This site will look much better in a browser that supports web standards, but it is accessible to any browser or Internet device.



blog0news


  • O BRASIL EH O QUE ME ENVENENA MAS EH O QUE ME CURA (LUIZ ANTONIO SIMAS)

  • Vislumbres

    Powered by Blogger

    Fragmentos de textos e imagens catadas nesta tela, capturadas desta web, varridas de jornais, revistas, livros, sons, filtradas pelos olhos e ouvidos e escorrendo pelos dedos para serem derramadas sobre as teclas... e viverem eterna e instanta neamente num logradouro digital. Desagua douro de pensa mentos.


    sexta-feira, maio 13, 2022

    Rubens Valente vs Brazil: The Risk of Reporting on Public Officials





    "Valente’s book attempts to expose corruption within Brazilian society by bringing to light documents and events previously unknown to the public. In particular, the book focuses on the case of banker Daniel Dantas, who was accused of financial corruption and attempted bribery. As a result of these accusations, the Brazilian Federal Police arrested Dantas. Gilmar Mendes, then president of the STF, ordered the release of Dantas on the same day of his arrest. New evidence was uncovered as a result of Dantas’ arrest and the first instance judge ordered a new arrest. Once again, Gilmar Mendes granted an application for habeas corpus within a few hours of this new arrest and ordered the release of Dantas. This sequence of arrests followed by quick release generated great interest among the public at the time. Valente tried to interview Mendes for the book throughout the year prior to publication, but did not receive a reply.

    Mendes filed a lawsuit against Valente soon after the publication of the book. He claimed that Valente wrote the book with clear defamatory intent, and requested compensation of R$200,000. The first instance judge initially rejected the claim, but after several appeals by Mendes, the STF validated the high court decision that Valente and the publisher should pay moral damages to Mendes. The judgment also ordered that any new edition of the book must include the full judgment as well as Mendes’ initial application to the court. In practical terms, this order, which would increase the number of pages by 30 percent, made any prospect of the book’s re-edition economically unviable and violated Valente’s intellectual property rights, as well as his right to free expression.!

    read more>> 

    Rubens Valente vs Brazil: The Risk of Reporting on Public Officials - Media Defence

    0 Comentários:

    Postar um comentário

    Assinar Postar comentários [Atom]

    << Home


    e o blog0news continua…
    visite a lista de arquivos na coluna da esquerda
    para passear pelos posts passados


    Mas uso mesmo é o

    ESTATÍSTICAS SITEMETER