STF decision on holding the press accountable does not represent censorship, says Barroso

STF

Minister stated that vehicles will only be punished in cases of “bad faith”, this Thursday (30)

The president of the Federal Supreme Court (STF), minister Luís Roberto Barroso, stated, this Thursday (30), that media outlets will only be held responsible in cases when the interviewees’ speech is in “bad faith”, which , according to him, does not restrict freedom of expression.

Yesterday (29), the Court approved a legal thesis reiterating that the constitutional principle of press freedom prevents prior censorship of published content. However, if an interviewee falsely accuses another person, the publication may be held legally responsible in cases of bad faith.

At the opening of this afternoon’s session, Barroso clarified that the Court reiterated its position against press censorship and in favor of freedom of expression.

“We reiterate our belief in the press, in the importance of freedom of expression, the prohibition of censorship and the non-responsibility of media outlets for statements made by third parties, except for intentional behavior with the intention of causing harm to someone or negligence,” he stated.

According to the president, as a rule, the press does not respond to statements made by third parties. However, newspapers, magazines and websites can be held liable in cases of bad faith and serious negligence.

“The hypothesis [julgada] it was someone accused of terrorism, murder and planting a bomb at the airport, when the accusation was known to be false. Who knows the story, this man [Zarattini] He spent his entire life facing false news that he had committed a terrorist act. The harm this does to his wife, to his children, to his family. There was a malicious interview and a negligence in informing that that man had not even been reported for committing the crime, and information was even spread that he had been a terrorist,” he stated.

Process

The Supreme Court’s decision was based on an action in which former federal deputy Ricardo Zarattini Filho sued the newspaper Diário de Pernambuco for moral damages, due to a report published in 1995.

In the journalistic article, Pernambuco politician Wandenkolk Wanderley stated that Zarattini, who died in 2017, was responsible for the bomb attack at Recife airport, in 1966, during the military dictatorship.

When going to court, Ricardo Zarattini’s defense said that Wandenkolk made false accusations and the publication of the interview caused serious damage to his honor. According to him, the newspaper published a false statement against him and presented him to public opinion as a criminal.

The newspaper claimed in the process that the publication of the interview took place within the scope of press freedom, protected by the Constitution.

The publication was ordered by the first instance to pay compensation of R$50,000. The Court of Justice of Pernambuco then annulled the conviction and ruled that the newspaper only reproduced Wandenkolk Wanderley’s speeches and did not make any accusations against Zarattini.

Subsequently, the Superior Court of Justice (STJ) revalidated the conviction, and the case ended up in the Supreme Court, which maintained the newspaper’s conviction upon understanding that the publication acted negligently without at least listening to Zarattini.

Read more:

STF decision approves possibility of press liability for interviews

Barroso reacts to the approval of PEC that interferes in the STF and talks about democratic setback

Lula chooses Flávio Dino to fill the vacancy left by Rosa Weber in the STF