 |
 |
 |
 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
WHEREAS legal charges and sentences are still issued against journalists for disseminating news or opinions about matters of public interest involving government officials WHEREAS on October 28, 2004, a criminal prosecutor in Salto requested a 10-month prison sentence for a journalist for ?defamation? after the reporter questioned the actions of the municipal zoo's director, and, although he was acquitted in a lower court, the case is still before an appeals court that has not yet ruled WHEREAS on December 14, at the request of a prosecutor, a court sentenced a journalist from Paysandú to a five-month prison sentence for four counts of ?especially aggravated? defamation after Mayor Álvaro Lamas said he was insulted by news and criticism reported by the journalist about a controversial business deal between the local government and a private individual WHEREAS the prosecutor who brought the case against the journalist from Paysandú used arguments alleging that news reports that are not ?objective,? ?truthful? and ?serious? can be prosecuted WHEREAS the judge who convicted the journalist said in her decision that ?the thesis that public figures should tolerate certain criticism for their actions has no basis.? WHEREAS on February 7, 2005, a judge in Soriano ordered the police to search the private residence of a journalist to obtain a copy of the tape of a radio program about child prostitution and alleged judicial and police corruption in the region, something that has not happened since democracy was restored in 1985 WHEREAS these cases of harassment of journalists and media outlets by prosecutors and courts follow a succession of similar rulings and sentences reported at the 60 th General Assembly of the IAPA in Antigua, Guatemala WHEREASthe Supreme Court of Uruguay acknowledged receipt of this resolution in a letter to IAPA headquarters on November 12, 2004, but it failed to comment on the concern expressed by IAPA for procedural reasons, and, instead, repeated and elaborated on a suggestion it had made in a ruling in March 2004 in which it warned journalists to ?reflect before publishing news or information? to avoid exposing themselves to lawsuits presented by ?people they refer to who may feel insulted? WHEREAS In its answer to the IAPA, the court said, ?the call for reflection in the decision? is ?a call to conduct journalistic work within the framework of professional ethics? which implies that the Supreme Court has unknown ?professional ethics? for journalists and the media which they should adhere to to avoid judicial consequences for what they say or write WHEREAS if journalists and the media are required to adhere to ?professional ethics? set by the Supreme Court that would constitute de facto state regulation of journalism WHEREAS Principle 6 of the Declaration of Chapultepec states, ?The media and journalists should neither be discriminated against nor favored because of what they write or say? THE MIDYEAR MEETING OF THE IAPA RESOLVESto express its growing concern for the continued charges and sentences that are contrary to press freedom to invite the Supreme Court and other branches of government in Uruguay to begin a serious and urgent evaluation of these facts to be followed by a serious review of the conduct of some judges and prosecutors and the repeal of legal rules that criminalize the so called press offenses to pass on this information to the Commission on Human Rights and the Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression of the OAS so this situation can be taken into account when the time comes to evaluate the status of human rights and press freedom in the country.
Copyright © 2003 Inter American Press Association. All rights reserved. . |
questions
or comments? | Reports
& Resolutions |
|
|