3619 Results
Quotes
Quotes based on international documents, law, and treaties- "The obligations of the private media [in an electoral context] are far fewer [than those on the public media]. The essence of a free media environment is that broadcasters and journalist are not told what they may or may not say or write. The best guarantee that the variety of political ideas are communicated freely and accurately is often understood to be for the media to be allowed to get on with the job unhampered. But this does not mean that private media have no obligations at all. Professional journalistic standards will demand accurate and balanced reporting, as well as a clear separation of fact and comment. Broadcasting stations usually have their licenses allocated by a public body. This will often come with terms attached about whether they are allowed to support any political party; what, if any, news coverage they are allowed to broadcast; and other conditions such as whether they have an obligation, for example, to broadcast public service announcements such as voter education spots."
- "Domestic law may also include provisions regulating how private broadcasters must behave during an election campaign, intended to ensure balanced coverage of parties and candidates. Occasionally, such regulations may also cover the print media. In the absence of such laws and regulations, however, there are no international standards requiring private media to adopt balanced editorial positions. For example, it could be expected that a political party newspaper would serve as a platform for that political party, and it would not be unreasonable for other private newspapers to endorse specific candidates or parties."
- "Depending on national regulations and laws, private media do not necessarily have the same responsibility as public media for neutrality and balance. For example, a political-party newspaper may be expected to serve as a platform for a particular party, and it is not unreasonable for a private newspaper to endorse a candidate in its editorial policy."
- "With due respect for the editorial independence of broadcasters, regulatory frameworks should also provide for the obligations to cover election campaigns in a fair, balanced and impartial manner in the overall programme services of broadcasters. Such an obligation should apply to both public and private broadcasters in their relevant transmission areas."
- "Some political parties own newspapers and even television channels, which are used as party mouthpieces to communicate the campaign issues of the party to the electorate. Where there are private rather than government-owned media the question of equitable access for parties and candidates arises and may need to be regulated. The acceptable international standard in this respect is that of non-discrimination."
- "In conformity with freedom of expression, legal provision should be made to ensure that there is a minimum access to privately owned audiovisual media, with regard to the election campaign and to advertising, for all participants in elections."
- "(p) While noting that article 19, paragraph 3, of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights provides that the exercise of the right to freedom of opinion and expression carries with it special duties and responsibilities, to refrain from imposing restrictions which are not consistent with paragraph 3 of that article, including on: (i) Discussion of government policies and political debate; reporting on human rights, government activities and corruption in government; engaging in election campaigns, peaceful demonstrations or political activities, including for peace or democracy; and expression of opinion and dissent, religion or belief, including by persons belonging to minorities or vulnerable groups;"
- "With these broad principles in mind, the Special Rapporteur wishes to emphasize that in pre-election periods…(f) Programmes provide an effective opportunity for journalists, current affairs experts and/or the general public to put questions to party leaders and other candidates, and for the candidates to debate with each other."
- "In this respect, the media will often be the main platform for debates among contestants, the central source of news and analysis on the manifestos of the contestants, and a vehicle for a whole range of information about the election process itself, including preparations, voting and the results, as well as voter education."
- "The legal framework may also require independent public media and privately owned media to cooperate in providing voter education information, if that is done under conditions that are not overly burdensome to their financial and other private interests."
- "Pluralist democracy and freedom of political debate require that the public is informed about matters of public concern, which includes the right of the media to disseminate negative information and critical opinions concerning political figure and public officials, as well as the right of the public to receive them."
- "The State, the government or any other institution of the executive, legislative or judicial branch may be subject to criticism in the media. Because of their dominant position, these institution as such should not be protected by criminal law against defamatory or insulting statements. Where, however, these institutions enjoy such a protection, this protection should be applied in a restrictive manner, avoiding in any circumstances its use to restrict freedom to criticise. Individuals representing these institutions remain furthermore protected as individuals."
- "The maintenance and development of genuine democracy require the existence and strengthening of free, independent, pluralistic, and responsible journalism. This requirement is reflected in the need for journalism to: submit the exercise of the various types of powers to continuous and critical examination."
- "No international tribunal has yet issued a decision on the merits of holding a media outlet liable for disseminating, without endorsement, unlawful statements (such as slander or incitement to hatred) made by a political party or candidate, international standards undeniably prohibit such statements, but leave open the question a to whether the media outlet should be held liable in addition to the speaker."
- "Holding media outlets liable for speech, even speech that violates international standards, requires editors to pre-screen all broadcasts and, owing to the vagueness of standards, to act as censors. During election periods when it is crucial that political parties be able to publicize their platforms, especially where the major broadcast media rare controlled by the government, the various competing rights may be better balanced by holding liable only the political party or individual responsible for the broadcast. A growing number of governments and courts which respect freedom of expression are choosing not to hold the media liable for unlawful statements published by the media (other than statements made or endorsed by media personnel)...The reasons for not holding the media liable are all the stronger during election periods when timely dissemination is crucial given that concern over liability often delays or prevents the airing of political party programmes. Insistence on holding the media liable for campaign statements clearly promotes self-censorship by privately-owned media and de facto government censorship of government-controlled media...International law strongly disfavours prior restraint, especially where the information's value depends on timely dissemination. The [OAS, ACHR] (in Article 13(2)) expressly prohibits all 'prior censorship'. The [ICCPR] and [ECHR] have been interpreted to prohibit administrative censorship except in extraordinary circumstances, and to require that any administrative order restraining publication be subject to speedy review by a court."
- "Under international law, opinions (as opposed to factual allegations) concerning matters of political debate may be restricted only in extraordinary circumstances. In particular, they may not be restricted on the ground that they are untrue. To require a speaker accused of defamation to prove the truth of an opinion 'infringes freedom of opinion itself."
- "Too often, the legal framework in a country making the transition to democracy censors campaign speech through the imposition of sanctions for speech that "defames" or "insults" another person, which could include the government, a government official, or a candidate in the electoral campaign. Such provisions are commonly found in the electoral code or media (public information) law. However, the examiner should be thorough in examining the legal framework as such provisions are also found in general constitutional, civil, criminal, and administrative laws. Any law regulating defamation of a person's character or reputation should be included only in the applicable civil law. A provision in the electoral law regulating defamation is not justified. ...Such limitations on free expression violate international human rights law. Additionally, such provisions usually violate free speech guarantees found in a country's constitution. ...This standard, however, is not applicable to prohibitions on inflammatory speech that is calculated to incite another person to violence."
- "Broadcasters should not be liable for comments made by candidates."
- "Fair media use implies responsibility on the part of all persons or parties delivering messages or imparting information via the mass media (i.e. truthfulness, professionalism and abstaining from false promises or the building of false expectations)."
- "Use of the media for campaign purposes should be responsible in terms of content, such that no party makes statements which are false, slanderous, or racist, or which constitute incitement to violence. Nor should unrealistic or disingenuous promises be made, nor false expectations be fostered by partisan use of the mass media."
- "International conventions and treaties explicitly classify advocacy for hatred, discrimination, and slander as unlawful statements and as such they prohibit them. However, the responsibility should be ascribed only to the individual making the statement without holding liable the media publishing it."
- "Under such circumstances, a law restricting the publication of opinion polls for a limited period of time in advance of an election does not seem ipso facto to fall outside the aims contemplated in article 19, paragraph 2 [of the ICCPR; Freedom of Expression]."
- "Regulatory or self-regulatory frameworks should ensure that the media, when disseminating the results of opinion polls, provide the public with sufficient information to make a judgement on the value of the polls. Such information could, in particular: name the political party or other organisation or person which commissioned and paid for the poll; identify the organisation conducting the poll and the methodology employed; indicate the sample and margin of error of the poll; indicate the date and/or period when the poll was conducted. All other matters concerning the way in which the media present the results of opinion polls should be decided by the media themselves. Any restriction by member States forbidding the publication/broadcasting of opinion polls (on voting intentions) on voting day or a number of days before the election should comply with Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, as interpreted by the European Court of Human Rights. Similarly, in respect of exit polls, member States may consider prohibiting reporting by the media on the results of such polls until all polling stations in the country have closed."
- "The conduct of opinion polls and exit polls -- especially when their findings can influence the judgment of a part of the electorate which has not yet gone to the polls -- is another area for consideration. Some jurisdictions consider any limitation on opinion polls or exit polls as an infringement of freedom of speech and expression, and hence unacceptable. On the other hand, some jurisdictions permit publication of such findings only after the polling is completed."
- "Voters should be able to form opinions independently, free of violence or threat of violence, compulsion, inducement or manipulative interference of any kind."
- "The exercise of power and the use of public funds by the state, the granting of customs duty privileges, the arbitrary and discriminatory placement of official advertising and government loans, the concession of radio and television broadcast frequencies, among others, with the intent to put pressure on and punish or reward the opinions they express threaten freedom of expression, and must be explicitly prohibited by law."
- "States shall not use their power over the placement of public advertising as a means to interfere with media content."
- "In its assessment of the media environment, an EU EOM will consider the broader obligations of state authorities, including the responsibility not to limit unjustifiably the activities of the media, or impede journalists in their reporting, as well as their responsibility to promote pluralism and freedom of the media."
- "Media outlets should not be required by law to carry messages from specified political figures, such as the president."
- "Measures should be put in place to ensure that government advertising is not used as a vehicle for political interference in the media."
- "We are of the view that elected political officials and members of government who are media owners must separate their political activities from their media interests."
- "Governments and public bodies should never abuse their custody over public finances to try to influence the content of media reporting; the placement of public advertising should be based on market considerations."
- "Checking the media: their affiliations, their availability to political parties and the ease of access of the public to them; are they “weighted” in favour of any particular cause or are they truly independent? are they controlled by one political party?"
- "Calls on member states to: provide the legal, political, financial, technical and other means necessary to ensure genuine editorial independence and institutional autonomy of public service broadcasting organisations, so as to remove any risk of political or economic interference."
- "The following enables journalism to contribute to the maintenance and development of genuine democracy: b) genuine editorial independence vis-à-vis political power and pressures exerted by private interest groups or by public authorities."
- "In cases where publicly funded media provide free access to the parties for party political broadcasts, these should be broadcast without editorial interference."
- "Public service broadcasting…enhances social, political and cultural citizenship and promotes social cohesion. To that end, it is typically universal in terms of content and access; it guarantees editorial independence and impartiality."
- "Media owners have a responsibility to respect the right to freedom of expression and, in particular, editorial independence."
- "Free political broadcasts should be aired during peak time viewing and listening, when audiences are highest."
- "Ensure that the Media is given access to information in cases of corruption and related offences on condition that the dissemination of such information does not adversely affect the investigation process and the right to a fair trial."
- "The media has a “corrective” function by bringing to the public’s attention corruption and inequitable practises. The absence of free media can lead to economic stagnation and improper practises by both governments and businesses."
- "Each State Party shall consider incorporating into its domestic legal system appropriate measures to provide protection against any unjustified treatment for any person who reports in good faith and on reasonable grounds to the competent authorities any facts concerning offences established in accordance with this Convention."
- "Journalistic activities must be guided by ethical conduct, which should in no case be imposed by the State."
- "Every social communicator has the right to keep his/her sources of information, notes, personal and professional archives confidential."
- "Alerts member states to the risk of the power of the media in a situation of strong concentration of the media and new communication services, and its potential consequences for political pluralism and for democratic process and, in this context: 1. Underlines the desirability for effective and manifest separation between the exercise of control of media and decision making as regards media content and the exercise of political authority or influence."
- "State Parties shall take necessary measures to ensure the freedom and independence of the media."
- "Media practitioners shall not be required to reveal confidential sources of information or to disclose other material held for journalistic purposes except in accordance with the following principles: the identity of the source is necessary for the investigation or prosecution of a serious crime, or the defence of a person accused of a criminal offence; the information or similar information leading to the same result cannot be obtained elsewhere; the public interest in disclosure outweighs the harm to freedom of expression; and disclosure has been ordered by a court, after a full hearing."
- "The following enables journalism to contribute to the maintenance and development of genuine democracy: d) the protection of the confidentiality of the sources used by journalists."
- "The practice of journalism in a genuine democracy has a number of implications. These implications, which are already reflected in many professional codes of conduct, include: e) observing professional secrecy with regard to the sources of information."
- "Domestic law and practice in member States should provide for explicit and clear protection of the right of journalists not to disclose information identifying a source in accordance with Article 10 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms...The right of journalists not to disclose information identifying a source must not be subject to other restrictions than those mentioned in Article 10, paragraph 2 of the Convention."