|
59
General Assembly
Chicago , October 10-14, Illinois |
|
Country-by-Country Reports
|
Speech by the Secretary
General of the Organization of American States,
Dr. Gaviria at the 59th General Assembly of the Inter-American Press
Association
Chicago, Illinois
Octubre, 2003
Mr. President of the Inter-American Press Association, Andres Garcia members
of the Association, Ladies, and Gentlemen:
I want to thank the people
of Chicago for their wonderful hospitality, and specially Mr. Jack Fuller,
President of the Tribune Publishing Company for inviting me to this Assembly.
It is a great honor to be able to address the distinguished audience of the
Inter-American Press Association. I have no doubt that all of us gathered
here today agree that freedom of expression is one of the most highly cherished
values in democratic societies. IAPAS commitment to freedom of press in the
Western Hemisphere and its support of rights and responsibilities of journalism
has played a key role in the strengthening of democracy in our region. In
our Hemisphere we established that every person has the right to freedom of
investigation, of opinion, and of the expression and dissemination of ideas,
by any medium whatsoever, in the American Declaration of the rights and duties
of Men, in 1948, even before the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was
proclaimed. Years later, the American Convention on Human Rights included
freedom of thought and expression as one of the human rights that states undertook
not only to guarantee, but also to win respect for. We must remember that
those who have interpreted this American Convention have concluded that the
guarantees embodied in it were designed to be as generous as possible and
to leave little room for restrictions on the free circulation of ideas. The
scope of protection of freedom of expression proclaimed in this inter-American
instrument is broader even than that established in the European Convention
or the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. But since then,
Latin America history is littered with shameful and lamentable examples of
dictatorial regimes and authoritarian governments that chose that option,
and we should take every precaution to avoid revisiting this practice. The
defense of freedom of the press and of expression has gained new momentum,
there has been a surge in the defense of this right. Recently, several countries
in the Hemisphere have fully tested the mettle of democratic institutions.
At times of crisis, fraught with political and social tension, freedom of
expression has become a catalyst permitting disputes to be resolved without
destroying the social fabric. At the same time, faced with social and political
conflicts, and even threats to national security as the fight against terrorism,
states are tempted to curb liberties in order to safeguard security and a
misguided notion of public order. During the 90s, we had the case of Peru
where governmental abuses such as subordination of the armed forces for illegal
and political ends, massive corruption, censorship of the media and limits
on civil liberties were on the rise. The determination of the Peruvian people,
its commitment to democracy, and some cooperation from the OAS and the International
Community, brought democracy back. Those actions were the basis for the most
resounding expressions of support for freedom of expression in OAS member-states,
with the adoption, in September 2001, of the Inter-American Democratic Charter.
We have clung to its precepts as governments in the Hemisphere, beset with
problems, have striven to respond to the demands of citizens, meet their needs,
and address the protests and unrest prompted by government decisions and policies,
as well as dissatisfaction with globalization. With the Charter we are protecting
the right of our peoples to live in democracy, we are incorporating our shared
vision and principles, our
needs, our aspirations, our collective will, and our commitment to work together
to defend our core values. In the Americas we all agree that representative
democracy is more than free and transparent elections. Under the Charter, democracy
means respect for human rights and public liberties, the separation and independence
of powers, transparency, accountability, honesty, responsibility, citizen participation,
a strong civil society, and a pluralistic party system. It also means access
to information, freedom of the press and freedom of expression, a system of
effective checks and balances, elimination of all kind of discrimination, and
the supremacy of the Constitution and the rule of law. The Charter draws attention
to a new generation of rights, regarding indigenous peoples, ethnic, religious
and cultural diversity in the Americas, regarding children, women, migrant workers
and their families, and rights of workers based on the conventions of the International
Labor Organization. The Charter is a result of the belief that we stand today
at a critical historical juncture. Political globalization has generated a worldwide
concern for social justice and the defense of democratic principles and human
rights. We face significant threats to the democratic systems of several nations
in our hemisphere. We have weak public institutions and political systems and
in many nations the state is unable to provide basic health, education, and
citizen security. The Charter provides our nations with the instruments to confront
threats and challenges collectively, in a manner that is orderly, decisive,
timely, and consensual. The Charter is not the culmination of our journey in
the preservation and defense of democracy, but rather, the most important tool
to aid us in that journey. We must work diligently to ensure that democracy
prospers and flourishes in our Hemisphere. It is specifically designed with
prevention in mind and is intended to provide active pro-democracy support from
our community of nations. The Charter goes much further than any of our previous
instruments to offer aid to a member state which fears that its democratic system
may be in peril. At the same time, the Charter enshrines the resolute commitment
of states to promote and defend democracy, as an essential ingredient for the
social, political, and economic development of the peoples of the Americas Two
years after the signing of the Inter-American Democratic Charter, we can all
look back in satisfaction on how much we have accomplished and what the Charter
means to the region today. It is an example and a guide for the rest of the
world. .The Charter is, thus, the most important symbol of our principal mission
at the OAS: the preservation and promotion of democracy. I have no qualms in
asserting that the Charter has become a keynote, living, indispensable, and
imperative document Nevertheless, the Charter only consists of words on paper
that need to be brought to life through our actions. The importance of the Charter
will only grow if you, publishers and journalists of this Hemisphere, help us
to take it, in heart and spirit, and make it part of the daily lives of the
citizens and the leaders of our Hemisphere. There is still much to be done,
and your commitment is essential in this process. Additionally, I should not
omit mentioning the Declaration of Santiago on Democracy and Public Trust, recently
adopted by the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of OAS member states in our last
general Assembly. This Declaration recognizes, yet again, that democracy is
strengthened by full respect for freedom of expression, access to information,
and free dissemination of ideas, and that the media can contribute to an environment
of tolerance for all opinions, promote a culture of peace, and strengthen democratic
governance. With all these undertakings by states, one might think that full
exercise of freedom of the press is guaranteed in our Hemisphere. Yet you, as
members
of the
Inter-American Press Association, are well aware of the problems that abound
in some countries, and which you have to face day after day. All too often this
is a rhetorical right to which only lip-service is paid: in many countries in
the region, there are obstacles in the practice of full freedom of expression
and freedom of the press. Of course, we are far from what happened almost 30
years ago, when democracies were the exception and dictatorships the rule. But
still many of our countries have inherited practices instilled in the dark years
of authoritarian regimes. Dictatorships left deep scars and it was utopian to
think that, solely by setting up democratic institutions, the authoritarian
instincts of those who then legitimately took over the reins of power would
automatically be overcome. Many of the limitations of the regimes we put behind
us two decades ago still, even now, impair the full exercise of freedom of expression,
because it is less uncomfortable to exercise power behind a screen of secrecy
than to do so under public scrutiny and the watchful eye of citizens. Those
practices erode the foundations of democracies. If freedom of information and
freedom of expression are a thorn in the flesh of anti- democratic systems of
government, violations of those rights --however subtle --cannot be accepted
in a democracy since they are profoundly incompatible with it. We are here to
be certain that we all do whatsoever is needed to avoid it Today, even though
many of our countries have adopted significant measures to enhance access to
information, some circles are still reluctant to subject governmental decisions
to public opinion, thereby hampering citizen oversight of decisions made by
those who govern. Another obstacle to full exercise of freedom of expression
is direct or indirect censorship of criticism. Several tools are used to censor.
The first and most extreme is the murder of those who dare to criticize the
authorities or a particular branch of the authorities. It is unacceptable that
since IAPA began keeping count, in 1988, 269 journalists have been slain in
the Americas. Even when we claim to have crossed the threshold to democracy,
the assassination of journalists is an ongoing and a very big concern in the
region. The second tool used to silence critics is what may be called judicial
harassment. Some of the laws used nowadays in an arbitrary fashion. Censorship
laws to dissuade criticism of government authorities are nothing other than
the bitter aftertaste of the efforts of authoritarian regimes to dress up in
legal clothes their suppression of comments and ideas that proved to be uncomfortable.
Of course, there are many other forms of intimidation threatening the lives
of those that dare to criticize government officials or that disagree on some
public decisions. Given these practices as means of silencing the press, the
least that state institutions must do, is take a political decision to investigate,
find, and properly punish those responsible for these crimes and at the same
time to change those laws that try to intimidate journalists. I wish to take
this opportunity to pay tribute to the Inter- American Press Asociation for
the extraordinary will in pressing governments and judicial systems in combating
impunity. At the same time, in order to mitigate judicial harassment, we should
continue to press all the branches of government in reforming legislation and
eliminating any possibility of lawsuits against those who criticize public figures.
We endorse the mandate of the Heads of State and of Government of the Americas
in the Third Summit of the Americas, where we were asked to Ensure that journalists
and opinion leaders are free to investigate and denounce without fear of reprisals,
harassment, or retaliatory actions. To monitor and address these problems, the
inter-American system for the protection of human rights and its Special Rapporteurship
for Freedom of Expression has worked intensively and usefully to onsolidate
and defend
freedom
of the press in the Hemisphere. The Declaration of Principles on Freedom of
Expression drawn up by that office, approved by the Inter-American Commission
of Human Rights, and supported by the Inter-American Press Association, has
become, along with the Declaration of Chapultepec, a highly valuable instrument
when it comes to evaluating the status of freedom of expression in the different
states. The impact of the work done by the Rapporteurship in the framework of
the Inter-American Commission in its first five years of existence, allow me
to state that the Heads of State and of Government of the Americas were right
in celebrating the creation of the Rapporteurship during the Second Summit of
the Americas, held in Santiago, Chile, in 1998. They were also right when, in
the following Summit, held in Quebec, they reiterated their support for the
work of the Rapporteurship. It is important to keep this political support and
to boost financial and institutional backing of this office, enabling it to
expand its activities. We need to guarantee that gi ven these current obstacles
to the full exercise of freedom of expression, its discussion must always be
on the agenda of meetings addressing problems associated with democratic institutions
and meeting to look for good governance in the Hemisphere. Some might wrongly
suppose that Latin America has more urgent matters to deal with than the struggle
for stronger guarantees for freedom of expression. It is true that the high
levels of poverty and growing inequality experienced by some countries make
it difficult for them to play an active part in the democratic political arena.
Nevertheless, it would be a big mistake to put off strengthening freedom of
expression as a fundamental component of democracy. Regarding this matter, I
want to refer to Economics Nobel Prize laureate Amartya Zen, who brought to
our attention how freedom of expression is key to the human development of political
and social participation skills, and that it allows individuals to express their
demands and draw political attention to them. In this moment of' our history
be it as an instrument for safeguarding other freedoms, or as a part and parcel
of democracy, freedom of expression must merit the region s most resolute respect
and any attempt to undermine it must be rejected out of hand. Simultaneously
work done by an independent and critical press is vital to ensure the effective
exercise of human beings rights and freedoms; political participation of citizens;
and the sustainability of the rule of law. Hence the importance of journalistic
respect for the ethical principles governing the profession. The credibility
and the very survival of the media, and the public s access to information,
depend on that ethic. However, the fact that the media must be responsible in
their mission of keeping society informed cannot serve as a pretext for imposing
practices or mechanisms that could impair their work. J ournalism serves the
public, not the government nor the vested interests of pressure groups. The
independence of journalism is a social good that demands respect on the part
of the authorities, needs to be defended by citizens, and calls upon those who
work in the media to go about their work in a manner commensurate with the social
value entrusted to their care. May all of us civil society, democratic governments,
and you, the Inter-American Press Association strive to implement that imperative.
Thank you very much.
Preguntas ó Comentarios? escríbanos
© 2002 Sociedad
Interamericana de Prensa. Todos los derechos reservados.
|