VZCZCXRO6774
PP RUEHCHI RUEHNH RUEHPB
DE RUEHDT #0035/01 0200850
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 200850Z JAN 06
FM AMEMBASSY DILI
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 2184
INFO RUCNARF/ASEAN REGIONAL FORUM COLLECTIVE
RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK PRIORITY 0283
RUEHLI/AMEMBASSY LISBON PRIORITY 0258
RUEHBY/AMEMBASSY CANBERRA PRIORITY 0331
RUEHWL/AMEMBASSY WELLINGTON PRIORITY 0218
RUEHLO/AMEMBASSY LONDON PRIORITY 0143
RUEHDT/AMEMBASSY DILI 1497

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 04 DILI 000035 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPT FOR EAP/MTS AND DRL 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PHUM PGOV KPAO TT
SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO CRIMINALIZATION OF DEFAMATION IN NEW PENAL CODE 
 
 
DILI 00000035  001.2 OF 004 
 
 
Summary 
----------- 
 
¶1. (U) Last month the Council of Ministers announced their 
approval of a new penal code for East Timor.  The law is now in 
the hands of the President either to promulgate or to veto. 
Although no official copies of the law are available, leaked 
copies have been circulated among civil society organizations 
and the diplomatic community.  No other issue addressed in the 
new law has received as much attention in recent weeks as its 
inclusion of provisions criminalizing defamation.  Members of 
the media as well as other civil society organizations have 
expressed their opposition publicly and a number are organizing 
to lobby for its abolition from the final penal code.  Embassy 
sources indicate that criminalization of defamation is one of a 
few key issues that President Xanana Gusmao is reviewing in 
deciding whether or not to promulgate the law in its current 
form.  Ambassador Rees expressed concerns about the criminal 
defamation provisions in a conversation with President Gusmao 
this week.  Although the next step --- expressions of concern to 
the Government and/or members of Parliament --- should await the 
President's decision on whether to sign or veto the bill, the 
Embassy includes draft talking points which, unless directed 
otherwise, we will use in private conversations on an if-asked 
basis pending further developments.  These talking points might 
also provide useful background for a proposed January 24 meeting 
between the Secretary and President Gusmao.  The draft talking 
points are set forth in paragraph 11.  End summary. 
 
Proposed code 
-------------- 
 
¶2. (U) On December 6, 2005 the Council of Ministers announced 
their approval of a new penal code for East Timor.  Parliament 
had in July 2005 authorized the Government to draft the penal 
code as a decree law, thus bypassing the Parliamentary debate 
and negotiation involved in the normal legislative process.  The 
new penal code is intended to replace the Indonesian Penal Code 
that has continued to apply to date, albeit with some 
modifications by UNTAET (United Nations Transitional 
Administration in East Timor) regulations.  The new law still 
requires the President's signature in order to be promulgated 
and the Constitution stipulates that he has 40 days from receipt 
to either sign or veto the law.  According to Embassy sources he 
officially received it on December 27.  The text of the law is 
not publicly available and official Embassy requests to the 
Council of Ministers for a copy have to date been denied. 
However, the Embassy was able to obtain a copy of the 
Portuguese-language document that was apparently leaked from the 
Council of Ministers and has been circulated among civil society 
organizations and the diplomatic community. 
 
¶3. (U) The new penal code includes several provisions 
criminalizing defamation and providing for punishment in the 
form of prison sentences or fines.  Defamation is broadly 
defined as any expression (written, gesture, image or other 
means) that is directed to a third person offending the victim's 
"honor".  Of particular concern is that the most severe 
punishments are reserved for expressions concerning public 
figures in the media.  While the basic crime of defamation is 
punishable by up to one year imprisonment, the same offense when 
committed "by means of the media" and against persons 
"performing public, religious or political duties" is punishable 
by up to three years imprisonment.  The law appears to allow for 
no mitigating factors.  In contrast to the Portuguese penal 
code, on which it is purportedly modeled, it does not make 
allowances for statements made in the public interest or in good 
faith. 
 
Response 
--------- 
 
¶4. (U) Response to the Penal Code's criminal defamation 
provisions has been almost universally negative among 
journalists and other members of civil society.  The vast 
majority of journalists see the criminalization of defamation as 
a tangible setback in East Timor's democratic development, 
describing it as a law written primarily to protect political 
leaders from criticism.  Discouragingly, there is a general 
consensus among journalists here that the promulgation of this 
law would result in a significant increase in self-censorship. 
Many journalists already admit to practicing some measure of 
self-censorship in their reporting on political issues and 
comment that, with criminal defamation ensconced in national 
law, they will have to go the "easy route" if faced with the 
 
DILI 00000035  002.2 OF 004 
 
 
prospect of imprisonment.  In contrast, a number of the more 
experienced journalists, while expressing concern that 
self-censorship will come to pervade East Timor's media, state 
that the law will not affect their own reporting.  This group 
primarily comprises those who started their journalistic careers 
as independence activists and therefore were imprisoned at some 
point or at least lived with the constant risk of imprisonment. 
One such journalist noted with irony that his two and a half 
year prison term in Indonesia was based on criminal defamation 
charges under the Indonesian Penal Code for his participation in 
student demonstrations following the Santa Cruz massacre. 
 
Government reaction 
-------------------- 
 
¶5. (U) Government representatives, especially Prime Minister 
Mari Alkatiri who has been pushing publicly for its immediate 
promulgation, have defended the defamation law as necessary to 
protect people's "good names", noting that journalists and 
others should not be concerned about the law as long as they are 
reporting the truth.  However, many observers among media, civil 
society and international organizations believe that the law is 
primarily intended as a political tool.  They note the complete 
lack of public consultation by the Government in preparing the 
law as well as the timing of introducing such a law in the year 
before a potentially bitterly contested national election. 
 
¶6. (U) The application of criminal defamation charges to date 
appear to support this view.  Although East Timor's own penal 
code is not yet in effect, the defamation and subversion 
provisions of the Indonesian Penal Code have been used on 
several occasions to arrest private citizens for criticism of 
government officials or statements.  To date, these have been 
few in number and resulted in only short detentions followed by 
dismissals.  However, this week, the Prime Minister declared 
that he is charging the head of the Democratic Party (PD) with 
criminal defamation for statements made last week accusing the 
Prime Minister of corruption. 
 
Journalists concerned 
---------------------- 
 
¶7. (U) Although the Government's plans to criminalize defamation 
have been common knowledge for quite some time, the media 
community has until now done little as far as promoting public 
discussion or mobilizing opposition.  Some Embassy sources note 
with regret that prior to the Council of Ministers' 
announcement, the media community did not take the possibility 
of criminalization very seriously.  Moreover, the East Timorese 
news media lack a sense of community and have to date been 
unable to mobilize effectively around issues of common interest. 
 
¶8. (U) However, it appears that the Council of Ministers' 
announcement has served as something of a catalyst for East 
Timor's journalistic community and a significant number are now 
concentrating their energies on campaigning against the 
promulgation of the law.  On December 20, the Timor Leste 
Journalist Association (TLJA), with support from the Timor Leste 
Media Development Center (TLMDC) and the Southeast Asian Press 
Association (SEAPA), held a workshop to address the issue.  The 
workshop was reportedly attended by almost all of TLJA's members 
as well as most members of the competing press association, 
Syndicato.  Many attendees stayed only for the high-profile 
speeches, by Father Martino Gusmao representing civil society's 
opposition to the law and Minister of the Presidency of the 
Council of Ministers Antoninho Bianco, representing the 
Government's position.  However, a core group of about 15 
journalists remained behind to form a working group to campaign 
against the criminalization of defamation.  The journalist 
working group plans a press conference this coming Tuesday, 
January 24 at which they will issue a joint declaration and will 
request a meeting with President Gusmao on his return from his 
current travel in the U.S. 
 
¶9. (U) In addition, all four of East Timor's daily papers have 
published articles either directly criticizing the law or 
reporting on criticism of the law from opposition Members of 
Parliament and civil society organizations.  A weekly paper, Vox 
Populi, has dedicated its last two issues to the criminalization 
of defamation.  Despite this apparent unity, there are still 
some cracks apparent in the media community.  For example, Suara 
Timor Lorosae (STL), East Timor's oldest paper which takes a 
consistent anti-Government line, has had a long-standing split 
with TLJA and so far has not joined the working group to oppose 
the law, despite STL's own opposition to it. 
 
DILI 00000035  003.2 OF 004 
 
 
 
President could veto 
--------------------- 
 
¶10. (SBU) During a January 16 meeting in anticipation of his 
trip to the United States, President Gusmao mentioned to 
Ambassador Rees that he was now considering whether to sign or 
veto the penal code.  Ambassador Rees responded by expressing 
serious concerns about the criminal defamation provisions. 
President Gusmao responded that he had similar concerns, but 
that Prime Minister Alkatiri had insisted that criminal 
defamation laws do not violate the principle of free speech, 
pointing to the fact that many democratic countries have such 
laws.  Ambassador Rees responded that if President Gusmao were 
to veto the bill on constitutional grounds, it would trigger a 
constitutional review by the Court of Appeals, which is 
currently dominated by international judges from Portugal and 
might well uphold the law as constitutional.  Ambassador added, 
however, that if the President were to veto the law on policy 
grounds, it would then be up to Parliament to decide by a simple 
majority whether to accept or reject the offending provisions. 
In this case it is conceivable, although not likely, that a 
unified opposition plus a few independent-minded Fretilin 
members could unite to uphold the veto, and in any event the 
President would have made a powerful statement in favor of 
freedom and democracy. 
 
¶11. (SBU). In an earlier conversation with Emboff, the 
President's Chief of Staff Agio Pereira relayed that Gusmao is 
looking closely at the law with special attention to the 
defamation issue.  Pereira said that the President may consider 
vetoing the law on either constitutional or political grounds. 
According to Pereira, the Office of the President is relying on 
a number of legal sources for analysis of the law.  In 
particular he reported that it has been forwarded to a trusted 
Portuguese constitutional lawyer for review.  In addition, he 
said, they will solicit the advice of two UNOTIL (UN Office for 
East Timor) legal advisors due to begin working in the Office of 
the President at the end of January. 
 
Draft talking points 
--------------------- 
 
¶12. (U) Unless directed otherwise, Emboffs will use the 
following talking points in private conversations if asked 
whether the United States has a position on criminal defamation. 
 These might also form the basis of statements to members of the 
Government and/or Parliament after the President makes his 
decision about whether to sign or veto the law, and/or for a 
public statement if that were to become appropriate at some 
future stage in the process.  These points might also provide 
useful background for a proposed January 24 meeting between 
Secretary Rice and President Gusmao.  (Note: Foreign Minister 
 
SIPDIS 
Jose Ramos-Horta, an appointed member of the Prime Minister's 
cabinet who has often been an advocate within the cabinet for 
forward-looking policies, would also be present at the proposed 
meeting.)  Suggested talking points follow: 
 
-- The USG is seriously concerned that the penal code recently 
passed by the Council of Ministers and pending promulgation 
criminalizes defamation. 
 
-- We believe criminalizing defamation would be a step backwards 
in the development of democracy in East Timor because it is 
likely to have a chilling effect on freedom of speech and public 
discourse. 
 
-- This law could have a detrimental effect on legitimate 
journalistic endeavor and the existence of a free press.  A free 
press is a central pillar of any functioning democracy - this 
law would undermine this fundamental democratic freedom and 
risks stunting the development of a free press at a critical 
time in its history. 
 
-- We are very concerned that the law as written particularly 
targets the freedom of the press to scrutinize, report on, and 
criticize public figures.  Its most severe penalties are 
reserved for speech that concerns public figures, the very 
people about whom the public needs to be most informed. 
 
-- Last November it was our great pleasure to share the good 
news that East Timor had been selected as eligible for a 
Millennium Challenge Account (MCA) compact.  One of the key 
criteria for this selection was East Timor's demonstration of a 
commitment to good governance.  The defamation law, on the other 
 
DILI 00000035  004.2 OF 004 
 
 
hand, goes against the principles of democratic participation 
and transparency that are the core of good governance. 
 
-- We hope that these provisions will be deleted from the penal 
code before it is promulgated.  We encourage the Government of 
East Timor (GOET) to enter into constructive dialogue with the 
news media regarding the role of a free and responsible press in 
East Timor's democracy. 
 
-- East Timor has made great strides as a democracy in a very 
short time.  It would be very disappointing indeed if its 
leaders were now to choose to take such a backward step.Adopting 
this law would send the message  both to the people of East 
Timor and to the international community that East Timor's 
commitment to democracy and freedom has weakened.  We hope that 
instead the Government will send the message that this 
commitment will be redoubled as the country moves towards 
national elections next year. 
WHARTON