Professional Documents
Culture Documents
*1 http://newtalk.tw/news_read.php?oid=17455 . The word pressure is used in the headline, while the report itself does not make any such conclusion.
garnishing his salary is a shocking abuse of power, threatening all public media, and putting a chill on freedom of the press. 4. THRAC expresses its dismay at the decision of the court to impose provisional seizure. We urge the Minister of Justice to undertake legal revisions to strictly limit the use of defamation laws. This is especially urgent in light of this case and a new UN Human Rights Committee statement*2 urging limits on the use of defamation cases by state parties to limit freedom of expression. 5. We request KMT Chairman Ma to make a clear statement disassociating his Party from the actions of Legislator Hsieh, and issue instructions to all KMT political figures to refrain from any use of defamation laws against the press except in the most egregious instances. We urge Chairman Ma to give his Partys support to a revision of defamation laws consistent with the recent comments of the United Nations Human Rights Committee. Taiwanese Human Rights Association of Canada President Michael Stainton and the Executive Committee
*2 On September 12, 2011 the UN Human Rights Committee 102nd session issued General Comment No. 34, strengthening the interpretation of Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrc/comments.htm).
Inter alia, the Comment states (para. 7): The obligation to respect freedoms of opinion and expression is binding on every State party as a whole. All branches of the State (executive, legislative and judicial) and other public or governmental authorities, at whatever level national, regional or local are in a position to engage the responsibility of the State party. And para. 47: Defamation laws must be crafted with care to ensure that they they do not serve, in practice, to stifle freedom of expression. At least with regard to comments about public figures, consideration should be given to avoiding penalizing or otherwise rendering unlawful untrue statements that have been published in error but without malice.2 In any event, a public interest in the subject matter of the criticism should be recognized as a defence. Care should be taken by States parties to avoid excessively punitive measures and penalties. Where relevant, States parties should place reasonable limits on the requirement for a defendant to reimburse the expenses of the successful party.2 States parties should consider the decriminalization of defamation.
10
30