Go homepage(回首页) Upload pictures (上传图片) Write articles (发文字帖)
The author:(作者)delvpublished in(发表于) 2013/10/26 11:02:40 Experts talk about Chen Yongzhou
Original title: "the offence of damage to business reputation" debate between the borders
Kan Jingxia, Director of journalist rights in China said the Association is working with related departments to communicated. Some experts believe that, "for the offence of damage to business reputation, who constitute this crime had to be the intentional dissemination of false information spread if it is negligence, should not constitute a crime"
Reporter Frank Wang
Trainee journalist Li Wei Beijing
October 22, in overtime Kan Jingxia received a phone call from the Director of journalist rights in China, called is the new newsletter and Association in Guangdong Province, Kan Jingxia already knows from the Internet, the Express News reporter Chen Yongzhou is criminal detention by police in Changsha city, "asking for our support."
Night of the China Journalists Association will find out from the Hunan provincial party Committee propaganda Department, the next day, and made contact with the Ministry of public security spokesman, "that both departments have been aware of the case," Kan Jingxia told this reporter.
About on October 22, Changsha City Public Security Bureau released Chen Yongzhou microblog message, describing them as "crimes on suspicion of damaging business reputation, on October 19 by police in Changsha detained according to law. At present, the case is under further review ".
On October 23, Changsha City Public Security Bureau told Xinhua said Chen Yongzhou fabricated involving zoomlion's three main facts: one is the fake zoomlion management buy-out of its good assets to indemnification, resulting in loss of State assets privatization. Two are fabricated zoomlion advertising 513 million a year spent, "monstrous marketing". Third, fabrications and slander zoomlion sales and financial fraud.
Zoomlion Assistant Du Feng told Xinhua that, the new express disputes and zoomlion, from "other serious false reports to us for a long time." After seeing these "false reports", the attitude against each other not around, no way to prove, zoomlion in June 2013, the head of a top newspaper led to new communication exclusively, wishes to clarify the facts, stop false reports, but without success. Zoomlion also made announcements to clarify, but successive "false reports".
Chen Yongzhou were not the first suspected to have committed a crime of harm the business reputation of reporters, "in recent years, was convicted of the crime reporters plenty," Zhu Wei, a researcher at the China University of communication Research Center, told reporters.
Border
According to October 23, the new express release statement, Chen Yongzhou events resulting from May 27, the new express publishes the zoomlion unannounced visits from the reporting of financial fraud journalists confirmed in central China region of alleged false sales, zoomlion last year reported in the central region were arrested for selling fake event.
The morning of October 17, Chen Yongzhou got a call from the police at the newspaper to work properly, said Chen would like to learn more about him after the theft. October 18 at about 9 o'clock in the morning, Chen Yongzhou and his wife came to the interview location, resulting in Changsha, was taken away by the police.
As with libel and damage the reputation of its crimes "crimes" and "undermine the credibility of business offence is an indictable offence, does not need to be prejudice to the prosecution", Zhu Wei, a researcher at China University of communication Research Centre told this reporter.
Chen Yongzhou is also not the first suspected of this crime reporter.
2002 l0 to November, Liaoning TV reporter carefully conspired with others made up the "dream treasure" mattress manufacturers use "black cotton" false news causing bodily harm and were carried out in Liaoning, Shenyang TV stations reported. In April 2003, well-planned by the Shenyang intermediate people's Court to the detriment of his goods offence punished with a fine of 20,000 yuan, and threatened with dismissal for disciplinary action.
Better known is the 2007 "cardboard-stuffed bun" event. August 12, 2007, Beijing second intermediate court "box paste buns" and, finally, Zi Beijia was concocting false news to damage the reputation of goods committed a crime, was sentenced to 1 year and fined L000 dollars.
"Cardboard box stuffed buns," not to harm the business reputation of a bun shop competitor or goods for the purpose of not brand-specific or manufacturer directly. However, criminal law and does not damage the reputation of the motives or objectives of goods, nor limit must be set for a specific business.
"News of somebody based on hearsay, fabricated explosive defects prevailing in certain types of electrical appliances in our country and in well-known magazines published false news, leading to an industry-wide reputation for such products have a serious impact, which of course could be to the detriment of goods be convicted and punished the crime", the Shanghai Procuratorate, a prosecutor said.
"Victim of libel against individuals, damage to business reputation are legal persons for the crime of", Zhu Wei said. Filing and standard because of its broad, undermines the credibility of commercial crimes have even been referred to as "Pocket". "But if actors that constitute this crime, had to be the intentional dissemination of false information spread if it is negligence, should not constitute a crime", Zhu Wei said.
From play to catch
On October 23, the Xinhua News Agency reported, China Journalist Association staff says, the Express News 22nd will inform China Journalist Association, China Journalists Association from the Hunan, Guangdong's propaganda about the situation, has been involved in the investigation.
"We did communicate with the Hunan provincial party Committee propaganda Department and the Ministry of public security, this is an ongoing investigation", Kan Jingxia, Director of journalist rights in China told this reporter.
As a journalist, industry self-regulatory organizations, approved by the China journalists association serving the domestic news organizations were employed in collecting and editing staff.
"If the journalist was innocent, neither illegal nor unethical, mind Association did not hesitate to defend the right journalists legal cover" Kan Jingxia said, "but this is the ideal situation."
"If journalists did not break the law, but part of the report is not true, from the ethical point, remember Association under the lawful rights and interests of the protection of journalists, to criticize them for education. "She said.
"The door is open for reporting false reporter, media, provincial journalist Association, the China Association of journalists and propaganda Department to report can be called or wrote" Kan Jingxia says, "don't get involved businesses which have no complaints, just reporting."
Maintain the head of media watchdog, Kan Jingxia, "about a decade ago, beat reporters, both enterprises and institutions, and private citizens are hitting, now caught many, many places will set a trap, plus some young inexperienced, greedy, eventually falling into delinquency situation."
2001 or even referred to as "journalist years", according to public reports, August 8, 1, two journalists of the Nanfang Dushi Bao in Shenzhen, ABA company interview, nearly 20 men were around. On October 20, the Chongqing business newspaper reporter Luo Xia at the time of interview and a nightclub on the wine market of manuscript, for refusing to Japan Unveils were entangled and beaten by several men. Additionally, there are several play press event occurs.
"Right of personality"
"The duty of journalists rights consists mainly of two parts: one is based on rights deriving from work, for example, reports, interviewing the right to rights", Zhu Wei, a researcher at China University of communication research centre said, "is based on the nature of work personal rights to special protection to journalists, pose a special risk to reporters, this is the special nature of occupation".
"But current domestic legislation, reporters have no special protection of the personality right", Zhu Wei told the reporter.
Zhu Wei believes that at a press conference, measure whether the infringement is the key factor in the job is at fault, "just follow the objective and impartial in its reporting of the facts reported, even the report itself caused some tort, journalist and media liability. ”
Beijing Foreign Studies University journalism professor Zhan Jiang himself had tried to persuade the party to give up criminal charges. A few years ago, widow of Director Xie Jin's thought of Public Security Department report accusing song Zude defamation, but Jiang, persuade them to court for civil action, "song Zude was indeed annoying, but sentenced him to compensation and a public apology can also be".
But for those who are against the business reputation of the enterprise, the "civil action is too slow, and hard to put. Instead, selecting a criminal prosecution, as long as the good relationship with the Public Security Bureau, and evidence generally incorporated ", Zhu Wei said.
Number of legal practitioners who told reporters, during the sensitive period, the Court will involve harmonization of civil cases are not even incorporated.
"Civil action even if the lawsuit succeeds, and few compensation received" Zhu Wei said. On October 23, he represented Sinopec "African Hustler" rumor reputation rights of victims first instance sentencing, the Court sentenced two defendants "IT business news network" "CDC" operators constitute an infringement and shall be liable, to the international career of China petrochemical materials and equipment company apologize to Zhang, and compensate the plaintiff mental distress soothing gold, 30,000 dollars and 15,000 dollars.
"But for the freedom of mankind, cannot be so easily", Jiang said, "would be cumbersome to use them, no matter what reporters do, public opinions quit first."
原标题：“损害商业信誉罪”边界之辩
中国记协权益处处长阚敬侠称，记协正在和相关部门进行沟通。有专家认为，“对于损害商业信誉罪，行为人若构成此罪，必须是故意散布虚假信息，如果是过失散布的，不应该构成犯罪”
本报记者 王峰
实习记者 李薇 北京报道
10月22日晚上7点，在单位加班的中国记协权益处处长阚敬侠接到一个电话，打来电话的是《新快报》和广东省记协，阚敬侠已经从网上知道，《新快报》记者陈永洲被长沙市警方刑拘，“请求我们的支持”。
中国记协当晚就向湖南省委宣传部了解了情况，第二天，又与公安部新闻发言人取得了联系，“这两个部门都已知道了这个案子”，阚敬侠告诉本报记者。
10月22日晚上7点半左右，长沙市公安局官方微博发布了陈永洲的消息，称其“因涉嫌损害商业信誉罪，已于10月19日被长沙警方依法刑事拘留。目前，案件正在进一步审查中”。
10月23日下午，长沙市公安局向新华社记者表示，陈永洲捏造的涉及中联重科的主要事实有三项：一是捏造中联重科的管理层收购旗下优质资产进行利益输送，造成国资流失，私有化。二是捏造中联重科一年花掉广告费5.13亿，搞“畸形营销”。三是捏造和污蔑中联重科销售和财务造假。
中联重科董事长助理杜峰对新华社记者表示，《新快报》与中联重科的纠纷，源于“对方对我们长期的严重失实报道”。在看到这些“不实报道”后，针对对方不实地采访、不求证的态度，中联重科一位高层负责人曾在2013年6月专门带队前往新快报社沟通，希望澄清事实、停止不实报道，但未果。中联重科也发过公告作出澄清，但对方依然连续进行“不实报道”。
陈永洲并不是第一个涉嫌触犯损害商业信誉罪的记者，“近年来，被判犯这个罪的记者很多”，中国政法大学传播法研究中心研究员朱巍告诉记者。
边界何在
根据10月23日下午《新快报》发布的声明，陈永洲事件起因于5月27日，《新快报》刊发了《中联重科再遭举报财务造假记者暗访证实华中大区涉嫌虚假销售》一文，报道了中联重科去年在华中大区涉嫌销售造假事件。
10月17日上午，在报社正常工作的陈永洲接到警方电话，称要向他了解关于此前陈宅失窃事。10月18日上午9时许，陈永洲与妻子共同来到约见地点，结果遭长沙警方带走。
同诽谤罪一样，损害商业信誉罪也是“因言获罪”的一种，“但损害商业信誉罪是公诉罪，不需被损害一方自诉”，中国政法大学传播法研究中心研究员朱巍告诉本报记者。
陈永洲也不是第一个涉嫌此罪的记者。
2002年l0至11月，辽宁电视台记者周密与他人合谋编造“梦宝”床垫生产厂家使用“黑心棉”，造成人身损害的虚假新闻，并分别在辽宁电视台、沈阳电视台进行报道。2003年4月，周密被沈阳中级法院以损害商品声誉罪判处罚金2万元，并受到开除公职的处分。
更为人所知的是2007年的“纸箱馅包子”事件。2007年8月12日，北京市第二中级法院审理了“纸箱馅包子”案，最终，虚假新闻炮制者訾北佳被以犯损害商品声誉罪，被一审判处有期徒刑1年，并处罚金l000元。
“纸箱馅包子”案并不以损害某家包子铺竞争对手的商业信誉或商品声誉为目的，也不直接针对具体商品品牌或生产厂家。但是，刑法并没有限定损害商品声誉的动机或目的，也没有限定行为必须针对特定的商家。
“比如某人根据道听途说的消息，捏造我国某类电器普遍存在易爆炸缺陷的虚假新闻并在知名杂志刊载，进而给全行业某类产品声誉造成严重影响，这种行为当然可以以损害商品声誉罪定罪处罚”，上海市检察院一名检察官说。
“诽谤罪针对的受害人是个人，损害商业信誉罪针对的则是法人”，朱巍说。正因其立案标准较为宽泛，损害商业信誉罪甚至被称为“口袋罪”。“但行为人若构成此罪，必须是故意散布虚假信息，如果是过失散布的，不应该构成犯罪”，朱巍说。
从打到抓
10月23日，新华社报道称，中国记协相关工作人员表示，《新快报》22日已将此事告知中国记协，中国记协随后从湖南、广东两地宣传部门了解了相关情况，已介入调查。
“我们与湖南省委宣传部和公安部做了沟通，这就是我们的调查工作”，中国记协权益处处长阚敬侠告诉本报记者。
作为一个记者的行业自律组织，中国记协服务于国内正式批准的新闻机构中被聘用的采编人员。
“如果记者是清白的，既没有违法，也没有违反职业道德，记协会毫不犹豫地维护记者的合法报道权利”，阚敬侠称，“但这是最理想的情况”。
“如果记者没有违法，但报道中有一部分内容不真实，从职业道德的角度，记协会在维护记者的合法权益下，对其进行批评教育。”她说。
“举报失实报道记者的大门是敞开的，记者所在的媒体、省记协、中国记协和宣传部门都可以，举报方式可以是打电话或写信”，阚敬侠称，“不明白涉事企业哪个部门都没投诉，就直接报案了”。
作为维护记者权益部门的负责人，阚敬侠感觉，“大约十年以前，打记者的行为多，不管是企事业机关，还是公民个人都敢打，而现在抓记者的多，很多地方会设圈套，再加上一些记者年轻没经验，又有贪心，最终陷入违法犯罪境遇”。
2001年甚至被称为“打记者年”，根据公开报道，那一年8月8日，《南方都市报》两名记者在深圳ABA公司采访时，遭到近20名男子围打。10月20日，《重庆商报》女记者罗侠在一家夜总会采写关于红酒市场的稿件时，因拒绝陪酒遭到几名男子的纠缠和殴打。此外尚有数起打记者事件发生。
“人格权”
“记者的职务权利主要由两部分组成，一是基于本职工作所衍生出来的权利，比如，报道权、采访权”，中国政法大学传播法研究中心研究员朱巍说，“另外则是基于工作性质对记者人身特别保护的权利，这是对记者职业特殊性质带来特殊风险的保护”。
“但目前国内在立法上，记者并没有特殊的人格权保护”，朱巍告诉本报记者。
朱巍认为，在记者职务中衡量侵权纠纷的关键因素在于是否有过错，“只要在报道中遵循客观公正的事实报道态度，即便是报道本身造成了一定侵权，记者和媒体也无需承担责任。”
北京外国语大学新闻学教授展江本人也曾劝说当事人放弃刑事起诉。几年前，导演谢晋的遗孀想到公安部门报案，指控宋祖德诽谤，但展江劝其到法院进行民事诉讼，“宋祖德当时的确很讨厌，但判他赔偿和公开道歉也就可以了”。
但对于那些被侵害商业信誉的企业来说，“民事诉讼太慢了，而且立案难。相反，选择刑事起诉，只要跟公安局的关系好，而且证据确凿，一般都能立案”，朱巍说。
一些法律实务界人士向本报记者介绍，在一些敏感时期，法院甚至会对涉及言论的民事案件统一不予立案。
“民事诉讼即使胜诉，获得的赔偿也很少”，朱巍说。10月23日，他代理的中石化“非洲牛郎门”谣言受害人名誉权维权案一审宣判，法院判处两被告“IT商业新闻网”“中华网”的运营商构成侵权并应承担责任，向中国石化物资装备部国际事业公司张某致歉，并分别赔偿原告精神损害抚慰金3万元和1.5万元。
“但针对言论治罪，轻易不能用”，展江说，“用了以后就会很麻烦，不管记者做了什么，社会舆论首先就不干”。
赞