2308 Results
Quotes
Quotes based on international documents, law, and treaties- "Member States may examine the advisability of including in their regulatory frameworks provisions whereby free airtime is made available to political parties/candidates on public broadcasting services in electoral time. Wherever such airtime is granted, this should be done in a fair and non-discriminatory manner, on the basis of transparent and objective criteria."
- "It is a good practice for the public media, at least, to provide free airtime or print space to the candidates or parties."
- "One practice that can ensure this standard is to require provision to political parties of the right to free time on public radio and television on a permanent basis, and not only during electoral periods. A legal framework that provides that all political parties are guaranteed an established number of minutes of broadcasting per month can ensure this practice. Ideally, during electoral campaigns, political parties and candidates would be allocated additional free time in order for them to disseminate information about their candidatures. Free broadcasting time or free newspaper space during election periods should be allotted under an established formula that can be applied objectively. Objective application is ensured if the law specifies the percentage to be distributed to political parties and candidates on a n equal basis, regardless of parliamentary strength. It is also recommended that the amount of broadcast time distributed on an equal basis be sufficient to enable all political parties and candidates to complete effectively in the elections."
- "The international standards and case-law make clear that governments have a negative obligation not to interfere with the imparting of information by the media or by willing speakers. While none of the international tribunals has directly examined the positive obligation of a government during a campaign period to broadcast views of political candidates on government-controlled channels, international norms discernible from a range of state practice confirm that this obligation is indeed widely-recognized."
- "The legal framework should ensure equitable access for political parties and candidates on state-owned radio and television during the election campaign period by providing that all parties are guaranteed a certain amount of broadcasting time according to a defined formula. For example, 50 percent of the time could be allocated equally among all parties with the remaining 50 percent differentially allocated on the basis of the number of votes obtained by a party in the last election or in proportion to its seats in the previous legislature."
- "Freedom of expression imposes an obligation on the authorities to take positive measures to promote diversity, which include among other things-: pluralistic access to the media and other means of communication, including by vulnerable or marginalised groups, such as women, children and refugees, as well as linguistic and cultural groups."
- "Community broadcasting shall be promoted given its potential to broaden access by poor and rural communities to the airwaves."
- "Efforts should be made to increase the scope of the print media, particularly to rural communities."
- "Taking positive measures to narrow the information gap between the rural and urban areas by increasing the coverage of the mass media, whether private, public or community based, (e.) Encouragement of the use of indigenous languages in the mass media as vehicles of promoting local, national, and regional inter-communication, (f.) Ensuring the media are adequately sensitized on gender issues so as to promote gender equality and equity in information dissemination."
- "Calls upon all States: (m) To facilitate equal participation in, access to, and use of, information and communications technology such as the Internet, applying a gender perspective."
- "Promoting diversity should be a primary goal of broadcast regulation; diversity implies gender equity within broadcasting, as well as equal opportunity for all sections of society to access the airwaves."
- "With these broad principles in mind, the Special Rapporteur wishes to emphasize that in pre-election periods…( h) Print and Broadcast media make available reports and programmes that will reach the largest number of voters possible, including in minority languages and for those who may have been traditionally excluded from the political process, such as ethnic or religious minorities, women and indigenous groups."
- "Key concerns are: Do minority parties/candidates have reasonable and fair access to media? Are media available in the language(s) of national minorities? Do minorities in outlying areas have sufficient access to media?"
- "A domestic observer group can assess whether the information is provided on time, is accurate, excludes any group of eligible citizens, and is delivered in a way most likely to ensure the highest level of participation. This can be done by: Including the issue in media-monitoring activities (see Chapter 9); Checking the content, quantity, and distribution of information published by the authorities, such as leaflets and posters; and Checking whether information produced by the authorities is available in “minority” languages (if the concern is that minorities have been excluded)."
- "The participating States reaffirm that freedom of expression is a fundamental human right and a basic component of a democratic society. In this respect, independent and pluralistic media are essential to a free and open society and accountable systems of government. They take as their guiding principle that they will safeguard this right."
- "In order to ensure the full enjoyment of rights protected by article 25, the free communication of information and ideas about public and political issues between citizens, candidates and elected representatives is essential. This implies a free press and other media able to comment on public issues without censorship or restraint and to inform public opinion."
- "Prior censorship, direct of indirect interference in or pressure exerted upon any expression, opinion or information transmitted through any mean of oral, written, artistic, visual, or electronic communication must be prohibited by law."
- "Prior conditioning of expressions, such as truthfulness, timeliness, or impartiality is incompatible with the right to freedom of expression, recognized in international instruments."
- "Declare that in the field of information and mass media they seek to achieve the following objectives: absence of censorship or any arbitrary controls or constraints on participants in the information process, on media content or on the transmission and dissemination of information."
- "While noting that art. 19, para. 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: The free flow of information and ideas, including practices such as the banning or closing of publications or other media and the abuse of administrative measures and censorship."
- "In accordance with international and regional law, “hate speech” laws should, at a minimum, conform to the following: ...no one should be subject to prior censorship."
- "With these broad principles in mind, the Special Rapporteur wishes to emphasize that in pre-election periods…(b)Censorship of any election programme is note allowed and the media are encouraged to broadcast and/or publish election-related programmes and are not penalized for programmes critical of the government, its policies or the ruling party."
- "No democracy can thrive unless citizens have the information they need to make the choices required of them in selecting their representatives in government. Similarly, the media cannot thrive if confronted with undue state interference in its broadcasts or if journalists suffer from censorship or intimidation."
- "Following on from this, the Special Rapporteur believes strongly that it is critical to raise the public conscience to ensure that criminal laws are not used (or abused) to stifle public awareness and suppress discussion of matters of general or specific interest. At minimum, it must be understood that:(a) The only legitimate purpose of defamation, libel, slander and insult laws is to protect reputations; this implies defamation will apply only to individuals - not flags, States, groups, etc.; these laws should never be used to prevent criticism of government or even for such reasons as maintaining public order for which specific incitement laws exist."
- "States should ensure that their laws relating to defamation conform to the following standards: No one shall be found liable for true statements, opinions or statements regarding public figures which it was reasonable to make in the circumstances; public figures shall be required to tolerate a greater degree of criticism; and sanctions shall never be so severe as to inhibit the right to freedom of expression, including by others."
- "The protection of a person's reputation should only be guaranteed through civil sanction in those cases in which the person offended is a public official, a public person or a private person who has voluntarily become involved in matters of public interest. In addition, in these cases, it must be proven that in disseminating the news, the social communicator had the specific intent to inflict harm, was fully aware that false news was disseminated, or acted with gross negligence in efforts to determine the truth or falsity of such news."
- "Public officials are subject to greater scrutiny by society. Laws that penalize offensive expressions directed at public officials…restrict freedom of expression and the right to information."
- "At a minimum, defamation laws should comply with the following standards: the repeal of criminal defamation laws in favour of civil laws should be considered, in accordance with relevant international standards; the States, objects such as flags or symbols, government bodies, and public authorities of all kinds should be prevented from bringing defamation actions; defamation laws should reflect the importance of open debate about matters of public concern and the principle that public figures are required to accept a greater degree of criticism than private citizens; in particular, laws which provide special protection of public figures...should be repealed; the plaintiff should bear the burden of proving the falsity of any statements of fact on matters of public concern; no one should be liable under defamation law for the expression of an opinion; it should be a defense, in relation to a statement on a matter of public concern, to show that publication was reasonable in all the circumstances; and civil sanctions for defamation should not be so large as to exert a chilling effect on freedom of expression and should be designed to restore the reputation harmed, not to compensate the plaintiff or punish the defendant; in particular, pecuniary awards should be strictly proportionate to the actual harm caused and the law should prioritize the use of a range of non-pecuniary remedies."
- "Defamation laws should reflect the principles that public figures are required to tolerate a greater degree of criticism than private citizens; (a) defamation law should not afford special protection to the president and other senior political figures; remedy and compensation under civil law should be provided."
- "Political figures should not enjoy greater protection of their reputation and other rights than other individuals, and thus more severe sanctions should not be pronounced under domestic law against the media where the latter criticize political figures. This principle also applies to public officials; derogation should only be permissible where they are strictly necessary to enable public officials to exercise their functions in a proper manner."
- "Political figures have decided to appeal to the confidence of the public and accepted to subject themselves to public political debate and are therefore subject to close public scrutiny and potentially robust and strong public criticism through the media over the way in which they have carried out or carry out their functions. Public officials must accept that they will be subject to public scrutiny and criticism, particularly through the media, over the way in which they have carried out or carry out their functions, insofar as this is necessary for ensuring transparency and the responsible exercise of their functions."
- "States should ensure that their laws relating to defamation conform to the following standards: No one shall be found liable for true statements, opinions or statements regarding public figures which it was reasonable to make in the circumstances."
- "To require truth in the context of publications relating to matters of public interest is excessive; (d) it should be sufficient if reasonable efforts have been made to ascertain the truth. With regards to opinions, it should be clear that only patently unreasonable views may qualify as defamatory."
- "In accordance with international and regional law, “hate speech” laws should, at a minimum, conform to the following: no one should be penalized for statements which are true."
- "...no one should be liable under defamation law for the expression of an opinion; in relation to a statement on a matter of public concern, it should be a defence to show that publication was reasonable in the given circumstances; and civil sanctions for defamation should not be so large as to exert a chilling effect on freedom of expression and should be designed to restore the reputation harmed, not to compensate the plaintiff or to punish the defendant; in particular, pecuniary awards should be strictly proportionate to the actual harm caused and the law should prioritize the use of a range of nonpecuniary remedies."
- "Political figures and public officials should only have access to those legal remedies against the media which private individuals have in case of violations of their rights by the media. Damages and fines for defamation or insult must bear a reasonable relationship of proportionality to the violation of the rights or reputation of others, taking into consideration any possible effective and adequate voluntary remedies that have been granted by the media and accepted by the persons concerned. Defamation or insult by the media should not lead to imprisonment, unless the seriousness of the violation of the rights or reputation of others makes it a strictly necessary and proportionate penalty."
- "In defamation and libel actions, a range of remedies should be available, including apology and/or correction; and (h) Sanctions for defamation should no be so large as to exert a chilling effect on freedom of opinion and expression and the right to seek, receive and impart information; penal sanctions, in particular imprisonment, should never be applied."
- "With these broad principles in mind, the Special Rapporteur wishes to emphasize that in pre-election periods…(c) The media are exempt from legal liability for provocative statements by candidates or party representatives; the right of reply is provided, as well as correction or retraction in cases where defamation is alleged; the manner and extent of remedy is determined by an independent body."
- "Every person has the right to communicate his/her views by any means and in any form. Compulsory membership or the requirements of a university degree for the practice of journalism constitute unlawful restrictions of freedom of expression."
- "The right to express oneself through the media by practicing journalism shall not be subject to undue legal restrictions."
- "There should be no legal restriction on who may practice journalism."
- "The following enables journalism to contribute to the maintenance and development of genuine democracy: a) unrestricted access to the journalistic profession."
- "The principle of equality of opportunity can, in certain cases, lead to a limitation of political party spending, especially on advertising."
- "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;"