1he repeal of Lhe Crlmlnal Llbel Law exempLs all medla pracLlLloners from all oLher legal obllgaLlons ulscuss Lhls sLaLemenL ln relaLlon Lo Lhe law of conLempL and defamaLlon generally
1he Crlmlnal Llbel law unLll 2001 was parL of Lhe defamaLlon laws of Chana Pere llbel ls seen as a crlmlnal acL and ls governed by Lhe Crlmlnal Code 1hls acLlon wlll resulL ln Lhe defendanL belng flned lmprlsoned or boLh lf Lhe case does noL end ln an acqulLLal lL was deflned ln SecLlon 113 of Lhe Crlmlnal code as A petsoo ls qollty of llbel wbo by ptlot wtltloq polotloq efflqy ot by ooy meoos otbetwlse tboo solely by qestotes spokeo wotJs ot otbet soooJs oolowfolly pobllsbes ooy Jefomototy mottet coocetoloq oootbet petsoo eltbet oeqllqeotly ot wltb loteot to Jefome tbot otbet petsoo 1hls law daLes back Lo Lhe colonlal era lL was creaLed aL a Llme where newspapers were galnlng popularlLy ln Lhe Lhen Cold CoasL and were belng used Lo preach lndependence and self governance lL was creaLed Lo proLecL Lhe colonlal offlclals from aLLacks from [ournallsLs AfLer lndependence Lhe nuC governmenL of Lhe fourLh republlc was noLed for uslng Lhls law Lo lmprlson many [ournallsLs 1he law was repealed ln 2001 by Lhe n governmenL Powever Lhey dld noL repeal Lhe Clvll Llbel Law ln modern socleLy freedom of LhoughL and expresslon as well as an lndependenL medla are among Lhe plllars on whlch democracy sLands Some argue LhaL Lhe desLrucLlon of Lhese could undermlne Lhe whole democraLlc socleLy 1he Crlmlnal Llbel Law dld noL encourage freedom of expresslon among [ournallsLs because Lhe law was Loo proLecLlve of offlclals ln auLhorlLy lor example ln some cases Lhe LruLh of a defamaLory sLaLemenL was no defense SecLlon 117(1) (h) of Lhe Crlmlnal Code sLaLes 1be pobllcotloo of Jefomototy mottet ls obsolotely ptlvlleqeJ ooJ oo petsoo sboll ooJet ooy cltcomstooces be lloble to poolsbmeot ooJet tbls coJe lo tespect tbeteof lo ooy of tbe followloq coses oomely lf tbe mottet ls ttoe ooJ lf lt ls foooJ tbot lt wos fot tbe pobllc beoeflt tbot tbe mottet sboolJ be pobllsbeJ 1hls means LhaL lL was posslble Lo convlcL a person for publlshlng a defamaLory sLaLemenL whlch ls Lrue buL consldered noL Lo be for Lhe publlc beneflL Such resLrlcLlons made lL dlfflculL for [ournallsLs for [ournallsLs Lo crlLlclze governmenL offlclals 1he repeal of Lhls law saw a greaL change ln Lhe way Lhe medla operaLed lL broughL abouL much more freedom [ournallsLs became much more darlng ln Lhelr reporLage buL Lo say LhaL lL exempLs all medla pracLlLloners from all oLher legal obllgaLlons ls LoLally unLrue 1here are sLlll laws LhaL proLecL Lhe repuLaLlon of lndlvlduals from defamaLlon Lhrough llbel Cne example of such laws ls Lhe Clvll Llbel Law under Lhls law anyone who feels defamed by a publlcaLlon ln a newspaper has Lhe rlghL Lo sue LhaL newspaper (or anyone responslble) for damages ln one lnsLance a former MlnlsLer of Lhe new aLrloLlc arLy (n) governmenL Pon Packman Cwusu Agyeman sued a local newspaper 1he alaver 13 bllllon (old cedl) for defamaLlon Pavlng losL Lhe case Lhe newspaper had Lo pay Lhls money and Lhls nearly collapsed Lhe newspaper buL Lhe MlnlsLer reLurned Lhe money Lo Lhe edlLor Mr !oo[o 8ruce Cuansah 1hls shows LhaL Lhe repeal of Lhe Crlmlnal Llbel Law dld noL guaranLee unllmlLed freedom of expresslon Lo Lhe medla under secLlon 114 of Lhe Crlmlnal Code A mottet ls Jefomototy wblcb lmpotes to o petsoo ooy ctlme ot mlscooJoct lo ooy pobllc offlce ot wblcb ls llkely to lojote blm lo bls occopotloo collloq ot offlce ot to expose blm to qeoetol botteJ cootempt ot tlJlcole SecLlon 2 of Lhe urafL uefamaLlon Law publlshed by nuC ln 1984 sLaLes LhaL o mottet ls Jefomototy lf lt ls llkely to lojote tbe tepototloo of oootbet petsoo os to lowet blm lo tbe estlmotloo of teosoooble membets of tbe commoolty ot Jetet membets of tbe commoolty ftom ossoclotloq wltb blm ot to Jlspotoqe blm lo bls offlce ptofessloo collloq ttoJe ot bosloess Pere Lhe plalnLlff musL be able Lo esLabllsh LhaL defendanL has by Lhe wrlLLen word defamed hlm A LesL for deflnlng defamaLory maLLer ls provlded by Lhe celebraLed [udge Lord ALkln woolJ tbe wotJs teoJ to lowet tbe plolotlff lo tbe estlmotloo of tlqbt tblokloq membets of soclety qeoetolly? 1
1he maLLer musL have been conveyed Lo a Lhlrd parLy by means of prlnL efflgy or words before Lhe maLLer can be deemed defamaLory
1he law of ConLempL of CourL ls almed upholdlng Lhe dlgnlLy and auLhorlLy of Lhe [udlclal sysLem SecLlon 113 of Lhe Crlmlnal Code deflnes crlmlnal llbel as A petsoo ls qollty of llbel wbo by ptlot wtltloq polotloq efflqy ot by ooy meoos otbetwlse tboo solely qestotes spokeo wotJs ot otbet soooJs oolowfolly pobllsbes ooy Jefomototy mottet coocetoloq oootbet petsoo eltbet oeqllqeotly ot wltb loteot to Jefome tbot otbet petsoo 1here are dlfferenL Lypes of conLempL of courL 1hose relevanL Lo medla pracLlLloners are covered by secLlon 223 of Lhe Crlmlnal Code lL sLaLes LhaL wboevet peoJloq ooy ptoceeJloqs lo ooy coott pobllsbes lo wtltloq ot otbetwlse ooytbloq coocetoloq socb ptoceeJloqs ot ooy potty tbeteto wltb loteot to exclte ooy popolot ptejoJlce fot ot oqolost ooy potty to tbe ptoceeJloqs ls qollty of o mlsJemeooot Chanalan courLs have also from Llme Lo Llme assumed powers Lo punlsh newspapers whlch scandallze Lhe courL uslng common law powers 1hls occurs when a newspaper commenLs ln lnsulLlng Lerms abouL a [udge's declslon or conducL of Lhe Lrlal 1hls ls however noL found ln Lhe Crlmlnal Code AnoLher conLempL of courL ls Lhe refusal Lo answer quesLlons on Lhe grounds of professlonal eLhlcs
l1 Slm v SLreLch (1936)
JlLh all Lhese laws ln place Lo say LhaL medla pracLlLloners have been exempLed from all oLher legal obllgaLlons would be false ln LhaL medla pracLlLloners musL be careful Lo publlsh only whaL ls Lrue Cne advanLage of Lhe repeal of Lhe Crlmlnal Llbel Law ls LhaL Lhe absence of LhaL provlslon under Lhe law LhaL Lhe LruLh of a defamaLory sLaLemenL ls no defense 1hls means LhaL where lL was once posslble Lo convlcL a person for publlshlng a defamaLory sLaLemenL whlch ls Lrue buL consldered noL Lo be for Lhe publlc beneflL [ournallsLs can now publlsh everyLhlng wlLhouL breaklng Lhe law provlded Lhe lnformaLlon belng conveyed ls Lrue 1he medla also has a responslblllLy Lo respecL Lhe dlgnlLy and auLhorlLy of Lhe [udlclal sysLem or face repercusslons for ConLempL of CourL ln concluslon Lhe repeal of Lhe Crlmlnal Llbel Law creaLed an avenue for a bolder press ln Chana lreedom of expresslon whlch lncludes freedom of Lhe press ls one of Lhe plllars on whlch democracy sLands As such Lhe medla also has a role Lo play Lo ensure LhaL Lhls democracy ls susLalned As such Lhe medla wlll always have legal obllgaLlons and responslblllLles Lo Lhe socleLy