Most Read
Most Commented
Read more like this
mk-logo
From Our Readers

Oon Yeoh, in his letter Journalists not above the law , said that if the president of the US is not above the law, why should journalists be? He gave the example of Richard Nixon having to turn in the Watergate tapes before the grand jury.

I thought that journalists, unlike corrupt executives, have a duty to the public to report corrupt executives. The protection of sources is essential. It enables the press to perform its function of a public watchdog.

Oon cited a 1972 US Supreme Court case of Branzburg v Hayes which denied reporters a shield. This is a case that was decided 4:1:4. This means that judges who oppose the shield are equal to the number of judges supporting the shield.

There is no American federal law on a reporter's shield. The law is as enunciated in the Branzburg case. The sharply divided opinion is clear to some and muddled to others. This greyness allows the lower courts a leeway in interpreting the scope of a reporter's privilege.

The US Supreme Court, by refusing the petition for review in the Judith Miller case , missed the opportunity to make a clearer decision on this reporters' shield.

After Branzburg, at least 49 states in the US developed laws to help reporters protect their sources.

In a dissenting opinion, Justice Steward in Branzburg said that the right to publish means the right to gather news and disseminate news. This implies a right of a confidential relationship between reporter and his source.

'When neither the reporter nor his source can rely on the shield of confidentiality against unrestrained use of the grand jury's subpoena power, valuable information will not be published and the public dialogue will inevitably be impoverished.'

In his concurring decision, Justice Powell in Branzburg, appears to invite future courts to develop journalists' privilege to protect them from unnecessary harassment by law enforcement.

Both Republicans and Democrats have now introduced bills (proposed law) for a American federal shield law for journalists. The bills claim to offer journalists protection but allow the government to determine who is and is not a journalist. The proposed laws puts at risk 'independent' journalists and bloggers.

As a final word, a law may be a law but it can still be a bad law which a person can and should, conscientiously object to.

ADS