Defamation Presentation

7/25/2019 Defamation Presentation

1/30

Media Law

DEFAMATION

Dania Al-Attar

Saleh Basalama

Niki Alipoor Yeganeh

Tony MedyatiCharumatyKaladharanDuchess UcandaRebekah DawnRitchie


2/30

ISTO!Y OF DEFAMATION

The law o" de"amation dates #a$k to the !oman Empire%

The o""en$e o" Li#ellis "amosis was sometimes p&nisha#le #' death%

(hile the penalties and $osts atta$hed to de"amation toda' are not as

serio&s) the' $an still ha*e a notorio&s +$hilling e""e$t), with prison

senten$es or massi*e $ompensation awards still an o$$&pational haard

"or .o&rnalists in man' $o&ntries%


3/30

(AT/S TE DEFINITION OF DEFAMATION0

(AT IS A 1OOD DEFAMATION LA(0

One whi$h la's the gro&ndwork "or striking a proper #alan$e #etween the

prote$tion o" indi*id&als2 rep&tation and "reedom o" e3pression

Law is a law whi$h aims to prote$t people against

"alse statements o" "a$t whi$h $a&se damage to their

rep&tation% This de"inition $ontains "o&r elements%


4/30

IN O!DE! TO BE DEFAMATO!Y) A STATEMENT

M4ST5

#e "alse

#e o" a "a$t&al nat&re

$a&se damage6 and

this damage m&st #e to the rep&tation o" the person $on$erned) whi$h in t&rn means

that the statement in 7&estion m&st ha*e #een read) heard or seen #' others%

DISTIN14ISIN1 DEFAMATION F!OM OTE!

8ON8E9TS5 Man' $o&ntries ha*e other t'pes o" laws whi$h ma' #e $on"&sed with) #&t sho&ld #e

disting&ished "rom) de"amation laws) e*en i" that term is &nderstood #roadl'% These

in$l&de hate spee$h) #lasphem' and pri*a$' laws%


5/30

ATE S9EE8 LA(S

There are two important di""eren$es with de"amation laws5

"irst) hate spee$h laws are intended to prote$t the sa"et' and

so$ial e7&alit' o" *&lnera#le gro&ps) rather than their rep&tation

se$ond) hate spee$h laws prote$t gro&ps o" people) identi"ied

#' $ertain shared $hara$teristi$s) rather than indi*id&als or legal

persons :s&$h as #&sinesses or nonpro"it organiations;%


6/30

BLAS9EMY LA(S

The di""eren$e with de"amation laws is again that #lasphem' laws do not spe$i"i$all'

prote$t indi*id&als or e*en the rep&tation o" the religion% !ather) the' prote$t the

sensiti*ities o" adherents to the religion%

9!I


7/30


8/30

CEY 9OINTS FO! MEDIA 9!A8TITIONE!S

1. The Serious Harm Test

Someone #ringing a li#el a$tion now has to pro*e the statement $a&sed) or was likel' to

$a&se serio&s harm to their rep&tation +new serio&s harm threshold,

elp &nderstand when $laims sho&ld #e #ro&ght dis$o&rage waste"&l &se o" $o&rt time%

2. With Regard To Business

B&sinesses $an now onl' s&e i" a statement $a&sed) or was likel' to $a&se) serio&s "inan$ial

loss

3. The Public Interest

9rote$tion "or those plishing material on matters where the' reasona#l' #elie*e that it is inthe pli$ interest


9/30

4. ore Pri!ilege

9ri*ileged material whi$h is prote$ted "rom de"amation a$tions is now e3tended to $o*er5

peer-re*iewed statements in s$ienti"i$ and a$ademi$ .o&rnals

reports o" s$ienti"i$ and a$ademi$ $on"eren$es and related do$&ments arti$les #ased on in"ormation pro*ided #' pli$ $ompanies and at press $on"eren$es

reports o" pro$eedings o" go*ernment " rom an'where in the world) international $on"eren$es and

international $o&rt pro$eedings%

". Single Publication Rule

The one-'ear time limit "or starting we# li#el a$tions now starts when an arti$le is "irst

plished online%

#. Website $%erators

Introd&$tion o" a new pro$ess aimed at helping potential *i$tims o" de"amation online) #'

resol*ing the disp&te dire$tl' with the person who has posted the statement

(e#site operators no longer ha*e to pre-moderate reader $omments%


10/30

&ote "rom &sti$e Minister)

Shailesh


11/30

STANDA!DS OF 9!OOF

Standard Be&ore Trial

Some legal standards aren2t &sed #' .&rors at a trial) #&t #' .&dges who m&st make

determinations at pretrial hearings%

Substantial '!idenceSstantial e*iden$e means Gmore than a mere s$intilla% It means s&$h rele*ant e*iden$e as

a reasona#le mind might a$$ept as ade7&ate to s&pport a $on$l&sion%G

Pre%onderance o& the '!idence

9reponderan$e o" the e*iden$e is re7&ired in a $i*il $ase and is $ontrasted with G#e'ond areasona#le dot)G whi$h is the more se*ere test o" e*iden$e re7&ired to $on*i$t in a $riminal

trial%


12/30

(lear and (on!incing '!idence8lear and $on*in$ing proo" means that the e*iden$e presented #' a part' d&ring the trial is

more highl' pro#a#le to #e tr&e than not and the .&r' or .&dge has a "irm #elie" or $on*i$tion in

it%

Be)ond a Reasonable *oubtThe main reason that the high proo" standard o" reasona#le dot is &sed in $riminal trials is

that s&$h pro$eedings $an res&lt in the depri*ation o" a de"endant/s li#ert' or e*en in his or

her death%


13/30

Burden o& %roo&The #&rden o" proo" is on the plainti"" :the part' #ringing the laws⁢ to show #' a

Gpreponderan$e o" e*iden$eG or Gweight o" e*iden$eG that all the "a$ts ne$essar' to win a

.&dgment are pro#a#l' tr&e%

(losing (omments

In $riminal $ases) altho&gh the standard is o" #e'ond reasona#le dot) it will ne*er #e

e3pe$ted o" the .&r' to #e a#le to pro*e the "a$ts o" the $ase a#sol&tel'%


14/30

9!OBLEMS OF DEFAMATION LA(

?% 8ost

- depends on d&ration and $omple3it' o" $ase

- legal "ees alone $an $ost tho&sands

- i" de"endant loses) there will #e a massi*e pa'-o&t

=% 4npredi$ta#ilit'

- depends on "a$ts o" the $ase

- 4C laws are 7&ite pro-.o&rnalist

- no predi$ting what or when something $an #e de"amator'


15/30

@% 8ompli$ated laws&its

- pro*ing whether something is de"amator' is not eas'

- $riteria5 s.e$t matter m&st #e de"amator') m&st re"er to plainti"") et$%

H% D&ration

- de"amation laws&its $an take a lot o" time

- some $ases $an take 'ears

- also &npredi$ta#le #e$a&se parties $an $hoose to settle o&tside $o&rt

% Internet

- laws regarding internet is di""erent d&e to how it is plished

- e%g% in 4C) laws &se to allow n&m#er o" times s.e$t matter is *iewed now

$hanged to n&m#er o" times it is plished


16/30

% E""e$ts on so$iet'

- de"amator' laws $an also ha*e positi*e e""e$ts

- allows "reedom o" spee$h

- gi*es $itiens "reedom to o#tain in"ormation


17/30

9!I


18/30

Tr&th

i" the statement was a$$&rate) then #' de"inition it wasn2t

de"amator'%

A#sol&te 9ri*ilege

A#sol&te pri*ilege means that the person making the statement has the

a#sol&te right to make that statement at that time) e*en i" it is de"amator'%

In general) a#sol&te pri*ilege e3empts persons "rom lia#ilit' "or

potentiall' de"amator' statements made5

d&ring .&di$ial pro$eedings

#' high go*ernment o""i$ials

d&ring politi$al #road$asts or spee$hes) and

#etween spo&ses%


19/30


20/30

The "ollowing options "or de"ense are a*aila#le to 'o&5

the words were not re"erring to the plainti""6

the words were tr&e in sstan$e and in "a$t :.&sti"i$ation;6

the words were "air $omment6

the pli$ation was pri*ileged6


21/30

ELEMENTS O ! DE!M!T"ON L!#SU"T

NOTE: WHOSE PART?


22/30

T$E ST!TEMENT

Needs to be s%oken

S%oken words usually &ade more 'uickly

There&ore Slander is considered less harm&ul than libel


23/30

(U)L"C!T"ON

a third %arty must ha*e seen+ heard or read

! third %arty is someone a%art &rom the %erson makin, thestatement

a de&amatory statement does not need to be %rinted in a

book


24/30

"N-UR.

in/ury to the sub/ect o& the statement

Meanin, must ha*e hurt the re%utation o& the sub/ect o& thestatement


25/30

!LS"T.

They should be in &act &alse

! true statement+ no matter how harm&ul is not considered asde&amation

statements o& o%inion are not considered &alse


26/30

UN(R"0"LE1ED

it must be un%ri*ile,ed

Suin, &or de&amation is not %ossible

"& the statement is %ri*ile,ed


27/30

RECOMMEND!T"ONS ON $O# TOREORM T$E L!#2

(ossible re&orms to %rotect de&amers &rom the harshnesso& the %unishment &or the de&amers are3

!rran,ements &or com%ulsory sit4downs between the %lainti5and the de&endant where they can come to an amicable

resolution &or e6am%le+ the de&endant can a,ree to issue a%ublic a%olo,y2

Establishment o& law re&orm commissions to ad*ocate &or there&orm o& the law o& de&amation2 Currently+ de&endants are

&aced with hea*y com%ensations which are more o&%unishments than com%ensations e2,2 RM788+ 8882


28/30

Establishment o& or,ani9ations that %rotect /ournalists &romde&amation suits or that can intercede in settlementsbetween the %lainti5 and the accused /ournalist2

"ntroduction o& new com%ensations im%osed on the de&endantlike withdrawal o& de&amatory statements &rom the media so

as to not burden the de&endant with a hea*y :ne that could%otentially bankru%t them2

Clear de:nition between &reedom o& e6%ression andde&amation2 -ournalists and blo,,ers are o&ten attacked &or

e6%ressin, themsel*es2 The law needs to clearly de:ne whatde&amation is such that there is no con&usion2


29/30


30/30

8ON8L4SION - BEC

De"amation Law g&ards the #alan$e #etween "reedom o" e3pression and the prote$tion o"

one2s rep&tation%

olds media pra$titioners a$$o&nta#le "or the $onse7&en$es o" their words) at the same time

&pholding pli$ interest%

Media $annot #e &sed as a tool to #&ll' or single o&t indi*id&als "or &ndeser*ed shaming%

Ens&res that what is plished is "air) tr&th"&l and ethi$al) e3tending the rea$h o" .&sti$e tothe written and spoken word%

Thro&gh $ase law and stat&tes) this helps $reate a #asis "or a glo#al standard o" media ethi$s

and $learl' de"ines #o&ndaries and esta#lishes rights%

Documents

Defamation Presentation