Lawsuits against newspapers are a “tool” in the hands of political and economic powers to pressure the press for their own benefit. Journalists who have experienced the pain of litigation know that the odds of losing a case have little to do with how right or wrong they are. Thus one may find himself at a disadvantage to the sitter's advantage. From there begins the “lash of lawsuits” by the powerful against the press.
And defamation? This is definitely a problem. Reminiscent of a controversial work of art based on its definition and current law. For some the work is formal and for others it is artistic work. Similarly, for some a text is an encouraging text criticizing bad texts and for another an unacceptable slur.
Can the boundaries between criticism and defamation be clearly defined? Yes! But whatever party is in power, power itself does not like that. Regardless of whether the sign on the front of the store is “Right” or “Left”, the authority is always the same. Authority dislikes criticism and control…
On the other hand, our fellow citizens are the target of defamation targeting their political and personal slander. These people have the right to defend themselves and it is their absolute right to seek justice. Let us return to the border issue.
Trouble with justice again! To what extent it is blind or “blinded” by the power and strength of political and economic factors. Generally you shouldn't. But judges are people too. How would a judge react when, for example, a Member of Parliament from the ruling party in Lagos (for example) used his surname as a pun in the title of an article, seeking to punish the perpetrators of his “slander”? Let's say “hare the hare”! Since the incident is true (albeit with other names of animals) I will tell you how the judge responded: “Oh! Can you criticize the honorable member like that? Is he a minister or adviser to the prime minister? Worse…
Media bombardment has been the norm lately. I personally disagree with this. Cases were filed against the media who did not treat me personally even when I received similar misbehavior from ministers, opposition MPs or lawyers. Or the journalists treated them in a derogatory manner as “the class enemy Thanasis Mauritis”. This is not my problem.
In order not to hide behind our fingers, I also understand the position of the Prime Minister's former manager, Grigoris Dimitriadis. The issue here is not a journalistic trial, but the “conviction” of a man when a judge hears the charges against him. When the press tries to pass judgment, the problem arises. But again, I have to admit that I cannot agree with the actions of Grigoris Dimitriadis. Not because he was wrong, but because his practice did not suit the political position he held.
For the rest, if the government wants justice, let it clarify the rules of the game. Not with type-killing laws, but with faith in the freedom of the press and the right to other viewpoints. Perhaps then we will have better terrain in the press, but also in our political life.
Thanasis Mauritis
