Papua New Guinea’s civic space has been rated as “obstructed” by the Civicus Monitor and the country has been criticised for pushing forward with a controversial media law in spite of strong opposition.

Among concerns previously documented by the civil rights watchdog are harassment and threats against human rights defenders, particularly those working on land and environmental rights, use of the cybercrime law to criminalise online expression, intimidation and restrictions against journalists, and excessive force during protests.

In recent months, the authorities have used the cybercrime law to target a human rights defender for raising questions online on forest enforcement, while a journalist and gender-based violence survivor is also facing charges under the law, said the Civicus Monitor in its latest report.

The court halted a logging company’s lawsuit against a civil society group while the government is pushing forward with the controversial National Media Development law.

Human rights defender charged under cybercrime law
On 9 December 2024, human rights defender and ACT NOW! campaign manager Eddie Tanago was arrested and charged by police under section 21(2) of the Cybercrime Act 2016 for allegedly publishing defamatory remarks on social media about the managing director of the PNG Forest Authority.

Tanago was taken to the Boroko Police Station Holding cell and released on bail the same afternoon. If convicted he could face a maximum sentence of 15 years’ imprisonment.

ACT NOW is a prominent human rights organisation seeking to halt illegal logging and related human rights violations in Papua New Guinea (PNG).

According to reports, ACT NOW had reshared a Facebook post from a radio station advertising an interview with PNG Forest Authority (PNGFA) staff members, which included a photo of the managing director.

The repost included a comment raising questions about PNGFA forest enforcement.

Following Tanago’s arrest, ACT NOW said: “it believes that the arrest and charging of Tanago is a massive overreach and is a blatant and unwarranted attempt to intimidate and silence public debate on a critical issue of national and international importance.”

It added that “there was nothing defamatory in the social media post it shared and there is nothing remotely criminal in republishing a poster which includes the image of a public figure which can be found all over the internet.”

On 24 January 2025, when Tanago appeared at the Waigani Committal Court, he was instead charged under section 15, subparagraph (b) of the Cybercrime Act for “identity theft”. The next hearing has been scheduled for February 25.

The 2016 Cybercrime Act has been used to silence criticism and creates a chilling effect, said Civicus Monitor.

The law has been criticised by the opposition, journalists and activists for its impact on freedom of expression and political discourse.

JOURNO ARRAIGNED ON CYBER HARASSMENT
Journalist Hennah Joku appeared before Magistrate Paul Nii at the Waigani Committal Court on charges of cyber defamation following a Facebook post made on 4th September 2024.
Read more:https://t.co/LEIDEcTZv6#EMTVNews #EMTVOnline pic.twitter.com/zHqm353Cst

— EMTV (@EMTVOnline) December 5, 2024

Journalist and gender activist charged with defamation
Journalist and gender activist Hennah Joku was detained and charged under the Cybercrime Act on 23 November 2024, following defamation complaints filed by her former partner Robert Agen.

Joku was charged with two counts of breaching the Cybercrimes Act 2016 and detained in Boroko Prison. She was freed on the same day after bail was posted.

Joku, a survivor of a 2018 assault by Agen, had documented and shared her six-year journey through the PNG justice system, which had resulted in his conviction and jailing in 2023.

On 2 September 2024, the PNG Supreme Court overturned two of three criminal convictions, and Agen was released from prison.

On 4 and 15 September 2024, Joku shared her reactions with more than 9000 followers on her Meta social media account. Those two posts, one of which featured the injuries suffered from her 2018 assault, now form the basis for the current defamation charges against her.

Section 21(2) of the Cybercrimes Act 2016, which has an electronic defamation clause, carries a maximum penalty of up to 25 years’ imprisonment or a fine of up to one million kina (NZ$442,000).

The Pacific Freedom Forum (PFF) expressed “grave concerns” over the charges, saying: “We encourage the government and judiciary to review the use of defamation legislation to silence and gag the universal right to freedom of speech.

“Citizens must be informed. They must be protected.”

Court stays logging company lawsuit against civil society group
In January 2025, an injunction issued against community advocacy group ACT NOW! to prevent publication of reports on illegal logging has been stayed by the National Court.

In July 2024, two Malaysian owned logging companies obtained an order from the District Court in Vanimo preventing ACT NOW! from issuing publications about their activities and from contacting their clients and service providers.

That order has now been effectively lifted after the National Court agreed to stay the whole District court proceedings while it considers an application from ACT NOW! to have the case permanently stayed and transferred to the National Court.

ACT NOW! said the action by Global Elite Limited and Wewak Agriculture Development Limited, which are part of the Giant Kingdom group, is an example of Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation (SLAPP).

“SLAPPs are illegitimate and abusive lawsuits designed to intimidate, harass and silence legitimate criticism and close down public scrutiny of the logging industry,” said Civicus Monitor.

SLAPP lawsuits have been outlawed in many countries and lawyers involved in supporting them can be sanctioned, but those protections do not yet exist in PNG.

The District Court action is not the first time the Malaysian-owned Giant Kingdom group has tried to use the legal system in an attempt to silence ACT NOW!

In March 2024, the court rejected a similar SLAPP style application by the Global Elite for an injunction against ACT NOW! As a result, the company discontinued its legal action and the court ordered it to pay ACT NOW!’s legal costs.

Government pushes forward with controversial media legislation
The government is reportedly ready to pass legislation to regulate its media, which journalism advocates have said could have serious implications for democracy and freedom of speech in the country.

National Broadcasting Corporation (NBC) of PNG reported in January 2025 that the policy has received the “green light” from cabinet to be presented in Parliament.

The state broadcaster reported that Communications Minister Timothy Masiu said: “This policy will address the ongoing concerns about sensationalism, ethical standards, and the portrayal of violence in the media.”

In July 2024, it was reported that the proposed media policy was now in its fifth draft but it is unclear if this version has been updated.

As previously documented, journalists have raised concerns that the media development policy could lead to more government control over the country’s relatively free media.

The bill includes sections that give the government the “power to investigate complaints against media outlets, issue guidelines for ethical reporting, and enforce sanctions or penalties for violations of professional standards”.

There are also concerns that the law will punish journalists who create content that is against the country’s development objectives.

Organisations such as Transparency International PNG, Media Council of PNG, Pacific Freedom Forum, and Pacific Media Watch/Asia Pacific Media Network among others, have asked for the policy to be dropped.

The press freedom ranking for PNG dropped from 59th place to 91st in the most recent index published by Reporters without Borders (RSF) in May 2024.

Civicus Monitor.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

The Palau Media Council has condemned a political lawsuit against the publisher of the Island Times as an “assault on press freedom” with the Pacific country facing an election on Tuesday.

In a statement yesterday, the council added that the lawsuit, filed by Surangel and Sons Co. against Times publisher Leilani Reklai over her newspaper’s coverage of tax-related documents that surfaced on social media, was an attempt to undermine the accountability that was vital to democracy.

The statement also said the lawsuit raised “critical concerns about citizens’ access to information and freedom of the press.

Palau recently topped the inaugural Pacific Media Freedom Index for press freedom.

“This lawsuit, combined with government’s statements endorsing that Island Times reported mis-information on its coverage of the tax related document and the decision to ban Island Times from Surangel and Sons [distribution] outlets, raises critical concerns about citizens’ access to information and the freedom of the press — both of which are cornerstones of a democratic society,” the statement said.

“The council sees this legal action as an assault on press freedom and an attempt to undermine the accountability that is vital to democracy.”

The statement said that Reklai, one of Palau’s senior journalists, was being targeted simply for reporting on documents that were already in the public domain.

“She did not originate the information but responsibly conveyed what these documents suggested, raising questions about the current administration’s narrative on corporate tax contributions,” the council said.

‘Journalistic duty’
“Reporting on such information is a journalistic duty to ensure transparency in tax policies and government incentives impacting the private sector.

“The Island Times, by publishing these documents, has provided a platform for clarifying public understanding of the new PGST tax law’s impact on major corporations and the actual tax contributions of Surangel and Sons.

“These issues are clearly within the public’s right to know, and the council emphasises that media plays a crucial role in reporting such findings and promoting informed debate.

The council said it stood in solidarity with Reklai and all journalists who strived to find and uphold the truth.

“In a healthy democracy, a free and open press is essential for informed citizens and responsible governance.”

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Palau’s largest newspaper is being sued for defamation by the company of President Surangel Whipps Jr’s father, just days ahead of general elections in the Pacific nation.

Surangel and Sons alleges “negligence and defamation” by the Island Times and its editor Leilani Reklai for an article published on Tuesday with “false and unsubstantiated allegations,” owner Surangel Whipps Sr said in a press release on Thursday.

Reklai has rejected the company’s allegations and said the “lawsuit is trying to control how media here in Palau tells a story”, a news article about the case in the Island Times reported on Friday.

“I feel like we are being intimidated, we are being forced to speak a certain narrative rather than present diverse community perspectives,” said Reklai, who is also a stringer for BenarNews.

The Micronesian nation of 17,000 people — 650 km north of Papua New Guinea — goes to the polls on November 5. Whipps Jr’s rival is his brother-in-law Tommy Remengesau Jr, who was president from 2001 to 2009 and 2013 to 2021.

The controversy comes after Palau was top of the inaugural 2023 Pacific Media Freedom Index of 14 island countries that highlighted the region’s media facing significant political and economic pressures, bribes and corruption, as well as self-censorship.

Island Times reported on Friday the suit is seeking compensation and punitive damages and that the company asserts the “monetary awards should be substantial enough to prevent similar conduct from the newspaper and Reklai in future”.

Surangel and Sons financial details — leaked from the country’s tax office — were posted on social media last weekend, prompting heated online debate over how much it paid.

A new corporate and goods and services tax system introduced by Whipps Jr’s government is currently being rolled out in Palau and its merits have been a focus of election campaigning.

The company in a statement said its “privacy rights had been violated,” the tax details were obtained illegally, posted online without consent, and some of the figures had been altered.

Motivation ‘confusing voters’
“The motivation behind the circulation of this document is clearly for misinformation and disinformation to confuse voters. In the end Surangel and Sons is not running for office. Unfortunately, it has been victimised by this smear campaign,” the company posted on social media.

Island Times in a 225-word, front-page story headlined “Surangel & Sons condemns tax report leak as privacy violation” reported the company’s statement on Tuesday. It also quoted financial details from the leaked documents and accompanying commentary.

Whipps Jr. in a press conference on Wednesday accused the Island Times of publishing disinformation.

“Island Times continues to print political propaganda, it’s not accurate,” Whipps Jr said, calling for a correction to be published.

The lawsuit against the paper and its editor was served the next day.

Whipps Jr’s spokesperson told BenarNews any questions related to the lawsuit should be directed to the parties involved.

Surangel and Sons was founded in 1980 by Whipps Sr, who also served as Palau’s president briefly in 2005 and for two years from 2007.

Business ‘offers everything’
The privately-owned business “offers everything from housing design and automotive repair to equipment rentals, groceries, and scuba gear” through its import, sales, construction and travel arms, the company’s website says.

Previously as CEO, Whipps Jr transformed the company from a family store to one of Palau’s largest and most diversified businesses, employing more than 700 people.

His LinkedIn profile states he finished as CEO in January 2021, after 28 years in the position and in the month he became president. His spokesperson did not respond to questions from BenarNews about if he still retains any direct financial or other links to the company.

Surangel and Sons said the revelation of sensitive business information threatens their competitive advantage and puts jobs at risk.

Palau’s Minister of Finance Kaleb Udui Jr told the president’s press conference on Wednesday an investigation was underway, a special prosecutor would be appointed and apologized for the leak to the company.

“I would hope the media would make extra effort to help educate the public and discourage misinformation and breaches of privacy of the tax office and any other government office,” Udui said, confirming the tax documents had been altered before being posted on social media.

He said tax office staff have previously been warned about leaks and ensuring data confidentiality, as breaches negatively impact the confidence of foreign investors in Palau.

Explanation rather than leak
Whipps Jr added that the newspaper should have explained the tax system instead of reporting the leaked information.

He also accused Island Times of failure to disclose a paid advertisement in this week’s edition of the paper for his political opponent.

“I’m disappointed in the Island Times, because there was an article that was not an article, a paid advertisement,” Whipps Jr said about a colourful blue and yellow election campaign graphic.

Island Times told BenarNews it was not usual practice to put “Paid Advertisement” on advertisements but it would review its policy for political campaign material.

Reklai fears the lawsuit could have serious consequences for the media in Palau and bankrupt Island Times, the paper reported.

“If I don’t stand up to this, it sends a signal to all journalists that they risk facing claims for damages for powerful companies and government officials while carrying out their work,” she said.

Palau has two newspapers and four radio stations and enshrined in its constitution are protections for journalists, including a guarantee they cannot be jailed for refusing to disclose sources.

Surangel and Sons said they would no longer sell Island Times through their outlets.

Copyright ©2015-2024, BenarNews. Republished with the permission of BenarNews.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

The state of civic space in Indonesia has been rated as “obstructed” in the latest CIVICUS Monitor report.

The civic space watchdog said that ongoing concerns include the arrest, harassment and criminalisation of human rights defenders and journalists as well as physical and digital attacks, the use of defamation laws to silence online dissent and excessive use of force by the police during protests, especially in the Papuan region.

In July 2023, the UN Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide, Alice Wairimu Nderitu, expressed concerns regarding the human rights situation in the West Papua region in her opening remarks during the 22nd Meeting of the 53rd Regular Session of the Human Rights Council in Geneva.

She highlighted the harassment, arbitrary arrest and detention of Papuans, which had led to the appropriation of customary land in West Papua.

She encouraged the Indonesian government to ensure humanitarian assistance and engage in “a genuine inclusive dialogue”.

In August 2023, human rights organisations called on Indonesia to make serious commitments as the country sought membership in the UN Human Rights Council for the period 2024 to 2026.

Among the calls were to ratify international human rights instruments, especially the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (ICPPED), to provide details of steps it will take to implement all of the supported recommendations from the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) and to fully cooperate with the Special Procedures of the Council.

Call to respect free expression
The groups also called on the government to ensure the respect, protection and promotion of the rights to freedom of expression, peaceful assembly and association, for clear commitments to ensure a safe and enabling environment for all human rights defenders, to find a sustainable solution for the human rights crisis in Papua and to end impunity.

In recent months, protests by communities have been met with arbitrary arrests and excessive force from the police.

The arbitrary arrests, harassment and criminalisation of Papuan activists continue, while an LGBT conference was cancelled due to harassment and threats.

Human rights defenders continue to face defamation charges, there have been harassment and threats against journalists, while a TikTok communicator was jailed for two years over a pork video.

Ongoing targeting of Papuan activists
Arbitrary arrests, harassment and criminalisation of Papuan activists continue to be documented.

According to the Human Rights Monitor, on 5 July 2023, four armed plainclothes police officers arrested Viktor Makamuke, a 52-year-old activist of the United Liberation Movement for West Papua (ULMWP), a pro-independence movement.

He was subsequently detained at the Sorong Selatan District Police Station where officers allegedly coerced and threatened Makamuke to pledge allegiance to the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia (NKRI).

A week earlier, Makamuke and his friend had reportedly posted a photo in support of ULMWP full membership in the Melanesian Spearhead Group (MSG) — an intergovernmental organisation composed of the four Melanesian states.

Shortly after the arrest, the police published a statement claiming that Makamuke was the commander of the West Papua National Liberation Army (TPNPB) — an armed group — in the Bomberai Region.

The Human Rights Monitor reported that members of the Yahukimo District police arbitrarily arrested six activists belonging to the West Papua National Committee (KNPB) in the town of Dekai, Yahukimo Regency, on 6 July 2023.

KNPB is a movement promoting the right to self-determination through peaceful action and is one of the most frequently targeted groups in West Papua.

The activists organised and carried out a collective cleaning activity in Dekai. The police repeatedly approached them claiming that the activists needed official permission for their activity.

Six KNPB activists arrested
Subsequently, police officers arrested the six KNPB activists without a warrant or justifying the arrest. All activists were released after being interrogated for an hour.

On 8 August 2023, three students were found guilty of treason and subsequently given a 10-month prison sentence by the Jayapura District Court.

Yoseph Ernesto Matuan, Devio Tekege and Ambrosius Fransiskus Elopere were charged with treason due to their involvement in an event held at the Jayapura University of Science and Technology (USTJ) in November 2022, where they waved the Morning Star flag, a banned symbol of Papuan independence.

Their action was in protest against a planned peace dialogue proposed by the National Commission on Human Rights (Komnas HAM).

According to Amnesty International Indonesia, between 2019 and 2022 there have been at least 61 cases involving 111 individuals in Papua who were charged with treason.

At least 37 supporters of the West Papua National Committee (KNPB) were arrested in relation to peaceful demonstrations to commemorate the 1962 New York Agreement in the towns Sentani, Jayapura Regency and Dekai, Yahukimo Regency, on 14 and 15 August 2023.

Allegations of police ill-treatment
There were also allegations of ill-treatment by the police.

On 2 September 2023, police officers detained Agus Kossay, Chairman of the West Papua National Coalition (KNPB); Benny Murip, KNPB Secretary in Jayapura; Ruben Wakla, member of the KNPB in the Yahukimo Regency; and Ferry Yelipele.

The four activists were subsequently detained and interrogated at the Jayapura District Police Station in Doyo Baru. Wakla and Yelipele were released on 3rd September 2023 without charge.

Police officers reportedly charged Kossay and Murip under Article 160 and Article 170 of the Indonesian Criminal Code (KUHP) for “incitement”.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

A defendant in an Indonesian case of alleged defamation, Fatia Maulidiyanti, has hit back at a statement by Coordinating Minister for Maritime and Investment (Menko Marves) Luhut Binsar Pandjaitan who said in his testimony that he wanted to audit all non-government organisations (NGOs) in the country.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Despite its champions being honoured with a Nobel Peace Prize, press freedom has a “sword of Damocles” hanging over it, warn this year’s two laureates.

Maria Ressa of the Philippines, co-founder of the news website Rappler, and Dmitry Muratov of Russia, editor of the independent newspaper Novaya Gazeta, will receive their prize in Oslo on Friday for “their efforts to safeguard freedom of expression”, reports AFP news agency.

“So far, press freedom is under threat,” Ressa told a press briefing, when asked whether the award had improved the situation in her country, which ranks 138th in the Reporters Without Borders (RSF) press freedom index.

The 58-year-old journalist mentioned her compatriot and former colleague, Jesus “Jess” Malabanan, a reporter for the Manila Standard Today, who was shot in the head on Wednesday.

Malabanan, who was also a Reuters correspondent, had worked on the sensitive subject of the “war on drugs” in the Philippines.

“It’s like having a Damocles sword hang over your head,” Ressa said.

Toughest stories ‘at own risk’
“Now in the Philippines, the laws are there but… you tell the toughest stories at your own risk,” she added.

Ressa, whose website is highly critical of Philippines President Rodrigo Duterte, is herself the subject of a total of seven lawsuits in her country.

Currently on parole pending an appeal after being convicted of defamation last year, she needed to ask four courts for permission to be able to travel and collect her Nobel in person.

Sitting beside her on Thursday, Muratov, 60, concurred with his fellow recipient’s words.

“If we’re going to be foreign agents because of the Nobel Peace Prize, we will not get upset, no,” he told reporters when asked of the risk of being labelled as such by the Kremlin.

“But actually… I don’t think we will get this label. We have some other risks though,” Muratov added.

‘Foreign agent’ label
The “foreign agent” label is meant to apply to people or groups that receive funding from abroad and are involved in any kind of “political activity”.

“Foreign agent” organisations must disclose sources of funding and label publications with the tag or face fines.

Novaya Gazeta is a rare independent newspaper in a Russian media landscape that is largely under state control. It is known for its investigations into corruption and human rights abuses in Chechnya.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Veteran Samoan parliamentarian and chairman of the Fa’atuatua i le Atua Samoa ua Tasi (FAST) has criticised what he characterises as the “extreme” and “defamatory” behaviour of the former Prime Minister of Samoa since losing government.

Speaking during his programme Ia Ao Samoa yesterday, La’auli Leuatea Schmidt said he was “appalled” by the actions of Tuila’epa Dr Sa’ilele Malielegaoi and his party, especially their “unfounded accusations” towards Samoa’s Chief Justice.

Tuila’epa and the Human Rights Protection Party (HRPP) have so far staged two separate “peaceful protests” to protest what they claim to be the “disintegration” of the Constitution.

Hundreds of people were seen marching in unison, singing together with posters held up in the air.

Some messages were directed explicitly at Satiu Simativa Perese, asking him to step down from the role of Chief Justice.

The Minister of Agriculture and Fisheries believes that Tuila’epa and his party have “gone too far” with their actions.

‘Whole new level’
“I have seen that the level of criticism from them (HRPP) has been upgraded. It has gone up to a whole new level and it’s disappointing [to see],” said La’auli.

“They used to sit here while we were on the other side.

“[And] back then they have been accusing us of so many things, yet we have never gone up to this level.

“This is extreme…what we are seeing right now, their actions and the things they have said is extreme.”

In saying that, La’auli said they are well-aware of all the accusations made by Tuila’epa and his party so far.

However, he flatly denied the claims from the Opposition Leader.

“The comments and remarks they have made are not only impolite, rude, unfounded but also have gone without barriers,” he said.

“I mean, we (FAST) have got used to the way he communicates and the blaming game from him [Tuilaepa].

‘Brainwashed our people’
“But what is sad to see is that they have manipulated and brainwashed our people and exploited our people to achieve their agenda. It’s disappointing to see.”

La’auli believes that the actions from the opposition side of government are causing “unnecessary hatred” among Samoans.

“The level of defamatory remarks has gone above and beyond, without barriers. They’ve made accusations so many times before to ruin the name of our leader, our party, and myself,” he said.

“But now, they are targeting the judiciary.

“I’m appalled at the things they have come up, with especially what they have said.

“It’s sad to see it coming from people who used to lead the country and from someone who was the Prime Minister.

“But I guess they don’t care anymore and have gone as far as trying to destroy the constitution and the judiciary. They have cursed our judiciary and have come up with all those baseless accusations towards the one pillar we are relying on to keep the peace within the country

‘Extraordinary defamation’
“The level of defamation is extraordinary.

“But the question is, who are they to question the work done by the panel of judges in Samoa?

“Were they appointed under the Constitution to question the work of our judges? Are they liable under the constitution to question the roles of judges? Is that their job? I don’t think so.

“Samoa’s highest courts have delivered their decision, so I do not understand why they are still questioning that.

“It seems like they are trying to imply that they are superior and that they are smarter than our judges.”

La’auli said the opposition side has been doing nothing but “wrong moves” since they stepped down.

Moreover, La’auli said, he had already tasked an “investigative team” to look into all the accusations made by the opposition leader and members towards the Chief Justice, judiciary and the FAST government.

‘Criticism has skyrocketed’
“Because the level of criticism has skyrocketed, we need to do something. Therefore, I had already called on our investigation team and asked them to go out and gather all the claims and accusations made by them and bring them all in.

“We will deal with all the unfounded accusations later on.

“At the moment we need to bring and gather them all in, and while we don’t want to waste our time to go and face them (HRPP) there will come a time where we will take all of them to court, that’s the best way to deal with this.

“We will leave it in the good hands of our police and judiciary.

“If they (HRPP) have the guts to break the law then they should also be bold and ready to stand before the court.

“They (HRPP) have exploited our people to achieve their goals.”

‘Tarnishing Samoa’s Constitution’
La’auli accused Tuila’epa of “tarnishing Samoa’s Constitution”.

“How can he accuse other people of destroying the Constitution when it has been greatly damaged under his leadership.,” he asked.

“You only need to look at all the amendments he made over the years, only to destroy and amend them again if it doesn’t work the way he expects it to work.

“So to say that we and the Chief Justice have destroyed our Constitutions is ironic. Because that’s exactly what he has been doing.

“The amendments made under his leadership and under his orders have not only tarnished our Constitution, but also the good work and sacrifice of our forefathers.”

Sialai Sarafina Sanerivi is a Samoa Observer journalist. Republished with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

North Fly MP James Donald yesterday made an appearance in Papua New Guinea’s Waigani Committal Court to face cyber crime charges for allegedly publishing defamatory materials against a lawyer and the management team of OK Tedi River Development Foundation.

Magistrate Garry Unjo, reading the MP’s charges, said Donald, from Gasuke village in North Fly district in Western Province, had allegedly published defamatory materials against Young and Williams principal lawyer Greg Sheppard and Ok Tedi River Development Foundation (OTRDL) chairman Steven Bagari, and Samson Jubi.

Donald was charged with a count each of attempting to pervert the court of justice, and publishing defamatory materials.

Police alleged that Donald had posted a false and misleading defamatory article titled “Where is the money?” on his personal Facebook page on July 26, alleging that Sheppard and Bagari had misappropriated more than K250 million ($110 million) in funds that belonged to the Ok Tedi landowners.

Other articles also signed and approved for release by him were allegedly published in the two daily newspapers, the PNG Post-Courier and The National.

According to the police summary of facts, Donald had allegedly posted defamatory materials against Sheppard, Bagari and Jubi intentionally to tarnish the reputation of the three men without factual evidence to support his claims on Facebook.

Police further alleged that Donald’s defamatory publications were made despite him knowing there was a writ of summons, filed by Young and Williams Lawyers on behalf of OTFRDL in the High Court of Singapore (HC/S628/2020 between OTFRDL and others, Vs James Donald).

His alleged accomplice, Phillip Baindridge, is the chairman of PNG Sustainable Development Progamme (PNGSDP).

The summons sought to retrieve funds worth more than K250 million (NZ$110 million) back to PNG and put into the control of foundation and the people affected.

Trevor Wahune is a University of Papua New Guinea journalism graduate and reporter on the OPNG Post-Courier.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Timor-Leste’s Journalist Association (AJTL) and journalism students marched through the streets of the capital Dili today calling on the government to scrap plans to change the law to make defamation a criminal offence.

Under the proposed law journalists could face jail sentences.

Opponents of the proposed law say it is an attack on democracy in a country with the highest world press freedom ranking in the region.

Words by Bob Howarth, image by AJTL.

READ MORE: Timor-Leste: Can the criminal defamation law in Timor-Leste be stopped?

• Ramos-Horta slams criminal libel plan

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Manila Judge Rainelda Estacio-Montesa has denied the motion for partial reconsideration filed by Rappler journalists, and upheld the cyber libel conviction of Rappler CEO and executive editor Maria Ressa and former researcher-writer Reynaldo Santos Jr.

“In view of the foregoing, the Motion for Partial Reconsideration filed by Accused Reynaldo Santos Jr and Maria Angelita Ressa is denied for lack of merit,” Montesa said in an order signed on Friday.

The next option for Ressa and Santos would be to file an appeal with the Court of Appeals.

READ MORE: Cases vs Maria Ressa, Rappler directors, staff since 2018

In denying the motion of Ressa and Santos, Montesa for the first time cited a Supreme Court First Division ruling from 2018, which says that cyber libel prescribes not 12 years, but 15 years – an even longer period.

The prescription period is one of the most legally contested issues in the Ressa cyber libel case. Former Supreme Court senior associate justice Antonio Carpio maintains that the prescription period is one year.

The disputed Rappler article was published May 2012, which means complainant Wilfredo Keng had the right to sue only until May 2013 if the one year prescription was followed. Keng filed the complaint only in October 2017.

Montesa found an “unpublished resolution of Tolentino v People,” which is a First Division ruling from the Supreme Court dated August 6, 2018.

Judge’s justification
Montesa quoted the resolution to justify her ruling that cyber libel does not prescribe in one year.

Although Montesa previously upheld the Department of Justice (DOJ) theory that cyber libel prescribes in 12 years, she is now citing the Tolentino resolution which says: “Following Article 90 of the Revised Penal Code, the crime of libel in relation to RA 10175 now prescribes in 15 years.”

“Thus, the Court cannot apply the 1-year prescriptive period provided for under the Revised Penal Code as claimed by the defense,” Montesa said.

Montesa’s earlier ruling on prescription period, and Tolentino vs People, have A different legal basis.

Under the Revised Penal Code (RPC), libel prescribes one year. The Cybercrime Law did not explicitly provide a prescription period for cyber libel.

This lack of a textual basis gave DOJ, and later on Montesa, an opening to cite the pre-war Act 3326 which lays down prescriptive periods for special laws.

The Cybercrime Law imposed penalties one degree higher for offenses under it. So from an original penalty of up to 6 years, cyber libel was now imposed a penalty of up to 12 years. Under the archaic Act 3326, that kind of crime prescribes in 12 years, in the DOJ’s and Montesa’s view.

Prescription of crimes
The Tolentino ruling, however, was based on Article 90 of the RPC which lays out prescription of crimes.

The First Division ruling said: “The new penalty (of cyber libel), therefore, becomes afflictive, following Section 25 6of the RPC… following Article 90 7of the RPC, the crime of libel in relation to RA 10175 now prescribes in fifteen (15) years.”

The 2nd paragraph of Article 90 says: “Crimes punishable by other afflictive penalties shall prescribe in fifteen years.”
Article 90

In his earlier column in the Philippine Daily Inquirer, retired justice Carpio pointed out that Article 90 “is classified into two,” and that the 2nd classification still makes cyber libel’s prescription one year.

“Those based on the length or nature of the penalty, and those based on the crime itself regardless of the length or nature of the penalty. Under the first classification are, among others, crimes punishable by correctional penalty which prescribe in 10 years. Under the second classification are, among others, ‘libel and similar offenses’ which prescribe in one year,” Carpio wrote.

Indeed, the 4th and 5th paragraphs of Article 90 said: “The crime of libel or other similar offenses shall prescribe in one year. The crime of oral defamation and slander by deed shall prescribe in six months.”

Cyber libel ‘not new crime’
In declaring the Cybercrime Law constitutional in 2014, the Supreme Court ruled in Disini vs Secretary of Justice that “cyber libel is actually not a new crime” from the RPC libel.

Thus, Carpio noted, “In such a case, the prescriptive period for cyber libel is governed by the RPC which prescribes its own prescriptive periods. Under Article 90 of the RPC, the crime of libel and other similar offenses shall prescribe in one year.”

“The Tolentino citation was unnecessary because, under Disini, there is a specific prescriptive period and that is Art. 90. We will address that on appeal,” said Ressa and Santos’ lawyer, former Supreme Court spokesperson Ted Te.

Ressa faces 5 other criminal cases related to tax, and 3 criminal complaints, including another cyber libel complaint filed by Keng.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Rappler chief executive Maria Ressa and former researcher-writer Reynaldo Santos Jr have filed a motion for partial reconsideration, appealing to Manila Judge Rainelda Estacio-Montesa to reconsider her decision that convicted the journalists of cyber libel.

Ressa and Santos’ lawyers from the Free Legal Assistance Group (FLAG) submitted their 132-page motion to the Manila Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 46 via email yesterday afternoon.

Copies were also mailed to the court and the prosecutors. The Manila RTC is still on lockdown due to possible exposure to personnel who were in contact with coronavirus-positive relatives.

READ MORE: ‘I’m scared to go to jail, I’m not as fearless as Maria’

The motion cited at least 13 errors committed by Judge Montesa in her June 15 verdict and accused her of malice.

In the motion, FLAG argued several key points and raised issues still largely unexplored with the very young, and still very contested, Philippine Cybercrime Law.

Among these are the following:

• Complainant Wilfredo Keng as public figure
• Malice
• Republication
• Prescription period of libel
• Intervention of the UN Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression, Professor David Kaye
• Imposition of fines instead of imprisonment for libel

The motion for reconsideration (MR) did not mince words in criticising Judge Montesa’s decision, saying “the court has resorted to language that borders on the sarcastic and, at times, crosses over to the partial”.

Free speech legal protection
FLAG asked the court to consider Philippine jurisprudence that fiercely protects free speech and apply them to the cybercrime law.

“The self-distancing by the court of this case from the issue of press freedom is so pronounced as to be unmistakable. In the process of that self-distancing, however, the fundamental principles of constitutional law on ‘content-based restrictions’ that have become hornbook law have been ignored,” said the MR.

Libel in the Revised Penal Code presumes malice in defamatory imputations even if they are true. Over the years, Philippine jurisprudence has made a distinction between a public figure and a private person, applying an actual malice rule for public figures.

It means that for a public official, malice on the part of the accused must be proven and not presumed.

Because the bar for determining malice is so high, even erroneous statements are not considered malicious – as long as there is failure to prove a “high degree of awareness of probable falsity”.

Judge Montesa ruled that because Wilfredo Keng was a private person, then malice was presumed.

FLAG said Keng was considered a public figure, citing the case Ayer vs Capulong which said a public figure was “anyone who has arrived at a position where public attention is focused upon him as a person”.

Public figure definition
“Its definition of a public figure is important to this case, as it clearly establishes that even non-governmental officials are considered public figures,” said FLAG, arguing that the rule on actual malice must be applied in the case.

Keng’s complaint was based on a 2012 story linking him to the late chief justice Renato Corona, who faced an impeachment trial.

Judge Montesa lectured the journalists on the supposed failure to verify information in an intelligence document that linked Keng to illicit activities in that story, saying that they were being reckless.

Before the verdict, United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Right to Freedom of Opinion and Expression Professor David Kaye submitted an unsolicited expert’s brief, making a case for how libel should be decriminalised, and how the court must prudently apply the cybercrime law while libel remains a criminal offence.

Judge Montesa merely “noted” Kaye’s brief, which, in the judiciary, means it was just acknowledged for the record.

International law principles
“With due respect, considering the opinion of Professor Kaye in his Brief would allow the court to arrive at a judgment that is more in accord not only with the facts and evidence presented during the trial but also with international law principles that govern the country’s commitments under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR),” said the motion.

As a final argument, FLAG said Judge Montesa should have been guided by jurisprudence, and by the Supreme Court’s own circular, that if it can, courts must impose only fines rather than imprisonment on libel cases.

Ressa and Santos were sentenced to a maximum of 6 years in jail.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Timor-Leste’s Minister of Justice plans to present to the Council of Ministers a proposal to include criminal defamation in the country’s penal code.

The International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) and its affiliate the Timor-Leste Press Union (TLPU) have protested against the move that would undermine press freedom and public interest journalism, reports IFJ.

The proposal to introduce a law of criminal defamation to Timor-Leste’s penal code (Articles 187-A to 187-F) stipulates that any person who publicly states and publishes through social media “facts” or “opinions” that may offend the honour, good name and reputation of a current or previous member of government, church official or any public official can be prosecuted and punished with up to three years in prison.

READ MORE: Ramos-Horta slams criminal libel plan – threat to rights in Timor-Leste

Media rights groups say the new law will have far reaching consequences as it criminalises actual expressions of one’s opinion and even criminalises a third person sharing this information.

The IFJ has addressed its concerns in a letter to Prime Minister Taur Matan Ruak.

The proposed law inadequately defines “offences” and places the legal burden of proving that a story is true upon the journalist and/or publisher.

The offences would carry between one to three years’ imprisonment. A person who offends against a dead person can also be punished with a prison sentence.

TPLU says: “This bill contradicts the Timor-Leste constitution in articles 40-41 concerning freedom of expression and freedom of the press. We from TLPU condemned this law.

“The government is trying to use a national emergency opportunity to endorse this bill with the aim of punishing those who berate leaders and politicians, but in our opinion this is to criminalise journalists and all citizens who criticize the government.”

The IFJ said: “We urge the government of Timor-Leste to take the necessary steps to ensure the proposal does not make it into the penal code.

“If laws to criminalise defamation are adopted this will mark a retreat from a commitment to democracy and an open society which has been to the very great credit of Timor-Leste.”

Former national president and Nobel Prize winner Jose Ramos-Horta and former prime minister and leader of the majority Fretilin party, Dr Mari Alkatiri, earlier this week criticised the draft law being “rushed” through Parliament and its impact on press freedom.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Pacific Media Watch Newsdesk

The Paris-based global media advocacy group Reporters Without Borders (RSF) has condemned yesterday’s arrest of Maria Ressa, editor of the independent Manila-based news website Rappler, on a “cyber libel” (defamation) charge.

It is referring the Philippine government’s “repeated persecution” of this journalist and her website to the United Nations Secretary-General.

Chosen as one of Time Magazine’s “persons of the year” in 2018, Ressa was spending last night in detention after being arrested at Rappler headquarters by agents from the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) armed with an arrest warrant issued on the basis of online defamation case filed last week.

READ MORE: Rappler CEO Maria Ressa arrested for ‘cyber libel’

“It seems that her arrest was left until the end of the afternoon with the deliberate aim of keeping her in detention overnight,” RSF said.

According to her colleagues, the judge said there was no time to handle the bail request until today.

-Partners-

The Philippine Justice Department filed the case against Ressa and Rappler on February 6 over an article published in 2012 about alleged ties between a Philippine businessmen and the then president of the country’s Supreme Court.

The charges, which carry a possible 12-year jail sentence, were brought under a cyber crime law that had not yet taken effect when the article was published.

‘No place in prison’
“Maria Ressa has no place in prison and the judicial persecution to which she is being subjected is becoming increasingly unacceptable,” RSF secretary-general Christophe Deloire said.

“Digging up an old case that was dismissed in February 2018 is absolutely absurd and confirms that this is not justice but an attempt to gag a media outlet and editor recognised internationally for their professionalism and independence.”

Deloire added: “We are asking the UN secretary-general to intercede as quickly as possible to end this harassment. At the same time, we ask the court that handles this case to dismiss all the charges against Maria Ressa and Rappler.”

This is the sixth charge to be brought against Ressa in more than a year of systematic judicial harassment.

Four charges of tax evasion and failing to file income tax returns were brought against Rappler and Ressa last November. A fifth charge, described by RSF as “completely spurious”, was brought in December.

Ressa is one of the 25 members of an international panel created at RSF’s initiative last year that drafted an international Declaration on Information and Democracy.

On the basis of the declaration, the leaders of 12 democratic countries launched a political process on November 11 aimed at providing democratic guarantees for news and information and freedom of opinion.

Media freedom awards
As well as being one of Time Magazine’s “persons of the year,” Ressa also received the 2018 Press Freedom Award from the Committee to Protect Journalists and has become a symbol of the Philippine media’s fight against intimidation by President Rodrigo Duterte.

The Philippines is ranked 133rd out of 180 countries in RSF’s 2018 World Press Freedom Index.

Press freedom groups around the world, including New Zealand’s Pacific Media Centre/Pacific Media Watch, condemned the persecution, with Pen America saying the arrest showed the Duterte government was “desperate” to silence critics.

“Maria Ressa, along with her colleagues at Rappler, has fearlessly exposed the abuses of the Duterte government, even in the face of relentless harassment,” Pen said.

“By arresting her on these absurd and baseless charges, concerning an article published 7 years ago and prior to the enactment of the very law under which she is being charged, the Philippines government has exposed how desperate it is to silence critics and stamp out independent journalism in the country.

“We call on the Duterte government to immediately drop these charges and release Ressa. Investigative journalism is not a crime.”

#Journalismisnotacrime

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Pacific Media Watch Newsdesk

Reporters Without Borders (RSF) has condemned the latest “absurd charges” that the Philippine Justice Department is planning to bring against the news website Rappler – this time libel charges in connection with an article posted in 2012 – and has called for the case to be dismissed.

The Justice Department has announced that Rappler, its editor and CEO Maria Ressa, and one of its former reporters, Reynaldo Santos Jr., are to be charged over a 2012 article about alleged ties between businessmen Wilfredo Keng and the then president of the country’s Supreme Court.

The charges, which carry a possible 12-year jail sentence, are based on the complaint that Keng brought five years later, in October 2017, under a cyber-crime law that was enacted several months after the article’s publication.

READ MORE: DOJ to indict Rappler for cyber libel

The National Bureau of Investigation dismissed the complaint in February 2018 because the law was not retroactive and because of a one-year moratorium on filing complaints, but reversed its decision the following month.

The Justice Department is reviving the case on the grounds that a principle of “continuous publication” can be applied to websites.

-Partners-

‘Grotesque persecution’
“The judicial harassment used by President Rodrigo Duterte’s administration to persecute Rappler’s journalists is becoming grotesque,” said Daniel Bastard, head of RSF’s Asia-Pacific desk.

“It would be almost laughable if it weren’t for the terrible judicial precedent that this decision would set, if upheld. We urge the court that handles this case to show independence and wisdom by dismissing it once and for all.”

The authorities have been systematically targeting Rappler for more than a year with the aim of intimidating its journalists. Four charges of tax evasion and failing to file income tax returns were brought against Rappler and Ressa in November.

A fifth, “completely spurious”, charge was brought in December, said RSF.

In January 2018, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) announced that it was revoking Rappler’s licence on the grounds that it had violated a ban on foreign ownership of media outlets, spuriously claiming that, by issuing Philippine Depositary Receipts to raise funds, it had sold some of its stock to foreign investors.

RSF referred this “unacceptable attack on media independence” to various international bodies.

In response to Rappler’s appeal against the SEC decision, a court ruled in July that the website should be allowed “reasonable time” to resolve any dispute about its financial structure.

The Rappler reporter assigned to covering the Malacañang presidential palace was meanwhile denied entry to the palace in February 2018 on Duterte’s personal orders.

The Philippines is ranked 133rd out of 180 countries in RSF’s 2018 World Press Freedom Index.

The Pacific Media Centre collaborates with Reporters Without Borders.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Vanuatu Prime Minister Charlot Salwai, the Minister responsible for Telecommunications, has informed Parliament that a cyber crime bill currently being developed will address the increasing issues and concerns regarding social media, especially Facebook.

He made the statement during the Ordinary Parliament sitting when responding to concerns raised by Malekula Member of Parliament, Sato Kilman regarding allegations made against him on the popular social media site.

MP Kilman referred to a post allegedly made by a fake ID that was circulated on Facebook, carrying allegations that the former Vanuatu Prime Minister had at least six bank accounts in Hong Kong with a total amount of 8 million euros.

“There are allegations that the Minister for Foreign Affairs is responsible for the post,” MP Kilman alleged.

“Does the government have resources to check such allegations before posting in public and tarnishing someone’s reputation?

“Can the police investigate if such allegations are true or not?

“You can apologise later but by then the damage has been done, a person’s credibility has been ruined. That happens to me but am sure it can happen to any of us.”

-Partners-

Emerging issues
MP Kilman then asked the Prime Minister if the Office of the Government Chief Information Officer (OGCIO) can use its resources to track down whoever is responsible for such posts.

In response, Prime Minister Salwai said the government was aware of emerging issues regarding Facebook.

“The government is working on a Cyber Crime Act, which will likely be ready by the next Parliament session to address this issue because Facebook has gone beyond [control],” said Prime Minister Salwai.

He said Facebook was not only a national but an international issue.

“It was the first agenda discussed during the Commonwealth Leaders meeting in London because people are using it to create a lot of social problems and attack people without substantiating information,” said Prime Minister Salwai.

He added that the issue was common in the Pacific and also in Vanuatu, people were using Facebook for political gain, attacking and making false statements or allegations about others.

“I think it is about time we should address this issue and as the Minister responsible for Telecommunications I want to announce to the House that the Cyber Crime Bill will come before this Parliament so we can control the use of social media.

“It has come to an extent where people feel free to say anything about others.”

Fake ID
On the other hand, PM Salwai said social media, especially Facebook, was a good communication tool but people were using it in the wrong way.

In a supplementary comment to the Prime Minister’s response, Foreign Affairs Minister Ralph Regenvanu confirmed seeing the post which he alleged was posted by a fake ID and not him as claimed.

Minister Regenvanu also confirmed allegations made by an adviser of a MP that he was the person behind the fake ID was false.

Minister Regenvanu said that out of all members of the House, being a regular Facebook user he had been the subject of many false allegations.

“That is what we should expect as MPs, we become figures of public scrutiny, you will find a lot of false allegations against me in Facebook,” he said.

“For example, they alleged I signed an agreement for the Chinese to build a military base here.

“I agree with the Prime Minister that we should have more control but we have to have some line so we don’t have too much control on media because freedom of expression is a constitutional right.

“We also have media freedom so we have to draw a fine line between unsubstantiated stories and balanced stories.

“Unfortunately, we don’t have that in Facebook so we have to look into that.”

The Pacific Media Centre republishes Vanuatu Daily Post stories with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz