Judicial Harassment In Latin America: The Phenomenon Of Silencing Without Killing

This article was kindly written for us by our partner Propuesta Cívica, in Mexico.

Leer en español

“I sued the journalist, but I didn’t kill them…”
– Marta Ruiz

To live in or be familiar with Latin America is to be aware of political and social realities that challenge the exercise of rights against institutional and facto powers. This includes understanding the threats to press freedom, which occur at physical, legal, media, and social levels.

In recent years, international and regional human rights organisations have made continuous calls to safeguard the plurality of information and ideas, protect journalists, and condemn attacks against them. These attacks are diverse; they can range from killing or making someone disappear to initiating legal proceedings against journalists to repress, inhibit, or silence critical voices or the dissemination of information on public interest issues.

As a civil society organisation, we have documented an increase in the use of legal actions—whether criminal, civil, or administrative—against journalists in Latin America. Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs) are a tactic where individuals claiming to be harmed by journalistic publications use the courts—filing civil lawsuits for damage to their honour, reputation, and dignity, or criminal complaints—to suppress and intimidate those who published or are planning to publish information about them.

Who Files Legal Actions Against Journalists?

In civil matters, lawsuits are filed by business actors or public figures who disguise their claims as ordinary lawsuits, while in reality, they constitute an abuse of the legal system. Notably, these lawsuits frequently lack evidence of journalistic negligence or actual harm to the plaintiff and seek exorbitant damages.

For instance, in 2022, members of the weekly publication Río Doce and the civil society organisation Quinto Elemento Lab were sued in a civil case by businessmen from Mazatlán, Sinaloa. The lawsuit was prompted by the publication of two investigations titled which detailed findings by the Financial Intelligence Unit (UIF) regarding transactions and family and political connections of a business consortium. This lawsuit was eventually withdrawn after the governor of Sinaloa made a direct request.

What Is the Purpose of SLAPPs?

The primary aim of SLAPPs is not necessarily to establish legal precedents or win judgments against perceived abuses of freedom of expression. Instead, they seek to exhaust defendants through prolonged and costly legal battles and create anxiety or distress over the possibility of being convicted or having to paying millions of pesos or dollars in damages. Honduras, Peru, Guatemala, and Mexico are the countries with the most reported cases of SLAPPs, followed by Ecuador, Colombia, Panama, and Nicaragua.

Such is the case of journalist Sergio Aguayo Quezada, who has been engaged in civil proceedings for eight years, initiated by the former governor of Coahuila, Mexico, for alleged moral damage.

Journalist and academic Aguayo Quezada primarily writes on topics related to politics, democracy, security, and human rights. The former governor has sued the journalist twice: first in 2016, following the publication of a column in the Reforma newspaper; and again in 2022, for the a book published in 2020 by Colegio de México and statements made on a podcast in 2021.

It is important to note that the second lawsuit was filed after the First Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation—the highest judicial authority in Mexico—ruled on amparo direct 30/2020, which determined that the column in question was an example of freedom of expression protected by the Constitution and international treaties, and acquitted Aguayo Quezada.

In the second case, proceedings have stalled as the former governor’s lawyers have filed legal appeals to prolong the process and avoid calling the book’s co-authors and the publishing house to trial.

Do These Legal Proceedings Impact Journalists?

The effects of these lawsuits also extend to the psychological and physical health of journalists. It has been observed that journalists who have been sued suffer physical consequences and harm to their personal well-being due to the anguish and anxiety caused by the possibility of being convicted and facing exorbitant financial penalties. These impacts include smear campaigns, family strain, social consequences, and economic and employment effects.

“I was so scared that I said: the moment the lawsuit ends, I no longer want to be a journalist, I no longer want to be a reporter.” (Journalist, Roxana Romero García) 

“The two lawsuits were exhausting for my physical and emotional health. I was already under a lot of violence and pressure for writing and defending freedom of expression. After these 1,112 days of living in uncertainty, I decided to take a break from journalism, but I still think about returning because there are stories that still need to be written.” (Journalist, Norma Trujillo)

Under What Conditions Do Civil Proceedings Against Journalists Occur?

These proceedings are marked by significant inequity. We have documented how, in most cases, there is a disparity between the parties in terms of political, economic, and/or social power—the person attempting to suppress journalistic activity (the plaintiff) and the person affected by this action (the journalist or media outlet). This disparity compromises the defence of freedom of expression, as journalists often lack the resources to secure high-quality legal representation, unlike plaintiffs.

The Importance of Addressing SLAPPs

As we have seen, the use of SLAPPs, particularly civil lawsuits, is highly detrimental to journalists. It is an alarming phenomenon because the judicial system is abused by claiming that those who promote freedom of expression supposedly harm the honour or dignity of public officials and/or business actors.

Journalists are the primary defenders of freedom of expression, which is a fundamental pillar of democracy. The psycho-emotional and economic suffering of journalists due to these processes has not been addressed by the States and could be diagnosed as a symptom of a crisis in Mexican democracy.

It is necessary for the Mexican State to make adjustments to its civil legal bodies to prevent such attacks against those exercising their freedom of expression and the press, and to effectively guarantee the exercise of these fundamental rights in a democratic society.

Written by:

Sara Lidia Mendiola Landeros – Executive Director of Propuesta Cívica
Víctor Javier Martínez Villa – Coordinator of the Legal Area of Propuesta Cívica
Eugenie Renaudo – Legal Intern at Propuesta Cívica 

Read more about Propuesta Cívica.

Disclaimer: Media Defence assumes no responsibility or liability for any errors, omissions or content in the context of this site.