On 21 November 2009, Neto, who resides in Fortaleza, received notice that property would be seized to cover the sum, which, with indexation, amounts to almost R$20,700 (approx. US$11,900). Neto, however, has said, “I have no property, I am a journalism student and live with my parents.”

Penalty for comment
The case began in March, when the student posted a comment on his blog about the lack of coverage the local media gave to a fight between two students at the Colégio Santa Cecília, a traditional private school in Fortaleza.

An anonymous reader then posted a comment on the blog insulting the director of the school, the nun Eulália Maria Wanderley de Lima, and criticising her performance in dealing with the conflict between the students. This led the nun to initiate a lawsuit for “moral damages” against the blogger.

A decision in the case was delayed since De Lima did not attend the first four hearings and always justified her absence. At the fifth hearing, the nun was present, but Neto was absent and failed to present his arguments. “I got confused with the dates,” the student explained.

According to the news website G1, Neto has also missed the deadline for appealing the decision. The student has changed lawyers and now plans to try to have the court’s decision annulled or change the amount of the damages awarded.

According to De Lima’s lawyer, Helder Nascimento, filing a lawsuit was the only alternative possible. He claims that the day after the publication of the comment, his office asked Neto to delete it and hand over information about the person who wrote it. According to the lawyer, however, “The comment was deleted only after 16 days had passed.”

Neto, on the other hand, claims he deleted the comment as soon as he was approached by the lawyer in May, about two months after it was posted. “I remember it like it was yesterday. There were three calls within a week. By the time of the second call, the comment was already gone,” the blogger said.

Neto says that right after the first telephone call, he contacted the journalist’s syndicate in Ceará to ask for advice regarding whether he should or should not hand over information about the person responsible for the comment.

“I tried to reason in every moment. I thought it was better not to expose the nun or myself, but I had no answer regarding any possibility of retraction,” Neto said.

Nascimento, however, insists that the blogger resisted in deleting the comment. The lawyer said, “Due to the initial refusal, there was damage to Eulália’s image over a period of 16 days.”

Neto claims to have handed over information regarding the name and e-mail address of the person responsible for the comment, but he later found out that the information was fake.

The student’s view is that bloggers in Brazil are the “victims of a breech of justice” that makes it possible for them to be held responsible for comments posted on their blogs. “There is no specific legislation for the Internet. The sentence was handed down convicting the blogger,” he said.

The lawyer disagrees. In his opinion, the case of Neto need not be seen as a precedent. “In this specific situation, there was disrespect on the part of the blogger, causing damage to Ms. Eulália. This doesn’t mean, as is being said on many blogs, that each blogger would be legally responsible for all comments on a blog. Neto’s delay (in deleting the comment) made him responsible.”

In Brazil there is still is no specific legislation dealing with content posted on the Internet. “Since we do not have appropriate legislation, it can be a problem for freedom of expression. We may end up creating a fear for people to express themselves. Since this occurred, I moderate the site and am, on one hand, fearful of censoring someone, and on the other hand, fearful of facing charges,” Neto said.

Journalist caught in gunfire
On 27 November 2009, Pamela Martin, a reporter for RBS TV, was shot in the leg while she was working on a report about illegal fishing in Bocaína do Sul, in the state of Santa Catarina, southern Brazil. At the time of the incident, Martin and her camera operator were in a boat along with three police officers.

According to information released by RBS, the shots were fired at the boat with the aim of hitting both the police and the journalists. The police shot back.

After the shootout, the reporter and a police officer who was also wounded were admitted to a hospital. The police are investigating the case.

Presentation of amended right
30 November 2009 – An amended version of the Brazilian draft Bill on Access to Information has been presented for public consultation by the Special Commission tasked by the Lower House of Congress with revising it. In July 2009, ARTICLE 19 published a Memorandum analysing the original Bill, published by the government on 3 May 2009. The amended Bill contains some improvements but a number of ARTICLE 19’s key issues have not been addressed. ARTICLE 19 calls on Congress to make further amendments to bring the law fully into line with international standards.

The amended Bill includes a number of positive changes, addressing three of our recommendations – adding a clear definition of the public bodies covered by the law; requiring a list of classified documents to be published; and identifying a central body with responsibility for undertaking promotional activities – along with a variety of other new positive measures.

While we welcome these positive changes, more needs to be done to ensure that the Bill gives full effect to the right to information. The appeals procedure has been strengthened but it still fails to establish an independent body to consider appeals against refusals to provide access to information. The experience of other countries demonstrates that such a body is essential to the success of a right to information law.

Other issues that still need to be addressed include:
– to provide for more extensive routine disclosure obligations;
– to provide for a central set of fees for standard charges, and for fee waivers for requests in the public interest;
– to clarify that requests for information will be assessed against the regime of exceptions set out in the law, and not whether a document is classified; and
– to introduce a public interest override.

The Bill now goes to Congress for finalisation and adoption. ARTICLE 19 calls on Congress to make the changes set out in our Memorandum and Comment and we remain ready to assist in this process in any way that we can.