13 Feb 2012 | Index Index, minipost
A second cleric is suing Irish public service broadcaster RTE for libel, after they accused him of child abuse. Former Archbishop Richard Burke claims he was named in the same Prime Time Investigates programme as Father Kevin Reynolds, whom RTÉ alleged had fathered a child while a missionary in Kenya. Burke admitted to having a sexual relationship with a woman whilst working in Nigeria, but claimed she was an adult at the time and that the relationship was consensual. ‘Mission to Prey’ claimed that the cleric had abused a minor.
9 Feb 2012 | Middle East and North Africa, Uncategorized
On 10 February, Abdel Aziz Al-Jaridi, director of two daily newspapers, Al-Hadath and Kul-Anas, will appeal a defamation conviction. Al-Jaridi was sentenced to four months in prison by the first instance court on 13 June 2011 for defaming Al-Jazeera news anchor Mohamed Krichen.
Krichen lodged a complaint against Al-Jaridi in April of last year. On 6 February, the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), called on Tunisian authorities to drop the jail term given to Al-Jaridi.
“Tunisian appeals court should throw out the prison sentence against journalist Abdel Aziz al-Jaridi at a 10 February hearing and authorities should use his case as an opportunity to break from the repressive practices of Zine El Abidine Ben Ali’s era,” said the CPJ.
Journalists in Tunisia can face up to six months in prison for defamation.
Al-Jaridi, considered to be a supporter to the former regime, is known for his articles defaming opposition figures and dissident voices during the rule of Zeine El Abidin Ben Ali.
25 Jan 2012 | Americas, Index Index, minipost
Radio journalist Johnny Alberto Salazar has been found guilty of libelling a lawyer, he is the first journalist to be jailed for defamation in the Dominican Republic. Salazar made comments on his radio station about local murders and said that lawyer Pedro Baldera Gomez, who works for the Human Rights Commission of Nagua, had defended a number of thieves in the area. Salazar has been ordered to pay a one million Dominican Peso (approx. 16,705 GBP) fine and spend six months in jail.
24 Jan 2012 | Uncategorized
This article was originally published in The Times
Sometimes the most reasonable-looking laws can cause the most damage. Let’s hope members of the Leveson inquiry into media ethics are familiar with this awkward fact. In France, stringent privacy laws have prevented investigation into the dodgy financial dealings of leading public figures. In Hungary, a media law has in a matter of months emasculated a free press, leading to radio stations being closed down and reporters and editors fired. That law includes many items on the wish lists of several witnesses to the inquiry, such as press regulation, licensing and fines.
In the UK journalists pride themselves on the irreverence and bolshiness of their newspapers. Yet despite the outrageous behaviour that led to the phone-hacking scandal, the real problem with Britain’s press is that it is too weak. It finds out far too little. If the job of journalism is to put into the public domain inconvenient truths that the rich and powerful would like to hide, then the performance of Britain’s press is nothing to be proud of. Part of this is economic (investigations are costly); laziness is another factor.
By far the biggest reason, however, is the number of laws that impede proper scrutiny. The most pernicious area is our defamation culture. Index on Censorship, together with its partners, has been leading the campaign to reform England’s libel laws. A defamation Bill has been drafted and should be included in the Queen’s Speech in May, as ministers have promised. Libel reform was, after all, part of the coalition agreement.
London has for years been a rich men’s playground, with oligarchs, oil barons and autocrats using our plaintiff-friendly courts to bully bloggers, newspapers and civil society groups. It was bad enough when the creators of South Park satirised our legal system (with Tom Cruise threatening: “I’m going to sue you — in England!”), but when President Obama signed into law the Speech Act, designed to protect Americans from English libel rulings, we went from farce to tragedy. MP’s rightly described that action as a “national humiliation” for the UK.
Until recently, libel reform appeared on course; broad consensus has been achieved on the main points of a final Bill. Yet some are now calling for delay, for defamation to be thrown into the post-Leveson soup. This would be folly. As he proceeds in his vital task of improving the standards of British journalism, Lord Justice Leveson should make clear that his inquiry will not be used as a device to delay implementation of a law that goes to the heart of democracy and the public’s right to know.
John Kampfner is chief executive of Index on Censorship
