In March 2010, the Armenian Parliament adopted amendments and bill on making additions to Civil, Criminal and Criminal Procedure Codes on mass media activity. New provisions in the Civil Code were adopted which were preceded by heated debates among journalists and media experts mostly on size of compensation in case of law violation – from 500.000 AMD (about $1.250) to 2 million AMD (about $5.000).
Since the amendments were made and till today, 16 cases were initiated against Armenian media on defamation and insult. According to the head of the Information Freedom Center Shushan Doydoyan, all these cases are still in actual as they are in the process of appeals.
Though experts welcome decriminalization of defamation and insult, they are concerned with the amounts of fines which seem more as a tool to influence the media than a punishment. Besides, the low knowledge of journalism ethics and prepossession of judges have a negative impact.
The president of the Committee to Protect Freedom of Speach Ashot Meliqyan says they are working on a suggestion to decrease the amounts of fines that will be lobbied in the Parliament.
In March 2010, the Armenian Parliament adopted amendments and bill on making additions to Civil, Criminal and Criminal Procedure Codes on mass media activity. New provisions in the Civil Code were adopted which were preceded by heated debates among journalists and media experts mostly on size of compensation in case of law violation – from 500.000 AMD (about $1.250) to 2 million AMD (about $5.000).
Since the amendments were made and till today, 16 cases were initiated against Armenian media on defamation and insult. According to the head of the Information Freedom Center Shushan Doydoyan, all these cases are still in actual as they are in the process of appeals.
Though experts welcome decriminalization of defamation and insult, they are concerned with the amounts of fines which seem more as a tool to influence the media than a punishment. Besides, the low knowledge of journalism ethics and prepossession of judges have a negative impact.
The president of the Committee to Protect Freedom of Speach Ashot Meliqyan says they are working on a suggestion to decrease the amounts of fines that will be lobbied in the Parliament.
“But the problem is not that much the shortcoming of the law, as the low level of civil culture when any kind of criticizm is perceived as insult. Public figures should understand that criticizm has wide borders, journalist has the right to ask provocative questions and even make provocative steps,” says Meliqyan.
Unreasonable amount of compensation for libel and insult in Armenia was criticized by the international organization “Reporters Without Borders.” According to the organization’s statement of May 2011, the amounts of fines endanger the existance of the publications and contribute to the self-censorship atmosphere. “The practice of making the newspapers silent through trials must be stopped,” reads the statement.
On the other hand, the level of ethics among Armenian journalist is lame. “In al 16 trials journalists have their pieces of fault,” believes Shushan Doydoyan.
“Journalists should not violate ethics, but the judge, who is unable to make unbiased decisions, is to say whether the insult took place or not: t’s a vicious circle,” states Ashot Meliqyan who is also one of the initiators of the idea to create Supervisory Board of Ethics in the Yerevan Press Club. Created in 2007, the mission of the Supervisory Board is to examine complaints-appeals on violations of Code of Conduct of media representatives and drawing conclusions.
According to Doydoyan, different political and financial interests do not allow the editorials to unite under one Code of Ethics.
Unverified sources are also dangerous for journalists, as they can become a reason to be blamed for defamation. According to the president of the Gyumri-based “Asparez” press club Levon Barseghyan, journalists are not active in searching reliable alternative sources even if the official information is unavaileble. Besides, only few journalists use their right to receive information through court. Levon Barseghyan says that since 2003 to 2011 only 80 cases were initiated in Armenian courts on failure to provide information most of them ended in favor of journalism.
Meanwhile, on June 24, 2011, for the first time the court made an unbiased decision in the trial of the Republican MP Tigran Arzaqantsyan against “Iravunq” newspaper.
The court of general jurisdiction of Kentron and Norq-Marash rejected the claim of the “Great Valley” company owner as it was ungrounded: as compensation for damage to the honor and dignity he demanded 3 milion AMD ($8.000) and additional $1.900 for legal services and the payment of state fees.
Ashot Meliqyan believes that this time there were no serious reasons, as well as the factor of Tigran Arzaqantsyan’s fame played a role. The case is in the process of appeal.
A new challenge for journalists is the norms of behavior on the Internet and on social networks and blogs. More and more often a journalist can lose his job because his views and his behaviour in the Internet do not coincide with the policy of his editorial.
According to Meliqyan, Armenian journalist usually accept the rules of their editorials, hence, self-censorship works here. “A journalist must have the right to express himself even if his veiws do not coincide with the editorial’s views but without contradicting the ethics.”
The expert in journalism ethics of the International Center for Journalists, the New-York-based reporter of “France 24” Oda Osman says that working in one of the American editorials he had to follow definite rules: not to participate in demonstrations, not to be a member of any political party etc. “I believe being a journalist we have responsibilities and we are expected to respect others’ opinions, to be attentive towards ours and try to enjoy trust as a journalist,” says Oda Osman.
Shushan Doydoyan says that journalist’s personal blog differs from editorials corporative blog for which only the media is responsible. The expert believes that the author can freely express himself in his personal blog without forgetting the ethics.
“But if the journalist’s opinion differs from the editorial’s he should think whether he wants to work there or not,” says she. The experts calls on creating norms of ethics for the Internet, as defamation and insult are equally unacceptable both in the real life and in the virtual space. “This field must be self-regualted, otherwise the government will regualte it,” believes the expert.
Source: JNews.am