More repudiations of the court that prevented an Infobae journalist from covering the trial against the Boca bar Rafael Di Zeo

Rafa Di Zeo leaving the courts (Luciano González)

The decision of the Oral Court 13, made up of judges Diego Leif Guardia, Adolfo Calvete and Enrique Gamboawhich prevents a journalist from infobae continue covering the oral trial against raphael dizeoformer leader of the club’s barra brava Boca Juniors, continues to add rejections.

The Inter-American Press Association (SIP) criticized the magistrates on Wednesday and argued that the decision sets a negative precedent for press freedom in the country.

Judges Guardia, Calvete and Gamboa accepted a proposal from Di Zeo’s lawyer, Diego Storto, who, in disagreement with the way in which the journalist reflected the innumerable contradictions that took place in the trial, asked that he could not continue attending under the formality of the possible “influence” that the publications could generate in the witnesses to come. Unusually, the Court did not notify the rest of the parties for their opinion and defined orally, without leaving the decision in writing, in another irregularity so that everything happens without much noise.

The president of the IAPA, Michael Greensonand the president of the Committee on Freedom of the Press and Information, Carlos Jornetthey questioned the decision of the court, which they considered “an act of discrimination and censorship of the free exercise of journalism”, especially when it comes to public judicial processes.

Greenspon, global director of Printing Licensing and Innovation of The New York Times Company, of New York, United States, and Jornet, director of the Cordovan newspaper La Voz del Interior, warned about the decision that “creates a negative precedent for press freedom by granting a court the power to decide who or what is authorized to cover matters of public interest”.

The unusual judicial decision also deserved the repudiation of the Argentine Journalism Forum (Fopea)which in a statement made it clear that prohibiting the coverage of a trial alters a fundamental principle in a rule of law and democracy, where the rule is the publicity of processes of public interest and secrecy is the exception.

It also generated the intervention of the Public Defender of Audiovisual Communication Serviceswhose head is Miriam Lewin and from the Legal Affairs Directorate because it sets a very serious precedent, and also from the head of the Chamber of Deputies’ Freedom of Expression Commission, Waldo Wolff.

When Argentina opted for the oral and public trial modality in 1992 under the enactment of Law 23,894, it was determined that a court could only revoke this mandate for reasons of security, public order or morality. And marking the contradictions, the oversights and the mendacity of various witnesses, facts for which Infobae was excluded from the debate under other formalities, does not appear among the grounds provided by law.

The Association of Journalistic Entities (ADEPA) added its concern. “Secret and concealment constitute the natural ecosystem of arbitrariness and misuse of power. That is why Article 1 of the National Constitution, by adopting a republican system, consecrates the publicity of government acts as an essential characteristic of our coexistence system ”, he assured.

“The acts of the judiciary, like all acts of government, must be public and be subject to the scrutiny and criticism of journalism and public opinion. Only in this way can the people carry out a real control of the performance of those who, in their name, exercise the power of the State”, he added.

“The aforementioned judicial decision takes us back to bygone times, in which administrative and judicial actions were not exposed to public scrutiny; depriving a procedural stage of information coverage that makes publicity a condition that gives it its name (oral and public trial), is a decision incompatible with articles 1, 14 and 32 of the National Constitution, as well as article 13 of the Pact of San José de Costa Rica”, completed Adepa.

Keep reading:

Serious court ruling prevents an Infobae journalist from covering the trial of Di Zeo at the request of the Boca bar
Policemen who praise bars, criminals who pass bills and weapons “of all caliber”: the incredible alternatives of the trial of Rafa Di Zeo
The disturbing story of Loco Arrieta: from getting to play in the First Division to being one of the sides of Rafa Di Zeo and Mauro Martín in the Boca bar
The trial against Rafa Di Zeo began for the battle of La Doce that ended with two deaths in 2013: the “army” that waited for him outside


#repudiations #court #prevented #Infobae #journalist #covering #trial #Boca #bar #Rafael #Zeo

Add Comment