MP-SP wants to investigate journalist as an accomplice in crimes of harassment against women

The Public Ministry of São Paulo (MP-SP) wants to investigate journalist Ricardo Feltrin for possible crimes of misogyny and spreading hatred against women. According to prosecutor Paulo Henrique Castex, Feltrin was an accomplice of Marcius Melhem, an actor and comedian, accused of persecuting and psychologically violating victims of harassment. The notification, issued last December, states that the journalist’s publications “are all partial” and that they contain “a bias explicitly favorable to the person being investigated, Marcius Melhem”.

A group of women, who, like Marcius Melhem, worked at TV Globo made a series of accusations of sexual harassment against the comedian in 2020. The process expired and was suspended, without concluding whether Melhem was really guilty. Now, the comedian is being accused of psychological violence against victims of harassment. Journalist Ricardo Feltrin, who followed the world of celebrities, started to cover the case and, according to him, found that the women had lied about the situations they experienced with the comedian.

Feltrin also accuses the group of using the public sector in their favor. According to the journalist, their lawyer had close relations with the Workers’ Party. Some of those involved were even received by First Lady Janja da Silva, Women’s Minister Cida Gonçalves and PT President Gleisi Hoffmann.

Also according to the notification signed by Castex, the journalist’s publications convey “real attacks against the intimacy, privacy and psychological health of the victims”. The prosecutor also states that Feltrin “applies a false veneer of journalism” to content “whose main objective is the frivolous dissemination of rumors and repeated attacks on women who reported being victims of crimes committed by Marcius Melhem”.

“I am being accused of psychologically harming people who lied,” said the journalist when commenting on the notification on his YouTube channel. “Do I have any accusations of slander since I started covering this case in January 2020? No. Defamation? No. Moral damages? Not either. Injury? Not either. Are there any accusations of these 200 articles I wrote about fake news? There aren’t any, right?” he asks.

MP-SP’s position violates freedom of expression and freedom of the press, according to expert

Although the prosecutor casts doubt on Feltrin’s profession in the notification, the journalist has extensive experience in the field. Feltrin held positions as reporter, editor and columnist in various outlets such as Folha de São Paulo and UOL for more than 20 years. He has worked in editorials from politics to covering the world of celebrities and since April he has worked as an independent journalist.

For constitutional lawyer and legal consultant on freedom of expression, André Marsiglia, the MP’s position violates freedom of expression and freedom of the press. “Journalism can take a stance. He can be critical, analytical, sharp, acidic. This is all part of journalism. Journalism is not simply reporting information. It’s up to you to take a stand and analyze it”, he considers.

Brazilian legislation provides for punishment for press professionals who go beyond their duties, according to Marsiglia. “Journalism can be illicit and abuse. When he goes off track and there are crimes against honor, this can and should be assessed and punished. But this punishment occurs in the civil-criminal sphere for offending someone’s honor. And who should do this [abrir o processo] it is the offended person themselves and not the Public Prosecutor’s Office”, he emphasizes.

The press has been seen as a danger to society

“For the first time in history, a journalist is being suspected for doing journalism. Except perhaps in dictatorships, right?”, says Feltrin in the video in which he defends himself. Recently, the Federal Supreme Court ruled that the press can be held responsible for what is said by interviewees. The presence of vague terms such as “concrete evidence” left the thesis vague, which, for experts interviewed by the People’s Gazette, imposes self-censorship on newspapers. In this scenario, it is more likely that media outlets will avoid publishing content that could cause legal problems.

The thesis defined by the Supreme Court has no direct relationship with Feltrin’s case, but it contributes to a movement against journalistic activity, according to Marsiglia. “This STF decision encourages and instigates other public entities – or even civil society – to understand the press as a danger to society” he comments. “In the past, we understood that the press protected us from public authorities, now public authorities seem to want to protect us from the press. This is an inversion of values”, concludes Marsiglia.