Adelaide: “Ha’u Persija O nia Prezensa, La’os Lalatak”

Iha knua ida iha mane klosan ida no feto ran ida mak João ho Adelaide. Sira nain rua namora malu. La kleur, João ne’e hetan serbisu iha fatin do’ok. Iha tempu ne’eba, seidauk iha internet hodi bele komunika sira nia domin ba malu. Buat hotu paradu itoan hodi halo João hanoin barak atu halo oinsa mak sira nia domin ne’e bele la’o nafatin. João komesa buka dalan atu bele komunika nafatin ho nia doben Adelaide. Nia ativu hakerek surat ba Adelaide.

Iha surat primeiru, Adelaide konsege fó resposta hodi halo João sente kontente tebes no ativu tebes kontinua hakerek. Lakleur de’it, Adelaide la fó resposta ona ba João nia surat. Durante tinan ida resin, Adelaide ne’e nunka fó resposta. Koitadu tebes no triste tebes ba Jõaa ne’ebé sempre badinas hakerek surat.

Situasaun ne’e halo Jãoa sente konfujaun tebes no husu ba nia katak, saida mak akontese? Atu justifika no klarifika situasaun ne’e, nia desidi hodi ba vizita nia doben, Adelaide. To’o ne’eba, João hare labarik ki’ik ida mak halimar iha uma oin. João husu ba nia laran, Adelaide dalaruma kaben ona ho mane seluk no sira nia oan mak halimar iha uma oin ne’eba. Laran kontinua konfujaun no la fi’ar nafatin. João hakbesik liutan ba uma oin.

Derepente Adelaide halai sai mai husi uma laran hodi hasoru nia. Akontese ona konversasaun entre sira nain rua. João husu ba Adelaide tanba saida mak la resposta surat ne’ebé nia haruka. Adelaide lia tun ba João hodi dehan; “Ha’u simu duni ita nia surat sira ne’e, maibé lia fuan mamuk ne’ebé hakerek iha surat tahan ne’e seidauk sufisiente ba ha’u. Ha’u persija liu o nia prezensa. La’os lia fuan mamuk iha surat tahan de’it,” hatete Adelaide ho mata been ba João.

Adelaide konsidera João nia domin ne’ebé pinta iha surat tahan mutin ne’e hanesan buat la’ek ida. Domin iha surat tahan mutin nia leten hanesan buat mamuk ida ba Adelaide. Adelaide prefere domin ida ho nia prezensa. Domin ida ho nia isin lolon tomak, la’os domin ho nia lalatak de’it iha surat tahan mutin hanesan João halo dadauk ne’e.

Tanba kaer metin ba prinsipiu domin ho prezensa isin lolon tomak mak, Adelaide desidi hodi kaben de’it ho mane ida ne’ebé lor-loron lori (antar) surat ba nia. “Ha’u kaben ho ida lor-loron lori surat mai ha’u, tanba nia mak lor-loron mai vizita ha’u. Loos duni ita bo’ot hakerek surat, maibé ha’u persija o nia prezensa. La’os o nia surat tahan mutin” hatete Adelaide.

Tanba ne’e, domin ho lia fuan de’it seidauk sufisiente, maibé domin tenke hatudu liuhosi ita nia prezensa no aktu sira.

Censure pour les médias du Timor?

Avec le cas de Raimundo Oki, arrêté pour avoir enquêté sur des soupçons de corruption, le nouveau conseil de la presse, apte à gérer les conflits concernant la presse, fera face à son premier vrai défi.
Raimundo Oki, journaliste du Timor Post a récemment été poursuivi pour diffamation, une infraction criminelle, pour avoir rédigé le 10 novembre 2015 un article dénonçant la corruption présumée de l’État dans un appel à projet visant à fournir et à installer du matériel informatique dans les services publics.

Ce procès gênant survient alors que le gouvernement du Timor Oriental est sur le point de nommer officiellement les membres de son nouveau Conseil de la presse, l’organisme dévolu au traitement des différends avec les médias dans un cadre légal, notamment par la médiation. Ce système de régulation de la presse, avait pourtant été retiré après plusieurs années de mise à l’étude.

Ce mépris pour le nouveau dispositif de plaintes est d’autant plus incompréhensible que le journal, conformément aux prescriptions de la récente loi sur la presse, a publié une substantielle clarification de l’enquête. Aucune objection n’avait pourtant été faite sur le délai ou l’adéquation de la correction. Tout cela ne semble pourtant pas avoir été suffisant.

Le Premier ministre mis en cause

Nous n’avons plus entendu parler de cette affaire jusqu’à ce que le journaliste Raimundo Oki reçoive une « convocation » du procureur général à Dili au motif que l’article relevait de la violation 285s du code pénal, une version de la diffamation criminelle incohérente et inactive. Cela s’explique sans doute par le fait que la personne mise en cause soit le Dr Rui Maria de Araujo, actuel Premier ministre et ancien conseiller du ministre des Finances à l’époque des faits.

Le 11 avril Raimundo Oki et son ancien collègue Lourenco Martins dûment convoqués et assistés de leurs avocats, ont comparu devant le Procureur général, chacun de son côté à 30 minutes d’intervalle. Les deux hommes ont fait valoir leur droit au silence. Le procureur a lu la déposition qui ne les a pas plus renseignés sur le fond de la plainte ni les motifs de violation de l’article 285s. Ils ont reçu chacun une « lettre » leur interdisant de changer d’adresse ou de voyager à l’étranger sans en avoir informé le procureur avec un préavis de 15 jours. Même si ces sanctions ne sont pas très lourdes, restreindre la libre circulation de ces deux personnes est dans le principe indigne et jette un froid supplémentaire sur une loi déjà condamnable. Le délai dont dispose désormais le procureur pour déposer l’acte d’accusation ou abandonner les charges n’a pas été clairement défini.

L’ironie réside dans le fait que les plaintes pour diffamation, qui ont largement diminué en Indonésie, atteignent aujourd’hui l’État démocratique du Timor Oriental. L’Indonésie, ancien occupant du Timor Oriental, inflige ainsi une leçon cinglante au pays qui doit pouvoir s’améliorer concernant la liberté de la presse. Depuis la chute de Suharto, les journalistes indonésiens luttent farouchement en s’opposant aux poursuites pour diffamation – lesquelles ont cependant considérablement diminué au cours des deux dernières décennies – à l’exemple du procès de Makassar en 2010 (dont le plaignant était pourtant un ancien commandant de Police au Sulawesi Sud), qui a abouti au premier acquittement pour diffamation, gratifiant le combat des journalistes indonésiens d’une très nette victoire.

Suivant l’article 285s du code pénal, lorsqu’un journaliste publie une information qui, «  porte de fausses accusations ou des soupçons d’acte criminel sur un individu avec la possibilité de le poursuivre en justice… » , ce journaliste est passible d’une peine de 3 ans d’emprisonnement ou d’une amende.

L’accusation doit cependant répondre à quatre critères :

• la publication effective de l’accusation ;
• le fait que le journaliste connaisse l’inexactitude du grief ;
• la perpétration d’une infraction ;
• la volonté de nuire à cet individu au moyen d’une action en justice.

Le cœur du délit requiert la preuve de la volonté de nuire, délibérément et intentionnellement à une personne innocente. L’interprétation stricte et étroite de la loi pénale s’impose. En conséquence, la preuve de chacun des éléments de l’infraction doit être être faite, conformément aux critères légaux. La loi 285s comporte deux aspects principaux.

Premièrement, le journaliste doit être « conscient qu’il commet une fausse accusation ». Il n’est pas fait mention de l’existence de preuve portée à la connaissance du journaliste. Dès lors, l’insuffisance ou l’absence de preuve prima facie ne permet pas de satisfaire à la première condition. Seuls des aveux ou un document confirmant cette volonté de l’auteur de l’article serait suffisante pour que le dossier ne tombe pas à cause d’un manque de preuves. L’interrogatoire de Raimundo Oki n’a rien mentionné de tout cela.

Deuxièmement, la parution doit avoir été faite « avec l’intention d’engager des poursuites contre la personne ». Comment un journaliste pourrait publier un article avec cette intention précise n’est pas clairement établi. Le journaliste peut penser que si les faits rapportés sont vrais, ils mériteraient une enqu^te de la justice. Toutefois, cette décision appartient au bureau du Procureur général. Puisque le discernement du journaliste est l’ingrédient essentiel des deux éléments de l’infraction, le fait d’accuser Raimundo Oki sans cette preuve est troublant.

Vue sous cet angle l’enquête ressemble à un exercice de collecte des informations destiné à « trouver » la substance qui coïncidera aux cases des « crimes » créés par l’article 285s. La question est de savoir dans quelle mesure le procureur va mener son enquête sur un crime « présumé » sans début de preuve. Dès lors, tout journaliste d’investigation rapportant des faits de corruption publique s’exposerait à un délit justiciable de l’article 285s. Un tel déroulement est contraire aux affirmations clairement exprimées aux articles 8 et 9 de la Loi de la Presse garantissant la non-ingérence et la protection de la liberté d’expression contre le harcèlement.

Aucune indication tangible ne permet de dire que Raimundo Oki a publié l’affaire dans un autre but que celui d’informer ses lecteurs sur une question d’intérêt public. Avec le cas d’Oki, le nouveau conseil de la presse, apte à gérer les conflits jugés trop répressifs contre la presse fera face à son premier vrai défi. Malgré les réserves quant à son pouvoir, il semblerait que les nouveaux membres du conseil s’orientent vers un consensus dont la liberté de la presse sera la principale préoccupation. L’investiture officielle des membres du conseil a eu lieu le 3 mai 2016, lors de la Journée mondiale de la liberté de la presse. Compte tenu de l’enquête en cours, cet événement sera très intéressant.

Traduction : Michelle Boileau
Source Jim Nolan* / New Mandala Muzzling Timor’s media

* Jim Nolan est un avocat de Sidney conseiller juridique bénévole à l’International Federation of Journalists (Asie Pacifique). En Indonésie, il a assisté en tant qu’Observateur pour l’IFJ à divers procès. Il a participé à de nombreuses actions promouvant la liberté de la presse et contre la diffamation dans le pays. En avril dernier, à Dili, il a siégé auprès des procureurs généraux comme observateur légal pour le compte de la fédération internationale des journalistes en soutien à Raimundo Oki.

48 States Gathering in Antalya to Discuss Poverty Issue

Turkish Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu and Gyan Chandra Acharya, the UN High Representative for Least Developed Countries, Landlocked Developing Countries, and Small Island Developing States in a press conference in Hotel Titanic, Antalya – Turkey, (27/05). Photo TP/Raimundos Oki

By Raimundos Oki

Report from Antalya, Turk

ANTALYA – United Nations categorizes there are 48 States in the world that lack of development.

Starting on Friday, the 48 least developed countries (LDCs) of the world was focus of a global United Nations conference in Antalya, Turkey, that aims to review their progress over the past five years.

In 2011, the international community adopted the Istanbul Programme of Action (IPoA) which charts a vision and strategy for the sustainable development of LDCs for the next decade; half way into it, this Midterm Review will take stock of successes, challenges, and lessons learned.

Participation is coming from the highest political level, with representatives from governments, the private sector, multilateral organizations, civil society, and academia. It will result in an inter-governmentally negotiated and agreed outcome in the form of a political declaration.

According to the UN Office that supports the world’s most vulnerable nations (OHRLLS), the LDCs represent the poorest and weakest segment of the international community, comprising more than 880 million people (12 per cent of the global population) and often suffer from governance crisis, political instability and, in some cases, internal and external conflicts.

The category of LDCs was officially established in 1971 by the UN General Assembly to attract special international support for the most vulnerable and disadvantaged members of the UN family. The current list of LDCs includes 34 in Africa, 13 in Asia and the Pacific and 1 in Latin America. The newest to have joined is South Sudan.

A United Nations conference focused on the world's least developed countries (LDCs) kicked-off today in Antalya, Turkey, to assess these 48 States' progress over the past five years, and to find ways of accelerating their path towards sustainable development.

“Least developed countries have seen significant progress and are a major human and natural resource potential for the world, but more needs to be done to support them,” said Gyan Chandra Acharya, the UN High Representative for Least Developed Countries, Landlocked Developing Countries, and Small Island Developing States, speaking in the Turkish coastal city.

“This event is a major opportunity for the international community to come together and reaffirm global commitments that were made in 2011 to ensure that the world's poorest nations are at the forefront of efforts to build an inclusive and sustainable future for the world,” he added.

Five years ago, UN Member States met in Turkey and adopted the Istanbul Programme of Action (IPoA), a ten-year plan to give impetus to economic and social development in some of the world's most vulnerable States.

The opening session of the Midterm Review of the IPoA, co-organized by Mr. Acharya's Office (OHRLLS) and the Government of Turkey, brought together high-level representatives and over two thousand stakeholders from governments, international and regional organizations, civil society, the private sector, foundations, think tanks and the media.

The three-day event will focus on how LDCs have experienced some progress in areas including poverty reduction, child mortality, gender parity and access to internet and mobile networks. Economic growth has also been strong even though its pace has been more volatile and below the average of the last decade. There has also been an increase in the number of countries fulfilling criteria, which will lead towards graduation from their status as an LDC.

Countries that demonstrate the lowest indicators of socioeconomic development – typically high infant mortality rates and low life expectancy rates, among others – are considered LDCs. A country is classified as an LDC if it meets three criteria:

-       Poverty – adjustable criterion based on Gross National Income (GNI) per capita averaged over three years. As of 2015 a country must have GNI per capita less than US $1,035 to be included on the list, and over $1,242 to graduate from it.

-       Human resource weakness (based on indicators of nutrition, health, education and adult literacy); and

-       Economic vulnerability (based on instability of agricultural production, instability of exports of goods and services, economic importance of non-traditional activities, merchandise export concentration, handicap of economic smallness, and the percentage of population displaced by natural disasters)

According to the UN, Samoa is the only country to have graduated since 2011. Equatorial Guinea, Vanuatu and Angola are scheduled to graduate, and seven other LDCs – Bhutan, Kiribati, Nepal, Sao Tome and Principe, Solomon Islands, Timor-Leste and Tuvalu – have reportedly met the criteria as of March 2015. Only Botswana, Cape Verde and Maldives graduated before 2011.

“This is an important opportunity to focus on the special needs of LDCs, and to assess the status of implementation of the IPoA, taking into account last year's important global agendas, including the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the associated Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs),” said Helen Clark, the Administrator of the UN Development Programme (UNDP), at the opening plenary.

“Despite important progress, however, significant challenges remain: 51 per cent of the population of LDCs live in extreme poverty, and 18 million children of school age are not in school. Despite LDCs having 12.5 per cent of the world's population, their exports account for only 1.1 per cent of the global total,” she noted.

The category of least developed countries (LDCs) was officially established in 1971 by the UN General Assembly to attract special international support to disadvantaged members of the UN family. The current list includes 34 in Africa, 13 in Asia and the Pacific, and one in Latin America. The newest to have joined is South Sudan.

“We cannot accept that in the next 15 years there will not be a reduction in the number of LDCs,” said Mogens Lykketoft, the President of the 70th session of the General Assembly, in an interview with the UN News Service.

“We have to make sure that there is enough growth in their economies so that there will be many, many, of the LDCs moving out of that category. It has been all too few up until now,” he lamented, noting that many are still least developed because of conflict, which if left uncontained, will impede efforts to end underdevelopment, poverty and hunger.

Speaking at a press conference, the Turkish Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu, said the global community should never forget that humanitarian and social development is “indispensable” for sustainable development.

“We will continue to bring the challenges of least developed countries to the agenda of G-20,” he stressed, noting that Turkey's official development aid was about $1 billion in 2010, and increased to $3.9 billion in 2015. (Oki)

This article also published in the Timor Post daily newspaper, Thursday 1st of June 2016, page 21.   

Reply to Petrus Suryadi Sutrisno

Petrus Suryadi

By Raimundos Oki
Once more, although I am not comparable to a Petrus Suryadi but I am not a sycophant who covers up his mistake to seek the face in the land that he used to despise. In addition, Petrus Suryadi’s pieces always represented the government of Timor - Leste, the legal experts of communication, and the press in Timor - Leste. In fact, the media community mentioned in Petrus’ pieces did not speak nor comment. Petrus Suryadi Sutrisno’s pieces were only a stepping-stone to seek the face of the leaders in Timor - Leste in order to cover his mistakes in the past.

Before answering Petrus Suryadi Sutrisno’s piece, first I want to emphasize here that I do not want to comment on the case of the Prime Minister Rui Maria de Araujo’s defamation demands against me, Raimundos Oki, Lorencio Vicente Martins, and Timor Post. I do not want to intervene on the work of the prosecution of this case. [I trust the authority to carry out their duties in accordance with applicable law in Timor - Leste, not in Indonesia. As the son Saben, Oe - Cusse (Timor - Leste), I am ready to accept the consequences of any of the Prime Minister Rui Maria de Araujo’s demands. As the son of the people of Timor - Leste, I have collaborated with the legal and justice system in this country because I dared to act (do) and dare to be responsible. Once again, this article is not heading to the Prime Minister Rui Maria de Araujo’s defamation demands, which are still in progress at the High Prosecutor's office Timor - Leste (Prokuradoria Jeral Republika).

I am Raimundos Oki not appropriate at all to compete equally with a senior reporter such as Petrus Suryadi Sutrisno who has already became a journalist since January 1976 when I was not yet born on earth. In addition, Petrus Suraydi was more than ten times active and involved in the Intelligence Operations abroad, particularly in Europe, and Portugal/East Timor. He used to be the first Indonesian journalists who managed to enter Portugal despite at the time of the Republic of Indonesia and Portugal did not have diplomatic relations. Assignment Communication-Public Relations-Social & Community Development Interdept Military Headquarters - Ministry of Home Affairs, as Senior Communications - Media Consultant for East Timor, 1985 - 1997 Senior Consultant in East Timor Media Centre, 1997.

However, my analysis to Petrus Suryadi Sutrisno’s piece that was published at the opinion column in printed edition of Timor Post Daily on Wednesday, 4 May, 2016, as well as in the Independente Daily, on Thursday, 5 May, 2016 was filled with expressions of his disappointment on the support of four world press organizations as International Federation of Journalists (IFJ), Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) and Freedom House, as well as the Asosiasaun Jornalista Timor - Leste (AJTL) and Timor - Leste Press Union (TLPU) to me, Lorencio Vicente Martins and Timor Post. In my view, before such press organizations of the international community and TL supported me, Petrus Suryadi had been visiting the Timor Post with the aim and intention to give a legal advisor and an expert witness on the case of Defamation sue of Prime Minister Rui Maria de Araujo in court, but his good will was rejected by Chief Editor (Editor in Chief) of the Timor Post, Santina Araujo that time. It was very unfortunate.

Learning from the support of such global media groups, Petrus Suryadi Sutrisno also attempted to cancel the presence of the IFJ and the Southeast Asian Press Alliance (SEAPA) in an international seminar on 3 May and at the JL Villa, Fatuhada - Dili. For Petrus Suryadi, IFJ and SEAPA presence at such an international seminar should be rejected because such organizations are the main supporters of Raimundos Oki, Lorencio Vicente Martins, and Timor Post. [In addition, he viewed that] Lorencio Vicente Martins, Timor Post, and I should not have the support of the global media group, because, such global media groups had blindly defended Defamation case performed by Raimundos Oki, Lorencio Vicente Martins, and Timor Post they had three times violated journalistic ethics.

Here I want to explain to the public that Petrus Suryadi, the former subordinates Defense Attaché Embassy in the Netherlands, has been blind. He considers himself old journalist but simultaneously he failed to get news updates relating to me, particularly about the case of Becora and the salaries at the FDCH. The victim of Becora case had filed the traffic police that was allegedly involved in the case to the prosecutor's office in Dili and the victim has given recognition to the PNTL Department of Justice last week. When this case occurred at the first time on 12 March, I went straight to the crime scene (TKP). I then immediately provided evidence what was happening at that time. On the next day, Monday 13 March, I immediately confirmed the traffic police at his workplace, but he refused to give a statement on the allegations of the victim. I did not know exactly whether the victim’s allegation was right or wrong. Let us wait for the results of the ongoing investigations in the PNTL (justice department) and the prosecutor in Dili.

Regarding the news of Fundo do Desenvolvimento do Capital Humano (FDCH); Timor Post published such a story based on the documents that had been accessed from the official site of Transparency (Portal Transparansia) under the control of the Ministry of Finance. In the description segment was written that the salaries for secretary Director of FDCH, Ismenio, was $ 11,000/month. However, when Ismenio was asked for confirmation, he denied such information, since the salary of $ 11,000 was not for one month, but it was a collection of two months. Ismenio also acknowledged there had been a human error on the portal transparency and he promised to fix it. Unfortunately, until now, the public does not have access at this portal, and they do not know whether the payroll staff of FDCH has been repaired or not. I did not know because after writing the news of payroll employees FDCH, I could not access the portal anymore

Petrus Suryadi Sutrisno set two of my reports as the main sources in his piece to undermine the reputation of the Global Media Groups for the sake of economic and other interests in Timor - Leste. Especially, in the current governance structure. Global Media Groups were comprised of the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ), the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), Freedom House, and South East Asia Journalists' Union (SEAJU) including Asosiasaun Jornalista Timor - Leste (AJTL) and Timor - Leste Press Union (TLPU) is not very important in the eyes of Petrus Suryadi.

Again, although I was not comparable to Petrus Suryadi but I am not a sycophant that covers his mistake for seeking the face on the land that he used to despise. Petrus Suryadi’s piece always represented the government of Timor - Leste, the legal experts of communication, and the press in Timor - Leste. In fact, the media community mentioned by Petrus’ piece had not yet spoken nor given any comments. Petrus Suryadi Sutrisno’s piece was only a stepping-stone to seek the face of the leaders in Timor - Leste in order to cover his mistakes in the past. Petrus also criticized Jim Nolan of the IFJ, because he did not consult to Petrus when coming to participate in recent international seminar on the World Press Freedom Day in Timor - Leste. Petrus Suryadi felt inferior because the Global Media Groups did not acknowledge him as an advisor of SEKOMS on Defamation case that was still in ongoing process.

Petrus Suryadi was also very upset to the reaction of the Global Media Groups to the defamation case charged by Prime Minister Rui Maria de Araujo of criminal cases because, in Petrus’ eyes, the case was not a national problem (a big issue?) in Timor - Leste, so that it should not necessarily invite the reaction of the Global Media Groups that provided solidarity and protection to Raimundos Oki, Lorencio Vicente Martins, and Timor Post. However, why should Petrus Suryadi blame this case? I have been ready to accept the consequences of any of the Prime Minister Rui Maria de Araujo’s demands. Indeed, I will not interfere the Prime Minister’s sue, but let the authorities to resolve it in accordance with the applicable law and justice in Timor - Leste. In addition, I am ready to accept the good or bad consequences of this case of defamation demand.

Translated by Former Program Manager at Southeast Asian Press Alliance (SEAPA) Wisnu T Hanggoro. 

Formalizada acusação contra dois jornalistas timorenses por "denúncia caluniosa"

06 de Maio de 2016, 18:54

Díli, 06 mai (Lusa) - O Ministério Público timorense notificou hoje dois jornalistas timorenses de que deduziu a acusação contra ambos por "denúncia caluniosa" relativamente a um artigo publicado no jornal Timor Post em novembro do ano passado que visava o primeiro-ministro.

A acusação, assinada a 21 de abril último pela magistrada Lídia Soares - e que a Lusa teve acesso - só foi hoje comunicada aos dois jornalistas, o redator Raimundos Oki e o editor do Timor Post Lourenço Martins.

"Cometeram os arguidos em coautoria material, um crime de denúncia caluniosa", refere o texto da acusação.

"Os arguidos agiram de forma deliberada, livre e conscientemente, bem sabendo não lhes serem permitidas tais condutas. Os arguidos sabiam que a sua conduta era proibida e punida por lei", sustenta.

Os dois jornalistas são acusados com base no artigo 285 do Código Penal timorense, que prevê pena de prisão até três anos e multa para quem "por qualquer meio, perante autoridade ou publicamente, com a consciência da falsidade da imputação, denunciar ou lançar sobre determinada pessoa a suspeita da prática de um crime, com a intenção de que contra ela se instaure procedimento criminal".

O processo refere-se a um caso que começou com a publicação a 10 de novembro de um artigo no diário Timor Post intitulado "suspeitas de que um ex-assessor do Ministério das Finanças (MdF) entregou um projeto a uma empresa indonésia".

Este artigo incluía erros factuais, incluindo o nome errado da empresa, e outros aspetos que foram depois corrigidos no dia seguinte pelo jornal.

Na acusação, o Ministério Público considera que Raimundos Oki "depois de obter a referida informação, não verificou a verdade dessa informação e nem a confrontou com o lesado, a fim de obter a sua versão dos factos".

"Fê-lo no intuito de atingir a honra, o bom nome e a reputação devidas ao lesado Rui de Araújo, bem sabendo que tais direitos são constitucionalmente protegidos e que a notícia não correspondia à verdade", refere o texto.

"O arguido tinha a plena consciência de que a sua publicação causaria prejuízos morais, sociais, familiares e profissionais incalculáveis à pessoa do lesado", refere.

Também o editor do jornal Vicente Martins "não mandou previamente averiguar a veracidade e a autenticidade das informações publicadas" tendo apesar disso autorizado a sua publicação.

A acusação, que mantém as medidas de coação - termo de identidade e residência - considera que os dois arguidos "sabiam que a notícia era falsa" e que com a publicação "o lesado seria sujeito a um processo de investigação criminal, por suspeita da prática de crimes no exercício de funções públicas".

"Pretendiam desse modo, com a denúncia, fazer com que o lesado fosse submetido a um processo criminal", refere ainda.

O caso tem suscitado apelos de várias organizações internacionais de jornalismo para que o primeiro-ministro timorense, Rui Maria de Araújo, retire o processo criminal contra os jornalistas.

Em resposta, numa carta às organizações internacionais, Rui Araújo disse que não troca liberdade de imprensa por "irresponsabilidade de imprensa" e que lhe é impossível intervir no gabinete do procurador para decidir se avança ou não a queixa.

Em declarações recentes à agência Lusa, o jornalista Raimundos Oki manifestou-se "muito preocupado" com o caso, considerando que os seus direitos fundamentais "estão a ser condicionados" e que desde que foi alvo da queixa sente "muito medo" cada vez que escreve uma notícia.

Quando foi ouvido pelo Ministério Público, no passado dia 11, o jornalista "usou o direito a silêncio", não respondendo às perguntas que lhe foram feitas.

ASP // VM

Lusa/Fim

http://noticias.sapo.tl/portugues/lusa/artigo/20685362.html

PM timorense não troca liberdade de imprensa por "irresponsabilidade de imprensa"

O primeiro-ministro timorense afirmou hoje que não troca liberdade de imprensa por "irresponsabilidade de imprensa" e que não intervirá no gabinete do procurador para decidir se avança ou não uma queixa contra dois jornalistas e um jornal.

"Como cidadão timorense que teve que suportar perseguição durante 24 anos de ocupação indonésia, apoiada pelos principais poderes ocidentais, incluindo alguns dos defensores de liberdade de imprensa no mundo, não trocarei liberdade de imprensa e liberdade de expressão por irresponsabilidade de imprensa e expressões irresponsáveis de liberdade", afirma Rui Maria de Araújo.

"Não tenho, como pessoa ofendida, controlo da decisão do gabinete do procurador. Seria impossível para mim, de qualquer forma, intervir junto do gabinete do procurador no exercício das suas funções de investigação e implementação da lei em Timor-Leste como eles considerarem adequado segundo a lei", afirmou.

A posição de Rui Maria de Araújo está numa carta de resposta a quatro organizações internacionais de jornalismo que escreveram esta semana ao primeiro-ministro timorense, a apelar para que retire uma queixa contra dois jornalistas e um jornal timorenses.

A Freedom House, o Committee to Protect Journalists, o South East Asia Journalist Unions e a International Federation of Journalists referem-se à queixa apresentada pelo chefe do Governo contra os jornalistas Oki Raimundos e Lourenço Martins e o jornal Timor Post, por um artigo publicado em novembro.

A resposta de quatro páginas datada de hoje, a que a Lusa teve acesso, não está em timbre do Governo e é assinada apenas por Dr. Rui Maria de Araújo, que afirma ter apresentado documentação ao gabinete do procurador relativamente ao artigo em causa enquanto cidadão e não como chefe do Governo.

O caso começou com a publicação a 10 de novembro de um artigo no diário Timor Post intitulado "suspeitas de que um ex-assessor do Ministério das Finanças (MdF) entregou um projeto a uma empresa indonésia".

Além de uma imagem de um documento assinado pelo agora primeiro-ministro, Rui Araújo e por dois outros assessores do MdF, referia-se a empresa PT Sistemindo Teknomata Mandiri mas quer a legenda da foto quer o texto do artigo referiam a empresa PT Packet System Indonesia, "apesar do jornalista afirmar no mesmo artigo que o Timor Post tinha uma cópia da carta de recomendação".

No texto, o jornalista referia que os três signatários tinham recomendado dar o contrato - em causa estava o fornecimento de conteúdos para o novo edifício do MdF - à empresa (com o nome errado) "porque a empresa cumpria o critério de concurso", acrescentando que "algumas pessoas consideram que se trata de uma mera entrega de projetos".

"Com todo o respeito à liberdade de imprensa e de expressão, são estes erros factuais? Podem jornalistas escrever e jornais publicar este tipo de notícias só por causa da liberdade de expressão e liberdade de imprensa?", questiona Rui Araújo.

Rui Araújo rejeita ainda o argumento das quatro organizações de que o jornal tenha publicado uma correção do artigo limitando-se a publicar uma notícia com declarações numa conferência de imprensa em que o primeiro-ministro negou "as falsas acusações" e um pedido de desculpa "que mencionava apenas um "erro técnico".

"Nem uma única palavra corrigindo as acusações sem qualquer base que referi. Isto foi muito mais do que um erro técnico ou factual. Todo o artigo estava baseado numa alegação de que um contrato tinha sido recomendado relativamente a uma empresa, algo que nem sequer era apoiado com base na documentação apresentada pelo jornal", refere Rui Araújo.

O chefe do Governo recorda que a lei de imprensa estabelece o direito de resposta a qualquer pessoa afetada por artigos de imprensa e o direito à correção, prevendo responsabilidades civis e criminais.

"O que fiz foi apresentar ao Gabinete do Procurador os factos de uma falsa acusação contra mim que tinha sido publicamente disseminada. Depende do procurador apresentar ou não uma queixa", escreve.

Apresentou os factos, insiste, porque a lei de imprensa lhe dá o direito de o fazer e porque "sendo alegações de corrupção crimes públicos" que podem ser investigados pelo Ministério Público, "é prudente que os cidadãos que tenham sido alvos de acusações publicas apresentem os factos" ao procurador.

Independentemente ou não de haver queixa, sublinha, o crime de "denúncia caluniosa", previsto no código penal e a que se referem as quatro organizações, é também um crime público que pode se investigador pelas autoridades, com ou sem queixa.

"É uma provisão da lei criminal para prevenir falsas acusações de conduta criminal. Existe para proteger a integridade da investigação criminal e do processo de procuradoria. Existe num número de democracias desenvolvidas, especialmente as que se baseiam na lei civil", escreve.

Raimundos Oki e Lourenço Martins estão com Termo de Identidade e Residência enquanto decorrem as investigações.

ASP
Lusa/Fim
http://24.sapo.pt/article/lusa-sapo-pt_2016_04_28_2044693195_pm-timorense-nao-troca-liberdade-de-imprensa-por--irresponsabilidade-de-imprensa 

High-Level Defamation Cases Curb Critical Journalism

Timorese journalist Raimundos Oki, pictured with UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon, is being sued for defamation by the Prime Minister of Timor-Leste. Credit: Hikari Rodrigues.

UNITED NATIONS, May 4 2016 (IPS) - High-level defamation, libel and sedition cases in Asian countries are sending signals to journalists that writing critical journalism can cost millions of dollars or years in prison.

“Increasingly we’re seeing countries, especially countries that call themselves democracies, (using) this more subtle approach within the means of the law to silence criticism,” Sumit Galhotra a Senior Researcher at the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) told IPS.

In two current cases in Bangladesh and Timor-Leste journalists are being sued for articles they wrote about their respective Prime Ministers.

Mahfuz Anam, editor of Bangladesh’s Daily Star, is currently facing billions of dollars in lawsuits.

“Over 70 defamation and sedition cases (have) been filed against this amazing editor at one of the largest English language papers in the country,” Galhotra told IPS. “The staggering number of them is really alarming.”

“There’s a signal being sent that this is what can happen to you,” he said. “You can also be in a court room facing financial devastation so think twice before you lift your pen to criticise.” -- Sumit Galhotra.

“Anam’s admission that he published unsubstantiated information accusing Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina of corruption has led to a barrage of defamation and sedition cases against him,” Galhotra wrote in a blog post published by the CPJ.

On the other side of the Indian ocean, Raimundos Oki a journalist with the Timor Post is facing possible jail time for an article he wrote about Timor-Leste’s Prime Minister Rui Araujo.

Araujo is suing Oki for defamation over a factual error in Oki’s reporting on a government tendering process.

Yet, according to a letter from four international journalism organisations, including CPJ, sent to Araujo, Oki and Timor Post published a correction and right of reply “in accordance with Timor Leste’s own Press Law.”

The Australian newspaper reported that Araujo’s response to the letter said that “press freedom and freedom of ­expression” should not be traded for “press irresponsibility” and “irresponsible ­expression of freedom.”

IPS spoke with Oki about what it is like to be a journalist in Timor-Leste. Timor-Leste is one of the least developed countries in Asia, according to the UN Human Development Index, and journalists there are paid less than $200 per month.

Oki said that the journalists have an important role in Timor-Leste’s development.

“To develop this country we need a journalist sometimes who pushes the government or pushes another institution in order to accelerate the development process,” he said.

Due to Timor-Leste’s oil and gas revenues, the national economy is dominated by the Timorese government, which uses this money to provide services to the Timorese people.

Oki said that it is important for journalists to follow where government spending is going, because it isn’t always known where these funds end up.

“The role of the journalist (is) to follow the money, where is the money going,” he said.

Yet, according to Galhotra, defamation cases such as the one Oki is facing send a signal to journalists who write about governments and large corporations.

“There’s a signal being sent that this is what can happen to you,” he said. “You can also be in a court room facing financial devastation so think twice before you lift your pen to criticise.”

He said that it is very hard to know exactly how many articles don’t get written because of the resulting self-censorship.

Commenting on Oki’s case, Galhotra told IPS that Oki has also received threatening phone calls telling him that he should “be careful.”

“Governments are very quick to take to courts to proceed on defamation proceedings but when it comes to affording journalists protections when we’re under threat we don’t see any action on that front,” said Galhotra.

http://www.ipsnews.net/2016/05/high-level-defamation-cases-curb-critical-journalism/