Disclaimer: The views expressed are that of the individual author. All rights are reserved to the original authors of the materials consulted, which are identified in the footnotes below.
In the modern Western World, liberty of expression and resistance to regulation constitute the theoretical foundations upon which ‘much of the power of the media has been built’.[1] Focusing the lens on the Middle East, however, freedom of communication is far from taken for granted, and a tightening gag is slowly strangling the source relied upon by citizens for ‘an informed view of the world’.[2]
Whilst defamation accusations in Lebanon reach alarming new highs, Amnesty International’s scathing branding of Egypt as ‘an open air prison for critics’[3] warns of a worsening situation for the Press.
In both countries, laws are being twisted to function as a ‘sinister tool of repression’,[4] silencing journalists through fear in what only can be described as a catastrophic crackdown on human rights.
In the U.K., the trimming of news pieces prior to acquisition by the public is an accepted reality; the ever-lingering threat of legal action means that journalists and media lawyers remain acutely aware of the presence of damaging falsehoods which may come back to bite
Cairo-based independent news website Mada Masr now joins an ever-growing blacklist of targets; following their report that President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi’s son, Mahmoud al-Sisi, had been ousted from his senior officer role within the General Intelligence Service, Mada Masr’s headquarters were raided on November 24, 2019.[5] The invasion by security forces serves as just one prime example that justifies Reporters without Borders’ ranking of Egypt as 163 out of 180 countries for press freedom.[6] The spiralling situation in Lebanon means that Reporters without Borders place the country not far ahead: 101 on the 2019 World Press Freedom Index reflects the appalling protection of journalistic liberties.
Drawing on an argument underlined in Lingens v. Austria (1986),[7] control of the Press by politicians is particularly provocative; due to the inherently public nature of the role, a politician ‘inevitably and knowingly lays himself open to close scrutiny of his every word and deed by both journalists and the public at large’. Shutdown of the media in Egypt and Lebanon, and the resultant stripping of this right, thus constitutes an outrageous abuse of power, shining the spotlight on the political corruption at its core.
Accusations of malfeasance in Lebanon are further seen to be founded if the original cause of the country’s media clampdown is considered; the ruthless roundup of journalists was triggered by threats to the status quo in 2015, when critics blamed Beirut’s waste pile-up on mismanagement by the government.[8]
In the U.K., the media would be able to crush any objection to disclosure of such corruption on the grounds of public interest: ‘what the public has a right to know’,[9] and consequently ‘part of the process of democratic accountability’. Apparent deprivation of this right in Lebanon not only robs Lebanese society of its vitality, but also undermines the country’s status as a parliamentary democracy.
Whilst freedom of the press, and expression of criticism in particular, stands as ‘the cornerstone of our democracy’,[10] the judgement in Castells v. Spain (1992)[11] spoke even more vehemently in support of the media: ‘Freedom of the press affords the public one of the best means of discovering and forming an opinion on the ideas and attitudes of their political leaders’. Muzzling the media in Lebanon prevents its government from being held accountable for its actions, obstructing the proper functioning of the Lebanese political system.
Yet the gravity of the situation becomes even more prominent as restrictions to democracy in Lebanon quickly snowball into an abuse of human rights; whilst Lebanon ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in 1972, the country’s own constitution protects ‘the freedom to express one’s opinion orally or in writing’ and ‘the freedom of the press’[12] by law.
Failure to adhere to this protection by the Lebanese government reduces the dignity of the country’s citizens to that of animals, mirroring the ‘utter contempt for human rights’[13] evident in Egypt.
There, the number of cases hounded by the Supreme State Security Prosecution (SSSP) has skyrocketed, as President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi attempts to systematically silence every government critic.
The Egyptian government is, however, whitewashing its strike to freedom of expression through the misuse of draconian counter-terrorism legislation. Coldly calculating, the SSSP has distorted the definition of ‘terrorism’ to ‘encompass peaceful protests, social media posts and legitimate political activities’.[14] The intention is to intimidate journalists and critics, and Philip Luther, Research and Advocacy Director for the Middle East and North Africa at Amnesty International, fears that the counter-terrorism legislation is indeed achieving its desired effect, warning that “the international community must not be fooled by this deceptive rhetoric”.[15]
In a turn of events, Internet publications in Lebanon are interestingly free from regulation, and this liberty extends to publications on online blogs and social media. However, whilst in the U.K., the social media boom and resultant ease of cross-border communication has been criticised as making ‘a mockery of the English court injunctions relating to confidential material’,[16] facilitating defence on the basis of public domain, the lack of regulation in Lebanon poses a far greater danger: confusion over whether the definition of publication encompasses online speech has triggered cases of individuals facing trial in both Lebanon’s Publications Court and Criminal Court.[17]
In contrast to Egypt’s counter-terrorism operation, Lebanon has instead silenced journalists using defamation tactics. Whilst the ‘law presumes that (a) defamatory statement is false’[18], the Lebanese government has utterly exploited this legislation, sentencing journalists to prison for their publication of supposedly false claims. Journalist and founder of Lebanon Debate, Michel Kanbour, is just one victim, reportedly having been sued for defamation around 20 times since 2015.[19] The failure of Lebanon’s Ministry of Justice to provide data on cases referred to the criminal courts[20] paints the picture of guilt; the situation in Lebanon raises an international alarm, underlining the potential for defamation laws to be used ‘as a tool for retaliation and repression rather than as a mechanism for redress where genuine injury has occurred’.[21]
Corruption appears entrenched in Lebanon’s justice system, as investigation indicates articles are being added to cases to justify pretrial detention.[22] Once found guilty, journalists who have insulted the dignity of the Lebanese president can be sentenced to two years in prison and can be fined up to 100 million Lebanese pounds.
Disrespect for human rights means that suspects are often unaware of their right to contact a lawyer, family member, or employer and to remain silent.
In Egypt, failure to present a search warrant in the Mada Masr raid points towards similar corruption,[23] whilst the powers of the SSSP have been exploited to increase pretrial detention to up to 150 days.[24]
As SSSP rampages show no signs of stopping and defamation accusations in Lebanon soar through the roof, the future for journalists in the Middle East appears increasingly bleak. Strategic silencing of the press undermines all democratic values, and the international community must awaken to the exploitation and misuse of legislation to achieve the nefarious governments’ goal: the muffling of all critics’ voices and an end to freedom of expression.
Charlotte Way (Human Rights)
SOURCES
[1] M. Feintuck, Media regulation, public interest and the law (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press 1999) p.9
[2] Ibid, p.15
[3] ‘Egypt: Unprecedented crackdown on freedom of expression under al-Sisi turns Egypt into open-air prison’ (Amnesty International, 20 September 2018) <https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2018/09/egypt-unprecedented-crackdown-on-freedom-of-expression-under-alsisi-turns-egypt-into-openair-prison/> accessed 28 November 2019
[4] ‘Egypt: State Security prosecution operating as a ‘sinister tool of repression’’ (Amnesty International, 27 November 2019) <https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2019/11/egypt-state-security-prosecution-operating-as-a-sinister-tool-of-repression/> accessed 28 November 2019
[5] ‘Egypt: Independent News Website Targeted’ (Human Rights Watch, 25 November 2019) <https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/11/25/egypt-independent-news-website-targeted> accessed 28 November 2019
[6] ‘2019 World Press Freedom Index’ (Reporters Without Borders) <https://rsf.org/en/ranking> accessed 28 November 2019
[7] Lingens v Austria (1986) 8 EHRR 407
[8] ‘“There Is a Price to Pay”’ (Human Rights Watch, 15 November 2019) <https://www.hrw.org/report/2019/11/15/there-price-pay/criminalization-peaceful-speech-lebanon> accessed 28 November 2019
[9] Tambini, D., Heyward, Clare, & Institute for Public Policy Research, Ruled by recluses? : Privacy, journalism and the media after the Human Rights Act. (London: Institute for Public Policy Research 2002) p.66
[10] Ibid, p.23
[11] Castells v Spain (1992) 14 EHRR 445
[12] ‘“There Is a Price to Pay”’ (Human Rights Watch, 15 November 2019) <https://www.hrw.org/report/2019/11/15/there-price-pay/criminalization-peaceful-speech-lebanon> accessed 28 November 2019
[13] ‘Egypt: Largest wave of mass arrests since President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi came to power’ (Amnesty International, 2 October 2019) <https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2019/10/egypt-largest-wave-of-mass-arrests-since-president-abdel-fattah-al-sisi-came-to-power/> accessed 28 November 2019
[14] ‘Egypt: State Security prosecution operating as a ‘sinister tool of repression’’ (Amnesty International, 27 November 2019) <https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2019/11/egypt-state-security-prosecution-operating-as-a-sinister-tool-of-repression/> accessed 28 November 2019
[15] Ibid
[16] Ludlam, Joanna, ‘Breach of Confidence’ in Crone, T, Law and the Media. (Oxford: Focal Press 2002) p.92
[17] ‘“There Is a Price to Pay”’ (Human Rights Watch, 15 November 2019) <https://www.hrw.org/report/2019/11/15/there-price-pay/criminalization-peaceful-speech-lebanon> accessed 28 November 2019
[18] Cauchi, Marietta, ‘Defamation’ in Crone, T, Law and the Media. (Oxford: Focal Press 2002) p.4
[19] ‘“There Is a Price to Pay”’ (Human Rights Watch, 15 November 2019) <https://www.hrw.org/report/2019/11/15/there-price-pay/criminalization-peaceful-speech-lebanon> accessed 28 November 2019
[20] Ibid
[21] Ibid
[22] Ibid
[23] ‘Egypt: Independent News Website Targeted’ (Human Rights Watch, 25 November 2019) <https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/11/25/egypt-independent-news-website-targeted> accessed 28 November 2019
[24] ‘Egypt: State Security prosecution operating as a ‘sinister tool of repression’’ (Amnesty International, 27 November 2019) <https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2019/11/egypt-state-security-prosecution-operating-as-a-sinister-tool-of-repression/> accessed 28 November 2019
コメント