Tweet
"WILL THE EDITORS BE PUT TO TORTURE, TAKEN AWAY FROM BREAD AND WATER, AND BE INTIMIDATED?" LEVON BARSEGHYAN
July 10 2014
"From the public interest's viewpoint, the mass media shall be
entitled not to disclose its source of information. In addition, as
far as I know, this is not a serious crime and particularly a grave
crime. The Court's decision in this regard is unsubstantiated,"
such opinion was expressed by the President of the Journalists'
Club "Asparez" , Levon Barseghyan, today, in the conversation with
Aravot.am, referring to the court's decision on disclosure of the
source of information by "Hraparak" daily newspaper and iLur.am
website. According to him, "If we are guided by the logic, the court
should have understood that its decision will not be exercised. The
mass media will not disclose its sources, in addition, it does not
have any leverage for reinforcement of its decisions. If the media,
let's assume, does not disclose its source, the plaintiff should apply
to Judicial Acts Compulsory Enforcement Service, which must deal
with compelling the media to disclose the source. And as to how it
is going to happen, it is very difficult to imagine. For instances,
will the editors be put to torture, taken away from bread and water,
or be intimidated? What is the tool by which the court will compel
media to execute its decision?" To our question of whether this will
cause harm to free speech and free media, Levon Barseghyan replied,
"This may really affect the coward journalist and extremely cautious
journalists and mass media. They may be cautious of falling under this
risk, and their media become sweeter than it is. And the mass media,
which had and have the courage, nowise can be intimidated by such
absurd verdicts. Eventually, the prosecutor's office and the SIS should
really be interested in how to prepare materials about the information
to disclose the crime, rather than being interested in the source,
from which the information incurs. Suppose, the source has released
a misinformation. Suppose, the information is a lie, what is their
benefit of it? The prosecutor's office benefits nothing. There is
no victim in this case. And if someone thinks that he is slandered,
insulted, he could have tried to defend his interests by the Civil
Code and without the prosecutor's office. If the police chief thinks
that he is slandered, what is your business, the chief prosecutor's
office? No way Kostanyan can explain about what the disclosure of the
source will give to him. And, then, in all the cases where the mass
media will be able to ridicule such absurd verdicts by the courts,
may say, "I have found this information in an envelope, early the
morning, in front of my door". Now, go and suffer. After reading,
I threw it into the stove. What else can you do? Nothing. In other
words, the court want to justify their non-filing a criminal case by
having no source."
Hripsime JEBEJYAN
Read more at: http://en.aravot.am/2014/07/10/165975/
July 10 2014
"From the public interest's viewpoint, the mass media shall be
entitled not to disclose its source of information. In addition, as
far as I know, this is not a serious crime and particularly a grave
crime. The Court's decision in this regard is unsubstantiated,"
such opinion was expressed by the President of the Journalists'
Club "Asparez" , Levon Barseghyan, today, in the conversation with
Aravot.am, referring to the court's decision on disclosure of the
source of information by "Hraparak" daily newspaper and iLur.am
website. According to him, "If we are guided by the logic, the court
should have understood that its decision will not be exercised. The
mass media will not disclose its sources, in addition, it does not
have any leverage for reinforcement of its decisions. If the media,
let's assume, does not disclose its source, the plaintiff should apply
to Judicial Acts Compulsory Enforcement Service, which must deal
with compelling the media to disclose the source. And as to how it
is going to happen, it is very difficult to imagine. For instances,
will the editors be put to torture, taken away from bread and water,
or be intimidated? What is the tool by which the court will compel
media to execute its decision?" To our question of whether this will
cause harm to free speech and free media, Levon Barseghyan replied,
"This may really affect the coward journalist and extremely cautious
journalists and mass media. They may be cautious of falling under this
risk, and their media become sweeter than it is. And the mass media,
which had and have the courage, nowise can be intimidated by such
absurd verdicts. Eventually, the prosecutor's office and the SIS should
really be interested in how to prepare materials about the information
to disclose the crime, rather than being interested in the source,
from which the information incurs. Suppose, the source has released
a misinformation. Suppose, the information is a lie, what is their
benefit of it? The prosecutor's office benefits nothing. There is
no victim in this case. And if someone thinks that he is slandered,
insulted, he could have tried to defend his interests by the Civil
Code and without the prosecutor's office. If the police chief thinks
that he is slandered, what is your business, the chief prosecutor's
office? No way Kostanyan can explain about what the disclosure of the
source will give to him. And, then, in all the cases where the mass
media will be able to ridicule such absurd verdicts by the courts,
may say, "I have found this information in an envelope, early the
morning, in front of my door". Now, go and suffer. After reading,
I threw it into the stove. What else can you do? Nothing. In other
words, the court want to justify their non-filing a criminal case by
having no source."
Hripsime JEBEJYAN
Read more at: http://en.aravot.am/2014/07/10/165975/