Attacks on the Press - Committee to Protect Journalists

attacks on the press in 2009americas: analysisafter taking office in 1990. During his tenure, independent journalists were underintense scrutiny: Their phones were tapped, and their movements watched. Reporterswere detained and questioned on trumped-up terrorism and tax charges;some were kidnapped and threatened by members of Peru’s shadowy NationalIntelligence Service. The Fujimori government fed information gathered in itsespionage to tabloids sympathetic to the administration (and loaded with stateadvertising). They, in turn, launched smear campaigns against leading critics inthe media, some of whom were forced into exile by the negative attention.In April 2009, Fujimori was sentenced to 25 years in jail after being convictedof crimes against humanity for directing military death squads. He was sentencedagain, in September, to six years in prison for secretly wiretapping politicians,journalists, and businessmen during his decade in power, along with bribing congressmenand buying off a television station and a newspaper editorial board toback his 2000 re-election campaign.“Espionage during the Fujimori era has been well-studied: It was systemic,extremely organized, and centralized,” said Ricardo Uceda, executive director ofthe regional press group Instituto Prensa y Sociedad, and a top Peruvian investigativereporter. “Fujimori needed such a system to exercise power. He was wellaware of journalists’ affairs and their flaws, and knew perfectly how to neutralizethe media.”Although espionage campaigns in Peru in the 1990s and Colombia in thisdecade were both pervasive and intrusive, there was a significant power imbalanceduring the Fujimori regime that made the spying more pernicious, Uceda pointedWho is in charge inColombia? Investigatorsexamining espionage arethemselves threatened.out. The Fujimori government, Ucedasaid, had such tight control over the judiciarythat it could ensure governmentespionage would go unchecked. That’sdifferent from contemporary Colombia,where the scandal has promptedan in-depth probe and arrests.Still, major reforms are far from certain in either Colombia or Argentina.Argentine officials appear to be brushing off legitimate threats to the country’sdemocracy. The 2001 intelligence law sets prison penalties of up to four years forillegal espionage, but the congressional committee tasked with overseeing intelligenceactivities has yet to take substantive steps to enforce the law and controlillegal spying.In Colombia, where the scandal hit just as Uribe was flirting with a bid fora third term, some possible reform is in its early stages. In October, Congressbegan considering a bill aimed at creating a smaller intelligence agency with morelimited functions, news reports said. External pressure may do some good. TheInter-American Commission, the autonomous human rights body of the Organizationof American States, expressed concern about the scandal and urged theColombian government to conduct a thorough review to prevent violations ofinternational human rights standards.Vice President Francisco Santos CalderÓn has publicly acknowledged thatthe situation is serious, and said the institutions of democracy are acting. DASDirector Felipe Muñoz said the agency will cut its workforce and focus on counterintelligenceand border control, according to press reports. But who is reallyin charge? A November report by Semana said that investigators examining theillegal espionage have themselves been threatened and followed in an attempt todisrupt the probe.The solution rests in the message sent from the top of the civilian government.Journalists and free press advocates say that real reform can be achievedonly through strong political will exercised by leaders at the highest levels of government.They must send a strong message that the intelligence service cannot beused against members of the judiciary, the political opposition, and the independentpress as a means to preserve power.Carlos Lauría is CPJ’s senior program coordinator for the Americas.6 66 7