Ecuador's Correa and Venezuela's Chávez are pushing to weaken a key OAS freedom of expression body.
Whatever the merits of Latin America’s left-wing presidents, their track record on freedom of expression has been terrible. The administration of Venezuela’s Hugo Chávez has shut down opposition radio and television stations on the thinnest of pretenses. Ecuador’s Rafael Correa is in the process of suing the country’s largest newspaper (El Universo) out of existence. Argentina’s Cristina Kirchner and her allies have gone after Clarín and La Nación again and again, most recently by passing a law declaring newsprint to be in the national interest. All three administrations regularly take time during public appearances to verbally attack specific journalists or news outlets.
While it’s been basically tough beans for local journalists and media outlets, the OAS’ Inter-American Commission on Human Rights has done some good work cataloging the abuses and bringing cases before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights – often to no avail, but at the very least it has maintained a useful legal-historical record of the abuses for posterity and the purposes of international shaming.
But because of its role as a state eye-poker, the IACHR is not exactly popular with the powerful, and next week the OAS is set to hold a vote in which its member states decide whether to smother one of its more bothersome (read: effective) parts.
At issue is the Office of the Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression, something like the IACHR’s press freedom subcommittee. The special rapporteur has been very aggressive over the last few years in condemning attacks on journalists in the region on the IACHR’s behalf. In addition to issuing sharp reports on press freedoms and monitoring best practices for freedom of expression legislation, it advises the Commission on how best to proceed in cases related to freedom of expression. (I’ve done some translation for the special rapporteur, so I am familiar with many of its public documents.)
The special rapporteur is quite well-funded (according to IACHR standards) by outside donors and it has become something of a go-to place for help for the continent’s at-risk journalists. (They are many: Latin America is one of the most dangerous places in the world for journalists).
Not surprisingly, the special rapporteur has often thrown down with Chávez and Correa, issuing opinions in its annual reports and press releases that are quite direct and critical by the standards of diplomatic communication. For example, on Correa’s case against El Universo and journalist Emilio Palacio:
The conviction for the crime of aggravated defamation against a public official, which has now been upheld on appeal, sentences the board members and the journalist to three years in prison, and orders the payment of a total of US$ 40 million in damages for the benefit of the President Rafael Correa.
[...]
The judicial decisions in question generate a palpable chilling effect on ideas or information that may offend the authorities, an effect which is incompatible with hemispheric freedom of expression standards. The self-censorship that results from these types of decisions impacts not only journalists and the authorities themselves, but all of Ecuadorian society.
Hugo and Rafael – always ready for a fight – are responding… well… poorly.
According to a recent article in Colombian magazine Semana, an OAS work group on reforming the IACHR – led by Ecuador and Venezuela – has come up with a list of changes that would basically gut the special rapporteur by limiting its outside funding, eliminating its separate annual report, and establishing a “code of conduct” for publicity activities like the press releases it issues.
A vote on the measure by state ambassadors to the OAS is set for Jan. 25. On the face of it, I can picture a possible scenario in which the special rapporteur loses handily. The Caribbean countries are in Venezuela’s pocket thanks to its Petrocaribe oil giveaways. Argentina is obviously no friend to the special rapporteur. And I can’t imagine there’s any love lost between Brazil and the IACHR at this moment, what wih the Belo Monte dustup. Other less-combative countries who want the special rapporteur to quiet down can spin their votes as being in favor of reform.
Should the OAS member states vote to gut the special rapporteur, it would send a nasty message to the rest of the IACHR: Don’t do your job too obviously well, or we will punish you.
An inherently negative conflict of interest built into these kinds of international human rights bodies is that they depend on the countries they regulate for their mandate and funding. The foxes are financing the hen house, inmates funding the asylum. Surely it is better than nothing; but unfortunately, it is precisely in the most challenging of political times that the system is weakest.
Comments
Of course there’s a conflict of interest for the press, too — which is the basis of this whole fight. The commercial media is often a group of very large companies that take sides against these lefty presidents. When their commercial and regulatory interests are threatened, they don’t often say, “oh, higher taxes on big companies, that will be better for society so let’s buck up and take it.” Instead, they sic their best reporters on the case of any little flaw in the proposal or in the president. The usual response in Venezuela is, “but the press supported the coup.” Which is true. But irrelevant: the press in Ecuador has probably treated Pres. Morales worse than any of these three countries you mentioned, and Morales has done less to crack down on the press than his Bolivarian neighbors.
Still, it doesn’t hurt to remember that the anti-press bias starts from a genuine grievance. And then goes way, way too far.
Congrats with the new magazine!
Hostility towards the press is hardly a leftist trait though. Here in Panama, right-wing Martinelli has exiled foreign journalists, started a war against daily La Prensa, cancelled the visa of the Reuters correspondent and I just learned that a TV journalist for CBC Canada has been refused entry to the country – they planned to do a piece on mining.
Right-wing Honduras, meanwhile, is one of the most dangerous countries for journos to work in and the same goes for Mexico.
I certainly don’t want to whitewash the left on their attitude towards a free press, but fact is that the more brutal repression comes from the right.
Hey, thanks! And yep, agreed. That’s why I wonder if Correa’s measure might just pass. He and Chavez and Kirchner are just the loudest ones, but lots of governments in the region totally hate the press, regardless of political affiliation. Maybe with the exception of Colombia? As Santos’ family owns El Tiempo, if I recall correctly. And I can’t even imagine how a right-wing Chilean government would deal with an major opposition newspaper, if there was one.
Chile learned through hard experience that the best way to neutralize leftists is to leave them to their own devices.