FINAL REPORT Media Law to unesco july1.pdf - AIBD

SESSION 4:
CASE STUDIES ON COMTEMPT OF COURT
CASE STUDY 1:
This case evolves around a crime correspondent wanting to
report on a bank hold-up by use of “surreptitiously obtained”
fuzzy pictures. In her report, the correspondent clearly
identifies the culprit and refers to his criminal past.
All work groups stated that this story should not be published,
since it could provoke a contempt of court case, firstly,
because the identity of the culprit has not yet been confirmed
by the authorities, secondly, due to the fact that the pictures
were unlawfully obtained and thirdly, for revealing previous
convictions. The groups concluded that, as a result of no trial
being set yet, there is a danger to prejudice legal
proceedings. Two groups concluded that the identification of
the alleged culprit could also lead to a defamation case.
Dr Iyer mentioned that the confidentiality of sources could
be a major issue as soon as the case would come to the
courts. Whenever identities are in doubt, he summarized,
pictures should not be published.
CASE STUDY 2:
The second case deals with a legal reporter wanting to expose
a judge of being bribed, relying on a tape recording and still
photographs of the judge and a named intermediary.
Generally, there was a consensus among the groups: Due to
an imminent danger of contempt of court, the report should
not be published, because the evidence was not strong
enough, the authenticity of tape and pictures were at stake.
Instead, public authorities should be notified. Then, the
reporter could follow-up on the proceedings of these
authorities. One group added that this could also be a case of
defamation.
CASE STUDY 3:
The third study examines the case of a feature article that
strongly criticizes a senior judge for misbehavior on the bench
and, according to the freelance author, “misogynist” remarks
during a Rotary Club meeting.
12