‘Incompatible with democracy’: strongly rejects Tucuman’s ruling protecting prosecutors and judges

The Buenos Aires City Bar Association has sounded the alarm and made a statement to that effect. “The strongest rejection” In the face of controversial judicial resolution tucuman. The measurement results are as follows Capital Judicial Center Criminal Courtmedia and journalists are strictly prohibited. Spread any content that “Ask questions or criticize” performance of Public Prosecutors Office of the state or its employees.

The judicial decision did not stop there, but also ordered the judicial authorities to be notified of this action. National telecommunications carrier (Enercom) Performing “administrative” tasks on the prohibited items listed above. For the University of Buenos Aires, a decision of this nature is “completely inconsistent with university policy” Essential principles of a democratic republic. ”

The group warned that in the rule of law, “no official, much less a judge, can establish himself as a judge.” censor of ideasThey emphasized that the possibility of expressing opinions on the actions of public authorities, “no matter how severe or unpleasant” is the basis of this system, “even without the right to criticize the institutions of government.” You can’t claim to be Republican or Democratic. ”

From a legal perspective, the University recalled the freedom of expression protected by Articles 14 and 32 of the National Constitution and international treaties. “We do not accept precautionary restrictions.”. They argued that in a republic, officials must be subject to “public scrutiny” and not protected by a “judicial fence.”

They explained the measures as follows “Particularly serious” That’s because it’s a “blanket ban” on entire government departments. They pointed out that this action openly contradicts the Argentine Supreme Court and the court’s jurisprudence. Inter-American Court of Human Rightsconsiders this type of resolution to be “a form of pre-censorship” that is prohibited under international law.

As a result, the CABA Bar Association called on the magistrates who signed the judgment to “encourage the competent authorities to promote corresponding institutional and disciplinary accountability processes”. The group concluded that freedom of the press is important. “Required Guarantee” To manage public authority and maintain the rule of law.

Osvaldo Hardo supports Millais’ labor reform: “I can’t oppose changing the law”

‘Legal muzzle’: FOPEA warns of six months of censorship of local media

he Argentina Journalism Forum (Fopea) joined in the refusal and expressed deep concern, especially about the “legal muzzle” placed on the company’s workers. Closed Circuit Company (CCC). The group questioned the measures taken by the acting judge. Lucas Taboadabanned journalists, producers and hosts from disseminating any kind of content about local prosecutors and judges for six months.

The dispute stemmed from criminal charges filed by the owners. Prosecutor’s Office, Edmundo Jimenezto the Director of CCC, Gustavo Olarte He accused them of “obstructing public functions” and of “institutional coercion”. However, FOPEA criticized Judge Taboada for threatening sanctions for judicial disobedience, ordering the immediate suspension of publications on television, radio and social networks that could “discredit” officials, and extending the ban to all media personnel.

In a statement, the group warned that the resolution amounted to an illegal act. “Pre-inspection” This is because the exercise of journalism is thwarted before actual harm can be proven. FOPEA recalled that case law has established that the honor of an official does not grant preemptive judicial protection, but rather preemptive judicial protection. subsequent repairsand as a precedent, a case of speech ascribed to is cited. Karina Millaythe court overturned a similar prohibition, considering that public display is inherent in the functioning of the state.

TC/DCQ