Jurists look for solutions to find a balance between right to free expression and right to defending honor and dignity
- 09.07.2008 23:23
- 1433
- 4 minute(s)
-
A group of jurists, representatives of a number of nongovernmental organizations together with representatives of the Parliament and mass media discuss the opportunity of adopting the draft law on the freedom of expression, which was formulated on the initiative of the Independent Journalism Center in connection with the difficult situation regarding the freedom of expression and defamation in Moldova.
The draft law was brought up for discussion again so that the civil society takes an attitude to the recent initiative to amend paragraph 8 of article 16 of the Civil Code and exclude the pecuniary damages for moral damage caused by defamation, which was put up by President Vladimir Voronin, Info-Prim Neo reports.
Eugen Rybca, jurist for the Independent Press Association, told a roundtable meeting on July 8 that the draft law on the freedom of expression aims to find a balance in guaranteeing the right to free expression and information on the one hand and the right to defending honor, dignity, professional reputation and private live on the other hand. “At the same time, the bill comes to transpose the European legislation on the freedom of expression and protection of private life into a language that is accessible to the Moldovan jurists, as a compilation of the European standards,” the expert said.
Unlike the draft law on the freedom of expression, which envisages a number of improvements in the legislation whereby to reconcile the two rights, the legislative initiative of President Vladimir Voronin aims at excluding aspects related to the moral damage caused by defamation, removing thus the defamed person’s right to seek pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages, Eugen Rybca says. According to the quoted source, the President’s initiative would constitute a danger to Moldova and would contribute to a larger number of cases lost at the European Court of Human Rights.
Parliamentary councilor Stela Turcanu said that the bill can be functional, but needs amendments so that it meets the international practices, the ECHR norms and the national legislation.
Olivia Pyrtac, representative of the International Research and Exchange Board and one of the initiators of the bill, says that the document was needed given the complexity of the disputes concerning the exercising of the right to free expression, damage to honor, dignity, processional reputation etc. and the imperfection of the national legislation in the field.
As regards the legislative initiative put forward by President Vladimir Voronin, ARTICLE 19, a leading international human rights organization based in London, considers that it is not appropriate to completely exclude the possibility of offering pecuniary damages for moral damage to the reputation from the Moldovan legislation. The organization says that the freedom of expression should be limited in order to protect the reputation because the repute of a person is closely connected with his/her dignity. Therefore, different types of remedies should be available to repair the damage caused by defamation. They should be used to repair the damage caused to the plaintiff’s reputation and not to punish those that spread such statements.
According to foreign analysts, President Vladimir Voronin’s proposal could completely exclude the possibility of obtaining pecuniary damages for moral damage caused by defamation. Even if the victims of defamation had access to some of the remedies, they would not be able to claim damages. ARTICLE 19 admits that the freedom of expression should be limited so as to protect the reputation, but says that the laws on defamation protected the reputation of the persons too much and misused the right to free expression. The organization says that the sanctions for defamation should be reasonably proportional to the damage caused to the reputation and this should be provided expressly in the national laws on defamation. The commentary is presented at the request of the Independent Journalism Center of Moldova, which asked ARTICLE 19 to analyze the President’s proposal and offer remedies for repairing the moral damage caused by defamation in accordance with the international law.
