Draft bill 18.

Summary.

The draft bill seeks to decriminalize defamation and insult and place them within civil law. It lists defamation, insult, actual malice, human rights defender, professional journalist, media outlet, hate speech, incitement to violence, pornography, the national economy, national security, sovereignty, public order, retraction, correction, public apology and judicial harassment as concepts in the proposal. It would repeal Articles 193, 194, 195, 196, 197, 198 and 199 of the Criminal Code (Código Penal) and includes a provision repealing the name of one of its titles.

In the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Panama (Código Procesal Penal de la República de Panamá), it would add a paragraph to Article 82 requiring the Public Prosecutor’s Office (Ministerio Público) official receiving a complaint to take measures against its use to initiate criminal proceedings as punishment, intimidation or retaliation targeting human rights defenders, professional journalists or media outlets. If the official finds such an intention, or it can be inferred from the circumstances and the alleged conduct, the complaint would be closed immediately. A paragraph added to Article 86 would permit the official to refuse a private criminal complaint intended to censor, intimidate or retaliate for critical opinions or publications concerning public funds or the public performance of state officials and people who formerly held or seek public office.

The draft bill would add Article 533 A to the Judicial Code of the Republic of Panama (Código Judicial de la República de Panamá). It would bar attachment orders against state assets and funds and against specified services and facilities: water, electricity, waste, telecommunications and media companies; health facilities and funeral services; places of worship; educational centers; ports, airports, toll roads and parking facilities. For the categories numbered 2 through 7, it would except attachments arising from family, employment and social security obligations. It would also add Article 784 A, requiring a claimant in a civil damages action for defamation or insult to prove the defendant’s actual malice under the rules for reasoned assessment of evidence.

The proposal would exclude damages in the listed circumstances involving final judgments, plea or cooperation agreements, expiry of a criminal action and foreign sanctions or convictions. It would exempt a person who retracts or corrects a statement before five business days have elapsed since the last publication, or publicly apologizes under the specified conditions. It also addresses the right of reply under Law 22 of June 29, 2005. For repeated statements or publications, it sets limits of 75 thousand balboas exactly for individuals and 150 thousand balboas exactly for media outlets; if the conduct persists beyond the two specified judgments, damages would have no ceiling. The bill would take effect upon promulgation. The public bodies concerned include the Public Prosecutor’s Office and the courts of the Republic of Panama (República de Panamá); the provisions could affect journalists, media outlets, human rights defenders, public utilities and the other sectors covered by the attachment restrictions.