[ad_1]
The ruling against Vicky Dávila and Radio Cadena Nacional (RCN Radio) —a second instance judgment— was delivered on October 15 by the Civil Chamber of the Superior Court of Bogotá, which found the journalist and the radio station La FM (of that radio station) of the departure of the Police of Colonel Jorge Hilario Estupiñán, for which the high court ordered them to compensate him and his family.
It is one of three judicial decisions, in a few days, against social communicators and the media, because last Monday the Prosecutor’s Office charged the journalist Diana Díaz with the crime of using a matter subject to secrecy or secrecy, due to the fact that she recorded an audio with which the For the Foundation for Press Freedom (Flip) denounced that the then manager of the National Radio Television of Colombia (RTVC), Juan Pablo Bieri, ordered the censoring of the program ‘Los puros criollos’ due to the opinions of its presenter, Santiago Rivas.
At the beginning of this month, a judge ordered an investigation into whether Dávila and fellow journalist Jairo Lozano violated the summary reserve in the Álvaro Uribe case by broadcasting conversations that Juan Guillermo Monsalve had with his own family, recordings that are part of the file. He also ordered Semana magazine to eliminate those conversations. This case also provoked the rejection of journalistic organizations.
In the case of the judgment of the Superior Court of Bogotá against Dávila, El Espectador maintains in its editorial that “Part of a false premise”Well, remember that the one that decided to remove Colonel Estupiñán from the Police was the same institution, “not the journalist.”
It all dates back to May 6, 2014, when Dávila, on La FM, reported a controversy over alleged acts of corruption that appeared to be related to Estupiñán. The journalist interviewed him, as well as General Yesid Vásquez Prada, Inspector General of the Police. The newspaper recalls that Dávila said: “The recording is forceful, and it has already been in the hands of the Police for a month. There should already be a minimally decision to have this man [Estupiñán] separated from the position so that he does not make more hiring, which obviously is wanting to direct the hiring in that department and that is corruption. There is no way around that ”.
Finally, Estupiñán was removed from the institution. But that decision, for the high court, “was made improperly and hastily.” However, El Espectador remarks that the order “was issued by authorities that have full autonomy, independence and are powerful enough to take responsibility for their actions”.
Then he asks four disturbing questions: “How long has the opinion of a journalist been capable of manipulating and hijacking the will of an institution like the Police? Wasn’t it the Police that decided to remove Estupiñán from his post? Are questions with ‘irony’ and ‘sarcasm’ enough to manipulate the actions of an entire institution, which has its own internal processes? Since when, moreover, journalism cannot be sharp and express its opinions?
“The message that is sent is terrible: journalists will prefer to remain silent rather than raise doubts about genuine suspicions they have,” the editorial adds. “It’s okay if the magistrates wanted to reproach Dávila’s way of acting, but when they sanction her financially they are using a dangerous gag”.
La Flip also rejected the ruling of the Bogotá Court and warned that it is about “a setback in terms of freedom of expression and a very dangerous precedent since it illegitimately restricts freedom of expression“In general, then, for that NGO, it not only attacks the central elements that could affect journalism, but” the deliberative exercise of a democratic system. This should alert society to a risk of censorship ”.
“It is a decision that represses public debate in the face of public administration, which is extremely serious in the current situation which, by virtue of the state of emergency, is characterized by a greater concentration of power at the head of the executive “, warns Flip, adding that the ruling against Dávila” profoundly disrupts the journalistic profession, since it limits it to develop exclusively the informative nature, excluding from its scope the possibility of contributing to public debate through opinion ”.
The sanction against Dávila for expressing his opinion “without mediating a prior judicial decision that could support it constitutes a serious violation of the right to freedom of expression“Continues Flip, and recalls a fundamental aspect for the exercise of journalism and democracy:” Journalists are free to report on alleged criminal actions, without the need for a conviction “.
The decision of the high court also “imposes restrictions on the form of journalism”, maintains this NGO, since “ignores international standards of freedom of expression, which protect speeches ‘in all their forms and manifestations’ “, and” it is unaware that in the Colombian legal system there are NO prohibited sources.
In addition, he considers, like El Espectador, that “an intimidating message is sent for journalists to refrain from using information from disciplinary or criminal investigations that may be in the public interest”. Finally, it ensures that this “curtails the autonomy of journalists and may generate an inhibitory effect in a context marked by criminal investigations that seek to punish sources.”
[ad_2]
