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) 2013/10/27 11:04:28 China Journalists Association： if reporters Chen Yongzhou was not offending the police let people
Chen Yongzhou was arrested on the new express the Beijing News events, yesterday told reporters the China Journalists Association official. According to reports, around October 22, journalist Association of Guangdong Province and the new Express newspaper informed about China Journalist Association, asking for help. That night, the China journalists association involved in this matter, to the propaganda Department of Hunan province, and provincial journalist to understand the situation and revert to journalists and the new Express newspaper in Guangdong Province. Yesterday afternoon, the China Journalists Association to the General Office of the Ministry of public security and information, put forward different views and deal with the matter according to law and justice, and guarantee the safety of journalists, prevent forced confessions, in the absence of hard evidence, in accordance with the principle of presumption of innocence to expedite the release of the journalists.
The official said, according to information provided by the new Express now, Chen Yongzhou belong to official conduct, public security departments have not found the reporter had provided evidence of the violation. On the premise of no evidence, journalists should not normally perform their duties done presumption of guilt, the implementation of wanted and were arrested.
State press and publication administration official in an interview with reporters of the newspaper Division, said the Administration had taken note of the Express News reporter is criminal detention, has passed the local administrative Department of press and publication information, and coordinate the relevant departments to ensure that fair and properly handle the matter.
Experts say
"The damage to business reputation, Sin bar very high"
Law School of China University of politics and law, he Bing, Vice President believes that inter-regional criminal detention and arrest by the police should be normal behavior, since there may be regional personnel and the personnel disputes within the region and outside of unlawful behaviour. Case is about press reports are true, as to constitute a crime of damaging business reputation very high threshold, if they do not have sufficient evidence to prove that, the case should be a tort.
He Bing, constitute a crime of damaging business reputation are three basic areas. First of all, press reports would be a gross exaggeration, or cannot constitute a crime; Secondly, the police have sufficient evidence to prove that the other party is subjective which is deliberately discrediting reports, knowing the truth deliberately fabricated; in addition, reported the results to the company did suffer a loss. "If you do not meet the above three points, even if parts of the reports to be inaccurate, only is within the civil litigation. ”
"Criminal detention by the police journalists newspaper should be informed"
Renmin University law school said Liu junhai, Director of the Institute, from the area of the law, reporters at the newspaper article, which itself is an act of duty, in this case, newspapers and individual journalists ought to be one, is criminal detention by public security organs individual journalists, failing to notify the newspaper is definitely inappropriate.
Juntai law firm Beijing Guo Zhaoli says, "for the media, relevant departments should be used with caution for the offence. "Guo said media coverage of listed companies engaged in the supervision process, sometimes the information is not necessarily very comprehensive, if required must be comprehensive and objective reports, apparently are too harsh. If there are some deviations were reported criminal detention, media monitoring and interviews will inevitably damage the normal order.
Guo suggested that under the crime situation does not constitute damage to business reputation, if companies believe bias exists in the media and violence against business interests, companies can go to court the media, safeguard their rights and interests through legal means.
Related news
Zoomlion in the new newspaper against defamation dispute in the case
Zoomlion ex situ trials were connected
AP Guangzhou Tianhe District Court 23rd external communications, the August 6, 2013, respectively accepted the plaintiff's new newspapers complain Ko Fai Chen Yongzhou, Guangdong and zoomlion Corporation reputation infringement disputes in both cases. After objection to jurisdiction raised by the defendant, refer the case to the yuelu District Court, has been dismissed by the Court. At present, the case is still at the trial stage.
According to the Bulletin of the Tianhe District Court, two plaintiffs to defendants zoomlion Assistant Ko Fai, Chairman of July 2013 several times in the certification of the Sina weibo microblog of the published content of the plaintiff's personal attacks in a row, caused great harm to their physical, mental and social reputation from the Tianhe District Court reputation litigation.
Defendants Ko Fai, Center, zoomlion was incorporated in his defence during the objection to jurisdiction.
Both defendants said the honour dispute in the present case, plaintiff Chen Yongzhou, domicile are outside the new newspaper in Guangdong Tianhe district, Ko Fai's habitual residence and zoomlion corporation domiciled in yuelu district of Changsha city. Therefore, yuelu district, Changsha city, Hunan province, requesting the case to be transferred to the people's Court for trial.
Tianhe District Court after hearing concluded that: the plaintiff's residence or domicile, "Tianhe yuancun erheng" can be identified as the result of infringement occurred. The plaintiffs presented its new express business in Guangdong Province, Tianhe district, Guangzhou City, and the offices are located. Therefore, Tianhe district, Guangzhou City for violations.
Tianhe District Court on October 22, dismissing the defendant Ko Fai, zoomlion according to law limited the objection to jurisdiction in the present case.
Sound
Judge news reporting untruthful or not is subject to investigation, not all inaccuracy is equated with "damage to business reputation". Suspected Chen Yongzhou "also have their own problems", which is a disguised replacement of concept, if Chen Yongzhou police evidence of alleged extortion or bribery, you should use these two criminal detention on charges that he, not "caught".
--Dean of school of journalism and communication studies, Jinan University, a former President of the Journalists Association of Guangdong province to Fan Kam
Harm the business reputation generally occurs between competitors, generally negative reports of the journalist does not constitute an offence in this second offence of damage to business reputation of intentional crime, that is known to be deliberately spread false facts or fabricate facts, if no proof Xinhua News deliberately fabricated false news, cannot be said to reporters suspected of offences in this regard.
--South China University of technology school of law Professor Xu Songlin
According to Xinhua News Agency
(Original title: China Journalist Association reporter without offending the police let people)
新京报讯 就《新快报》陈永洲被拘捕事件，昨天记者采访了中国记协有关负责人。据介绍，10月22日晚7时左右，广东省记协和新快报社把此事告知中国记协，请求帮助。当晚，中国记协介入此事，向湖南省宣传部门和省记协了解情况，并回复广东省记协和新快报社。昨天下午，中国记协又向公安部办公厅了解情况，提出不同意见，并要求依法公正处理此事，保证记者人身安全，防止刑讯逼供，如无确凿证据，应按照无罪推定原则，尽快释放当事记者。
该负责人表示，目前就《新快报》提供的资料显示，陈永洲的行为属于职务行为，公安部门也未提供发现该记者有违法行为的证据。在没有证据的前提下，不应当对正常履行职务的记者做有罪推定，实行通缉和拘捕。
国家新闻出版广电总局新闻报刊司有关负责人在接受媒体记者采访时表示，总局已注意到《新快报》记者被刑拘的事情，目前已通过地方新闻出版行政部门了解情况，并协调有关部门确保公正、稳妥处理此事。
■ 专家说法
“损害商业信誉罪门槛很高”
中国政法大学法学院副院长何兵认为，警方跨区域刑拘和抓人应是正常的行为，因为可能存在区域外的人员和区域内人员产生纠纷并违法的行为。案件的关键在于记者的报道是否属实，因为要构成损害商业信誉罪的门槛很高，如果警方没有充分的证据证明，案件就应该是民事侵权。
何兵表示，构成损害商业信誉罪的条件一般来自三个方面。首先，记者的报道得是严重失实，不然构成不了犯罪；其次，警方要有充分的证据证明对方是主观上属蓄意抹黑的报道，明知道不是事实故意捏造；此外，报道的结果对公司的确蒙受损失。“如果达不到以上三点，即使报道有失实的部分，也只能属民事诉讼范围。”
“警方刑拘记者应告知报社”
人民大学商法学院研究所所长刘俊海表示，从法律范畴来说，记者在报纸上发表了文章，本身是一种职务行为，在此情况下，报社和记者个人应该是一体的，如果公安机关只是刑拘记者个人，没有知会报社，肯定是不合适的。
北京市君泰律师事务所律师郭昭利称，“针对媒体，有关部门应慎用该罪名。”郭律师称，媒体记者在对上市公司等从事监督报道的过程中，有时所掌握的资料不一定非常全面，如果要求必须全面客观才能报道，显然过于苛刻。如果因为报道存在一些偏差就被刑拘，必然会损害正常的媒体监督和采访秩序。
郭律师建议，在不构成损害商业信誉罪情况下，如果企业认为媒体报道中存在偏差并侵害企业利益，企业可向法院起诉该媒体，通过法律手段维护自身权益。
■ 相关新闻
新快报社诉中联重科名誉侵权纠纷在审理
中联重科请求易地审理被驳
据新华社电 广州市天河区法院23日对外通报，该院分别于2013年8月6日、8月7日受理原告陈永洲、广东新快报社诉高辉及中联重科股份有限公司名誉侵权纠纷两案。后被告提出管辖权异议，请求将案件移送至长沙市岳麓区法院审理，现已被法院驳回。目前，案件仍在审理阶段。
据天河区法院通报，两原告以被告中联重科股份有限公司董事长助理高辉于2013年7月多次在其实名认证的新浪微博上连续发布对原告人身攻击内容的微博，对其身心及社会名誉造成极大伤害为由，向天河区人民法院提起名誉权纠纷诉讼。
被告高辉、中联重科股份有限公司在提交答辩状期间提出管辖权异议。
两被告称，本案为名誉权纠纷，原告陈永洲、广东新快报社的住所地均不在天河区，高辉的经常居住地和中联重科股份有限公司的住所地在长沙市岳麓区。因此请求将本案移送至湖南省长沙市岳麓区人民法院审理。
天河区法院经审理认为：原告住所地即户籍所在地“广州市天河区员村二横路”可认定为侵权结果发生地。原告广东新快报社提出其营业地和办事机构所在地是广州市天河区。因此，广州市天河区为侵权行为地。
天河区法院已于10月22日依法裁定驳回被告高辉、中联重科股份有限公司对本案管辖权提出的异议。
声 音
判断新闻报道失实与否，必须经过调查研究，并非所有的报道失实都等同于“损害商业信誉”。至于怀疑陈永洲“本身也有问题”，这属于偷换概念，如果警方掌握了陈永洲涉嫌敲诈勒索或受贿的证据，应使用这两个罪名刑拘他，而不能“先抓后审”。
——暨南大学新闻与传播学院院长、曾任广东省新闻工作者协会主席 范以锦
损害商业信誉行为一般发生在竞争对手之间，一般来说记者的负面报道并不至于构成这个罪名；其次损害商业信誉罪属于故意犯罪，即明知是虚假事实而故意散布或捏造事实，如果不能证明记者的新闻报道故意捏造虚假消息，就不能说记者涉嫌这方面的罪名。
——华南理工大学法学院教授徐松林
据新华社
(原标题：中国记协 若记者未违规警方快放人)
赞