|
Hong Kong Law Reform Commission |
11.1 According to a survey conducted in Hong Kong in 1990, 58% of the journalists surveyed considered that there was an "urgent" or "very urgent" need to set up a press council. Only 9% said there was no urgent need.[318] In the survey commissioned by the four major journalists' associations in 1999, 74% of the journalists objected that a "government-appointed" press council be created, but as many as 56% agreed that Hong Kong should have a "non-governmental statutory monitoring body", with only 24% disagreeing. The findings of the public opinion poll commissioned by the HKPC in 2002 also revealed that 85% of the respondents considered that Hong Kong needs an independent body to monitor the press.
11.2 At the First International Conference of Press Councils and Similar Bodies, the delegates declared that the institution of press councils and similar bodies is a desirable method whereby freedom of the press and the corresponding responsibility of the press may be developed and enhanced.[319] They also determined that the method whereby a press council or similar body is constituted is a matter for each country or region, and will necessarily reflect such factors as its legal traditions, constitution, socio-economic development, culture and civilisation. However, a press council or a similar body must be autonomous and independent of Government or any other outside interference. The Constitution of the World Association of Press Councils also notes that the creation of an independent press council is a method whereby the freedom, the responsibility and the accountability of the press may be maintained and enhanced.[320]
11.3 The functions and positive effects of a press council are manifold:[321]
(a) It protects the rights of the public in relation to the press.
(b) It protects the press against the state, other governmental powers, and the public, thus enabling the industry to enjoy a greater degree of press freedom.
(c) It provides a democratic, efficient and inexpensive forum for the hearing of complaints against and by the press.
(d) It offers a forum for the discussion of ethical questions in journalism and helps to reconcile the conflict between press freedom and individual rights.
(e) The variety of interests represented on a press council can produce well-balanced ethical rules and decisions.
(f) It can stave off statutory or other forms of regulation by Government.
(g) It can serve as a mediator between the media and the public. Where a council is trusted by both the media and the public, it can act as a safety-valve, or as a buffer-state.
(h) It can improve the quality of journalism by judging what is good and what is bad media performance with reference to a code of ethics.
(i) It can promote greater adherence to ethical standards by utilising peer pressure.
(j) It allows the press to enter into a dialogue with the general public and persons adversely affected by its work.
(k) It can act as an effective alternative forum for the resolution of disputes by offering a quicker and cheaper remedy to the aggrieved parties than a court of law.
(l) It can perform a valuable service in aiding research on the conduct and development of the mass media.
(m) It may be able to provide professional training to journalists in certain areas.
11.4 It can be seen that one of the major functions of a press council is to prevent abuses of press freedom. A press council provides a mechanism through which the standards of care and responsibility on the part of the media can be maintained without jeopardising press freedom. Citizens unwilling or unable to bring legal proceedings against the media may hold the media accountable by lodging a complaint with the council. Publishers can also save legal fees and court costs. Investigation and public condemnation of bad journalism by a press council would contribute to higher professional standards. The public is likely to have a higher respect for journalism if the media organisations are subject to the scrutiny of an independent body. The press council therefore provides a model whereby conflicts between press freedom and the right to privacy can be resolved.
11.5 The observations of the UK National Consumer Council on industry self-regulation are instructive:[322]
"It is striking that the more successful self-regulatory schemes – the advertising, ombudsmen and direct marketing schemes, for instance – are all enforced through dedicated organisational structures outside the industry itself … . It also seems to be important that the controlling influence – notably the membership of the governing body – should be genuinely independent, coming from outside the industry that is the subject of regulation. This does not necessarily mean a majority of consumer representatives: it might include professionals, academics, representatives of other interests or industries, or statutory regulators. …
As with the court process, there is little doubt that any redress mechanism should be free from pressures from the trade or professional body to deliver decisions which suit its purpose or appear to favour members. So the running of the redress system should always be separated from the rest of the scheme, and with lay members in a majority.
Similarly, the body for code monitoring and enforcement … should usually have a majority of independent lay members. Trade bodies find it very difficult to impose sanctions on their own members and may also be tempted to stint on the effort needed to monitor compliance with a code.
In practice, it is in drawing up the rules that a lay majority is most often missing. … Making the rules is the area that professional bodies, and those with special expertise, guard most jealously. There is a feeling that outsiders do not have the knowledge needed to judge what is appropriate. We are not persuaded that this is the case, or that insiders can always distinguish between what they think is in consumers' interests and what is their preferred way of carrying on."
11.6 We have studied the press councils and similar bodies in about 50 jurisdictions, including Australia, Austria, Bangladesh, Belgium, Canada, Cyprus, Denmark, Egypt, Estonia, Fiji, Finland, Germany, Ghana, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Kenya, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Macao, Nepal, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Nigeria, Norway, Peru, the Philippines, Portugal, Russia, South Africa, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, Tanzania, Turkey, the UK and the US. Twenty seven of them are voluntary bodies without any state support; six are voluntary bodies with some state support; and 14 have a statutory basis. Their major features are summarised in the two tables at Annex 4.
11.7 Voluntary press councils without any state support – Self-regulatory bodies that operate without any Government backing or involvement include the following:
(a) Australia – Australian Press Council;
(b) Austria – Austrian Press Council;
(c) Canada – the press councils in Alberta, the Atlantic Provinces, British Columbia, Manitoba and Ontario;
(d) Cyprus – Code of Conduct for Journalists Committee;
(e) Estonia – Estonian Press Council;
(f) Fiji – Media Council;
(g) Israel – Israel Press Council;
(h) Japan – Newspaper Ethical Standards Monitoring Chamber of the Japan Newspaper Publishers and Editors Association;
(i) The Netherlands – the Press Council of The Netherlands;
(j) New Zealand – New Zealand Press Council;
(k) Norway – Norwegian Press Council;
(l) Peru – Peruvian Press Council;
(m) The Philippines – The Press Council of the Philippines;
(n) Russia – Grand Jury for the Media;
(o) South Africa – Press Ombudsman and Appeal Panel;
(p) Sweden – Press Ombudsman and Press Council;
(q) Switzerland – Press Council of Switzerland;
(r) Taiwan – the National Press Council;
(s) Tanzania – Media Council of Tanzania;
(t) Turkey – Turkish Press Council;
(u) United Kingdom – Press Complaints Commission;
(v) United States – news councils in a small number of states, eg, Minnesota News Council and Washington News Council.
11.8 It will be seen that an important reason for the press to establish a voluntary self-regulatory mechanism is to avoid the creation of a statutory council. Press councils created under the threat of legislation can found in Canada, Cyprus, Fiji, Germany, Israel, Kenya, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Tanzania and the UK. As observed by Nicole Dietrich, the declared readiness of a state to react to a permanent and substantial disproportion (or gap) between lawful and fair reporting by the press clearly improves the environment for voluntary measures. In her view, Government plans to increase legal restrictions or to raise the public's awareness of media ethics could motivate the press to participate in the self-regulatory system.[323]
11.9 Although voluntary press councils provide a forum for the general public to express their criticisms and opinions concerning the performance of the press, most of them do not have any sanctions or their sanctions are not respected by the press. It is a common criticism of voluntary press councils that they do not have effective sanctions other than to make their adjudications public and to require the offending newspapers to publish the adjudications. The success of a voluntary council depends on moral persuasion rather than law to promote compliance with its code. The council can do nothing if a newspaper refuses to publish a critical adjudication. Another problem with a voluntary council is its coverage. Even if a council has sanctions enforceable against its members, it is not effective if a number of newspapers are not bound by its adjudications. Some councils also do not have enough financial resources to discharge their functions.[324]
11.10 However, a voluntary press council can be effective if the following conditions exist: (a) the operation of the council is regulated by a contract which requires an offending member to publish the adjudication with due prominence and/or pay a fine; (b) all newspapers and periodicals are members of the council and therefore subject to its jurisdiction and bound by the terms of that contract; (c) the overwhelming majority of members comply with the adjudications; and (d) the council is prepared to enforce the contract against any defaulting member. A model of a successful voluntary press council is the Press Council in Sweden, which has legally binding contracts with almost all newspapers in the country, requiring an offending newspaper to publish the adjudication and pay an administrative fee to the council.
11.11 Voluntary press councils with some state support – Contrary to suggestions that press councils in other jurisdictions are predominantly voluntary in nature, our study reveals that many press councils or similar bodies have a statutory basis or are supported by the state in some way. The following are press councils or similar bodies that are not created by statute but are supported by the state or underpinned by a statute:
(a) the Council of the Mass Media in Finland (about half of its costs are funded by the state);
(b) the Press Council of Germany (underpinned by the Law for Guaranteeing the Independence of the Complaints Committee of the Press Council 1976; about half of its costs are funded by the state);
(c) the National Committee for Accuracy and Reliability of Information in Italy (a Regional Council of the Order of Journalists may commence disciplinary proceedings under Law No 69 of 3 February 1963 if the behaviour of a journalist is held by the Committee to be in breach of a code);
(d) the Media Council of Kenya (its membership includes the Director of Information, an ambassador and a former ambassador);
(e) the Quebec Press Council in Canada (receiving some funding from the Government); and
(f) the Press Complaints Commission of Sri Lanka (receives public funds and its decisions are enforceable under the Arbitration Act).
11.12 Statutory press councils – Contrary to the suggestion made by the HKJA that there are "very few" statutory press councils, there are at least 14 statutory press councils or similar bodies created by statute:[325]
(a) Bangladesh – Press Council (Press Council Act 1974);
(b) Belgium – Council of the Flemish Media (decree of 2 March 1985);
(c) Denmark – Press Council (Media Liability Act 1991);
(d) Egypt – Supreme Press Council (Article 211 of the Constitution of the Arab Republic of Egypt and Law No 148 of 1980);
(e) Ghana – National Media Commission (Articles 166 and 167 of the Constitution of the Republic of Ghana and The National Media Commission Act 1993);
(f) India – Press Council (Press Council Act 1978);
(g) Indonesia – Press Council (Article 5(2) of the Constitution and Press Act 1999);
(h) Lithuania – Inspector of Journalistic Ethics and the Ethics Committee for Journalists and Editors (Law on the Provision of Information to the Public 1996);
(i) Luxembourg – Press Council (Law of 20 December 1979);
(j) Nepal – Press Council (Press Council Act, No 2048);
(k) Nigeria – Press Council (Nigerian Press Council Decree No 85 of 1992 & Decree No 60 of 1999);
(l) Portugal – High Authority for the Mass Media (Article 39 of the Constitution of the Republic of Portugal; established by a law of 1990 and supplemented by the Law of the High Authority for the Mass Media in 1998);
(m) South Korea – Press Arbitration Commission (Law Relating to Registration, etc of Periodicals 1981); and
(n) Sri Lanka – Press Council (Sri Lanka Press Council Law 1973).
We may mention, in passing, that there is a frequent phenomenon across the Commonwealth in which press organisations seek statutory guarantees for enforcing semi-autonomous regimes, often financed by parliament.[326]
11.13 Although an authoritarian state may establish a statutory press council to muzzle the press, a number of jurisdictions established a statutory press council only to redress the failure of the local media in regulating its activities to the satisfaction of the people. The statutory councils in these jurisdictions provide evidence that a press council created by statute can be independent of the Government. These precedents can be found in Bangladesh, Belgium, Denmark, Ghana, India, Lithuania and Portugal. The legislation in these jurisdictions contains an elaborate scheme which ensures the independence of the press council and to keep the Government at arms length in the appointment of its members, thus ensuring that press freedom will not be compromised when providing relief for victims of press abuses. For example, instead of asking a Government minister to make all the appointments, the legislation may provide that the press members of a statutory press council be returned by the journalists' unions and/or publishers' associations, and the lay members be returned by persons who do not have connections with the Government, such as the Judiciary, the barristers' association, the solicitors' association, the University Grants Commission, Members of Parliament, the Speaker of Parliament, a religious body, the association for the protection of consumers, the teachers' association, and journalists' training institutes.
11.14 It is important not to overlook that a statutory press council may or may not have any effective sanctions. While it is common to label a voluntary press council as a paper tiger, a statutory press council may also be established in such a way that it does not have any teeth. Thus, although the Danish Press Council and the High Authority for the Mass Media in Portugal may impose a fine on an offending organisation, and the National Media Commission in Ghana and the Press Complaints Commission in Sri Lanka may apply to the Court to enforce their orders, the Bangladeshi Press Council, the Indian Press Council, the Indonesian Press Council, the Council of the Flemish Mediain Belgium, and the Ethics Commission of Journalists and Editors in Lithuania cannot compel an offending organisation to publish their adjudications, nor do they have the power to impose a fine for unethical conduct. It is therefore not necessarily true that the establishment of a statutory press council is a draconian measure to muzzle the press, nor is it necessarily true that a statutory press council is effective in curbing press abuses. A statutory press council is merely a paper tiger if it is not backed up with any sanctions that are enforceable against a defaulting newspaper.
11.15 The Australian Press Council (APC) was established after discussion between publishers and the Australian Journalists' Association. It is dependent upon the newspaper industry for its funding. The aim of the Council is twofold: to help preserve the traditional freedom of the press within Australia and to ensure that the free press acts responsibly and ethically. To carry out its latter function, it serves as a forum to which anyone may take a complaint concerning the press.
11.16 The APC consists of: (a) ten publisher members appointed by the Council on the nomination of constituent bodies to represent the newspaper and magazine industry; (b) seven public members appointed by the Council on the nomination of the Chairman (after public advertisement of vacancies) to represent the general public; (c) three journalist members (including one former editor) appointed by the Council on the nomination of the Chairman to represent the viewpoint of print media journalists and editors, chosen from persons who are not employed by a constituent member; and (d) a Chairman appointed by the Council from persons who have not had any previous connection with the press. The number of public members and journalist members shall together be not greater than the number of newspaper members. The Vice-Chairman is elected from the public members. The Chairman has been, by tradition, a distinguished person with a legal background. Members vote as individuals, not as representatives of the bodies that nominated them.
11.17 The procedure normally requires advertisement for vacancies. The Council's practice is that neither the renewal of appointment nor appointing alternates as full members requires further advertisement. In addition, the Council is not precluded from inviting a particular person to be nominated. Applications are considered by a committee, normally consisting of the Chairman, Vice-Chairman and one or two public members. The advice of other members, especially public members, may be, and is often, sought.
11.18 The APC deals with complaints against newspapers, magazines and periodicals printed or published in Australia, whether or not the publisher belongs to an organisation affiliated with the Council. The effect of this approach is that complaints are accepted against many small newsletter type publications. As long as they have a public circulation the Council will deal with them. The APC also accepts complaints from third parties, ie persons not immediately affected by an article where the victim remains silent.
11.19 The APC has adopted a Statement of Principles against which it determines whether a complaint against a publication should be upheld. The Statement is drafted by the Council with the co-operation of the publishers and their editors, after consultation with the industry following the publication of the results of a survey of past complainants to the Council.
11.20 If the Executive Secretary considers the complaint could be the basis for a legal action against the publication, the complainant will be requested to sign a document waiving his legal rights before the Council will proceed further. The Council secretariat will first try to mediate a settlement to the satisfaction of the parties. But if the attempt at a negotiated settlement fails, the complaint will be sent to the publication for a formal written response. The parties may, by consent, agree to use the services of a locally-situated Public Member to act as a mediator of the complaint. Where mediation is unsuccessful, or the option is rejected by either party, the complainant may refer the matter to the Council for adjudication.
11.21 When a complaint has been referred to the Council, the Executive Secretary arranges for the complaint to be considered by the Complaints Committee. Members of the Committee are appointed by the Council. The Chairman and Vice-Chairman are ex officio members of the committee. The remainder of the members is determined by the Council, subject to the requirement that the public members and an ex officio member shall together constitute a majority of the membership, and the other members shall include at least one journalist member and one newspaper member. Lawyers may not appear as a representative of either party. There is no formal taking of evidence at the hearing. The Complaints Committee drafts an adjudication that goes to the Council as a recommendation.
11.22 In its adjudication, the Council may uphold a complaint in whole or in part or it may dismiss all aspects of the complaint. Alternatively, it may simply express an opinion on the matter. The publication concerned is required to prominently print any adjudication concerning it. The Council has no requirement that the adjudication be printed verbatim but requires that, where edited, the conclusion and spirit of the adjudication remain clear and unchanged. The authority of the Council rests solely on the willingness of publishers to respect the Council's views. It does not have power to punish publishers who fail to meet its standards or to direct the publication of an apology; nor does it have power to enforce publication of its censure.
11.23 In a survey conducted in 1995, some complainants felt that the printing of the adjudication was not prominent enough. In order to overcome this concern, the Complaints Committee now monitors the printing of adjudications from the previous month at its monthly meeting, ensuring that they are published and published with appropriate prominence. If the adjudication has not been printed in the publication affected, or the committee believes that the publication has misrepresented the finding or not printed it with adequate prominence, it can recommend to the Council such action as would be appropriate in the circumstances. A summary of all printing of adjudications known to the Council (both in the publication cited, and in other publications) is published in the annual report. The Council also publishes all adjudications in its quarterly newsletter. All adjudications are posted to the Council's website and maintained there until archived at the AustLII website.
11.24 The APC reports that self-regulation works because the newspaper and magazine publishing industry is committed to it. Throughout the last ten years, every critical adjudication against a mainstream newspaper or magazine by the APC has been printed with due prominence. However, some smaller country and suburban newspapers, not affiliated with the Council, have not co-operated with the Council.[328] A survey of past complainants shows that many believe that the number of public members should be increased, the median indicating that public members should account for 50% of the Council and the remaining 50% should be filled by publishers and journalists in equal number. Further, although about 60% of the respondents were not primarily concerned with monetary compensation, a majority of them strongly indicated that the Council should be able to impose a fine if it rules against the publication.[329] The APC has also been spurned as "window dressing", and ABC-TV's Media Watch presenter, Stuart Littlemore, branded it a lap-dog rather than a watchdog.[330] Others see the Council as something of a rubber-toothed apologist for the press, lacking the bite to deal effectively with readers' complaints. In a case in which the APC ruled that the Daily Telegraph had committed an unjustified breach of privacy, the Telegraph buried the adjudication at the bottom of page 22 under a bland and ambiguous headline "Press Council rules", even though it had splashed the sneak photographs, plus headlines and text across pages one and three.[331] Frank Sharman, a lecturer in legal studies, notes that it is very rare for a newspaper to refuse to publish a report adverse to itself, but more often the report will not get as much prominence as the original story.[332]
11.25 Online self-regulation[333]- Since 2000, the APC also accepts complaints against the on-line version of members' newspapers. The Chairman of the Council says that Council members accept that press responsibility is not determined by the medium in which the story is presented. They therefore support the public's right also to lodge complaints about the members' on-line publications.[334] When the Council makes a finding about material appearing on a website, a link will be included in the relevant on-line site pointing to the adjudication as published on the Council's website. This link would appear on the front page of the on-line site published on the day requested by the Council if the original article which is the subject of the complaint appeared on the front page; otherwise the link will appear on the news index of the day requested by the Council. Additionally, an annotation, with the appropriate link, will be placed in the on-line archive of the article which was the subject of the complaint.
11.26 The APC is also considering whether it could play a role in relation to on-line news reporting by non-member publications. Once it has gained experience in the handling of complaints about on-line publications, the Council would draw up a plan whereby, on the payment of a fee, on-line publishers who are not members could become affiliates of the Council and note on their sites that they were subject to the Council's self-regulatory scheme. The APC approach to the resolution of complaints relating to on-line news material seems to provide an appropriate model for self-regulation of this aspect of the on-line industry.
11.27 The Austrian Press Council was founded in 1961 by the Austrian Journalists Union and the Association of Austrian Newspaper Publishers. It is an organisation of representatives of the Austrian press. It has 24 members. Half of them elected by the journalists' associations and the other half by the editors' associations. The Association of Austrian Newspaper Editors & Newspaper Publishers and the Trade Union for the Arts & the Media each appoint 10 members; two further members are appointed by the Austrian Newspaper Association and Concordia Press Club respectively. The aims of the Council are to ensure that the press fulfils its professional obligations, and that the freedom of the press is not violated. It is responsible for maintaining the press' reputation and for determining and preventing abuses.
11.28 The Austrian Press Council adjudicates complaints of violations of their Code of Ethics for the Austrian Press. Any person can lodge a complaint with the Council; not only those who are directly injured by a publication. The Council can also take action on its own initiative. Complaints are dealt with either by one of the two Senates (of 12 members each) or by an ombudsman, who is a specially designated member of the Press Council.[336] A hearing then takes place, to which the parties are summoned. The parties try to find a solution acceptable to both, or they decide to bring the case before the Press Council. If proceedings before the Press Council are initiated, a report must be submitted. The Council either approves this report or decides to open proceedings. The Council has no punitive powers except to publish its judgment and to direct the offending newspaper to publish the judgment. It cannot compel publication, although the vast majority of the newspapers publish as recommended.
11.29 Sonninen and Laitila reported in 1995 that two boulevard papers did not pay attention to the council's decisions because their owners were not members of the publishers' association.[337] Walter Berka reported in 1993 that although most of the press publications respected and published the Austrian Press Council's findings, the most powerful Austrian newspaper, Neue Kronen-Zeitung, against which there had been many negative judgments, refused to do so. The Council was also criticised for having only publishers and journalists as members and for not including impartial experts or representatives of the public. As a consequence, the public was largely unaware of the Press Council's work and it was viewed by many as having little authority.[338] In 1999, the Council was said to be preparing agreements with the publishing houses on the voluntary publication of its judgments.[339]
11.30 All but one of Canada's ten provinces have a press council. Most, but not all, dailies are members of the councils. All the press councils in Canada are funded by news organisations and foundations, though the Quebec Press Council received some funding from the Government. None of the councils have legal power to enforce their decisions.
11.31 The first press councils were created in the early 1970s, largely in response to proposals for greater Government regulation of the press. In Ontario, for example, a provincial commission investigating human rights in the late 1960s proposed the establishment of a press council to control and discipline the press and other news media. In Quebec, also during the late 1960s, the provincial government created a special legislative committee to investigate the impact of a concentration of ownership on freedom of the press. The committee did not make any recommendations but premier Jean-Jacques Bertrand thought that a provincial press council would be an excellent idea.
11.32 In 1970, the Special Senate Committee on Mass Media increased the pressure on the news media by urging the creation of a national press council. Although the proposed press council was to be non-governmental, publishers perceived an implicit threat of direct government regulation of the news media. Eventually, the first press council in Canada was created in Windsor in 1971. A year later the Ontario and Alberta press councils were formed. The Quebec Press Council also began operations in 1973.
11.33 The second wave of press council creation in Canada was triggered off by the report of the Royal Commission on Newspapers in 1981. The Commission said that "newspapers which do not become enthusiastically involved in the establishment and operation of press councils are exceedingly short-sighted".[341] The Commission proposed a Canada Newspaper Act, which would have required creation of local press councils in communities with chain-owned monopoly newspapers. The Act would also have created a federal Press Rights Panel, one of the functions of which would have been to "observe the performance of newspapers in Canada … and to publish annually a review of that performance with any comment and advice to newspapers or government that it deems appropriate".
11.34 Although few of the Royal Commission on Newspapers' recommendations were incorporated into legislation, a bill that would have enabled the federal Government to create a federal council to hear complaints from provinces without press councils was introduced in Parliament by the Trudeau Government. The message to newspaper publishers was clear: create voluntary press councils or face the possibility of Government regulation. The result was a resurgence of interest in press councils in the provinces that did not have them. Although the bill was not enacted into law, there were voluntary press councils for British Columbia, Manitoba, and the Atlantic Provinces by 1983.
11.35 Alberta[342] - The Alberta Press Council was formed in 1972 at the initiative of Alberta newspaper publishers. It is an independent, voluntary body that serves to protect the public's right to full, fair and accurate news reporting. Member newspapers each pay a share of the cost in proportion to circulation. The Council has 17 directors, including the chairman:
(a) One public member is elected by Council from each circulation area of the daily newspapers – a total of seven.
(b) The publisher of each daily newspaper appoints one staff member as a press representative – a total of seven.
(c) The Alberta Weekly Newspapers Association appoints one publisher/editor from a weekly newspaper and one public member.
(d) The Chairman is elected by the Council from the public.
11.36 The Council considers complaints from the public about the conduct and performance of Alberta's newspapers. It does not consider complaints where the complainant is pursuing litigation. Nor does it pursue third party complaints. Decisions of the Press Council must be published in full and in a prominent location by the newspaper against which the complaint has been lodged. The decisions can also be published in all other member newspapers if they choose to do so.
11.37 The Atlantic Provinces[343] - The Atlantic Press Council is a voluntary organisation that aims at maintaining a high professional standard of journalism in the Atlantic provinces by adjudicating complaints from the public about the conduct of the press and complaints from members of the press about the conduct of individuals towards the press. Members of the Council include one professional member drawn from each sponsoring newspaper, and one public member chosen by each newspaper as broadly representative of their constituencies. The Council does not have its own Code of Practice.
11.38 British Columbia[344] - The British Columbia Press Council consists of 11 elected members, five from member newspapers and six from the public. The former chairman was a judge in Saskatchewan before he moved to British Columbia. He is now a public member. Of the five professional members, three are publishers and two are editors. All of British Columbia's dailies and more than 100 community papers are members of the Council. The Council considers unsatisfied complaints from the public about the conduct of member newspapers. It uses its Code of Practice as a yardstick for assessing complaints. Complaints against a newspaper which is not a member will be considered only if the newspaper agrees. The newspaper involved is obliged to publish the adjudication as written.
11.39 Manitoba[345] - The Manitoba Press Council is an independent non-judicial body that seeks to promote high quality journalism. Its objectives include preservation of press freedom and consideration of complaints from the public and members of the press. It does not consider a complaint if the newspaper involved is not its member, but may request a complainant to sign a waiver agreeing not to take legal action on a complaint if such action is contemplated. The Council has nine directors; four professional members from the newspaper industry, and five members (including the chairman) representing communities throughout Manitoba.
11.40 Ontario[346] - The Ontario Press Council (OPC) is a voluntary association of Ontario newspapers. It considers unsatisfied complaints from the public about the conduct of the press in gathering and publishing news, opinion and advertising, and complaints from members of the press about the conduct of individuals and organisations toward the press. The Council may deal with a complaint against a newspaper that is not a contributing newspaper if that newspaper so chooses.
11.41 There are 21 council members, including the Chairman who must not be from the press, 10 Public Members who are broadly representative of society, and 10 Professional Members who must fairly represent publishers, editorial staff and advertising employees, aiming at the following breakdown: two publishers; seven editorial employees made up of two editors or executive editors, two departmental editors, and three reporters; and one advertising representative. All members are elected at an Annual Meeting.
11.42 The OPC has four Standing Committees, namely,
(a) an Executive Committee;
(b) an Inquiry Committee to examine complaints and report its findings to the Council, recommending the action it considers appropriate;
(c) a Finance Committee; and
(d) a Nomination Committee, consisting of the Chairman, two Public and two Professional Members, to consider and propose to the Council the names of persons for election as Council Members; the names of Council Members proposed for appointment to Standing Committees, and the name of a Council Member proposed as Vice-Chairman.[347]
The Council may establish a Special Committee, consisting of three Public and two Professional Members, to propose appointment or reappointment of a Chairman.
11.43 The Inquiry Committee consists of five Council members. Three of them, including the Chairman, are Public Members. After the committee has decided on a recommendation, the Council will make a final decision. The Council and its committees may hear and question witnesses, but no one may be represented or accompanied by counsel. The Council does not normally deal with a complaint that involves litigation, whether launched, threatened or in prospect. It may, under some circumstances, ask a complainant to sign a waiver agreeing not to take legal action on any complaint heard by the Council on which the Council makes a finding. Member newspapers are obliged to publish the text of the adjudication in a prominent place in the newspaper.
11.44 Observations – Hamelink reports that the complaints process of the Canadian press councils is "generally respected" by the press.[348] However, Raphael Cohen-Almagor observes that the staff of the press councils is very small, consisting of between two and four salaried officers. The councils have a small budget and the media are not particularly interested in publicising the complaints mechanism. As a result, most people are oblivious to their work. Members of the councils are also fairly prominent people who are busy with their own work. The councils therefore meet infrequently. For example, the Ontario PC meets three times a year. Usually it takes several months from the time a complaint is made until its adjudication.[349] Enn Raudsepp also points out that although the press is obliged to publish a summary of the Council's adjudication, it publishes the adjudication in brief, with a tiny headline at the bottom of the page. [350]
11.45 Press Council – The Press Law of 1989 provides for the establishment of a Press Council and a Press Authority but the relevant provisions have not been implemented. A Press Council and a Press Authority were initially formed after the passage of the law. The Press Council had three journalists, three editors, four members representing parliamentary parties and an experienced lawyer as the president. However, the two bodies ceased to function after a few sessions because of strong objections from the Cyprus Union of Journalists and the Publishers' Association who withdrew their representatives from these bodies. They argued that journalism was a matter requiring self-regulation, not Government involvement. This rendered the two bodies inoperative and various attempts to revive them failed. After demise of the Press Council, and following instances of misconduct by journalists, the Government issued several warnings that the media had to choose either self-regulation or regulation by law. The media opted for self-regulation.
11.46 Code of Conduct for Journalists Committee – The Cyprus Union of Journalists, in co-operation with the owners of the print and electronic media, approved a code of conduct in 1997. A Code of Conduct for Journalists Committee (also known as the Media Complaints Commission) was also set up to oversee the implementation of the code and deal with complaints. The Committee is financed by the founding members and made up of a Chairman and 12 members. Three members are appointed by the Union of Journalists, three by the Publishers' Association and three by the owners of the electronic media. The Cyprus Union of Journalists, the Publishers Association and the owners of the electronic media jointly appoint the Chairman and another three members. The present Chairman is a former judge and former Permanent Secretary of the Foreign Ministry. The Committee usually acts when a complaint is filed by an interested person, or on its own initiative, if in its opinion there is a serious breach of the code. It does not have the power to impose penalties on offenders or ask for damages to be paid, but it can publish its decisions. The offenders are expected to publish the decisions and findings of the Committee.
11.47 The Estonian Press Council (EPC) was set up by the Estonian Newspaper Association in 1992. In 1997 several media organisations decided to reorganise the EPC on a wider basis. As a result, a non-profit-making organisation was founded by the Newspaper Association, the Association of Broadcasters, the Journalists' Union, the Association of Media Educators and the Consumers' Association. At present, the Network of Estonian Non-Profit-Making Organizations, the Estonian Council of Churches and the Baltic News Service are also members of the EPC. Every member-organisation delegates one to four representatives to the Press Council. The total number of members is limited to 17, of which seven need to represent non-media organisations. At present, there are 16 members in the EPC: 2 chief editors (national daily, local paper); 2 deputy chief editors (newspapers); 1 department head (TV); 2 journalists (radio, cultural magazine); 4 professors (one of journalism, psychology, ethics, and philosophy); 2 from Consumer Union; 2 managers from media associations; and 1 clergyman. The EPC is mainly financed by the membership fees, though some projects have been financed by foundations.
11.48 The aims of the EPC are to protect press freedom; to examine complaints about media ethics; and to support the development of journalists' professional skills and ethics and adherence to the good tradition of journalism. The basis for examining complaints is the Code of Ethics introduced by the Estonian Newspaper Association, the Association of Estonian Broadcasters and the EPC. The EPC examines both complaints received and cases on their own initiative. It does not examine a case if it is obvious that a legal issue is at stake. If the complaint is upheld, the newspaper or station must print or announce the full text of the adjudication within 10 days. If the media organisation does not comply, the EPC must make the adjudication public by other means of mass communication.
11.49 The Thomson Foundation consultants of the UK presented a report to the Fiji Government in 1996 on the future of media legislation and regulation in Fiji. The report recommended that a new Media Act be enacted to cover the qualitative aspects of content and conduct in both the print and the broadcast media and to establish an independent media council to which regulation of these matters should be entrusted. After the Government had expressed an intention to set up such a media council by legislation, the industry-sponsored News Council changed its name to Media Council and expanded its membership to include an equal number of public and media members with an independent Chairman and an independent Complaints Committee. The Council now has 14 members, with seven representing media organisations and seven representing the public.[353] Apart from upholding freedom of speech, the Council promotes a media code and adjudicates complaints through a Complaints Committee, which consists of three public members (including its Chairman) without any media representative. To strengthen the public membership of the Council, its Constitution has also been amended so that the public members must be appointed by the Complaints Committee.[354] The Council will also advertise and invite interested parties to apply.
11.50 The Complaints Committee deals with complaints concerning any media organisation, whether it is a Council member or not, according to the Council's General Media Code of Ethics and Practice. The Council asks complainants to sign a legal waiver before accepting their complaints. Legal representation is not allowed. Offending organisations are expected to publish the adjudications. The Committee has no power to enforce its adjudications. There have been instances of a media organisation refusing to reply to the complaint and co-operate with the Committee. In 2003, the Government published a draft Media Bill to establish a statutory media council, purporting to implement the recommendations of the Thomson Foundation.[355] The Bill provides for an Appeals Committee to hear appeals from the Council's Complaints Committee and to make recommendations to the Council, which has a lay chairman and an equal number of press and lay members.
11.51 In response to pressures within the Government to enact a press law and to restrict journalistic activities, the journalists in 1956 formed an Ethics Committee to pre-empt "intervention from above". In 1963, the National Union of Journalists, the Press Editors' Committee and the Union of the Dailies Management established the Israel Press Council. The Council comprises representatives of the journalists (30%), representatives of publishers and editors (30%), and public representatives (40%). Sixty members sit in the Council, and ten in the Executive Committee that implements the decisions of the Council. The functions of the Council are to protect freedom of the press and information, to crystallise ethical codes, and to examine alleged violations of the codes.
11.52 Upon receipt of a complaint, the President of the Council or the Secretary-General will examine whether it has any substance. The Council does not deal with complaints that are handled by the court or by the police. If the complaint is not rejected, it will be passed to the Council's legal advisor to review whether there is a prima facie case. If so, the Council will request the media organisation concerned to give a response. After receipt of the response, the legal advisor will pass the complaint to the Chairperson of its Ethics Tribunal if there is a prima facie violation of the Code of Ethics. The Chairperson of the Tribunal will then form a tribunal consisting of three members: a public representative (who will also be the Chairperson of the tribunal), a journalists' representative, and a representative of publishers and editors. Appeals from the tribunal are adjudicated by a larger panel of the Tribunal, consisting of five or seven members nominated by the Chairperson of the Ethics Tribunal. Two members of the panel must be public representatives. The other three are representatives of journalists, publishers and editors. If a complaint is upheld, the Tribunal may issue a warning or reprimand; require that an apology be published; or suspend the newspaper from the Council for a limited period of time. The newspapers "usually" comply with the rulings of the Tribunal.[357]
11.53 The image of the Council has been described as one of a stagnant, ineffective body, whose work is obscure and whose existence is questionable.[358] In 1996, the Minister of Justice and the Minister of the Interior set up a Public Committee on Press Laws headed by the President of the Press Council to review the work of the press in Israel. With regard to the Press Council, the Committee concluded that its voluntary status and the fact that the Council's decisions were not binding hindered its ability to enforce the Code of Ethics. It recommended the enactment of a Press Council Law that would compel the press to abide by the Code drawn up by the Council. Under its proposals, the authority to write and enforce the Code would remain in the hands of the independent Press Council, while the law would stipulate that all journalists and newspapers are obliged to conduct their affairs in accordance with the Code, and that they must respect the rulings of the Ethics Tribunal. However, there would be no sanctions for violations of the Code other than public and moral sanctions determined in accordance with the Council's bylaws with reference to its Code.
11.54 There is no press council or press ombudsman in Japan. However, the Japan Newspaper Publishers & Editors Association (NSK), which is the leading association of newspaper editors and publishers in Japan, plays a pivotal role in maintaining the ethical standards of the press. To monitor the ethical standards of newspapers, NSK set up a Newspaper Ethical Standards Monitoring Chamber within its secretariat.[360] The Chamber is staffed by several veteran newsmen with extensive experience as journalists. Every day these newsmen monitor every page of all the papers published by NSK member companies and examine them against the Canon of Journalism adopted by NSK. If they find any article which appears to contravene ethical standards or arouse social criticism, it is referred to the Editorial Affairs Committee (a body consisting of managing editors) for consideration. When the alleged contravention is affirmed, NSK will issue a warning to the offending newspaper. If the newspaper does not heed the warning, its membership may be suspended or it may be expelled from the Association. There have been a few cases of such expulsions in the past.
11.55 The Netherlands Press Council (NPC) was created in 1960, in response to public calls for Government regulation to protect individuals against journalistic excesses. It is an independent body established by the NPC Foundation, which comprises representatives of the Netherlands Association of Journalists and several newspaper and television companies. The Council is financed entirely by the Foundation.
11.56 The Council consists of a chairman, three vice-chairmen at most, 10 journalists and 10 non-journalists. All of them are appointed by the Board of the NPC Foundation. The chairman and vice-chairmen are members of the judiciary, usually from a high justice office. As far as the journalist members are concerned, the appointments are made on the recommendations of the Netherlands Association of Journalists and the Netherlands Society of Editors-in-Chief, as the case may be. Some of the non-journalist members are (former) politicians, including a former Minister of the Interior and a former Member of Parliament. They are appointed because of their personal social experience.[362] The secretary must be a lawyer.
11.57 The Netherlands Press Council is charged with the examination of complaints against violations of good journalistic practice by journalists working for newspapers, periodicals, press offices, radio and television. Only persons or organisations directly or indirectly mentioned in the challenged publication can complain. In addition, the complaint must be directed against a professional journalist (whether or not he is a member of the Dutch Association of Journalists) rather than a publication or editor, unless the complaint concerns an editorial comment.
11.58 The chairman, assisted by the secretary, makes a preliminary examination of the complaint. In most cases he decides to arrange a hearing, in which case the complaint will be heard by a committee consisting of the chairman, two journalist members and two non-journalist members. The NPC decides complaints on the basis of "whether the boundaries of that which is socially acceptable have been exceeded, in view of the demands of journalistic responsibility". There is no written code governing journalism in the Netherlands, but most trade associations abide by the Code of Ethics of the International Federation of Journalists.
11.59 The Netherlands Press Council can only give an opinion on a complaint. The findings of the Council are published online and in the biweekly magazine of the Association of Journalists. They are also sent to the national news agency and to the media. The newspaper, magazine or broadcasting programme concerned is requested to publish the adjudication, but it is not obliged to do so. As advised by the NPC, about 70% of the media concerned published the council's decisions. Nonetheless, the Council does not consider the lack of sanctions a real problem.[363]
11.60 The New Zealand Press Council is a self-regulatory body established in 1972 when there was a real possibility of statutory intervention.[365] It adjudicates on complaints made against the editorial content of newspapers and magazines. It may also consider complaints by a newspaper about the conduct of persons and organisations towards the press. In the past five years, the Council has extended its jurisdiction to all print media with an appreciable readership including websites. The Council comprises six public members (including the chairman who is a former judge) and five industry members. The industry members are appointed by the Newspaper Publishers Association (2), the journalists' union (2) and the magazine publishers (1). The public members are appointed by a panel which includes the Chief Ombudsman. The Council is funded entirely by the publication industry. In circumstances where a legally actionable issue may be involved, the complainant will be required to provide a written undertaking that having referred the matter to the Press Council, he will not take or continue proceedings against the newspaper or journalist concerned. Its purpose is to avoid the possibility of a Council adjudication being used as a "trial run" for litigation. The Council is prepared to accept complaints made in good faith by third parties. Its Statement of Principles is not a rigid code but may be used by complainants to give an indication of the nature of their complaints. Its only sanction is to require an offending newspaper or magazine to publish the essence of the decision, giving it fair prominence. Since it is not backed by a statute, the Council has difficulties dealing with publishers "who point blank refuse to submit to a complaint from the public".[366] The Council does not have any power to insist a newspaper follow any set course.
11.61 The Norwegian Press Council was established in 1936. It consists of two journalists, two editors and three public representatives. Its members are appointed by the board of The Norwegian Press Association, which is an organisation founded by the National Union of Journalists, the Editors' Association and the Publishers' Association. The Council hears complaints against virtually all publications that traditionally fall within the term "press". Individuals, organisations and public authorities may file complaints with the Council. The Secretary-General of the Press Association, who is not a member of the Council, may also file complaints on his own initiative. The Council will not consider a complaint if legal action has been commenced or if the complainant declares an intention to take such action. However, it does not require that the right to legal action be waived. As a consequence, complainants may bring legal proceedings if they are not satisfied with the Council's decisions.
11.62 If the Norwegian Press Council determines that there was a press abuse, it will issue a condemnation, which should be printed in a conspicuous place in the offending publication and should also carry the Council's logo. Although the Council does not have any enforcement power, the right of correction set forth in the Penal Code and right of reply recognised in the Code of Ethics provide the public with speedy and often adequate remedies. The press on the whole respects the Press Council and the ethical standards enunciated in the Norwegian Press Association's Code of Ethics.
11.63 The Peruvian Press Council is a voluntary body jointly established by 12 national publishers representing a total of 15 newspapers and five magazines. It has a five-member Board of Directors and an Honour Council, both comprised entirely of representatives of the press industry. The Honour Council is responsible for accepting and suspending members, as well as for approving the procedures that the Ethics Tribunal should follow. The Board of Directors takes positions on issues relating to freedom of the press and supervises administrative matters. The five members of the Ethics Tribunal are elected by the five directors and another five external electors recognised for their prestige and honesty, including the federal Ombudsman, a rector of a university, and a priest. The President of the Tribunal is a lawyer and none of its members are from the press.
11.64 The Ethics Tribunal responds to requests from people affected by publications who are members of the Council, and any complaints involving the alleged transgression of journalistic ethics by any print publication, whether or not it is a member. The Ethics Tribunal can issue public pronouncements on complaints not resolved in the first instance by its Executive Secretary. Recently, Expreso, adaily, withdrew from the Council after it had repeatedly chosen not to fulfil its commitment to the Council by refusing to publish the Board of Directors' press releases and the Tribunal's decisions.[369]
11.65 The Press Council of the Philippines was founded by the Philippine Press Institute in 1965. It was established at a time of public outrage against an increasingly sensational trend in crime reporting. The publishers decided that establishing a self-policing agency was preferable to state regulation, which was being considered by Congress.
11.66 The Press Council of the Philippines used to have a former judge as chairman and a number of civic leaders, apart from senior editors, as members. It had an investigation panel that consisted of two former Supreme Court judges, the executive director of the Philippine Press Institute, the president of the Philippine Newspaper Publishers Association, the dean of the School of Mass Communication at the University of the Philippines and the managing editor of a newspaper. Investigations could be launched either on complaints brought before the Council or on the Council's own initiative. The sanctions that could be imposed were mainly moral. The Council ceased to function after President Marcos declared martial law in 1972.
11.67 After the fall of Marcos, the publishers, instead of reviving the Press Council, decided to appoint resident ombudsmen in the major newspapers to hear complaints against unfair or inaccurate reporting. Although most newspapers complied, the ombudsmen were not effective: few complaints were brought to their attention and they did not take the initiative to unearth cases of corruption or abuse. Subsequently, the Press Institute resurrected the idea of a Press Council in 1993. However, the Council reconstituted in 1994 has a limited scope. Its object is to guarantee "every news subject's right to reply". It is now composed of the editors of the Institute's member newspapers. As at 2001, it has 11 members and a chairman and vice chairman elected by the Press Institute from its members.
11.68 The Council decides by consensus and may require a newspaper to publish the disregarded side of a story, and, if it refuses to do so, cause the publication of the Council's findings in other newspapers and in the Institute's publication. The existence alone of the Council seems to have had some moderating effect. Newspapers invariably make redress on first notice to avoid the risk of sanction by public exposure.
11.69 Judicial Chamber on Information Disputes – The Judicial Chamber was established by a presidential decree dated 31 January 1994 (No 228). Although it was described as a judicial chamber, almost all its members were former journalists and its jurisdiction was separated from that of the Court. The Chamber aimed at restraining violations of media rights and abuses of media freedom by journalists. It adjudicated on "disputes and other cases involving the mass media", and had the power to censure and make recommendations. The Chamber performed its functions independently without interference and even ruled against the Government on occasion. Although the Chamber was awarded the Honorary Prize for Outstanding Contribution to the Development of Russian Media Law founded by the Law and Mass Media Centre, it was disbanded a year later in 2000.
11.70 Grand Jury for the Media – In 1995, the Journalists' Union initiated the establishment of regional Ethics Councils within the union. It also launched an educational campaign to induce journalists to follow its Code of Professional Ethics. The result was, however, unsatisfactory. The Union therefore established a press council known as the Grand Jury for the Media in 1998. The Grand Jury deals with complaints on the basis of the Code. The sanctions at its disposal are warnings, publication of critical adjudications, and suspension or termination of union membership. Since membership of the Union is not compulsory, an expelled journalist may continue to work in the media.[372]
11.71 The journalists and publishers' associations in South Africa set up a self-regulatory mechanism by way of a Press Ombudsman and an Appeal Panel in 1997. The two bodies are financed by the Newspaper Association of Southern Africa. The Ombudsman mediates, settles and, if necessary, adjudicates complaints in accordance with the Code of Conduct adopted by the founding bodies.
11.72 The Press Ombudsman (PO) is a person with extensive experience of press editorial work at a senior level and also of mediation of disputes. However, he is not allowed to have a material financial interest in the media or be in the employ of the media. As regards the Appeal Panel, it consists of a Chairperson and 12 members. The Chairperson should have extensive experience in press law and adjudication or be a person with extensive experience in the application of the rules of natural justice. He is not allowed to have a financial interest in the media or be in the employ of the media. Six members of the Panel should, judged as a group, have practical editorial and journalistic experience in the printed media ("press representatives"), and the other six members should be members of the public ("public representatives"). No member may be a member of, or in the employ of, any legislative authority or be an employee of the executive branch of such an authority; nor shall a member be an employee or official of any political party or similar organisation.
11.73 The PO and the Chairperson and members of the Appeal Panel are appointed by an Appointment Panel. According to the Constitution:
(a) the Founding Bodies Committee has to advertise in the printed media for nominations for members of an Appointment Panel and for the post of PO and for members and a Chairperson of the Appeal Panel;
(b) the Founding Bodies Committee shall request a fit and proper person to appoint four persons from those nominated for the Appointment Panel in response to that advertisement;
(c) the fit and proper person and the four persons nominated by him shall constitute the Appointment Panel;
(d) the Appointment Panel shall, after public interviews with nominees as selected by them after consultation with the Chairperson of the Founding Bodies Committee, appoint a PO, a Chairperson and the 12 members of the Appeal Panel;
(e) if the post of Chairperson of the Appeal Panel becomes vacant, the Founding Bodies Committee shall convene or reconvene an Appointment Panel to fill the vacancy.
11.74 The PO is appointed for five years on a contract with the Chairperson of the Founding Bodies Committee in consultation with his Committee. The contract may only be terminated on abolition of the post or by the death or resignation of the PO or upon commission of any act or omission which would disqualify him from acting as a director of a public company, or on a complaint unanimously lodged by the Founding Bodies Committee with the Appeal Panel which shall only terminate such a contract on grounds of incompetence.
11.75 Complaints about infringements of the Code are lodged by private individuals or institutions first with the PO, who will try to settle the matter. The PO does not accept any complaint where legal action has been threatened or is considered by the Ombudsman to be a possibility, unless the complainant waives any right to claim civil relief. If the parties fail to reach a friendly settlement, the complaint becomes a formal one. The PO may require the parties to verify on oath any evidence advanced to support an averment of fact and call upon the parties to furnish further information. He may make his decision on written statements and evidence submitted by the parties but if in his opinion it is necessary, the PO may meet the parties in the form of a round table discussion. Following the investigation, the PO may reprimand an offending respondent and direct that a correction and its findings be published by it in such manner as may be determined by the PO.
11.76 Either party may lodge an appeal against the PO's decision with the Appeal Panel. Upon receipt of the relevant documents, the Chairperson of the Appeal Panel may appoint an Adjudication Panel consisting of himself and one press representative and one public representative, though the chairperson may appoint two press and two public representatives if necessary. The parties are not entitled to legal representation when appearing before the PO or Adjudication Panel, but may be accompanied by advisers. The findings of the Panel are public documents.
11.77 Although newspapers have complied with all orders from the PO or Appeal Panel decisions, the Government wanted stricter regulation as per the SA Human Rights Commission proposal that the PO and the Broadcasting Complaints Commission be merged and strengthened and established by legislation. Political pressures are reported to be mounting, with signs of Government dissatisfaction with the press as a whole.[374]
11.78 Sweden established the first press council in the world in 1916. The Council originally consisted only of members with a journalistic background. Later, in 1969, it introduced Public Members and established the Office of the Press Ombudsman for the General Public (PO). The Press Cooperation Board (comprising the Association of Newspaper Publishers, the Swedish Federation of Journalists and the National Press Club) contributes to the financing of the Council and the Ombudsman, although the Association of Newspaper Publishers plays the dominant role. Pecuniary sanctions also partly finance the council's work. The Press Co-operation Board is also responsible for the charter of the Press Council and the rules for the PO. It has adopted a Code of Conduct for the Press, Radio and Television, which protects individuals against unwarranted suffering caused by publicity.
11.79 The Press Ombudsman is appointed by a committee made up of the Head of the Parliamentary Ombudsmen, the Chairman of the Swedish Bar Association, and the Chairman of the Press Cooperation Board. He is employed by a foundation, which separates the office from the media and the Government. The PO has traditionally been chosen from highly qualified lawyers and the first two ombudsmen were both judges prior to their selection for the post. However, the post has also been filled by an experienced publisher who can talk to the responsible persons at the papers in their own terms. The duty of the PO is:
(a) to provide advice and assistance to individuals who feel themselves to have been wronged or offended by the publicity they have received in a newspaper or periodical;
(b) to investigate deviations from "good journalistic practice", either on the initiative of the PO himself or following complaint from the public;
(c) to refer a complaint to the Press Council for decision if necessary; and
(d) to further adherence to a high standard of press ethics by moulding public opinion.
11.80 The Press Council consists of two different groups (known as the Opinion Boards) working on a parallel basis with six members each. Three members are appointed by the three press organisations and two members represent the general public. The representatives of the general public must not have any connections with the press. The Public Members are appointed jointly by the Head of the Parliamentary Ombudsmen and the Chairman of the Bar Association. The five members then appoint the chairman who is usually a judge from either the Supreme Court or the Supreme Administrative Court.
11.81 Anyone who considers himself to have been wronged or offended by a Swedish publication can file a complaint to the PO, whether or not the publication is a member of the Association of Newspaper Publishers. A condition for filing a complaint is that the applicant is directly affected by the article or news item. The PO can examine a complaint on his own initiative only if he has the consent of the affected party. The PO can also accept a complaint from an outsider with the affected party's consent. The PO is obliged to consider whether or not there is any unwarranted suffering as a result of the publicity. If a complaint is found to be invalid by the PO, the complainant can appeal to the Press Council.
11.82 In some cases, the complainant and the PO both find that the best solution would be a printed correction, a rejoinder or a complementary article. The PO then negotiates with the editor over the phone. If the matter is settled in this way, the case is dismissed. If the PO cannot find a way to settle the complaint through a correction or a rejoinder and there has been a clear breach of the Code, he will refer it after investigation to the Press Council, which then adjudicates the claim. Both the Press Council and the PO examine cases that appertain to "good journalistic practice". They have the freedom to determine what good journalistic practice means without any formal reference to the Code of Conduct.
11.83 If the Press Council finds a complaint valid it will issue a critical adjudication, stating that the newspaper or the periodical concerned has "disregarded", "violated" or "seriously violated" good journalistic practice, depending on the seriousness of the case. The Council has legally binding contracts with almost all the press in Sweden that require an offending publication to publish the statement without delay. The offending newspaper must also pay a fine in the form of an "administrative fee" to the Council, amounting to approximately 25,000 Swedish krona. Newspapers with a circulation of less than 10,000 are required to pay a smaller fee. The fees are not meant to be an effective deterrent, but are used as a revenue-raising device for the PO and the Council on the basis that those whose conduct generates their work should contribute toward their costs.
11.84 Neither the PO nor the Council has the power to award damages to a successful complainant. The redress for the applicant lies in the fact that the paper has to publish the decision indicating that the paper has treated the person against the Code of Conduct. The national news agency is informed of the findings of the Council, and interesting cases are referred to all of the press. Since a complaint could be pursued in court after it has been dealt with by the Press Council, a decision rendered by the Council can be used by the complainant in subsequent legal proceedings.
11.85 The self-regulatory system in Sweden is respected by the press. The adjudications of the Press Council are taken very seriously, even by the tabloid press. The present PO, Pär-Arne Jigenius, says that he cannot recall any case where a paper has refused to publish a critical adjudication.
11.86 The self-regulatory body of the Swiss press was originally founded by the Swiss Federation of Journalists in 1972. It was reformed into the Swiss Press Council when the Foundation for the Swiss Press Council was created in 1999 with a wider base. The newly established Press Council has 21 members, comprising 15 professional journalists and six representatives of the public, elected by the Foundation's Council. Each sex is entitled to at least eight seats on the Council.
11.87 The Swiss Press Council considers complaints about media ethics made by journalists and members of the public. It may also initiate its own complaints. The decisions of the Press Council are based on the Declaration on the Duties and Rights of a Journalist issued by the Foundation's Council and the directives on the Declaration. The Press Council has three chambers directed by the President and the two Vice-Presidents. The composition of the chambers is determined by the Press Council. The President and Vice-Presidents are professional journalists elected by the Foundation's Council.
11.88 Complaints received by the Press Council are first examined by the President. All decisions of the President have to be circulated to the Council members before publication. However, a complaint may be referred to a chamber at the request of two members. A chamber deals with a complaint by holding meetings. Where a complaint raises questions of professional ethics of a fundamental nature, the chamber can be turned into the full Council. Decisions of the chamber must be endorsed by the Council before publication. The Swiss Press Council can make observations and recommendations in deciding on a complaint but does not have any means of sanctions at its disposal. The decisions of the Council are usually published in the media and on the Council's website.
11.89 The Swiss Press Council may consider a complaint even though legal proceedings are being brought in respect of the same subject matter giving rise to the complaint unless there is risk of such proceedings being influenced by the procedure of the Council and no fundamental question of professional ethics is at stake.
11.90 The first self-regulatory body in Taiwan was the Taipei Press Council formed by the Newspaper Society of Taipei in 1963. Eight years later, the Press Council was replaced by the Taipei News Council which was formed to deal with complaints about the press, television broadcast, radio broadcast and news agencies. The News Council had power to initiate its own enquiries as to whether a media organisation was in breach of the council's Codes of Ethics. In 1974, the Taipei News Council was expanded into a news council for the whole of Taiwan. Since martial law was lifted in 1987, the news media in Taiwan are no longer under Government control.
11.91 The National Press Council is sponsored by eight news associations representing the news editors, news agencies, broadcasters, newspaper companies and journalists in Taiwan. It has 11 members who are veteran journalists, journalism scholars, legal experts and prominent civic figures invited by the eight associations. The Chairman is elected from its members, who must not be engaged in journalism or government administration. The main functions of the Council are to accept complaints about news reports, commentaries, broadcast programmes or advertisements; to carry out investigations and hearings before arriving at a decision; to rule on the complaints; and to conduct studies for the elevation of journalistic ethical standards. The Council accepts third party complaints and may initiate an investigation. It may deal with a case whether or not the media organisation concerned is a member of one of its member associations. The Council uses its own codes of ethics as the basis for its deliberations and resolutions. Funding is shared among the member associations.
11.92 Upon receipt of a complaint, the Chairman will consider whether to make a decision on his own. If the Chairman cannot reach a decision, then the complaint will be investigated by a committee of one to three members. After investigation by the committee, the Council will decide whether to hold a public hearing. When investigation is completed, the Council will adjudicate on the complaint. Both parties may apply for a review of the adjudication. The findings of the Council are made public and recorded in its journal.
11.93 The number of complaints handled by the Press Council is small. It has been commented that the Council has not been effective in regulating the conduct of the Taiwan media. All the Council members are appointed by the media. The Council is also said to have a close relationship with the Government. It has no power to impose sanctions on an offending organisation, nor is an offending organisation obliged to comply with its rulings. Some newspapers have ignored the rulings or refused to publish the adjudications with prominence.[378]
11.94 The case involving Scoop Weekly illustrates how extreme press intrusion in Taiwan can be. In that case, a former female government official was secretly filmed in her apartment having sex with a married man. Subsequently, a 40-minute VCD showing the sexual encounter was distributed free withthe magazine. The Government ordered the disc be withdrawn from the news-stands, but the film was uploaded on the Internet and illegal copies were on sale in Taiwan and Hong Kong. The victim writes: "Suddenly I became transparent and totally exposed in public eyes. No matter how much clothing I wrap myself up in, I am still naked."[379]
11.95 The non-governmental Media Council of Tanzania (MCT) is set up to promote press freedom in Tanzania, following a concerted campaign to pre-empt a Government decision to establish a statutory council. A major objective of the Council is to consider and adjudicate upon complaints from the public and amongst the media inter se against alleged infringements of the code of ethics.
11.96 The membership of the MCT consists of media outlets, journalists' training institutions, journalists' associations and press clubs. The Council has a National General Convention (the highest decision making body of the Council), a Governing Board, an Ethics Committee and a Finance and Administration Committee. The Governing Board has a President, a Vice-President, an Executive Secretary, seven media representatives and four public representatives. The President is required to be "an eminent citizen of impeccable integrity and proven intellectual ability". Two public representatives are lawyers and at least one third of the board members are women. All the board members are elected at the General Convention, except that the Vice-President is elected by the board members themselves and the Executive Secretary is an ex officio member.
11.97 The Ethics Committee is an autonomous adjudication body constituted by the Governing Board from amongst its members. Its members have no voting rights on the Board in matters relating to cases adjudicated before it. The Ethics Committee has no less than six members, including two jurists of high professional standing, two persons of high moral standing drawn from the civil society, and the rest are media representatives of high professional standing. The Committee hears complaints in public. Legal representation is not allowed as the primary objective is amicable settlement and reconciliation, but the Committee may, on request, allow legal representation for the parties.
11.98 The Committee may settle a complaint amicably or reconcile the parties, order publication of an apology in the manner directed by the Committee, suspend membership temporarily, and order "token payment of damages and costs". A complainant who is not satisfied with the outcome may take legal action. All member associations are required to sign documents in a form prescribed by the Council with a view to ensuring their submission to the Council's jurisdiction and the binding effect and enforcement of any orders made by the Council.
11.99 The MCT receives financial support from the Swedish International Development Agency, the Friedrich Ebert Foundation, the Netherlands-based Communication Assistance Foundation, and the annual fees paid by its members. The Council is striving to be self-sustainable in the long run but has difficulty in collecting fees from a section of its members at present. The MCT enjoys much respect and about 98% of its rulings are complied with.[381] It runs seminars and workshops on ethical issues for media practitioners. Some of the African countries such as Uganda, Kenya and Zambia are looking to the MCT as a model.
11.100 The Turkish Press Council (TPC) is a voluntary organisation established in 1988 by a group of journalists with the support of some publishers. Journalists, media organisations and press associations are eligible to become members of the Council. The TPC has two major organs, namely, the Members' Council and the Supreme Board. The Members' Council is composed of individual members, readers, members of press associations, and the representatives of organisations mentioned in the Press Council Charter. It serves as the General Assembly of the Press Council.
11.101 The Supreme Board considers complaints about violations of the Professional Principles of the Press. It has 34 members: 16 members elected in the annual meeting (eight journalists and eight lay members) and 18 members representing dailies, radio and television broadcasters that subscribe to the Press Council Charter. The Supreme Board considers complaints put to the Council. If a complaint involves a journalist or a media organisation, the Supreme Board may reprimand the journalist, or censure the journalist or media organisation concerned if the violation is serious. The Board adjudicates on complaints concerning the print media, the broadcast media and Internet publications. The results of its adjudications are published by the Council.
11.102 The TPC is financed by income and donations from its members. The newspapers, news agencies, radio and television broadcasters, and journalists' associations contribute on a pro-rata basis, while individual members pay a yearly fee equal to five pounds Sterling. The income is collected by a foundation set up to support the Press Council and all expenses are paid out of this foundation.
11.103 The complainant may seek redress from the Court and the TPC at the same time on the same set of facts. An aggrieved party may lodge an appeal to the Press Council on the ground that the Supreme Board has made a mistake. Upon receipt of the application, the Chairman, Vice-Chairman and Secretary-General would review the case and submit a report to the Supreme Board. If the report is adopted by a two-thirds majority, the new report supersedes the old one.
11.104 Since some sections of the Hong Kong press have looked to the UK Press Complaints Commission as a model when discussing press self-regulation in Hong Kong, we have devoted Chapter 12 to a discussion of press self-regulation in the UK.
11.105 Many local news councils were formed in the 1950s and 1960s. This grassroots movement gave impetus to the formation of the National News Council in 1973. It was self-appointed and supported by the Twentieth Century Fund and the Markle Foundation. It received and investigated complaints to which the media themselves declined to respond. The Council comprised 18 distinguished citizens. Only eight members were from the industry. Both the media and the complainants might be represented by lawyers at hearings. The Council's findings included both majority and dissenting opinions. Due to lack of funding and resistance from major news organisations, it was dissolved in 1984. There are, however, regional news councils in some states, including Minnesota, Washington and South Florida.
11.106 Minnesota[383]- The Minnesota News Council comprises a chairperson and 12 public and 12 media members. Media members do not represent the outlets they work for; they participate as independent professionals. The Council is the oldest and most active council in the US. It has had four state supreme court justices (all sitting judges) as chairmen. Bob Shaw, a founding member of the Council, says judges are good because they exude authority and know how to run a hearing, and they command prestige.[384] The News Council receives and adjudicates on complaints. It will hold a hearing if the media outlet refuses to take action to satisfy the complainant, or the complainant feels that the action taken was inadequate, and the complainant waives the right to sue. The news outlet may decline to attend, but the hearing will proceed anyway. The adjudication process is on a case-by-case basis, without any reference to any code or guidelines. The news outlet involved in the complaint is encouraged to report the determination. The Council can only use adverse publicity as penalties for violations of good journalistic practice.
11.107 Washington State[385]– The Washington News Council (WNC) is a voluntary, independent and non-partisan organisation formed by a group of concerned citizens. The nomination and application process when it first set up was open and widely publicised. Almost 1,000 nomination forms were mailed or faxed to the media and to citizens statewide. Anyone could nominate up to three people: one media, one public, plus themselves in either category. 180 nominations were received from all over the state, about equally divided between media and public members. About half of those in each group were self-nominated. Every nominee was mailed an application form, along with a personal letter explaining the responsibilities of Council membership and a page describing the Council's anticipated first-year activities. Applicants were also asked to submit a brief resume. In the end, 65 applications were received and a Selection Committee was named to assess the applications.
11.108 Start-up funding for the Council was provided by foundations, corporations, associations and individuals across the state of Washington, but the major support has come from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. The mission of the WNC is to help maintain public trust and confidence in the news media by promoting fairness, accuracy and balance. If a reader, viewer or listener feels personally harmed by a story that has been written or broadcast about him, and believes it is inaccurate, unfair or incomplete, he may file a complaint with the Council. He must first agree not to sue the media outlet for libel or other damages.
11.109 Members of the WNC participate in hearings, forums and other events. They also serve as the Board of Directors, overseeing the organisation's staff, operations and budget. The Council and, hence, the Board are divided evenly between Media Members and Public Members. The Public Members include business people, a representative of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, a professor of public affairs, a citizen activist, a principal, a farmer and a teacher. The Chair is the former Chief Justice of the Washington State Supreme Court. The WNC has no authority to order any news organisation to do, or not do, anything. Its purpose is to generate public discussion of the issues raised in complaints. The Council's only weapon is whatever publicity is given to its hearings.
11.110 The press council in Finland was founded in 1927, making it the second oldest in the world. It was reconstituted in 1968 as the Council for Mass Media (CMM), which is a self-regulatory body for publishers and journalists in the mass media, including the print media, the broadcast media and, recently, the Internet. Its task is to interpret good professional practice and defend freedom of speech and of publication. The CMM comprises a chairman and nine members. Of the nine members, three are nominated by journalists' associations and three are by editors' associations. These six media representatives are appointed by a selection committee, which comprises representatives of media organisations affiliated to the CMM. The remaining three members represent the public. These public members are selected by a special sub-committee instead of co-opted by the media members prior to the reform in 1998.
11.111 A complaint may be filed by any individual requesting the investigation of a breach of good professional practice or a question of freedom of speech or publication. The complaint need not come from a person directly affected by information that has been published. However, the CMM may not take up a case against the will of the party affected unless particularly pressing reasons exist. If the complainant is involved in a related criminal or civil case in a court of law, the Council would not take up the matter or would terminate its deliberation during those legal proceedings. Apart from dealing with complaints, the CMM may, on its own initiative, bring up an issue concerning the freedom to publish, or raise a matter of principle relating to good journalistic practice.
11.112 The Council applies the code of practice adopted by the Union of Journalists in Finland. Any media organisation which has been found to have violated good journalistic practice must publish the findings and decisions of the Council promptly and without comments. So far this has happened almost without exception. The findings and decisions are also published in the journal of the journalists' union. The Council is generally respected by the Finnish journalists. A survey in 1994 among members of the journalists' union shows that 84% were satisfied with its decisions
11.113 The Council is funded by the Council for Mass Media Relief Association by way of annual fees, but the Association may accept state assistance in support of the functions of the Council. The CMM is therefore jointly funded by the professional organisations and the state. In 1998, about half of the Council's costs were paid by the member organisations, while the other half were met by the Finnish Government. Ari Heinonen advises that state funding does not endanger the Council's independence because it is merely part of the regular aid for non-governmental organisations. The state has only a financing role. It is excluded from the working of the council.
11.114 In 1952, the Federal Ministry of the Interior drew up a draft Federal Press Act which would provide for the establishment of a self-regulatory body in the form of a corporation under the Civil Code. Although the legislation did not come into existence, four associations of journalists and publishers (namely, the Association of German Newspaper Publishers;[388] Association of German Magazine Publishers; German Journalists' Association; and the Trade Union of Journalists) founded the German Press Council in 1956.
11.115 The German Press Council (GPC) operates in accordance with the 1985 constitution of the Association of the Sponsors of the GPC, the general assembly of which consists of two representatives of each of the four supporting associations. The GPC consists of 20 members, half of them representing the publishers and the other half representing journalists. Each of the four supporting associations nominates five members who are active in the German press either in publishing or journalism but members appointed to the Council are independent of the delegating associations.
11.116 The Association of the Sponsors of the GPC has provided for the establishment of a Complaints Committee, which consists of 10 members elected from the Council. The Committee consists of publishers and journalists who are appointed in equal numbers on the recommendation of the four supporting associations. Every year, the chairmanship of the committees alternates in turn among the four supporting associations. In January 2002, the GPC set up another complaints committee to deal specifically with complaints about improper handling of personal data by an editorial office.
11.117 Anyone may file a complaint with the GPC about publications or events depicted in the German press. The Council itself may also initiate complaint proceedings. Complaints are examined on the basis of the Press Code, which was first drawn up by the GPC in collaboration with the press associations and presented to the Federal President in 1973. The Council is also responsible for the editorial content of the on-line services of publishing houses.
11.118 Complaints are first dealt with by the Chairperson of the Complaints Committee. Cases that are not clearly ill-founded are referred to the Complaints Committee for consideration. Complaints of fundamental significance are forwarded to the plenum of the GPC for adjudication. As a rule, a complaint will not be handled if a ruling on the matter could influence the outcome of a pending criminal investigation or court case. The Federal Parliament enacted a law in 1976 to facilitate the work of the Complaints Committee and to guarantee the Committee's independence.[389]
11.119 If a complaint is justified, the Complaints Committee may issue a public reprimand; a censure; or an advice for the editorial staff. Newspapers and magazines participating in the self-regulatory system are under a moral obligation to publish public reprimands. Generally speaking roughly 90% of German publishers have signed a declaration undertaking to publish any opinion or reprimands that might be issued by the GPC.[390] The Committee can waive the obligation to publish if it is necessary to protect the interests of an affected person. About two thirds of the complaints are dealt with at an early stage without a formal decision of the Committee. The Council publishes an annual report, which is respected by the members.[391]
11.120 The Federal Parliament and Government support GPC with federal funds by supplying a maximum of 49% of the funds necessary for its operation. By virtue of the Law for Guaranteeing the Independence of the Complaints Committee of the Press Council enacted in 1976, the GPC received a fund from the Federal Government every year to guarantee its independence in "working on, discovering and removing defects" within the press. The fund is appropriated for the work of the Complaints Committee, and the amount is DM240,000 in recent years. The federal fund from the Ministry of the Interior represented about 45% of the budget of the Council in 1997 but has been dropped to about 30% in 2001. The Ministry of the Interior does not have any influence over how the money is used nor does it interfere with the work of the Council.
11.121 Gustaf von Dewall reported in 1997 that some had criticised the GPC as a "toothless tiger" on the ground that it had no power to enforce its sanctions and the sanctions were not sufficient to deter publishers. He noted that 13 public reprimands were issued in 1995 but five of them were never published. Several newspapers had no objection to publishing the adjudications so long as they agreed with the criticism, but not if they disagreed. He also reported that the critical adjudications were published by very few newspapers, suggesting that the public were not aware of the Council's activities. Gustaf von Dewall therefore concluded that the GPC was not an efficient regulator. He stressed that for self-regulation to be effective, all newspapers must participate in the system.[392]
11.122 However, the GPC advised the Privacy sub-committee in June 2002 that the Council was more effectively in recent years. Not only had the number of complaints risen steadily from 1998 to 2001, more and more people and institutions also sought their advice. The Council also clarified that almost all newspapers that had signed the undertaking published the public reprimands whether or not they agreed with the decisions. In some cases, even newspapers that had not signed the undertaking also published a reprimand if they received one. Nonetheless, the GPC admitted that although newspapers with a high standard invariably published the reprimands, there were poor quality newspapers that had signed the undertaking but refused to publish them. In addition, there are publishers that have not signed and will not publish a reprimand issued against them.[393]
11.123 Regulation of ethics in journalism is based on Law no. 69 of 3 February 1963, which sets up regional professional bodies (the Regional Councils of the Order of Journalists) as well as a National Council of the Order of Journalists. The Regional Orders are composed of six professional journalists and three publishers from each region. They are responsible for controlling the qualifications of journalists before registering them in the roll. They also have the power to punish professional abuses, to supervise the behaviour and the integrity of journalists, and to impose sanctions when a journalist registered in the roll acts in a manner contrary to the prestige and dignity of the profession. Thus, Regional Orders may issue an oral warning or reprimand, suspend a journalist from practising for a short period of time, or even expel him from the Orders.
11.124 The National Council of the Order co-ordinates the Regional Orders' activities and functions as an organ of appeal against the disciplinary sanctions decided by the Regional Orders. It is also possible to appeal against the decision of the National Order via the regional court where the relevant Regional Order is seated all the way up to the Court of Appeal and the High Court.
11.125 The Orders have been criticised by some for being the bureaucratic instrument of a powerful guild which does not allow the free exercise of freedom of expression, and which does not guarantee professionalism and respect for the ethical rules. Against this background the National Order and the National Federation of the Italian Press (FNSI) adopted the Charter of Duties of Journalists in 1993. Although the Charter is a set of regulations established on a voluntary basis by the Order, its sanctions have the backing of statutory regulation.
11.126 In 1994, the National Order and the FNSI established the National Committee for Accuracy and Reliability of Information. Its members are appointed by the President of the National Order and the President of the FNSI. The Committee consists of five members, comprising a judge who is also the chairman, two journalists, a representative of the National Council of Radio-Television and Telecommunication Users, and a representative of the Committee for the Protection of Minors and the Weak. Publishers and the media industry did not participate in the establishment of the Committee.
11.127 Anyone who believes that he has been prejudiced by media reports, or who believes that the behaviour of a particular journalist is in breach of the principles set out in the Charter, can file a complaint with the Committee. If the complaint is valid, the Committee notifies the appropriate Regional Order. The Regional Order can then decide whether to commence disciplinary proceedings under the Law of 1963. The Order is, however, under no obligation to do so. The Committee functions as a centralised body of inquiry, but it is not clear how far the Regional Orders are bound by its decisions and whether or not they are prevented from making their own investigations. In any event, the Committee informs the editor of the newspaper about its decision, and asks the newspaper to publish it promptly with the same prominence as the report that triggered the Committee's involvement. If the editor does not agree, the Committee will publish it by other means, including in the journal edited by the Order.
11.128 According to Gustaf von Dewall, there is a lack of confidence on the part of both politicians and the press in the ability of the Orders to supervise press ethics. The public is generally unaware both of the Charter and of the possibility of filing a complaint with the Orders. Journalists themselves also feel that the Orders do not amount to an effective regulator nor to a promoter of press ethics. Instead they are seen as bureaucratic bodies that serve to maintain a "closed shop" style of journalism. The Orders have, however, become more active in the nineties, but this seems to be mainly because of outside pressure, both from the public and from a pressure group of journalists.[395]
11.129 The self-regulatory Media Council of Kenya was launched in 2002. It has 17 members, half of whom are media practitioners and the other half are lay people. Members representing the public include an author, a lawyer, an educationist, an ambassador, a university lecturer and the former Kenyan ambassador to Sweden. Those representing the media include newspaper owners and editors, a journalism lecturer, the Secretary-General of the Kenya Union of Journalists, and the Director of Information. The training institutions are represented by a lecturer. The Media Owners Association has promised to assist the Council financially but noted that their success will depend on their integrity.
11.130 The principal activity of Quebec Press Council (QPC) is adjudicating complaints about infringements of the public's right to complete and honest information, or of press freedom. Its Board of Directors has 22 members – seven designated by management organisations, seven designated by journalists' organisations, and eight members of the public (including the Chairman). Unlike the other major Canadian press councils, which accept complaints only against member newspapers, QPC accepts complaints against any news organisation, even those that are not members of its constituent organisations. It also welcomes complaints from journalists who believe they have been hindered in their work. The parties generally represent themselves, without the aid of a lawyer.
11.131 The complainant need not be an individual or organisation who has been directly involved in a dispute. Any individual, group, or organisation that believes its right to information has been infringed may complain. The underlying assumption is that low-quality information harms all consumers of information, and thus any consumer of information has the right to complain. He need not be identified in the offending media content.
11.132 The Council has a Complaints Committee that has nine members from the Board of Directors: three members appointed by journalists' organisations, three appointed by management organisations, and three representatives of the public. A complainant dissatisfied with the decision may appeal to an Appeals Board. The QPC has no legal power to enforce its decisions, nor does it impose any sanctions. It can do little more than publicise its decisions in the hope that publicity about violations of ethical principles will educate and influence journalists. Pritchard stated in 1991 that the Council has won widespread praise for being dynamic and effective.[398] The QPC is funded by the industry, but it also receives some funding from the Government.[399]
11.133 The Newspaper Society, the Editors Guild and the Free Media Movement established a Press Complaints Commission (PCC) in 2003 to hear complaints by the public against any wrongful acts or omissions by newspapers. The Commission is also responsible for the implementation of the Code of Professional Practice drawn up by the Editors' Guild and adopted by the Sri Lanka Press Institute, which is the umbrella body of the three media organisations.
11.134 The Commission comprises 11 members, six (including the Chairman) from the community at large and five from the press. The first Chairman was formerly the Secretary-General of Parliament and a former Ombudsman. A Director-General mediates and settles disputes between the public and the press in the first instance, failing which the Commission will settle the disputes by arbitration. A decision of the PCC may be enforced through the courts under the Arbitration Act if the offending newspaper does not comply. Since start-up costs are too heavy for the local press to carry, the Government will provide a large part of the funds necessary to establish the PCC. This will be done by re-routing the existing statutory Press Council's budget and by using the state press' portion of the publishers' levy.[401] The statutory Press Council (discussed below) will be abolished in the near future.
11.135 The Press Council in Bangladesh is a quasi-judicial body established by the Press Council Act 1974 with the twin aims of preserving the freedom of the press and maintaining and improving the standard of newspapers and news agencies in Bangladesh. The Council consists of a Chairman and 14 members. The Chairman is nominated by the President of Bangladesh and must be a person who is, or is qualified to be appointed as, a judge of the Supreme Court of Bangladesh. The remaining 14 members are chosen from a wide range of backgrounds, including:
(a) three working journalists nominated by such association of working journalists as the Chairman may notify (ie, the Bangladesh Union of Journalists);
(b) three editors nominated by such association of editors as the Chairman may notify (ie, the Council of Editors);
(c) three owners or managers of newspapers and news agencies nominated by such association of owners or managers of newspapers and news agencies as the Chairman may notify (ie the Association of Owners of Newspapers and News Agencies);
(d) three experts in the field of education, science, art, literature and law of whom respectively one shall be nominated by the University Grants Commission, one by the Bangla Academy and one by the Bangladesh Bar Council; and
(e) two Members of Parliament nominated by the Speaker of Parliament.
11.136 Before notifying any association under (a), (b) or (c), the Chairman must consult such associations, individuals and interests concerned as he thinks fit. Where a nomination body fails to send the names of its nominees to the Chairman when invited by him to do so, or where a nominating body does not exist for the time being, the Chairman may nominate members to represent the category concerned. The names of persons nominated by the Chairman are notified in the official gazette and the nominations take effect from the date on which they are so notified.
11.137 The Council has the power to entertain and adjudicate complaints on any matter falling within its mandate, whether on receipt of a complaint made to it or otherwise. If a complaint discloses a prima facie case of violation of journalistic ethics, the Council would, after giving the newspaper or news agency an opportunity of being heard, hold an inquiry into the complaint. The Council has the same powers as a civil court, so that it can summon and enforce the attendance of witnesses, require the production of documents, receive evidence on affidavits, requisition any public record and issue commissions for the examination of witnesses. The Council cannot, however, hold an inquiry into any matter which is pending before a court. The Government may pay to the Council in each financial year such sums as may be considered necessary for the performance of the functions of the Council.
11.138 If the Council upholds the complaint, it may warn, admonish or censure the newspaper, news agency, editor or journalist concerned and require the newspaper to publish its findings. It cannot compel an offending newspaper to publish its judgment against the newspaper. The Council and its members are immune from legal actions in respect of anything that is done under the Press Council Act in good faith. Newspaper reports of matters published under the authority of the Council are also absolutely privileged. Given the lack of real sanctions, the strength of the Council lies in whatever moral force it can exert in making the industry abide by that the code. According to Tawhidul Anwar, there is "widespread agreement" that the Council has, on the whole, performed that task reasonably well,[403] but Victor Gunewardena comments that communication ethics tend to be disregarded in Bangladesh, and the Press Council "seem[s] to be regarded with defiance".[404]
11.139 Although Belgium does not have a national press council,[406] a regional media council known as the Council of the Flemish Media was created in the Flemish community by a decree of 2 March 1985. It is an official body established and financed entirely by the state to express an opinion on media topics. Its jurisdiction extends to the print and broadcast media. It has a president and a general assembly of 30 members elected by associations representing the proprietors, editors and journalists. There is also a committee of experts consisting of 10 members representing editors, trade unions, news agencies, the audio-visual sector and political authorities. The committee of experts only provides technical assistance to the general assembly. Apart from dealing with complaints from the public, the Council may also give an opinion at the request of the Government or on its own initiative. However, the Council does not base its opinion on any code, nor does it have any sanctions apart from the publication of its opinion.
11.140 The publishers in Denmark established a press council in 1964 that acted only on complaints brought to its notice. Since it operated through the voluntary compliance of publishers, the council had not been successful in making press self-regulation effective. As a result, the Government had to take legislative measures and took control of the council.[408] The current Danish Press Council (DPC) is established in accordance with the Media Liability Act 1991 (also known as the Law on the Responsibility of the Media). Before the Act was enacted, representatives of the press, the Union of Danish Journalists, the Ministry of Justice, the Law Society and the Council of the Danish Bar took part in the work of the committee that produced a report that formed the basis of the Media Liability Bill. The DPC has jurisdiction over the following mass media: (a) newspapers, daily papers, weekly magazines, local papers, professional papers and other national, periodical publications which are published at least twice a year; and (b) Danmarks Radio (Danish Broadcasting Corporation), TV2, TV2's regional enterprises, and undertakings authorized in Denmark to broadcast radio or television programmes.
11.141 The DPC is an independent public tribunal. It comprises a chairman, a vice-chairman and six other members appointed by the Minister for Jus