Freedom of the press in East Timor

Last updated

Freedom of the press in East Timor is protected by section 41 of the Constitution of East Timor. [1]

Contents

After gaining its independence from Indonesia in 2002, there was little discord between the East Timor press and the government. However, after 2005, the East Timor government was more active in attempting to suppress anti-government sentiment in several of the country's newspapers, leading the rights group Freedom House to downgrade its press status from "Free" to "Partly Free" in its 2006 report. [2]

Background

In 2005, Reporters Without Borders said East Timor had one of the most liberal press environments in Asia. [3] However that same year, parliament gave the executive authority to enact a new penal law that criminalized defamation and dramatically increased penalties for defaming government officials. [4]

The move was the first in a series of steps by the government against news outlets and journalists that wrote about issues such as corruption and widespread hunger. The effort would later include criminal indictments against some of the country's most prominent journalists. These indictments, and East Timor's legal restrictions on the press, have widely criticized by press freedom groups around the world.

Timor Post headquarters in Dili Timor-Post-Building-Dili-2009.JPG
Timor Post headquarters in Dili

One early sign of the changing environment was the government's 2005 treatment of the daily newspaper Suara Timor Lorosae for its coverage of a famine in the country. [5] In response, the government evicted the newspaper from its offices, halted government advertising in the newspaper, banned officials from speaking with Suara Timor Lorosae reporters, and ordered government agencies to boycott the publication. [6]

In 2007, the newspaper's offices were attacked during a period of political tension, according to the Committee to Protect Journalists. [7] In 2009 and 2015, high-ranking officials in the government brought criminal defamation charges against investigative journalists who reported on corruption. A 2014 media law passed by parliament was widely criticized by journalists in East Timor and press freedom groups when members of the government began using criminal defamation laws to prosecute journalists who reported on corruption.

2013 Media Code Proposal

In October 2013, a group of approximately 150 East Timorese journalists gathered in Dili, the country's capital. The assembled journalists voted on a proposal about journalistic self-regulation within the country. Included in this proposal was a 10-point code of ethics that addressed issues of freedom of expression, confidentiality of sources, and accuracy in reporting. The code was also put in place to curb the common practice of government officials paying journalists to report on them and their policies in a favorable manner. [8]

2014 Media Code Amendment

On May 6, 2014, the East Timor Parliament amended the 2013 Media Code and drafted new certification requirements for journalists in the country. The new law would make journalists go through a training process with a press organization that has been certified by the official government Press Council. This training process would take from six to 18 months. [9]

New provisions

Article 9 in the document states: “1) Everyone has the freedom to express and disseminate their ideas through the media. 2) No one shall be disquieted for their political, philosophical, religious or other opinions.” Some have cited provisions in Article 17 that seem to contradict the statements in Article 9. This article excludes civil servants, advertisers, political leaders or office-holders from practicing journalism “concurrently” with their occupation. In Chapter 8 of the document, details of the new Press Council are outlined. The article states the council will be made up of five people who have the power to “Exercise disciplinary authority over journalists,” and “Grant, renew, suspend and revoke the professional credentials of journalists.” [10]

Criticism

After the new law was passed by parliament, it was sharply criticized by various press freedom groups. Human Rights Watch (HRW) called on the government to “eliminate the Media Act’s Requirement of an official Press Council and its requisite listing of journalists in favor of media self-regulation.” [11] Some members of the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) called the law "draconian", and sent a petition to the East Timor Government, urging them to strike down the law. [12] Because of the 2014 law, East Timor dropped 26 places to 103rd place out of 180 countries on the Reporters Without Borders World Press Freedom Index. It was the second-sharpest drop on the list behind Andorra, which fell 27 places. [13]

Appeal

In response to widespread criticism of the law, in July 2014, East Timor President Taur Matan Ruak, who had not yet signed the bill, sent the proposal to East Timor's Court of Appeal to determine its constitutionality. In August 2014,The Court of Appeal found several aspects of the media law to be unconstitutional and was sent back to East Timor's parliament. As of October 2016, no more significant action has been taken by East Timor's Government to amend the bill. [14]

Indicted journalists

Jose Belo

In 2008, East Timor Minister of Justice Lucia Lobato accused Jose Belo, publisher of investigative newspaper Tempo Semanal of defamation. At the time, many of the press laws in East Timor were inherited from Indonesian military rule. [15] In a number of articles in Tempo Semanal, Belo accused Lobato of corruption and using her power to get friends and family members into high-paying government positions.

In response, Lobato brought a defamation charge against Belo using an Indonesian-era law that made defamation a criminal offense. Lobato was criticized by many members of the East Timor press, as she and other members of the East Timor government were in the process of drafting a new law that downgraded defamation to a civil, rather than criminal offense. Under the old law, Belo faced a possible prison sentence of seven years. Belo said “It’s very sad for my country that they keep using foreign invader’s laws to prosecute me. We should have our own laws.” [16]

After the East Timor Government pressed charges against Belo, several press freedom groups criticized the East Timor Government for limiting press freedoms. Some of these groups include East Timor and Indonesia Action Network (ETAN), Pacific Media Watch (PMW), and the Australian Centre for Independent Journalism (ACIJ) who sent a letter to East Timor's President José Ramos-Horta urging him to drop the charges against Belo. [17]

Court decision

Ultimately, outside support for Belo helped his case. In June 2009, Ramos-Horta passed a law that removed defamation as a criminal offense. Soon after, charges against Belo and the Tempo Semanal were dismissed. [18]

Raimundos Oki

On November 10, 2015, freelance reporter Raimundos Oki wrote an article for the Timor Post in which he accused East Timor Prime Minister Rui Maria de Araújo of possible “bid rigging” in a government computer contract. In this case, Oki contends that Araujo had a history of this practice, and according to internal government documents, he gave preferential treatment to a particular technological firm—Packet Sistemindonesia Teknotama (PT). [19]

Defamation charges

After the story's release, the government claimed Oki had released the story with a “factual error” by misspelling the name of technology firm, PT. On November 17, 2015, The Timor Post issued a correction with the accurate spelling of PT and printed a written response from the prime minister's office, defending itself against the accusations. In January 2016, the East Timor Government charged Oki with criminal defamation charges. Oki faces a maximum sentence of three years in jail if convicted. [20]

Outside support

As in the case of Jose Belo, many press freedom groups have voiced their support for Oki. The IFJ, CPJ, and Freedom House are just a few who have reached out to the East Timor Government. In a letter sent to Prime Minister de Araujo in April 2016, they urged him to drop charges against Oki and his former editor, Lourenco Martins. In a response letter to the group, Araujo said: “I will not trade press freedom and freedom of expression with ‘press irresponsibility’ and ‘irresponsible expression of freedom.” [21]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Defamation</span> Any communication that can injure a third partys reputation

Defamation is a communication that injures a third party's reputation and causes a legally redressable injury. The precise legal definition of defamation varies from country to country. It is not necessarily restricted to making assertions that are falsifiable, and can extend to concepts that are more abstract than reputation – like dignity and honour. In the English-speaking world, the law of defamation traditionally distinguishes between libel and slander. It is treated as a civil wrong, as a criminal offence, or both.

Freedom of the press or freedom of the media is the fundamental principle that communication and expression through various media, including printed and electronic media, especially published materials, should be considered a right to be exercised freely. Such freedom implies the absence of interference from an overreaching state; its preservation may be sought through the constitution or other legal protection and security. It is in opposition to paid press, where communities, police organizations, and governments are paid for their copyrights.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Human rights in Armenia</span> Overview of human rights in Armenia

Human rights in Armenia tend to be better than those in most former Soviet republics and have drawn closer to acceptable standards, especially economically. In October 2023, Armenia ratified the Rome statute, whereby Armenia will become a full member of the International Criminal Court.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Censorship in Turkey</span>

Censorship in Turkey is regulated by domestic and international legislation, the latter taking precedence over domestic law, according to Article 90 of the Constitution of Turkey.

The Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act (AIPPA) was passed in 2002 by the Zimbabwean Parliament under the majority of the Zimbabwe African National Union – Patriotic Front (ZANU–PF) and Former President Robert Mugabe.

Latvia is one of the three post-Soviet Baltic states having regained independence in 1991 and since 2004 is a member State of the European Union. After its independence there have been fundamental changes of political, economic and social nature that have turned Latvia into a democratic country with a free market economy. This reflects on the mass media landscape which is considered well-developed despite being subjected to a limited market and a linguistic and cultural split between Latvian (58.2%) and Russian speakers (37.5%). In 2017 Freedom House defined Latvia's press freedom status as “free", assigning to the country's press freedom a score of 26/100. The 2017 World Press Freedom Index prepared annually by Reporters Without Borders (RSF) states that media in Latvia have a "two-speed freedom", underlying different levels of freedom for Latvian-language and Russian-language media. According to RSF's Index the country is ranked 28th among 180 countries.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Temesgen Desalegn</span> Ethiopian journalist

Temesgen Desalegn is an Ethiopian journalist. As an editor of the independent weekly newspaper Feteh, Desalegn went to court many times and was imprisoned from 2014 to 2017 as a result of his criticism of the national government, drawing protests on his behalf from the international press freedom groups Committee to Protect Journalists and Article 19 and from Amnesty International. In its 2014 report, the U.S. Department of State also reported its concern against Temsgen's 3 years sentence by the government, emphasizing that Freedom of expression and freedom of the press are fundamental elements of a democratic society and government. The Human Rights Watch also reported his charge in August 2012 and his three years sentence in 2014.

Most Azerbaijanis receive their information from mainstream television, which is unswervingly pro-government and under strict government control. According to a 2012 report of the NGO "Institute for Reporters' Freedom and Safety (IRFS)" Azerbaijani citizens are unable to access objective and reliable news on human rights issues relevant to Azerbaijan and the population is under-informed about matters of public interest.

Freedom of the press in Djibouti is not specifically mentioned by the country's constitution. However, Article 15 of the Constitution of Djibouti does mention an individual's right to express their opinion "...by word, pen, or image..." and notes that "these rights may be limited by prescriptions in the law and in respect for the honour of others."

Laos has one of the most restrictive media environments in the world. In 2020, Reporters Without Borders ranked Laos 172 out of 179 on its annual Press Freedom Index, behind countries such as Cuba and Iran.

Censorship in Bolivia can be traced back through years of conflict between Bolivia's indigenous population and the wealthier population of European descent. Until Bolivia democratized in 1982, the media was strictly controlled.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Freedom of the press in South Korea</span>

South Korea is considered to have freedom of the press, but it is subject to several pressures. It has improved since South Korea transitioned to democracy in the late 20th century, but declined slightly in the 2010s. Freedom House Freedom of the Press has classified South Korean press as free from 2002 to 2010, and as partly free since 2011.

Freedoms of expression and of the press are constitutionally guaranteed in Zambia, but the government frequently restricts these rights in practice. Although the ruling Patriotic Front has pledged to free state-owned media—consisting of the Zambia National Broadcasting Corporation (ZNBC) and the widely circulated Zambia Daily Mail and Times of Zambia—from government editorial control, these outlets have generally continued to report along pro-government lines. Many journalists reportedly practice self-censorship since most government newspapers do have prepublication review. The ZNBC dominates the broadcast media, though several private stations have the capacity to reach large portions of the population.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Freedom of press in Eritrea</span> Overview of freedom of media in Eritrea

Although the Eritrean constitution guarantees freedom of speech and press, Eritrea has been ranked as one of the worst countries in terms of freedom of the press. As of 2004, the press in Eritrea under the government led by Isaias Afwerki remained tightly controlled.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Safety of journalists</span> Overview article

Safety of journalists is the ability for journalists and media professionals to receive, produce and share information without facing physical or moral threats.

Somaliland is a democratic nation in the Horn of Africa. Somaliland has endorsed the freedom of expression and free press since it declared its independence from Somalia. According to Somaliland's constitution and Somaliland media laws, defamation and libel are not criminal offenses; aggrieved parties may seek redress in civil courts.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Internet censorship and surveillance in Africa</span>

This list of Internet censorship and surveillance in Africa provides information on the types and levels of Internet censorship and surveillance that is occurring in countries in Africa.

Freedom of the press in India is legally protected by the Amendment to the constitution of India, while the sovereignty, national integrity, and moral principles are generally protected by the law of India to maintain a hybrid legal system for independent journalism. In India, media bias or misleading information is restricted under the certain constitutional amendments as described by the country's constitution. The media crime is covered by the Indian Penal Code (IPC) which is applicable to all substantive aspects of criminal law.

Freedom of the press in Bangladesh refers to the censorship and endorsement on public opinions, fundamental rights, freedom of expression, human rights, explicitly mass media such as the print, broadcast and online media as described or mentioned in the constitution of Bangladesh. The country's press is legally regulated by the certain amendments, while the sovereignty, national integrity and sentiments are generally protected by the law of Bangladesh to maintain a hybrid legal system for independent journalism and to protect fundamental rights of the citizens in accordance with secularism and media law. In Bangladesh, media bias and disinformation is restricted under the certain constitutional amendments as described by the country's post-independence constitution.

Since the end of the Rwandan Civil War, many forms of censorship have been implemented in Rwanda.

References

  1. ↑ "Constitution of the Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste" (PDF). Retrieved 25 October 2016.
  2. ↑ "East Timor | Country report | Freedom of the Press | 2006". freedomhouse.org. Archived from the original on 2017-03-30. Retrieved 2016-11-01.
  3. ↑ "East Timor | Country report | Freedom in the World | 2006". freedomhouse.org. Retrieved 2016-10-22.
  4. ↑ "East Timor | Country report | Freedom of the Press | 2006". freedomhouse.org. Archived from the original on 2017-03-30. Retrieved 2016-11-01.
  5. ↑ "EAST TIMOR – Committee to Protect Journalists". cpj.org. 3 February 2005. Retrieved 2016-10-22.
  6. ↑ "East Timor | Country report | Freedom of the Press | 2006". freedomhouse.org. Archived from the original on 2017-03-30. Retrieved 2016-11-01.
  7. ↑ "Newspaper office attacked – Committee to Protect Journalists". cpj.org. 4 August 2007. Retrieved 2016-10-22.
  8. ↑ "Timor | journlaw". journlaw.com. Retrieved 2016-10-22.
  9. ↑ "East Timor's curbs on media freedom – Index on Censorship". Index on Censorship. 2014-05-20. Retrieved 2016-10-22.
  10. ↑ "Timor Leste Press Law (2)". Human Rights Watch. 2014-07-15. Retrieved 2016-10-22.
  11. ↑ "HRW: East Timor: Revise Repressive Media Law". www.easttimorlawandjusticebulletin.com. Retrieved 2016-10-22.
  12. ↑ Pacific, Café. "Pacific Media Centre | articles: Taking on the challenge of Timor-Lestes media in transition". Pacific Media Centre. Retrieved 2016-10-22.
  13. ↑ "World Press Freedom Index 2015: decline on all fronts | Reporters without borders". RSF (in French). Retrieved 2016-10-22.
  14. ↑ "East Timor's media law unconstitutional – Court of Appeal – The Northern Myth". The Northern Myth. 2014-08-21. Retrieved 2016-10-22.
  15. ↑ News, B. B. C. (16 September 2011). "East Timor profile – Timeline". BBC News. Retrieved 2016-10-22.{{cite news}}: |last= has generic name (help)
  16. ↑ Murdoch, Lindsay. "Timor journalists fight repressive new media laws". The Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved 2016-10-23.
  17. ↑ "ACIJ Letter to Pres. Ramos-Horta" (PDF). February 18, 2009.
  18. ↑ "East Timor | Country report | Freedom of the Press | 2010". freedomhouse.org. Archived from the original on 2015-10-02. Retrieved 2016-10-23.
  19. ↑ "Journalist faces criminal defamation threat in East Timor – Committee to Protect Journalists". cpj.org. 29 February 2016. Retrieved 2016-10-23.
  20. ↑ "Prime minister files defamation suit against journalist – SEAPA – Southeast Asian Press Alliance". www.seapa.org. Retrieved 2016-10-23.
  21. ↑ "Global Voices – Timor Leste's Prime Minister Isn't Backing Down on His Defamation Lawsuit Against Two Journalists". Global Voices. 2016-05-07. Retrieved 2016-10-23.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.