Statements by Reporters Committee, CPJ, on Miller Jailing

By: E&P Staff Lucy Daghlish, executive director of the The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, released a statement this afternoon, saying that the organization " fully supports Judith Miller in her insistence that she not betray her source. She does not believe, nor do we, that reporters are above the law, but instead holds that the work of journalists must be independent and free from government control if they are to effectively serve as government watchdogs.

"Allowing prosecutors to demand testimony and evidence from reporters, particularly in a case of such clear public importance as to White House responses to a critic's arguments about Iraq's access to nuclear materials, means that journalists will be treated as unpaid investigative agents of the federal government, with no regard for the resulting loss of credibility or independence that will ultimately prevent the truth from reaching the public.

"The role of a free press is enshrined in our constitution, and a free and independent news media is recognized by our own State Department as one of the essential elements in a democracy. It is what we expect of emerging democracies around the world, and we must demand the same from our courts here at home.

"We plan to continue working with members of Congress to pass federal shield law legislation to ensure that sources receive at least as much protection in the federal system as they do in virtually every state court."

Meanwhile, the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) also responded.

?Governments worldwide have taken note of the decisions made by the U.S. prosecutor and courts in this case. We are deeply concerned that an investigation intended to uncover potential wrongdoing by U.S. government officials has instead sent a terrible message to the rest of the world,? said Ann Cooper, executive director of CPJ. ?Repressive regimes who routinely jail journalists have already used this case to justify their actions.?

CPJ said its research has found at least two instances in which other governments have cited the U.S. case to justify the imprisonment of journalists or the passage of restrictive press laws.

In January, the Cameroonian government defended the imprisonment of a journalist on defamation charges by saying in a letter to CPJ: ?You are aware that courts have decided in a number of countries that protection of free speech does not grant journalists, for instance, the privilege to refuse to divulge sources in all circumstances.?

In December 2004, Venezuelan officials cited the U.S. case while responding to international criticism of its new media law restricting broadcast news coverage in the name of preserving social order, CPJ said.