no journalist — no person — should go to jail for what he or she writes.”
But public officials continue to try and avoid media investigation and criticism by bringing charges of insult against journalists. Greene cited the case of Chilean journalist Alejandra Matus, now living in exile in Miami. Matus fears arrest if she returns to Chile, where a supreme court judge has charged her with insult and where her investigative book, The Black Book of Chilean Justice, has been banned.
The World Press Freedom Committee, which includes 44 press freedom groups on six continents, recently released a global study of insult laws, which exist in more than 100 countries. The WPFC has challenged national leaders and lawmakers to eliminate the laws, pointing out that public officials deserve more scrutiny, not less, than do private citizens.
Greene called on Latin American journalists to lead the way in the worldwide effort to eliminate insult laws. Journalists, she said, can write columns and editorials and provide coverage of current desacato cases “as part of a joint effort to educate readers and listeners to the truth that we already know: In a free and democratic society, the goal must be more discourse, not less; and in a free and democratic society, the journalist must be a watch dog — not a lap dog.”
ANNEX
A Challenge to Latin American Journalists:
Oppose Laws that Shield Public Officials
October 16, 2000
Remarks by Marilyn Greene, Executive Director, World Press Freedom Committee
To the Inter American Press Association
Santiago, Chile
Five years and seven months ago, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights declared in its 1994 Annual Report that desacato laws — laws that shield public officials from public scrutiny — are incompatible with the American Convention on Human Rights. It recommended that Latin American nations maintaining these laws wipe them off their books.
Nevertheless, today, desacato or insult laws remain intact and in effect in at least 18 countries in this hemisphere, providing convenient cover for government officials who do not wish to answer for their actions and policies to the people they represent.
Insult laws, a form of criminal defamation, deliberately aim to elevate officials, governments, national symbols and public institutions from criticism and examination by the public and its eyes and ears, the news media.
We need not look far for examples. Chilean journalist Alejandra Matus, charged under Chile’s state security law with defaming Chilean judges in her book , “The Black Book of Chilean Justice,” has been living in exile for more than a year. She fears she cannot return home to Chile without facing arrest and imprisonment.
Earlier this year, another Chilean journalist, Jose Ale Aravena, was convicted of insulting the former president of the Supreme Court. He, too, was charged under Article 6 of the state security law, and was given a suspended 541-day prison sentence.
Chile is not alone in clinging to these anachronistic laws. They exist also in Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Peru, Uruguay and Venezuela.
It would seem self-evident, in this year of 2000, that no journalist — no person — should go to jail for what he or she writes. Indeed, politicians in some of these countries with insult laws have denounced the laws and vowed to get rid of them. But in the years since the Inter-American Commission’s report, only Paraguay has eliminated its desacato law from the criminal code. Argentina, the other regional country to have shed its desacato law, did so prior to the Commission’s recommendation, following journalist Horacio Verbitsky’s long battle against desacato charges.
Why do nations cling to such legislation, denounced by their own leaders and by intergovernmental bodies as well? Rationalizations range from an alleged desire to protect individuals’ privacy, to avoid the media circus surrounding such events as Princess Diana’s death and to “protect” citizens from false or dangerous information.
Earlier this year, Costa Rica seemed close to reform of its criminal code and rejection of its desacato provisions. Inexplicably, the effort collapsed, indicating that perhaps in Costa Rica and elsewhere, would-be reformers merely need encouragement and political “cover” for moving to eliminate insult laws. Editors, reporters, publishers and press freedom groups can provide this.
I am here today to urge you as journalists to counter specious and self-serving arguments and excuses for failure to act.
You can point out that:
1. Plenty of legal remedies already exist, in civil libel and slander legislation, to provide recourse for perceived defamation.
2. Public officials deserve less — not more — protection from public commentary than ordinary citizens. They have sought the notoriety involved in serving the common weal through public office. And as such, they are the servants of the public, not its masters. The European Court of Human Rights has on numerous occasions expressed this view in turning aside legal efforts to punish “insult.” It said in a case involving Croatia’s irreverent Feral Tribune, “the very function of the press in a democratic society (is) to participate in the political process by checking on the development of the debate of public issues carried on by political office-holders.”
3. Democracy and economic prosperity are not possible without public accountability of its leaders and transparency in its transactions, and vigorous public discussion of issues and choices.
4. Press freedom cannot be said to exist in a nation where journalists are jailed for their work. And without press freedom, no nation can call itself a democracy.
5. Full participation in the international political and economic community is not possible as long as a nation fails to abide by the principles of good governance accepted by that community. All nations are bound by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which declares in its Article 19:
“Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.”
Four years ago, at a meeting of the Commonwealth Press Union in South Africa, WPFC Chairman Jim Ottaway and General Counsel Leonard Marks declared war on insult laws, thus launching the campaign that I speak of today.
Since then, WPFC has been working hard to set in place the structures and weapons with which to wage this global battle. The lines are now set, and Latin America has the opportunity to lead the way for more than 100 countries worldwide to dispense with these outdated and counterproductive laws which slow all aspirations to democracy in countries where they continue to exist.
We have developed a multi-faceted attack plan, based on what we have heard in requests for help from journalists and democracy advocates around the world. A landmark study completed this spring by University of North Carolina Professor Ruth Walden describes the prevalence of insult laws around the world, citing their existence in more than 100 countries. I will be happy to provide copies of the report to anyone requesting them.
With your help, the fight against insult laws will be conducted:
A. In the courts
In consultation with expert media lawyers, we have produced the basic model for a friend-of-the-court brief which can be adapted to defense arguments against desacato charges anywhere.
In the Americas, press freedom advocates may request hearings and state positions before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, and may urge government leaders to refer precedent-setting cases to the Inter-American Court.
B. In the legislatures
When journalists and lawmakers in the country determine that they are ready to take action toward reform, your colleagues in the international free-press community will mobilize to help make missions to lawmakers needing encouragement, those resistant to change and those sitting on the edge. Armed with opinions of international bodies such as the European Court of Human Rights, the UN Human Rights Commission and the Organization of American States, the group will show that now is the time to make the changes needed to function as full partners in today’s international community.
The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, in its 1994 Annual Report, provides strong support for the legal argument that desacato laws are inconsistent with the American Convention on Human Rights and other international human rights declarations. Copies of the Commission’s findings against desacato laws are available for you to take with you.
C. In the public arena
Press freedom advocates such as all of us in this room and in editorial offices throughout the world are challenged to write columns and editorials, and to provide coverage of desacato cases as part of a joint effort to educate readers and listeners to the truth that we already know: In a free and democratic society, the goal must be more discourse, not less; and in a free and democratic society, the journalist must be a watch dog — not a lap dog.
The World Press Freedom Committee is an umbrella organization with 44 affiliates, including the IAPA, on six continents. The WPFC and IAPA are also members of a Coordinating Committee of Press Freedom Organizations, a nine-group “guerrilla” unit joined to promote press freedom in the world.
This Coordinating Committee sponsors a Fund Against Censorship, providing legal assistance to journalists facing prosecution. Pamphlets describing the Fund are available in the registration area here. Please take these with you for use in referring cases in your countries for help of any legal nature.
