Originally posted by chegitz guevara
In our democracy, yes, but this isn't some universal standard. I also think that our democracy could stand to give its leaders some libel/slander protection as well, considering **** like Swift-Boating. It's one thing to try and protect the opinions of those who are opposed to those in power. It's another thing to allow people to make up lies out of whole cloth for the purpose of throwing an election or bringing down a government. The 1st helps democracy. The 2nd thwarts it.
Originally posted by lord of the mark
In a democracy,. . .
In a democracy,. . .
In our democracy, yes, but this isn't some universal standard. I also think that our democracy could stand to give its leaders some libel/slander protection as well, considering **** like Swift-Boating. It's one thing to try and protect the opinions of those who are opposed to those in power. It's another thing to allow people to make up lies out of whole cloth for the purpose of throwing an election or bringing down a government. The 1st helps democracy. The 2nd thwarts it.
In other democracies, libel laws may provide equal protection to public figures and private individuals. I dont think thats a good idea, but yes, its true of other democracies.
Guev, the Venezualan press law that HRW cites specifically extends SPECIAL protections to govt officials that ordinary folks dont get. It also extends those protections only to govt officials, not to people prominent in public life who are not govt officials. You cant show disrespect to the Prez, to a legislator, etc. But you CAN show disrespect to a union official, a businessman, a newspaper editor, or an NGO leader. This is NOT a law to maintain civility in public life. It is a law to protect Chavez and his officials. It is a classic example of the limitation of freedom of speech to maintain power. Now you may feel that in view of the socio-economic situation in Venezuala thats justified - but lets not pretend its something other than what it is.
Note also the law speaks of disrespect. Belief that what you say is true, or even proof that it actually is true, would not appear to be a defense. Even under US law, an intentional lie against a public figure is NOT protected speech, nor, IIUC, is reeckless disgregard to the truth. Public figures in the US do occassionally succeed in libel suits, IIUC.
Comment