08/10/2020
Statement on premature closure of World Press Photo Exhibition
The Macau Portuguese and English Press Association (AIPIM) regrets the premature closure of the World Press Photo Exhibition for reasons yet to be clarified. If the premature shutdown of the exhibition is a result of pressure related to some photographs on display, then we consider it to be a serious and worrying incident that signals an erosion of freedom of expression.
We emphasize that the World Press Photo exhibition brings together the world’s best photojournalism and has been a prestigious event for Macau over the years, highlighting quality photojournalism and press freedom.
AIPIM Board of Directors
Macau, October 8, 2020
31/10/2020
AIPIM launches Legal Advisory Service
The Macau Portuguese and English Press Association (AIPIM) has created the Legal Advisory Service for its members, following one of our key pledges for the term in office of the serving Governing bodies. This comes following a Protocol of Cooperation signed today with Ling, Lei & Cortés - Advogados e Notários (Lektou) law office.
The aforementioned service will take effect on November 1.
AIPIM Board of Directors
18/03/2020
Statement
The Macau Portuguese and English Press Association (AIPIM) is highly concerned and regrets the inclusion of Macau and Hong Kong in the Central Government’s decision to ban American journalists from three US media outlets from working in China.
AIPIM calls for a clarification on the activity of non-local journalists and media outlets in order to ease concerns and ensure that press freedom is fully upheld as enshrined in Article 27 of the Macau Basic Law. This applies not only to local journalists and media outlets but also to non-local journalists and news organizations with their headquarters outside of Macau, as mentioned in Article 9 of the Macau Press Law.
AIPIM is worried about the negative impact of the escalating tensions between the United States and China over press freedom and hopes that this situation can de-escalate and be reversed as soon as possible.
AIPIM thus regrets both this decision by Beijing regarding US journalists and the measures previously taken by Washington affecting Chinese journalists and news organizations.
Macau, March 18, 2020
13/12/2019
Statement
In face of recent cases of journalists from outside of Macau being denied entry or being subject to length questioning at the borders, the Macau Portuguese and English Press Association (AIPIM) expresses concern and calls on Macau authorities to respect the journalists’ freedom of movement and stresses the importance of ensuring that press freedom is fully upheld.
Macau, December 13, 2019
APIM Board of Directors
Macau, 30th of July 2019
Subject: Amendment to the Civil Protection Bill
To: Mr. Ho Ion Sang,
President of the First Standing Committee of the Legislative Assembly
The Macau Portuguese and English Press Association (AIPIM) has been paying close attention to the Civil Protection Bill since the public consultation last year, expressing the highest interest and concern in this proposal.
After our letter, dated 25th of June 2019 - and where we requested for a meeting with the legislators of the First Standing Committee of the Legislative Assembly -, and following your response, we would like to express our observations and suggestions regarding this bill.
AIPIM understands the importance of having a legal framework to promote and reinforce the coordination and operations of the civil protection system.
Our worries, however, fall on the fact that the provision in the law that establishes a new type of crime, previously referred as “crime of false alarm”, and renamed crime “against the public security, public order and public peace in sudden public incidents”.
Since the beginning of the whole process, AIPIM has warned to the eminent risks of implementing a type of crime that may conflict with freedom of expression and press freedom in the Macau SAR – rights enshrined in the Basic Law – and the right to information.
We have publicly expressed at the time of the public consultation that we are dealing with a very sensitive matter: if this crime is not adequately delimited and it’s misused, fundamental rights and freedoms might be at risk.
At the time of the public consultation we have stated that the implementation of such a legal frame, which aims at prevent and criminalize certain social behaviors, needs to be evaluated with extreme care to avoid the possibility of being ambiguously interpreted or equivocal in any way. For that, we underlined in out letter sent in August 2018 during the public consultation period that the scope of the crime, the facts that lead to the behaviors now deemed as illegal and the sphere in which this crime might be applied need to be extremely well defined.
ARTICLE 25
The first version of the Civil Protection Bill, approved in a first reading by the legislators, included a provision on Article 25 which caused great concern: the article had vague and subjective concepts and expressions regarding the intent, object of the crime (“biased, unfounded or fake news”) and consequence. This caused high concerns as we consider they could open the door to misinterpretation of the provisions and consequent misapplication of the law, harming the freedom of expression and of press and right to information.
Under the new version of the article, announced recently by the Secretary for Security, some of the vague expressions and concepts mentioned by AIPIM were eliminated –such as the term “biased, unfounded or fake news”. The new provision also modifies the way the intent and consequences are formulated. We consider this as positive and a step forward, and as a response to some of our main concerns.
Nevertheless, AIPIM still considers that risks concerning the freedom of expression and freedom of the press remain. AIPIM does maintain certain reserves towards the actual necessity of such new type of crime.
AIPIM would like to reiterate what was expressed during the public consultation: it looks to us that the Penal Code already has enough provisions to protect what the Government aims to protect with the new crime: mainly under the articles related to libel, offense to a public authority figure, threat, abuse or simulation of warning signals, inciting public disobedience.
We do find questionable the need of creating a new type of penal crime on a legal framework for Civil Protection. It is our understanding that, perhaps, it would be more adequate to have an addendum or even a modification to the Penal Code.
We also identify some risks on the interpretation of Article 25 together with point 4) of Article 5 (please see more below). As a result we believe that the outcome that ensures more guarantees is the removal of Article 25 from the bill.
If the legislators decide to keep Article 25, this article should be subjected to further modifications in order to better specify and clarify the intent and consequent of the behavior deemed as illegal. “Causing public panic” should not be the only condition for someone to be criminally liable – we suggest that this liability comes only if the causing of panic leads to an actual obstruction of the rescue operations.
The conjugation of the two conditions and the delimitation of the scope of the crime will lead to fewer situations in which fundamental rights (such as freedom of expression and freedom of press) are at risk. At the same time, the objective of the law becomes clearer.
AIPIM also suggests that the penalty currently proposed on the bill is reviewed to a more proportional and lenient punishment: As it is, it is not inappropriate and unreasonable considering other penalties for more serious criminal behaviors.
Thus, AIPIM suggests a new version for the number 1) of article 25:
Instead of :“While the state of immediate prevention or of higher level is activated, as referred in Article 6, whoever produces and disseminates false information about sudden public incidents and the response operations with the intent of causing public panic, which will be objectively sufficient to cause public panic is liable to a two years term in jail or a fine up to 240 days”.
We suggest: “While the state of immediate prevention or of higher level is activated, as referred in Article 6, whoever produces and disseminates false information about sudden public incidents and the response operations with the intent of causing public panic and harming the rescue operations, which will be objectively sufficient to cause public panic and harming the rescue operations is liable to a one year term in jail or a fine up to 120 days”.
ARTICLE 5 – NUMBER 4)
The suggested modification of Article 25 alone will not, in our view, be sufficient to a fair improvement of the bill in the matter that concerns the protection of fundamental rights. In order for this to happen, we suggest that the modification of Article 25 is interlinked with another modification, this one to Article 5 in what concerns the type of incidents considered as “sudden public nature incidents”, as this new type of legal framework is activated whenever authorities aim to prevent these kind of incidents.
In number 4) of Article 5 one can read: “incidents of security in society, in which are included internal security incidents, incidents that affect the normal functioning of the economy and sudden public nature incidents, originating in external factors or with them related”.
AIPIM sees as absolutely inadequate and unnecessary the inclusion of this number 4) on Article 5, as this provision is out of the scope of the civil protection realm.
There’s a certain vague description of what can be considered as a “security incident in society”, as well as of the incidents included in this provision (internal security incidents, incidents that affect the normal functioning of the economy and sudden public nature incidents, originating in external factors or with them related). AIPIM fears this may open way to a broad and not objective interpretation, hence allowing grey areas and situations that are not related to the civil protection’s mission.
On the other hand, number 4) of Article 5 seems to fit in the Internal Security Act of the Macau SAR and not in this bill. The Civil Protection Framework should follow international patterns of incidents that fall on the civil protection scope, such as calamities, catastrophes and serious accidents.
May protests or strikes – rights protected by the Basic Law - be considered as “security incidents in society”?
It seems the inclusion of this in a situation of civil protection is forced and out of context with the number 2) of Article 2.
WHAT AIPIM SUGGESTS
Considering the concerns expressed regarding the creation of this new type of crime, we do consider that the elimination of Article 25 is what ultimately guarantees the protection of the fundamental rights expressed in the Basic Law.
If the intention is to keep this article, then AIPIM suggests a modification to the bill that combines two new reviews on the proposal:
1 – the modification of the number 1) of Article 25 to the following
“While the state of immediate prevention or of higher level is activated, as referred in Article 6, whoever produces and disseminates false information about the sudden public incidents and the response operations, with the intent of causing public panic and with the aim of harming rescue operations, which will be objectively sufficient to cause public panic and harm the rescue operations is liable to a one year term in jail or a fine up to 120 days”
and
2 – The complete elimination of number 4) of Article 5
We look forward to hearing from you regarding these matters.
With our warmest regards,
AIPIM Board Members
AIPIM - Associação de Imprensa em Português e Inglês de Macau
Avenida Comercial de Macau, No. 70, FIT Centre, 5th Floor - A, Macau
S.A.R.
Email: imprensamacau@gmail.com
Depiction of the freedom of the press and access to sources of information for working journalists in Macau
Evaluation of the survey by the Macau Portuguese and English Press Association (AIPIM) regarding press freedom in the Macau Special Administrative Region
Frederico Rato, José Manuel Simões, Rui Flores
download
Statement
The Macau Portuguese and English Press Association (AIPIM) expresses concern over the uncertainty surrounding the news coverage related to the upcoming Legislative Elections, which may result in constraints to the journalists’ work.
AIPIM believes that it is crucial that the right to information and press freedom are fully respected in all instances and at all times - including before the election campaign begins - in accordance with what is enshrined in the Basic Law and the Press Law. This includes interviews and news coverage involving candidates running in the election.
AIPIM also stresses that it is important that the Electoral Affairs Committee does not issue any guidelines or instructions to media outlets or journalists pertaining to news coverage during any specific period of time.
Macau, April 20, 2017