libel Archives - Page 4 of 75 - Index on Censorship

Romania criminalises insult

11 Dec 13 | Romania

See statement from Romanian civil society groups:

Attacks on freedom of expression: Insult and libel recriminalized

The signatory organizations condemn the anti-democratic practices adopted and exercised by the current parliamentary majority and publicly ask the Romanian President not to promulgate the law through which, surreptitiously, the offenses of libel and insult were reintroduced in the Criminal Code.

In 2006, the Parliament decided to repeal the offenses of insult and libel. In 2007, the Constitutional Court ruled that the offenses of libel and insult are not repealed, then, in 2010, the High Court of Cassation and Justice has ruled that the offenses of insult and libel are abolished, and in 2013 the Constitutional Court ruled again that the offenses of libel and insult are not repealed.

OSCE congratulated Romania after insult and libel were decriminalized. This decriminalization also increased the rating of the country in relevant international rankings, such as those of Reporters Without Borders.

An old bill 2011 (Pl-x 680/2011) proposed the repeal of a single article of the Criminal Code, namely Article 74/1. Under very suspicious circumstances, this bill was radically changed the night before being adopted by the Chamber of Deputies during the plenum of 10 December 2013 (“The International Human Rights Day”) by introducing, among other provisions, the offenses of libel and insult.

This decision, taken without any public consultation made useless ten years of efforts made by the society for the decriminalization of insult and libel. It eliminates Romania from the democracies who reject the idea that a man can be imprisoned for his words.

We remind politicians that the decisions of the Constitutional Court quoted as a pretext for introducing the offenses of insult and libel in the Criminal Code must comply with the European Convention on Human Rights and the jurisprudence of the ECHR – which have the force of law in Romania. Imposing an obligation on defamation to be criminally sanctioned is not supported by any article of the European Convention on Human Rights and of any judgment by the European Court of Human Rights.

On the other hand, due to the haste with which the amendments to the Criminal Code were adopted, another obsolete article was passed, namely Article 207 – burden of proof. This article is in manifest contradiction with ECHR jurisprudence, demanding those who make a statement to prove the absolute truth of the facts narrated, proof impossible in many situations, especially when it comes to journalistic investigations in complex cases. According to the jurisprudence of the ECHR (see case Dalban v. Romania, for example), those who make a statement, even false / exaggerated, cannot be penalized in any way if they prove the existence of a reasonable factual basis for their statement.

It is imperative that Articles 205-207, which recriminalize insult and libel be removed from the Criminal Code. The current form of the law is a serious assault on press freedom and freedom of expression in general.

The signatory organizations ask the Romanian President not to promulgate this law through which, clandestinely, the offenses of libel and insult were reintroduced in the Criminal Code.

Association for the Defense of Human Rights in Romania – the Helsinki Committee

ActiveWatch

Association for Technology and Internet

Center for Independent Journalism

Schillings: Trollhunters General

05 Sep 13 | Comment, News and features, United Kingdom

A troll, yesterday

Law firm Schillings has relaunched as a privacy and cyber security firm, the Lawyer reports.

Schillings, scourge of many a Fleet Street editor, clearly believes the future of libel and privacy lays online. As such, they have co-opted online security firm “Vigilante Bespoke” into “Schillings IT Security”.

Vigilante Bespoke (which wouldn’t be a bad rapper name) started in 2009 as an “ethical hacking” business, testing gaps in firms and individual’s technological security.

Now, Vigilante Bespoke founder Oliver Crofton is being cast by Schillings as the Trollhunter General. He explains on the Schillings site:

“Although the internet is seen by some as anonymous, everything we do online leaves a “digital fingerprint”, which in some instances can be traced to uncover valuable identifying information.

“During investigations we look to uncover IP addresses (these are unique codes that relate to an individual home or office internet connection), which can often lead us to the street address of the person posting the nasty comments. In some instances, website server connection logs can be analysed, which can give us the mac address (a computer’s name and location) of the computer being used to post the unsolicited content.

“Simple tools also help when tracing people online, such as indepth online searches for usernames; as these are often used across several websites and each website may vary in the amount of information available about their users.”

Apart from troll hunting, the Schillings site has lots more to say on social media: what does a company do, for example, when compromising pictures of senior figures are Instagrammed (“the Weiner Dilemma” perhaps?). How to deal with negative customer reviews on say, TripAdvisor, or how to handle an ex-employee who can’t stop ranting about your company online?

The Schillings site is, in its own way, an indicator of where the new libel and privacy battles will be fought. It’s not about newspapers any more.

(ht Leah Borromeo)

Ryanair, libel and Miss World

22 Aug 13 | News and features

Ryanair has embarked on a litigation spree after a Channel 4 documentary made allegations about its practices. The airline is to sue the television station Associated Newspapers, Mirror Group newspapers and one of the pilots interviewed for the programme, who has already been fired by the Irish firm for contributing to the programme. There were reportedly plans to sue the Belfast Telegraph as well, but then graciously accepted an apology from that paper.

The main point in contention is the claim that Ryanair planes carry very low amounts of fuel. In a statement following the Belfast Telegraph’s apology, Ryanair’s Head of Communications Robin Kiely said:

We welcome the Belfast Telegraph’s apology and its acceptance that Ryanair’s pilots are free to carry as much fuel as they wish, that Ryanair fully complies with EU fuel regulation, and the IAA’s confirmation that Ryanair’s safety is “on a par with the safest airlines in Europe”.

Ryanair has sought the services of Belfast solicitor Paul Tweed in the upcoming cases. Probably a wise move – Tweed claims to have “never lost a case”.

And Ryanair, of all people, could back up this claim. In 2011, Tweed represented Rosanna Davison [pictured], a former Miss World and daughter of single-browed singer Chris de Burgh in a defamation case against the airline.

Davison had criticised Ryanair’s already controversial “charity” pin-up cheesecake calendars, featuring female air stewards in various states of undress, for not featuring any Irish models. The airline responded a little strongly, saying Davison’s comments “bordered on racism and demonstrated an elitist attitude against Ryanair’s international cabin crew.” The model engaged lawyer to the stars Tweed, sued for defamation and won E80,000 in compensation and damages. In engaging Tweed this time round, Ryanair have clearly learned their lesson.

Mr Tweed has the distinction of practising in Dublin, Belfast and London, a fact he regularly points out while bemoaning moves for libel reform in England and Wales. Perhaps, if Stormont fails to pass the law reform fought so hard for on this side of the Irish Sea, the budget airlines’ planes will be packed with celebrities, oligarchs and quacks looking to take advantage of Mr Tweed’s services in Belfast’s and Dublin’s more claimant-friendly courts.