Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Legislator Hsieh Kuo-liang (謝國樑) initiated legal proceedings against Newtalk Web site head Su Tzen-ping (蘇正平) and journalist Lin Chao-i (林朝億) over a report published on the site last month concerning the Want Want Group’s bid to acquire cable TV operator China Network Systems.
The report suggested that two pan-blue camp legislators, Hsieh being one, had pressured the National Communications Commission (NCC) into approving the merger. Hsieh also applied for the provisional seizure of Su and Lin’s salaries and assets to the tune of NT$5 million (US$166,000).
Thankfully, faced with appeals from civic groups and academics alarmed about the economic intimidation of media workers, Hsieh subsequently withdrew his application for the seizures.
However, there is something worrying about this litigation that goes beyond political interference in the freedom of the press and needs to be addressed on a legal and systemic level.
A few years ago, Hon Hai Precision Industry chairman Terry Gou (郭台銘) sought a similar injunction against Joyce Kung (曠文琪), a business reporter for the Chinese-language Commercial Times. Now that Hsieh has reinforced the efficacy of this approach, there are concerns it could become commonplace for the wealthy and powerful to use their financial clout against journalists trying to report the truth.
In legal terms the freedom of the press can be maintained by calling on judges presiding over appeals for provisional seizures to take into account the unique position of the press as the fourth estate.
The importance we accord press freedom is demonstrated by provisions within the Criminal Code that allow for a degree of latitude in cases pertaining to fair comment or subjects considered fair game. Judges have the power to interpret the law and if they think journalists have genuinely represented the truth and been sufficiently rigorous in checking the facts, find in their favor.
Nevertheless, the guarantees enshrined in the Criminal Code are insufficient because powerful individuals can just as easily file a civil case.
On a systemic level, to prevent such lawsuits from curtailing press freedom, people working in the media should establish a “journalists’ litigation fund,” as in the US and UK, with pre-agreed contributions from media companies and the government, and donations from journalists and other quarters.
Such a fund would be overseen by the public sector and specialist organizations, and be used to pay the cost of related lawsuits. That would give people working in the media industry an adequate guarantee as well as a sense of unity, which is all the more important with the increasing numbers of private reporters undertaking investigative journalism, who would otherwise have to face the threat of legal action on their own.
Freedom of the press costs nothing, but that does not mean that it comes without a price. Clearly, it is unfair to ask individual journalists to pay that price.
In addition, the rich and powerful need to know that they too have to pay a price for their position in society, and that with the limelight comes public scrutiny. They must not be allowed to use the threat of economic sanctions to intimidate reporters. The courts, too, should learn to respect the unique position of the media.
Finally, media companies and the government also need to play their part, to support the establishment of a litigation fund so journalists can monitor the rich and powerful in society without fear of the consequences.
Chad Liu is an assistant professor in the Department of Communications at National Chung Cheng University.
Translated by Paul Cooper
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under