{"id":392,"date":"2024-06-26T01:58:03","date_gmt":"2024-06-26T00:58:03","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/?post_type=publication&#038;p=392"},"modified":"2024-06-26T01:58:05","modified_gmt":"2024-06-26T00:58:05","slug":"criminal-defamation","status":"publish","type":"publication","link":"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/publications\/introductory-modules-on-digital-rights-and-freedom-of-expression-online\/module-5-defamation\/criminal-defamation\/","title":{"rendered":"Criminal Defamation"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Historically, defamation was usually a criminal offence. While some countries still have the offence of criminal defamation on their statute books, it is widely opposed, most notably by:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>the United Nations (<a href=\"https:\/\/www.un.org\/en\/\">UN<\/a>);<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>the Africa Commission on Human and People\u2019s Rights (<a href=\"https:\/\/www.achpr.org\/\">ACHPR<\/a>);<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>the UN Human Rights Council (<a href=\"https:\/\/www.ohchr.org\/en\/hrbodies\/hrc\/pages\/home.aspx\">UNHRC<\/a>) <a href=\"https:\/\/www2.ohchr.org\/english\/bodies\/hrc\/docs\/GC34.pdf\">General Comment No. 34<\/a> provides that: \u201cStates Parties should consider the decriminalisation of defamation and, in any case, the application of the criminal law should only be countenanced in the most serious of cases and imprisonment is never an appropriate penalty\u201d;[footnote]UNHRC, \u2018General Comment No. 34\u2019 (2011) (accessible at https:\/\/www2.ohchr.org\/english\/bodies\/hrc\/docs\/gc34.pdf).[\/footnote]<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Moreover, Principle 22 of the African Commission on Human and People\u2019s Rights (<strong>ACHPR<\/strong>) <a href=\"https:\/\/www.achpr.org\/public\/Document\/file\/English\/Declaration%20of%20Principles%20on%20Freedom%20of%20Expression_ENG_2019.pdf\">Declaration on Principles of Freedom of Expression and Access to Information in Africa<\/a> calls on states to amend criminal defamation and libel laws in favour of civil sanctions that are necessary and proportionate. It further states that the imposition of custodial sentences for the offences of defamation and libel <em>is<\/em> a violation of the right to freedom of expression.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Court have also taken a strong stance:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>In a landmark decision handed down by the African Court on Human and Peoples\u2019 Rights (<a href=\"https:\/\/www.african-court.org\/en\/\">African\u00a0Court<\/a>) in 2013 in the matter <em>of <\/em><a href=\"https:\/\/en.african-court.org\/images\/Cases\/Judgment\/Judgment%20Appl.004-2013%20Lohe%20Issa%20Konate%20v%20Burkina%20Faso%20-English.pdf\"><em>Konat\u00e9 v Burkina Faso<\/em><\/a>,[footnote]African Court, Application No. 004\/2013 (2013) (accessible at https:\/\/en.african-court.org\/images\/Cases\/Judgment\/Judgment Appl.004-2013 Lohe Issa Konate v Burkina Faso -English.pdf).[\/footnote] it was held that imprisonment for defamation violates the right to freedom of expression and that criminal defamation laws should only be used in restricted circumstances.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>The ECOWAS Court has upheld that criminal defamation and libel laws should be repealed, as evidenced in the 2018 judgment in <a href=\"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/06\/FAJ-and-Others-v-The-Gambia-Judgment-compressed.pdf\"><em>Federation of African Journalists and Others v The Gambia<\/em><\/a> which \u201crecognised that the criminal laws on libel, sedition and false news disproportionately interfere with the rights of Gambian journalists and directed that The Gambia \u201cimmediately repeal or amend\u201d these laws in line with its obligations under international law.\u201d[footnote]Media Defence, \u2018Update: ECOWAS Court delivers landmark decision in one of our strategic cases challenging the laws used to silence and intimidate journalists in the Gambia\u2019 (2018)(accessible at https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/news\/update-ecowas-court-delivers-landmark-decision-in-one-of-our-strategic-cases-challenging-the-laws-used-to-silence-and-intimidate-journalists-in-the-gambia\/).[\/footnote]<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Most recently, the ECOWAS Court held that Nigeria\u2019s Broadcasting Code violated the right to freedom of expression protected by the ACHPR because the Code prohibited protected speech and the sanctions for committing hate speech were excessive. Nigeria was ordered to align the code with its international obligations and to protect the right to freedom of expression.[footnote]The Incorporated Trustees of Expression Now Human Rights Initiative v. Federal Republic of Nigeria ECOWAS ECW\/CCJ\/JUD\/37\/23 accessible at https:\/\/altadvisory1.sharepoint.com\/sites\/PowerLaw\/Shared Documents\/General\/U. Research\/Media Defence &#8211; Update Africa Modules\/Summary Modules\/Drafts to client\/in Federation of African Journalists and Others v The Gambia.[\/footnote]<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-group highlight\"><div class=\"wp-block-group__inner-container is-layout-flow wp-block-group-is-layout-flow\">\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading has-text-align-center\"><strong><strong>African Commission\u2019s critique of Rwanda\u2019s criminal defamation laws<\/strong><\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><a href=\"https:\/\/achpr.au.int\/en\/decisions-communications\/agnes-uwimana-nkusi-saidati-mukakibibi-rwanda-42612\"><em>Agnes Uwimana-Nkusi v. Rwanda<\/em><\/a> concerned the conviction of journalists Agnes Uwimana-Nkusi and Saidati Mukakibibi on the grounds of defamation and threatening national security following the publication of three articles criticizing the <strong>Rwandan <\/strong>government.[footnote]<em>Agnes Uwimana-Nkusi v. Rwanda<\/em> (2021) (accessible at https:\/\/achpr.au.int\/en\/decisions-communications\/agnes-uwimana-nkusi-saidati-mukakibibi-rwanda-42612). See also Global Freedom of Expression at Columbia University, \u2018Case update: Agnes Uwimana-Nkusi v. Rwanda (accessible at https:\/\/globalfreedomofexpression.columbia.edu\/cases\/agnes-uwimana-nkusi-v-rwanda\/).[\/footnote]<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The journalist published articles detailing allegations of corruption among high-profile public officers, the human rights situation in Rwanda, and other government shortcomings. The government argued that the articles intended to incite violence and strife against the government by using defamatory statements devoid of evidence. Having exhausted all available domestic remedies, Media Dence (Media Legal Defence Initiative as it was then), filed a complaint to the Commission on behalf of the journalists arguing Rwanda violated their rights to freedom of expression and to a fair trial.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Commission considered whether discussing the 1994 Rwanda Genocide amounted to genocide denial. Considering Rwanda&#8217;s history, it assessed if implementing penal code articles was necessary and proportionate. The Commission emphasized democratic governance contexts in evaluating public order protection and incitement definitions. While acknowledging the sensitivity around the genocide, it found the journalists\u2019 articles did not incite violence or threaten security.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Commission criticised criminal defamation laws, deeming them disproportionate restrictions on journalism. It stressed the vital role of freedom of expression in democracy, particularly in fostering political discourse and holding officials accountable. Consequently, the Commission ruled Rwanda&#8217;s actions violated Article 9 of the Charter by unjustly restricting the journalists\u2019 freedom of expression.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Promisingly domestic trends indicate \u2013 for several countries \u2013 a shift away from criminal defamation:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>In 2016, in <a href=\"https:\/\/www.southernafricalitigationcentre.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/Order-3-Feb-2016.pdf\"><em>Misa-Zimbabwe et al v Minister of Justice et al<\/em><\/a>,[footnote]Constitutional Court of Zimbabwe, Case no. CCZ\/07\/15 (2015) (accessible at https:\/\/www.southernafricalitigationcentre.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/Order-3-Feb-2016.pdf).[\/footnote] the Constitutional Court of Zimbabwe declared the offence of criminal defamation unconstitutional and inconsistent with the right to freedom of expression as protected under the Zimbabwean Constitution.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>In 2018, the Constitutional Court of Lesotho struck down the provisions of the Penal Code relating to criminal defamation in <a href=\"https:\/\/www.southernafricalitigationcentre.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/05\/2018-05-21-Judgement.pdf\"><em>Peta v Minister of Law, Constitutional Affairs and Human Rights<\/em><\/a><em>,<\/em>[footnote]Constitutional Court of Lesotho, Case no. CC 11\/2016 (2018) (accessible at https:\/\/www.southernafricalitigationcentre.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/05\/2018-05-21-Judgement.pdf).[\/footnote] stating that they violated the right to freedom of expression as protected in the Lesotho Constitution.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>In 2020, Sierra Leone\u2019s Parliament has also <a href=\"https:\/\/reliefweb.int\/report\/sierra-leone\/sierra-leone-ifj-hails-repeal-criminal-defamation-law\">repealed<\/a> its 1965 Public Order Act in 2020 by approving the Independent Media Commission Act 2020.[footnote]Media Foundation for West Africa, \u2018Major Boost for Press Freedom as Sierra Leone Scraps Criminal Libel Law after 55 years\u2019 (24 July 2020) (accessible at https:\/\/www.mfwa.org\/major-boost-for-press-freedom-as-sierra-leone-scraps-criminal-libel-law-after-55-years\/).[\/footnote]<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>In 2022, Zambia amended the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.parliament.gov.zm\/sites\/default\/files\/documents\/acts\/Act%20No.%2023%20Penal%20Code%20(Amendment),%202022.pdf\">Penal Code<\/a> to abolish the offence of criminal defamation of the President.[footnote]International Bar Association, \u2018Zambia: IBAHRI welcomes death penalty abolition\u2019 (2023) (accessible at https:\/\/www.ibanet.org\/Zambia-IBAHRI-welcomes-death-penalty-abolition).[\/footnote]<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>In 2023, the South African legislature, repealed the common law crime of criminal defamation, this was done through the passing of the <a href=\"https:\/\/pmg.org.za\/bill\/1133\/?via=homepage-card\">Judicial Matters Amendment Bill<\/a>. In clause 35(2) the Bill notes that there are well-established civil remedies to respond to defamation as opposed to the chilling criminal defamation laws.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Despite these important legal decisions protecting freedom of expression, there have been instances in which journalists faced arrest for defamation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>In 2019 in Ghana, National Security operatives raided an online news portal\u2019s office, arresting its deputy editor and a reporter over the publication of allegedly false news about the National Security Minister Albert Kan Dapaah.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>In October 2021, also in Ghana an editor of a digital newspaper, David Tamklie, was arrested by plain-clothed officers wielding guns for publishing false news.[footnote]Section 208.[\/footnote] The arrests were carried out under the Criminal and Offices Act of 1960 and the Electronic Communications Act 775 of 1960. According to the Criminal Offences Act, anyone who publishes or reproduces a false statement, rumour or report that could cause fear and alarm to the public commits a misdemeanour. The Electronic Communications Act similarly provides that any person who knowingly sends a false electronic communication is liable for conviction to a fine or imprisonment of no more than five years or both.[footnote]Section 76.[\/footnote]<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>In Angola, a reporter was arrested and charged with criminal defamation insult and forgery, if convicted, the reporter faces up to 1.5 years in prison according to the <a href=\"\/www.fd.unl.pt\/Anexos\/Investigacao\/1274.pdf\">Penal Code<\/a>.[footnote]Committee to Protect Journalists \u201cAngolan authorities charge journalist with criminal defamation over corruption report\u201d 2023 (Accessible at https:\/\/cpj.org\/2023\/09\/angolan-authorities-charge-journalist-with-criminal-defamation-over-corruption-report\/).[\/footnote] Criminal defamation investigations against Angolan journalists spike ahead of the elections and are reported as criminalising journalism in Angola.[footnote]Committee to Protect Journalists \u201cAngolan editors questioned in separate criminal defamation investigations\u201d 2021 (Accessible here).[\/footnote]<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Historically, defamation was usually a criminal offence. While some countries still have the offence of criminal defamation on their statute books, it is widely opposed, most notably by: Court have also taken a strong stance: African Commission\u2019s critique of Rwanda\u2019s criminal defamation laws Agnes Uwimana-Nkusi v. Rwanda concerned the conviction of journalists Agnes Uwimana-Nkusi and [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":0,"parent":386,"menu_order":255,"template":"page-templates\/chapter.php","publication-category":[],"class_list":["post-392","publication","type-publication","status-publish","hentry"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v28.1 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Criminal Defamation | eReader<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"While some countries still have the offence of criminal defamation on their statute books, it is widely opposed.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/publications\/introductory-modules-on-digital-rights-and-freedom-of-expression-online\/module-5-defamation\/criminal-defamation\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Criminal Defamation | eReader\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"While some countries still have the offence of criminal defamation on their statute books, it is widely opposed.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/publications\/introductory-modules-on-digital-rights-and-freedom-of-expression-online\/module-5-defamation\/criminal-defamation\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"eReader\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2024-06-26T00:58:05+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.mediadefence.org\\\/ereader\\\/publications\\\/introductory-modules-on-digital-rights-and-freedom-of-expression-online\\\/module-5-defamation\\\/criminal-defamation\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.mediadefence.org\\\/ereader\\\/publications\\\/introductory-modules-on-digital-rights-and-freedom-of-expression-online\\\/module-5-defamation\\\/criminal-defamation\\\/\",\"name\":\"Criminal Defamation | eReader\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.mediadefence.org\\\/ereader\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2024-06-26T00:58:03+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2024-06-26T00:58:05+00:00\",\"description\":\"While some countries still have the offence of criminal defamation on their statute books, it is widely opposed.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.mediadefence.org\\\/ereader\\\/publications\\\/introductory-modules-on-digital-rights-and-freedom-of-expression-online\\\/module-5-defamation\\\/criminal-defamation\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.mediadefence.org\\\/ereader\\\/publications\\\/introductory-modules-on-digital-rights-and-freedom-of-expression-online\\\/module-5-defamation\\\/criminal-defamation\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.mediadefence.org\\\/ereader\\\/publications\\\/introductory-modules-on-digital-rights-and-freedom-of-expression-online\\\/module-5-defamation\\\/criminal-defamation\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.mediadefence.org\\\/ereader\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Publications\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.mediadefence.org\\\/ereader\\\/publications\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":3,\"name\":\"Summary Modules on Digital Rights and Freedom of Expression Online in sub-Saharan Africa\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.mediadefence.org\\\/ereader\\\/publications\\\/introductory-modules-on-digital-rights-and-freedom-of-expression-online\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":4,\"name\":\"Module 5: Defamation\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.mediadefence.org\\\/ereader\\\/publications\\\/introductory-modules-on-digital-rights-and-freedom-of-expression-online\\\/module-5-defamation\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":5,\"name\":\"Criminal Defamation\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.mediadefence.org\\\/ereader\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.mediadefence.org\\\/ereader\\\/\",\"name\":\"eReader\",\"description\":\"Media Defence\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.mediadefence.org\\\/ereader\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Criminal Defamation | eReader","description":"While some countries still have the offence of criminal defamation on their statute books, it is widely opposed.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/publications\/introductory-modules-on-digital-rights-and-freedom-of-expression-online\/module-5-defamation\/criminal-defamation\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Criminal Defamation | eReader","og_description":"While some countries still have the offence of criminal defamation on their statute books, it is widely opposed.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/publications\/introductory-modules-on-digital-rights-and-freedom-of-expression-online\/module-5-defamation\/criminal-defamation\/","og_site_name":"eReader","article_modified_time":"2024-06-26T00:58:05+00:00","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/publications\/introductory-modules-on-digital-rights-and-freedom-of-expression-online\/module-5-defamation\/criminal-defamation\/","url":"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/publications\/introductory-modules-on-digital-rights-and-freedom-of-expression-online\/module-5-defamation\/criminal-defamation\/","name":"Criminal Defamation | eReader","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/#website"},"datePublished":"2024-06-26T00:58:03+00:00","dateModified":"2024-06-26T00:58:05+00:00","description":"While some countries still have the offence of criminal defamation on their statute books, it is widely opposed.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/publications\/introductory-modules-on-digital-rights-and-freedom-of-expression-online\/module-5-defamation\/criminal-defamation\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/publications\/introductory-modules-on-digital-rights-and-freedom-of-expression-online\/module-5-defamation\/criminal-defamation\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/publications\/introductory-modules-on-digital-rights-and-freedom-of-expression-online\/module-5-defamation\/criminal-defamation\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Publications","item":"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/publications\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"name":"Summary Modules on Digital Rights and Freedom of Expression Online in sub-Saharan Africa","item":"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/publications\/introductory-modules-on-digital-rights-and-freedom-of-expression-online\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":4,"name":"Module 5: Defamation","item":"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/publications\/introductory-modules-on-digital-rights-and-freedom-of-expression-online\/module-5-defamation\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":5,"name":"Criminal Defamation"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/","name":"eReader","description":"Media Defence","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/publication\/392","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/publication"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/publication"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/publication\/386"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=392"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"publication-category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/publication-category?post=392"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}