In one of the Bahraini councils, a question was not familiar, but he carried a deep debate about the relationship between the press and justice. One of the attendees asked, is it the right of any newspaper or media outlet to convey the facts of an existing trial in a criminal case, especially if it contains sensitive details that affect the reputation of people and their lives?
What appeared in the beginning a professional question about freedom of publication, soon turned into a discussion that carries legal and human dimensions, after one of them added another more accurate question, is it permissible for the newspaper to draw a picture of criminal cases in a stories, suggesting to the reader that the accused is the criminal, and that the victim is an angel who has no sin? Isn’t this a violation of the principle of neutrality, an indirect distortion of the truth, and directed to the public opinion before the judiciary says his word?
In a moment of anticipation, everyone corresponds to, as if they were waiting for those who have the final word. At that time, one of the attendees spoke to whom he sold in the law, and he said, “The law does not prevent newspapers from transferring the course of the sessions as long as they are public and there was no judicial order to prevent publication.”
Everyone agreed to this, and they agreed that the transfer of the information is a media duty, and that transparency in coverage is part of the journalistic function in the service of society.
But the most important question remained stuck, is it permissible for the newspaper, and if it was transferred, it is impact? To draw, color, orient, and issue an implicit judgment before that the judiciary does?! At first sight it seemed strange, but shortly after meditation, it turned out to be more legitimate than ever.
On many cases, we note that the street has ruled before the trial procedures ended. The image of the accused, which (although symbolic) is published in the newspapers, or accompanying the news, may show it in the form of a deliberate killer, carrying a knife, or his eyes appear to be guilty. As for the victim, it is often drawn in the form of a Back child, a broken woman, or an innocent man who betrayed time. This type of photography, and if it carries a dramatic dimension, it strikes the principle of justice in its depth, the accused is innocent until it is proven guilty.
I returned to the Bahraini Press Law No. (47) of 2002, specifically the sixth chapter that deals with the criminal responsibility of the newspapers, so I did not find an explicit text that prohibits this type of media handling. However, Article (69b) includes a clear indication of punishing those who publish what would prejudice the dignity of people or their private lives. So did the accused draw a comet that is no longer a violation of dignity? Is the visual and psychological promotion of the idea of guilt is not an indirect criminalization before the issuance of the ruling?
What is more dangerous than the legal text is what humanity dictates to us. Yes, humanity that must precede any journalistic emotion or an attempt to attract the reader through visual or emotional excitement. Behind the accused, even if it is proven condemned later, a family that will live sad and let down, and the victim is also the people who are waiting for justice, not the stark headings.
I am not here to ask the press to silence or ignore issues – never, because I am part of it – but rather I hope that they are transferred, not to judge, and to reflect reality, not to design it, and to have a human sense that makes it realize that every line is written an effect on the souls, and it may have an effect on the course of the issue itself.
All we hope is that the press remains a mirror of justice, not an arc for its trial.
