20 Mar 2012 | Americas
Last week, the online newspaper El Faro ran a story on how the Salvadoran government negotiated a truce with criminal gangs, known as “maras”, just before recent midterm elections. According to El Faro, the recent transfer of dangerous gang leaders from high security prisons to low security facilities was part of the deal. In exchange, the gangs, which contribute much to the high violence statistics in El Salvador, reduced their murder rate, the publication claimed.
But as soon as El Faro published the story all hell broke lose. The mnister of Justice and Security, General David Munguia Payes, held a press conference, to which El Faro was not invited. After denying the existence of a pact between the government and the criminal gangs, the minister said the work of El Faro was dangerous.
El Faro maintained that the job of a news organisation is to question government policies and challenge views held up by the powers at be. However, the outlet added, in weak democracies like El Salvador this could bring on added problems.
Carlos Dada, director of El Faro, said the government has told them they have intercepted messages between gang leaders where they have expressed their dissatisfaction with El Faro’s reporting. “But the government has not offered us any protection,” he said.
El Faro has been in the eye of the storm since it criticized the selection of military officers to run the police and security offices — something they say is forbidden under El Salvador´s 1992 peace accords, which ended a 12-year civil war.
20 Mar 2012 | Index Index, minipost, United Kingdom
The teenager accused of making “grossly offensive” comments about the deaths of six British soldiers in Afghanistan has denied charges against him. Azhar Ahmed, of West Yorkshire, appeared before Dewsbury Magistrates’ Court today. Ahmed is charged under the Communications Act 2003 after allegedly posting a message on Facebook earlier this month commenting on the relative coverage of British soldiers killed in a bomb blast in Afghanistan and the deaths of Afghan civilians. The teen also faced a racially-aggravated public order charge, but this was withdrawn before the court today. Ahmed will will stand trial at Huddersfield Magistrates’ Court on 3 July.
20 Mar 2012 | Uncategorized
Another week and another case of a young man getting into trouble over social media postings.
Last week, it was Azhar Ahmed, who angrily ranted about soldiers on his Facebook page, and now faces trial under the Communications Act 2003 (though the initial charge that his posting had been “racially aggravated” has been dropped).
This week, it is Swansea student Liam Stacey. Twenty-one-year-old Stacey today pleaded guilty of a “racially aggravated public order offence” after he tweeted racist remarks about Bolton Wanderers footballer Fabrice Muamba, and then addressed further racist remarks at tweeters who challenged him. (you can view Stacey’s now-deleted timeline here. Very strong language http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nA5v2eZ5ZZE).
The two cases have several common elements. Both involve social networking sites. Both involve young men. Both outbursts were reactions to widespread, communal grief.
And both raise the question: is the law as it stands fit for purpose? The pace at which social media changes the way we communicate is startling, even though the intuitive nature of much of the technology we use makes it seem normal. It is difficult now for many to remember life before Twitter, and almost impossible to think of life before YouTube, just seven years ago. We do not really think of posting a tweet or a Facebook status update as “publishing” or “sending a message” in the same way as printing a leaflet or even sending a text message.
The Twitter Joke Trial rightly upset many people, who saw in the prosecution of Paul Chambers a misunderstanding of both the message and the medium. But the question is, can a law be formulated that will accommodate free expression online? Or, given the changing nature of electronic communication, is any law doomed to obsolescence?
Padreig Reidy is Index on Censorship’s news editor
20 Mar 2012 | Azerbaijan News, Europe and Central Asia, Index Index, minipost
Two musicians and the leader of a youth organisation were detained by police during a sanctioned rally in Azerbaijan. On Saturday, Camal Ali, the front-man of popular band Bulustan, used profane language to criticise Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev during a performance at the youth rally in Baku. Organisers were angered by his profanities, and he and fellow band member Natiq Kamilov were detained by police, along with Etibar Salmanli, the head of the Nida youth organization. The three protesters were badly beaten by police before being detained.
