A BOLA – Benfica e-mail case: judge justifies several illegal actions (Justice)

A BOLA – Benfica e-mail case: judge justifies several illegal actions (Justice)

Judge Carlos Alexandre on Monday, along with FC Porto’s communications director Francisco J. Marques and commentator Diogo Faria, convicted former Porto Channel director journalist Julio Magalhães of correspondence violations and crimes. to a legal entity, under the so-called Benfica email claim.

The instructional decision issued by BOLA justified the illegal activities.

The lawsuit is scheduled for April 2017 and February 20, 2018, where there are more than 20 programs. Kainat Porto da Bench“About 55 e-mails exchanged between Benfica employees have been found.”

Many points in Porto’s defense went unanswered. As noted, the “public interest that underlies the character of the stakeholders” did not refer to “investigating and disseminating and disseminating information among different persons” nor did the defendants hold professional cards that showed “disrespect for previous conflicts and depletion of information sources”.

As a result of the initial decision, these three elements (Francisco J. Marques, Diogo Faria and Julio Magalhães) now have all the elements to be brought to trial and substantiated. Some points were highlighted as “public interest underlying the goals.”

“It is the dissemination of research, knowledge and communication between different individuals (many of whom are unknown) outside the limited group of people who are endangered and watching the football phenomenon. global, society) – and it should be noted that in order to violate the rights of assistants and harm them »can be read, and then at another point can be referred to the accuracy and adequacy of the facts disclosed. the means used.and the public interest inherent in the content of the facts.

It explains: “The defendants allege that their behavior, especially that of Francisco J. Marquez, was motivated not by any persecution or malicious campaign, but by the animus narrandii that existed in the course of their activities.” journalist, was not welcomed. “As defined in Article 14.0 of the Journalist’s Charter (Law No. 1/99), the functions of a journalist are related to the following responsibilities: 1) objectivity; 2) independence; 3) honesty; 4) pre-conflict of visas; 5) elimination of inaccuracies in the work; 6) respect for the presumption of innocence; 7) the truth; 8) protection of personal inviolability in the absence of indisputable public interests. All these values ​​do not follow the criteria of objectivity and independence that characterize the function of a journalist, but, on the contrary, contradict the functions performed by the defendants, who are just subordinates, pursuing the competitive interests of the FCP Group. As witness Jose Manuel Ribeiro said at the hearing on 06.09.2021, these are incompatible functions and common practice, so the suspension of a journalist’s license with the start of this type of function. Therefore, the arguments of the defendants are not valid, because they only support the legitimacy of their alleged right to information on the assumptions made when the exercise of the right of journalists to report is under threat.

The statement of claim also states the lack of objectivity and the exclusion of all disclosed information.

Violation of the obligation to objectivity and release was also noted. Finally, it was noted that the defendants had forgotten one principle of the legal system: the prohibition of “the use of their illegal activities.”

Congratulating himself, Benfica’s defense classified the decision as “correct” and “important” because it “reinforces the view that it is impossible to say everything, including slander and libel, in club competition, as well as the selection, manipulation, contextualization of documents and The killings, moreover, had already been obtained and then criminally trafficked. ”

The defendants said they would appeal the decision.

Read it in full in the print edition or digital wholesale

.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.