CHAPTER II SITUATION of FREEDOM of EXPRESSION in the REGION A. Introduction and Methodology 87. This Chapter Describes Specific
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
CHAPTER II SITUATION OF FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION IN THE REGION A. Introduction and Methodology 87. This chapter describes specific aspects related to the situation of freedom of expression in the countries of the region in 2007. 88. The chapter is divided into four sections: Section A consists of the introduction and an explanation of the methodology used; Section B has to do with the evaluation of the situation of freedom of expression in the region in 2007; Section C details the most important developments related to the exercise of freedom of expression in the Member States during the year; and Section D contains tables with the information received in 2007 by the Office of the Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression, broken down by country. These tables are included in the 2007 quarterly reports, in which the Office of the Special Rapporteur evaluates the situation of freedom of expression in the region, a practice it began in 2006. 89. The States Parties to the American Convention have the obligation not only to respect the human rights enshrined in this instrument but also to guarantee that they are exercised. This implies that the States are obligated to investigate and punish those responsible for all acts of violence, including those committed by persons who are not agents of the State. Consequently, this report includes not only the murders, threats and aggressions allegedly committed by State agents, but also those in which the alleged perpetrators are private individuals. 90. The evaluation of the state of freedom of expression in the region presented in Section B and the evaluation by country in Section C were based on information received by the Office of the Special Rapporteur, which is detailed in the tables in Section D. Information gathered during working visits and seminars was also taken into account. In addition to a summary of information received by the Office of the Special Rapporteur, Section D includes sources for the information and Internet links, when these are available. 91. In the last three annual reports, Section C categorized each year’s most significant developments in accordance with the approved Declaration of Principles on Freedom of Expression. For this new annual report, the Office of the Special Rapporteur concentrated its efforts on evaluating in general terms the key issues that have emerged in the area of freedom of expression during the year in the region as a whole, then did a detailed, country-by-country analysis. Both evaluations took into account the Declaration of Principles on Freedom of Expression, although for this report the analysis and developments were not organized according to each principle. 92. The Office of the Special Rapporteur receives information about freedom of expression from different sources, analyzes it on a daily basis and takes whatever action it deems appropriate, such as issuing press releases and sending requests for information to the States. 93. In doing the evaluation for this annual report, the Office of the Special Rapporteur took into account all the allegations and information regarding the state of freedom of expression that it received during 2007. In previous reports, events that were representative of the situation in each country had been listed and then grouped according to the principles that were being violated. For the 2007 annual report, the idea was to take all the information received and use it as the basis on which to make a specific evaluation of the situation in each Member State. 94. Another aim of the new report was to provide a space for registering all the information and allegations received during 2007. That is the purpose of Section D and its tables. 20 95. As in previous annual reports, both in the Section B evaluation of the state of freedom of expression in the region and in the Section C country-by-country analysis, there is a marked predominance of developments in the field of journalism, which is a reflection of the information received. 96. However, in addition to the customary alerts, allegations and relevant information, in 2007 the Office of the Special Rapporteur received—in response to the questionnaire (annexed to this report) sent out as part of the groundwork for the Special Study on the Situation of Freedom of Expression in the Americas— written replies from States, civil society organizations from different countries, academic sectors and individuals. B. Evaluation of the Situation of Freedom of Expression in the Region 97. As in previous years, the Office of the Rapporteur has evaluated the situation of the right to freedom of expression in the Americas. In 2007, this evaluation is based primarily on the study of the following aspects: 1. violence against the communications media: murders and aggressions; 2. censorship; 3. criminal prosecutions; 4. abusive use of official authority; 5. pluralism and diversity in radio broadcasting; 6. access to information; and 7. confidentiality of sources. 1. Violence against the media: murders, threats and aggressions • Murders 98. In 2007, violence once again became a particularly urgent issue for journalism in the region, mainly because of two clearly identified problems: murders, as well as aggressions and threats directed at the media as the result of their exercising the right to freedom of thought and expression. It is important to note that both of these problems share the characteristic of not being limited to acts of aggression carried out by agents of the State; alerts were also registered in which the acts of aggression were linked to private individuals in view of the lack of prevention and guarantees by the State. 99. In that regard, Principle 9 of the Declaration of Principles on Freedom of Expression establishes that: “The murder, kidnapping, intimidation of and/or threats to social communicators, as well as the material destruction of communications media violate the fundamental rights of individuals and strongly restrict freedom of expression. It is the duty of the state to prevent and investigate such occurrences, to punish their perpetrators and to ensure that victims receive due compensation.” 100. According to the information received by the Office of the Special Rapporteur, at least sixteen murders and three disappearances apparently related to the work of journalism were recorded this year. In those twelve months, such murders of members of the media were registered in Brazil, Colombia, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Mexico, Paraguay, Peru and the United States. 101. For the second year in a row, Mexico was the country that saw the highest concentration of murders during the 12-month period, registering a total of six murders and three disappearances. Two reporters, a spokesman on security issues for the government of Sinaloa and three newspaper deliverymen were murdered for reasons apparently related to their work in journalism, and another three journalists disappeared. The majority of these reported cases could be related to organized crime operations, which underscores the vulnerability of the media in this situation. 21 102. The Office of the Special Rapporteur has reacted forcefully, condemning such acts as those just mentioned. It issued press releases in cases in which journalists were murdered, urging the States to duly investigate to determine the causes of the crimes, punish the perpetrators and intellectual authors, and make reparations to the victims’ family members when appropriate.26 103. In this regard, the Office of the Special Rapporteur emphasizes that murder is the most brutal and violent way to violate the right to freedom of thought and expression and to stop the free flow of information and ideas, becoming in effect the worst act of censorship. The persecution and murder of individuals for exercising the right to freedom of thought and expression are characteristics common to dictatorships; when seen in democratic systems, they weaken democracy. 104. Thus, the Office of the Rapporteur underscores the importance—for the protection of freedom of expression—of overcoming impunity by determining those responsible for the murders. In that regard, in 2007 some progress was made in several investigations into murders of members of the media that took place during the year or in the past. As an example, in Brazil, the person behind the assassination of the Paraguayan journalist Samuel Román, who died in 2004, was convicted of the crime. In Haiti, two of those responsible for the murder of Jacques Roche were sentenced to life in prison; meanwhile, a commission that includes journalists is helping to facilitate the investigations into the murders of other journalists. In the Dominican Republic, journalist Facundo Lavatta’s killer was sentenced to 30 years in prison, as was the murderer of Juan Andújar. In the United States, Chauncey Bailey’s murderer was caught a few days after the reporter’s death and confessed that he had killed him because of articles he had published. In Colombia, demobilized paramilitary members confessed their responsibility in the murders of journalists Martín Larrota Duarte and José Emeterio Rivas Rivas. 105. Nevertheless, the lack of due investigation into certain murders of journalists in 2007 and in previous years has been a cause of permanent concern for the Office of the Special Rapporteur. These crimes frequently remain unpunished, giving rise to new murders and an increase in self-censorship. 106. The Office of the Special Rapporteur again urges the States to promptly investigate these cases and to apply the greatest possible effort to ensure that these crimes do not remain unpunished. Especially in the case of Mexico, it reminds the State that it should not only investigate and penalize, but also adopt all necessary measures to prevent such acts as those registered in 2007 from being repeated, taking actions to address the problem of violence against the media. In addition, the Office of the Special Rapporteur reminds States that they can also be held responsible internationally for the lack of an effective investigation of crimes perpetrated by organized crime.