‘Your mother wears combat boots’ and other slanders

Michael Hedges April 27, 2008

The Russian State Duma sharpened legal language on slander and libel to include ‘damaging honor and dignity,’ the consequence for media outlets being an even closer watch on what they say or print or face being closed. Defamation laws continue to discourage dissent, criticism and other forms of free speech. But, then, not everybody believes free speech and free press are good things.

Knowing that legislation normally moves through the Russian legislature at less than break-neck speed an amendment to the law on slander and libel was introduced and passed by the State Duma, the lower house, with uncommon quickness. Introduced by MP Robert Schlegel in January the laws’ new language puts defamation charges and punishment on par with terrorism. Schlegel, somewhere to the right of Attila the Hun (no offense, Attila, OK?), also proposed a law criminalizing “reading erotic material in public,” according to RIA-Novosti.

Assuming passage after a second and third reading in the State Duma, the upper house of the Russian Parliament must vote on the amendment and President Vladmir Putin must sign it into law. It could be his final act as chief executive of the Russian Federation. It’s certainly a burning issue for him.

A week before the State Duma passed the slander and libel amendment President Putin was victimized by unrepentant rumor mongering from a small tabloid newspaper Moscowsky Korrespondent. Within hours, literally, of reporting an uncomfortable suggestion about President Putin’s personal life, the newspaper disappeared from the universe. First the editor was fired for standing up for his reporters. Then the owner announced its’ closing because it never made any money anyway. And, too, its’ distribution was halted by Moscow authorities. Nobody waited for some silly law to be passed.

President Putin appeared rather uncomfortable fielding a question on the subject from a Russian journalist at a press conference along side Italian Prime Minister-to-be Silvio Berlusconi. He took particular offense at the question and referred to journalists as ‘slime.’  Mr. Berlusconi ‘pretended’ to shoot the journalist. Her current whereabouts have not been disclosed.

Journalist and press freedom advocates have strongly pressed governments to decriminalize defamation laws. The Council of Europe adopted a resolution calling on Member States to abolish imprisonment for defamation. In a report to the CoE’s Venice Convention on Democracy Through Law (April 7), Herdís Thorgeirdóttir wrote of the “chilling effect” on media as the public watchdog. “Journalists have the duty (not simply a right) to impart information and ideas on all matters of public interest, in a manner which sometimes may include a degree of exaggeration or even provocation.”

The reported noted that the European Court of Human Rights (Strasbourg) has “never upheld or condoned a prison sentence for defamation in cases involving media professionals or entities. When discussing cases where criminal sanctions might meet the proportionality test in the context of freedom of expression, the Court has focused on issues of public order, the protection of certain aspects of private life, not the protection of reputation.”

Western common law generally holds that libel (written) and slander (spoken) can only exist when damage is clear, often monetary. And truth is generally, but not always, considered the ultimate defense.

Honor and dignity are often more valued than property or wealth, particularly where property and wealth is held by the few.

The propertied, wealthy and powerful use criminal defamation laws to intimidate media outlets not otherwise intimidated, say human rights organizations. OSCE media representative Miklós Haraszti continues to press governments to “decriminalize the professional mistakes of journalists and to allow these offences to be treated exclusively in civil courts.” In a March (2008) report to the OSCE, Haraszti warned of “a certain 'meltdown' of OSCE (members) commitments” to speech rights.

French president Nicholas Sarkozy ultimately dropped (March) a lawsuit filed a month earlier under the criminal code as the “toughest way” to punish the newspaper Nouvel Observateur for unflattering comments. Earlier President Sarkozy won a judgment in civil court against Ryanair for unauthorized use of a photo in an ad.

In 2006 the aforementioned Mr. Berlusconi lost a defamation suit against an author of a book, claiming it “besmirched his reputation.” In 2001 he sued the Economist for an editorial that “sullied his good name.”

But where authoritarian politicians and dictators roam free defamation laws, including defaming the State and defaming religion, are used to minimum if not eliminate dissent. The Economist (April 24) published a scathing commentary on media in the new EU Member States where, it says, “politicized public broadcasting is a useful tool to manipulate the voters, especially when commercial television is run by friendly tycoons.” The article noted Slovakia’s new retrograde media law and 100 cases of Bulgarian journalists called to courts in 2007 for “infringing on somebody’s ‘honor and dignity’.” Now safely EU Members Eastern Europe’s ruling class can return to its roots.

It is a worldwide phenomenon. Kampala, Uganda, news magazine The Independence was raided Saturday (April 26), computers confiscated, journalists arrested. One of the journalists, John Njoroge, told Reuters,”We think the government is not happy with a story.”

“We are going to use (equipment confiscated) as evidence to prosecute for seditious material and defamation,” said police spokesperson Judity Nabakhoba, quoted by Reuters.

But defamation laws are not just for politicians’ benefit. The Economist article points to language in the Bulgarian law that affords the same protection as ‘public persons’ to business leaders. Media in Thailand is reeling from a suit filed by Tesco Lotus, part of UK retailer Tesco, against Krungthep Turakij columnists, editors and journalists for reporting critical of its business practices.

Kazakhstan officials have told OSCE representatives that its laws will be amended to decriminalize defamation charges against journalists. In 2007 lawyers have chased Kazakh journalists for more than €10 million in damages in 130 civil cases. In Kazakhstan, Thailand and elsewhere journalists and media workers are far from well-paid, the fear of financial ruin from courts friendly to plaintiffs can be more intimidating than jail time.

As naturally as the sun rising in the East, lawyers for parties claiming the injury of defamation have been chasing bloggers and web publishers.

The Guardian and Observer newspapers in the UK were obliged recently to remove from their websites six articles about businessman Nadhmi Auchi for “significant inaccuracies,” in settling a lawsuit. Auchi’s lawyers have also chased after The Financial Times, the Sunday Times and Mail on Sunday. The Italian business weekly Il Mondo also apologized and removed articles after threat of lawsuit as its website is accessible in the UK and, therefore, liable under UK law.

Fact, however, is irrefutable. Media outlets are obliged to correct inaccuracies and commonly established journalistic standards tend to draw a line between fact and opinion. The ‘chilling effect’ occurs not when opinion is given but, rather, when fact is inconvenient.

The UNESCO sponsored World Press Freedom Day will be observed May 3, 2008.

Media in Spain - Diverse and Challenged – new

Media in Spain is steeped in tradition. yet challenged by diversity. Publishers hold great influence, broadcasters competing. New media has been slow to rise and business models for all are under stress. Rich in language and culture, Spain's media is reaching into the future and finding more than expected. 123 pages, PDF. January 2018

Order here

The Campaign Is On - Elections and Media

Elections campaigns are big media events. Candidates and issues are presented, analyzed and criticized in broadcast and print. Media is now more of a participant in elections than ever. This ftm Knowledge file reports on news coverage, advertising, endorsements and their effect on democracy at work. 84 pages. PDF (September 2017)

Order here

Fake News, Hate Speech and Propaganda

The institutional threat of fake news, hate speech and propaganda is testing the mettle of those who toil in news media. Those three related evils are not new, by any means, but taken together have put the truth and those reporting it on the back foot. Words matter. This ftm Knowledge file explores that light. 48 pages, PDF (March 2017)

Order here

More ftm Knowledge files here

Become an ftm Individual or Corporate Member to order Knowledge Files at no charge. JOIN HERE!