Rights for pictures
The right to information through pictures
The right to news pictures
The recent ruling handed down by the European Court of Human Rights on the case of the photograph of France’s Préfet in Corsica, Mr. Erignac, who was assassinated in the street, shot in the back in February 1998, was a ruling against the right to publish pictures and against the freedom to report information through news pictures.
The photograph made front-page news in national and international media and was run again and again on all television channels; it showed an official representative of the French State who had been a victim of a cowardly assassination, lying on the road. The photo had a considerable impact on public opinion, triggering a demonstration by the people of Corsica who came out into the street for the first time ever, demanding that law and order be restored.
No one has queried the political and historic importance of this photo. The European judges cast no doubt on this either. And yet the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg has now ruled that the right to show and publish the photograph of an attack, even when it is a political event, must receive prior authorization from the relatives of the victim(s) to respect their “right to grief”, for this picture rekindled the grief of the family.
The ruling, while a mere delusion which will never stop the uncontrolled and uncontrollable broadcasting of un-credited photos via the Internet, bans the use of violent pictures within the European Union and has deprived the European public (alone) of the right to be given news by the media on events of such fundamental importance for democracy as the assassination of an official representative of the State, murdered because of the position he held. This is an issue of major importance. The right to news and information is being effectively made a private interest, for the vested interests of individuals. This is the end of a myth, the illusion of the basic value of the right to information through pictures.
The judges at the European Court considered that the only “legitimate” time scale was not the immediate time for topical news, but an historic time scale: the photograph of Mr. Erignac could be published in years to come, once the family had achieved closure.
But what can be said about the complete lack of any moral justification for this ruling which bans the publication of photos in Europe, yet allows photographs showing distress in other parts of the world? Should we be handling news stories differently according to the nationality of the victims and the countries involved?
The issue at stake is serious indeed. An appeal against this ruling will be made to the European Court of Human Rights. I am therefore urging you to sign a petition presenting the case arguing for the importance of this fundamental issue of the right to take pictures, of our right and our freedom to show and publish news pictures in Europe. Any ban on this right would be the end of democracy.
http://www.visapourlimage.com/anglais/appel.php3