OAS » IACHR » Special Rapporteurship for Freedom of Expression » Argentina

Freedom of Expression

Argentina

25.              The Office of the Special Rapporteur is concerned that in some provinces of Argentina the journalists and other media workers and the citizens could face more difficult conditions for the full exercise of their right to freedom of expression as compared to the situation in the large urban centers, especially Buenos Aires. This becomes clear when one observes the map of reported cases of possible restrictions and pressures, contrary to the free dissemination of information, threats, and attacks on social communicators as well as pressures on journalists to reveal their sources of information.

PRINCIPLE 4 OF THE DECLARATION OF PRINCIPLES ON FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION (Access to information in the hands of the state)

26.              The Office of the Special Rapporteur has closely followed congressional consideration of a bill on access to information. The bill was approved by the Chamber of Deputies in May 2003. The proposal is aimed at allowing individuals access to the data bases of official organs and it establishes administrative and judicial sanctions for public officials who fail to respond to the requests. In addition, it makes public those laws, decrees, and documents that have been kept secret by the State for more than 10 years, and those not classified based on the need for secrecy. Nonetheless, consideration of that proposed legislation had been held up in the Senate. In its annual report for 2003, the Office of the Special Rapporteur urged the Senate to debate and adopt the bill in question. Finally, the Senate approved the proposal on December 1, 2004, and after making some changes sent it back to the Chamber of Deputies. The Chamber of Deputies can veto the changes made by the Senate by a two-thirds vote. The Office of the Special Rapporteur is concerned about some of the changes made to the bill, especially the exceptions made to the principle of publicity, the requirement the request be justified in a form that would be in the nature of a sworn statement, the introduction of tariffs, and ambiguity in the definition of public information.[1]

27.              There was a similar situation in the case of the provinces of Santa Fe and Mendoza, where the legislatures have had similar proposals before them. In these cases, the senators also introduced clauses that would require showing a legitimate interest in order to obtain information,[2] what is “legitimate” could be defined by state organs.[3]

PRINCIPLE 5 OF THE DECLARATION OF PRINCIPLES ON FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION (Prior censorship, interference, direct or indirect pressures)

28.              The Office of the Special Rapporteur received information on a judicial decision[4] in the province of Salta that was said to have prohibited a media outlet from disseminating information about a man accused of murder that could call into question the presumption of innocence.[5]

29.              In addition, on March 10, 2004, the news program Telefe Noticias, was said to have been taken off the air from Canal 23, a state-owned station, allegedly by order of the governor of the province of San Luis, when it was reporting on a protest march against the local government’s education policy. Instead of the news program, a film was shown.[6]

PRINCIPLE 8 OF THE DECLARATION OF PRINCIPLES ON FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION (Right of social communicators to keep sources, notes, and personal and professional files confidential)

 30.              On August 6, 2004, the government of the province of Neuquén presented a complaint, before the provincial courts, against the daily newspaper Río Negro to reveal the origin of information published in an article on August 4, 2004. The Office of the Special Rapporteur considers it positive that attorney general Ricardo Trincheri dismissed the complaint, asserting that no judicial or police organ could engage in investigative practices that might endanger journalists’ privilege of confidentiality.[7]

 PRINCIPLE 9 OF THE DECLARATION OF PRINCIPLES ON FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION (Murder, kidnapping, intimidation of and/or threats to social communicators, and material destruction of communications media)

 31.              Following are some cases reported to the Office of the Special Rapporteur related to threats to and attacks on the personal integrity of social communicators and against the establishments of media outlets. All the cases mentioned here occurred in the interior.

 32.              On March 1, 2004, unknown persons threw paint on the car of Alfredo Valdez, host of the program La Ciudad Despierta on Radio Nacional, in the province of Tierra del Fuego. The car was parked in front of his home. The attack was similar to one that occurred days earlier against Héctor "Lito" Lavia, director and owner of the local daily newspaper Prensa, after it published a report regarding a provincial official.[8] On March 6, 2004, in the early morning hours, the offices of El Diario de El Fin del Mundo, in Ushuaia, also in the province of Tierra del Fuego, were set on fire. The fire destroyed the newsrooms and the administrative offices. According to the forensic report, the fire was intentional. The Federal Government sent the deputy secretary for media, Gabriel Mariotto, to look into the matter. On March 8, Mario Jorge Colazo, Secretary of State for the province, undertook to "investigate in depth and ensure the security of the persons and their property.”[9]

 33.              As regards the events in Tierra del Fuego, on March 1, at night, Carmen Miranda, a journalist with El Diario del Fin del Mundo and secretary general of the Sindicato de Prensa (trade union of media workers) in Ushuaia, province of Tierra del Fuego, was questioned in the street by two members of the investigations service (Servicio de Investigaciones) of the Provincial Police. The police wanted to learn the places of residence of other journalists in the city, arguing that they would be able to provide better protection and prevent attacks such as those suffered by Héctor Lavia and Alfredo Valdez. The next day, provincial Secretary of Security Rubén Cena apologized for the inadequacy of the procedure, though he made official the intent to draw up the list of journalists’ places of residence.[10]

 34.              In January 2004, cameraman Gustavo Aguirre and journalist Heraldo Cruz, of a local cable television station in the tourist town of Paso de la Patria, Corrientes, were beaten by several individuals. One of the individuals was reportedly identified as the son of the local intendant, and another as the chief of personnel of the local government. The attack occurred when they were taping a news report for the program Futura TV.[11]

 35.              On June 11, 2004, members of the program Puntodoc, on Canal América, in Buenos Aires, were attacked by persons from a local night spot reported as an alleged place of sexual exploitation of young women, in the province of Córdoba. The local police refused to take the crime report from the journalists; accordingly, they had no guarantees of security.[12]

 PROGRESS

 36.              On December 30, 2003, the First Court of Appeals (Cámara de Apelaciones en lo Civil, Comercial, de Minas y del Trabajo de la Primera Nominación) of the province of Catamarca, Argentina, overturned the judgment of liability imposed on the publisher of the daily newspaper El Ancasti.[13] On annulling the judgment, the court considered that, based on the doctrine of actual malice, in no way had the judge’s right to honor been harmed, with which the caselaw of Catamarca for the first time accepted that doctrine, which is recognized by the federal Supreme Court of Justice.[14]

 37.              On May 6, 2004, the provincial law of Tucumán that protects the journalists’ privilege of confidentiality with respect to their sources was adopted.[15]

 38.              On June 23, 2004, the law on freedom of the press (“ley de libertad de imprenta”) was repealed by the governor of San Luis, Alberto Rodríguez Saá, deputies, and senators. That law, which dated from the 1940s, established “press crime” ("delito de imprenta") and punishments such as closing, imprisonment, or sequestration of copies for those who publish news that is "subversive, seditious, obscene, immoral, or slanderous.”[16]

 39.              In September, Judge Raquel Villagra, of the province of Córdoba, issued a judgment favorable to a request for information by the daily newspaper La Voz del Interior. The paper had filed a writ of amparo against the Public Services Regulatory Entity (ERSEP: Ente Regulador de Servicios Público) of the province for delaying, without justification, access to the minutes of the regulatory agency’s Board of Directors meetings. According to the judge, the refusal was arbitrary and illegal, while the request of the La Voz del Interior was part of the normal exercise of its right to inform.[17]

 40.              In November, the Chamber of Deputies of Argentina approved a bill to amend Article 45 of the Law on Radiobroadcasting, declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of Justice. The amendment would give social organizations and non-profit organizations access to radio licenses, which would do away with restrictions that require that one be a commercial enterprise to be able to provide radiobroadcasting services. As of the writing of this report, the bill had yet to be approved by the Senate, a necessary step for it to be adopted definitively.[18]

 

---

1889 F St. N.W. Washington, DC, U.S.A. 20006 / E-mail: [email protected] / Phone: (202) 370-9000 / Fax: (202) 458-3650