COMPLAINT TO IRISH TIMES – PLEASE WRITE LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Concerning Minister Gormley’s Tara propaganda contained in an article on Satuday, 18th July 2009

lettersed@irishtimes.com

The following letter was sent to The Irish Times on Sunday 19 July. Please write letters to the editor in support of it.

TaraWatch
Suite 108
The Capel Building
Mary’s Abbey
Dublin 7

18 July 2009

Dear Irish Times,

I am writing to you on behalf of TaraWatch with regards to the article that appeared in The Irish Times, on Saturday 18 July, entitled ‘New rules to protect Tara’, by Olivia Kelly. We are extremely surprised, and gravely concerned that we were not given a chance to comment on, or reply to the Minister’s statements. We would now like to exercise our right of reply, and the public’s right to fair and balanced reporting.

Only eight days earlier, on Friday 10 of March, another article about the Hill of Tara and the M3 motorway by Ms Kelly appeared in The Irish Times, entitled ‘Minister accused of delaying UNESCO bid’. In that article, the Minister was given not just an opportunity to reply, but his vociferous reply took up approximately 75% of the piece, while failing to give any of the factual background to our statements.

We did not find out about the Minister’s statements and press release on Friday until the six o’clock news mentioned it, at which time we immediately sent out a release at 6.30. However, it was not referred to in Ms Kelly’s article. We are extremely disappointed we did not get to comment on the Ministers statements, because they are full of inaccuracies and amount to no more than propaganda, which we believe was specifically designed to appear in your paper on the day of the Green Party Conference. The Minister is no doubt under attack from elements within his own party, due to his overall performance with regards to the protection of Tara, since he took office, and we have no doubt that Liam Reid, his press advisor ( an former Irish Times environment reporter), calculated the timing and content of the release to coincide with the conference.

First, I would like you to compare the article with the press release by the Minister. You will see that half of it is direct quotation, and the other half is a close paraphrase. Then, I would like you to consider what the article does not contain. Despite the fact that this is an extremely controversial matter, and that the article deals with numerous topics (National Monuments Act, Tara Landscape Conservation Area, and UNESCO), there is no opposing viewpoint, or any indication critical analysis of the assertions by the Minister whatsoever. In fact, if you examine the Minister’s press release in light of previous statements and articles, you will find that there is no real news contained therein whatsoever, and the story is pure Government propaganda, designed to deceive the media and the public.

Pilot landscape programme

The title alone, ‘Gormley Outlines Progress on the Review of Archaeological Policy and Practice & the proposed National Monuments Bill 2009’, immediately throws up red flags. The Minister is talking about actions that it is claimed will happen in the future; actions that have already been announced in the past. However, they are reported as new measures by Ms Kelly:

“NEW PROTECTIONS for the Tara-Skryne Valley, which would prevent the construction of retail parks and superstores along the route of the M3, have been announced by Minister for the Environment John Gormley.”

In fact, Killy Holland reported the pilot landscape conservation area at Tara Skryne in The Irish Times exactly one year ago, on 28 July 2008, in an article entitled ‘Protection plan to be piloted in Tara valley’. Please note that Ms Holland’s article also lacked any critical analysis, or alternative viewpoint from TaraWatch or anyone else, and also reads like a copy/paste of the Minister’s press release. However, it was at least a new story back then.

The Minister’s present release begins as follows:

“One of my first tasks on assuming office in 2007 was to attempt to deal with the legacy of previous decisions in relation to the M3 and the possible impacts on the Hill of Tara and the surrounding landscapes. I was of the opinion then and I am still of the same opinion that legislation needed to be bolstered to offer further protection to our national monuments and associated landscapes nationwide,” said Minister Gormley.

Ms Kelly writes:

“Mr Gormley said he could not prevent the construction of the motorway near the Hill of Tara, which continues to be the subject of protests by environmental and heritage groups, but he could protect the landscape to prevent inappropriate development.

Unless Ms Kelly attended the Ministers press conference, and heard him make the statements above, they are inaccurate because they do not reflect his release. Nowhere in the release does he say he could not prevent the construction of the motorway. Certainly, he has said that in the past, but he did not say it in the statement of 17 July 2009. It is also worth noting that Ms Kelly refers specifically to the existence of our current campaign, but yet no call was made to us, and no quote from our release was included.

If you examine the content of the information on the pilot programme in the release you will see that there is no new information whatsoever about the pilot scheme, compared to last year’s article. In fact, it is so devoid of information that the Minister even admits that the exact location of the zone of protection for landscape has not yet even been determined, and will not be determined until next year. This is to say nothing of the absurdity of the notion of a pilot landscape programme, with a motorway being built through it. Finally, one point we would want the public to be aware of is that the pilot programme will have no statutory basis, despite the fact that the Minister is also trumpeting his future improvements in statutory protections for heritage and landscapes in the very same release. We believe that the Minister is attempting to give the impression that the pilot landscape programme will have a statutory basis, by talking about the two completely separate subjects in the same release.

National Monuments Bill 2009

What the Minister does say in the release is that “legislation needed to be bolstered to offer further protection to our national monuments and associated landscapes nationwide.” His release later goes into great detail about the wonders of the proposed new National Monuments Bill 2009. We would like to present two critical observations to you, and to the public, in regards to this legislation. Firstly, this legislation was promised to be delivered in the summer of 2008. Secondly, the Minister fails to mention that he is currently defending the validity of the current legislation in the European Court of Justice, as reported by Frank McDonald, on Tuesday 30 June 2009. (Again, this article gave no alternative viewpoint or comment by the public campaigners on the issue).

UNESCO

With regards to the UNESCO nomination of the Hill of Tara and other Irish sites, the Minister states:

“The new landscape conservation zone for Tara Skryne will protect the area from development damage. I am also ensuring that Tara will be on the updated tentative list of sites for future nomination for UNESCO World Heritage status when it is finalised later this year.”

This is a statement that again deserves critical analysis, because there is no explanation as to why the nomination did not take place, as promised, in June of this year, at the UNESCO World Heritage Committee meeting, in Seville, such as was recently given in response to PQs, which were not reported in your paper.

Your paper reported in December 2008 that a public consultation had been launched, to review Ireland’s Tentative List of UNESCO sites. The Guidelines for public participation specifically stated that the list would be presented at Seville. Our campaign mobilised and put up a new web site, lobbied the public in Ireland and abroad, made a detailed submission and prepared to send Observers to Seville to comment on the nomination. Many other members of the public also followed the Ministers Guidelines and participated in good faith in the process. However, the Minister made no statement and gave to explanation prior to the June meeting putting the public on notice that the plan had been postponed. He was subsequently forced to so after TaraWatch submitted a series of Parliamentary Questions to Fine Gael, Labour, Sinn Fein and Independent TDs to ask of the Minister.

It as in the Minister’s written responses that the fact that he had started the review process of Ireland’s Tentative List in December 2007 came to light. I feel we are right to infer that the Minister is intentionally delaying the UNESCO process, in order to facilitate construction of the M3, because this process should not take three years to complete, and Tara could have been nominated in his first year as Minister. The Minister’s written explanation, given on Wednesday 8^th July is that:

“While it was initially envisaged that Ireland’s new Tentative List would be submitted to UNESCO in advance of the June 2009 session of the World Heritage Committee, this has not been possible mainly because the review process and World Heritage Committee requirements for the tentative list process have been more complex than at first envisaged. It was also considered better to take more time in preparing a new Tentative List in keeping with UNESCO guidelines and best international practice (emphasis added). I will be forwarding the new Tentative List to UNESCO before the end of this year and it will then be presented at the 34th Session of the World Heritage Committee in 2010.

(Written replies to Parliamentary Questions Nos. 405, 406, 407, 408, 409, 410, 411, 412, 413, 414, 415, 427, 428 and 430)

One key question the Minister failed to answer, out of the many posed, was ‘please define the area of the proposed World Heritage Site?’ So, we now have a release by the Minister, claiming to be taking two sets of measures to protect a certain area, and landscape, but the public still do not know where exactly that area is. What does that tell you about the Minister’s public consultation? What it tells us, and the public, is that the Minister is actively preventing UNESCO, along with the European Commission from protecting Tara and doing his job for him…quite the opposite from what we are told in his release and your newspaper article.

The Minister’s release also states:

“The Bill may also provide for ratification of certain International Conventions including:
· The UNIDROIT Convention on Stolen and Illegally Exported Cultural Objects,
· The Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit, Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property and
· The UNESCO Convention on the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage.

However, the most important International Convention, the UNSECO Convention Concerning the Protection of World Cultural and Natural Heritage, is not scheduled for ratification, despite the fact that Ireland signed the Convention in 1991, which would give real statutory protection to national monuments of outstanding universal value, rather than non-statutory and illusory promises of protection.

‘Best International Practice’

The most cynical statement by the Minister in his recent response to PQs, above, is that he delayed the UNESCO nomination to ensure ‘best international practice.

As you are no doubt aware, there has been massive international opposition to the M3 at Tara, based on the argument that the planning for the M3 did not meet ‘best international practice’. The 60-page submission we made, as part of the UNESCO public process, pointed this out and went through the UNESCO Guidelines in fine detail, quoting many international experts, to the effect that Tara should be a World Heritage Site, but not with the M3 going through it. We stated that is would be contrary to best international practice for UNESCO to accept Tara as a World Heritage Site, under the current circumstances.

Tim O’Brien somewhat misreported our position on this matter as well. The headline on the 15 August 2008 read ‘TaraWatch against UN heritage status’. In fact, we stated in our release that we clearly favoured UN status, but only on condition that the M3 is moved. The current thinking is that it is not best international practice for UNESCO or any State to inscribe a world heritage site with a motorway actively being built through it. The UNESCO Guidelines provide for such a situation, with regards to an Action Plan to mitigate current threats to a proposed site. However, UNESCO cannot intervene until the site is on the Tentative List. It now looks like that will happen at the exact same time the road is due to open. What a coincidence!

Conclusion

In the Olivia Kelly article of 10 July, the Minister’s spokesperson makes some very strong allegations concerning the UNESCO nomination process:

“It is the Minister who initiated this process, the Minister who kick-started it and pushed it forward and that he is being accused of delaying it is utterly untrue and very disappointing.”

However, the spokesperson fails to mention that Ireland is legally bound to review its Tentative List, under the UNESCO Convention, every ten years. The last review took place in 1992, seventeen years ago. We find it shocking that the Minister has taken so long to perform this legal duty, given the tardiness of the review when he took on the responsibilities of the Minister for the Environment in 2007. Tara could easily have been added to the Tentative List at the 2008 World Heritage Committee Meeting in Quebec, which we attended. Again, we were told there by UNESCO that they could not intervene until the Minister presented the site for nomination, and the Minister is fully aware of that.

The public and the media have been repeatedly duped by the Minister’s spin machine. We would like to correct that situation, and being the only active group campaigning on the public’s behalf, we feel we have a right to comment and a right to reply, just as the public has a right not to be spoon-fed the Minister’s propaganda. We also have a right to have our opinions expressed in a clear manner and accurate manner, and to be given an opportunity to adequately respond to false and damaging accusations made against us. We have published no ‘utter untruths’, and I take great offence to these claims made in your paper, as they are associated with my good name, and are clearly intended to hurt my reputation, attack my credibility and lower my standing in the community, along with members of the public who challenge the Minister’s decisions in relation to the protection of Tara.

I am attaching full copies of articles and press releases mentioned herein, as well as some relevant quotations from the Code of Practice for Newspapers and Periodicals, The Universal Declaration of Human Rights as well as the UNESCO- International Principles of Professional Ethics in Journalism. I am also attaching a letter I sent to the Editor of your paper at 2.10pm on Friday 19 July, before we learned of the Minister’s latest release. That letter is now obsolete, given the subsequent series of events, but it shows the consistency of our arguments.

We would like to respond in detail to the Minister’s release, whether it is in a news article or an opinion piece, based on the contents of this letter to you. As you can see from the length of this letter alone, there is simply too much to say in letter to the editor format.

Kind regards,

Vincent Salafia
087-132-3365

ATTACHMENTS

Gormley Outlines Progress on the Review of Archaeological Policy and Practice & the proposed National Monuments Bill 2009

17/07/09

Mr John Gormley TD Minister for the Environment, Heritage & Local Government today (17 July 09) outlined progress on the Review of Archaeological Policy and Practice & the proposed National Monuments Bill 2009.

“One of my first tasks on assuming office in 2007 was to attempt to deal with the legacy of previous decisions in relation to the M3 and the possible impacts on the Hill of Tara and the surrounding landscapes. I was of the opinion then and I am still of the same opinion that legislation needed to be bolstered to offer further protection to our national monuments and associated landscapes nationwide,” said Minister Gormley.

“In September 2007 I initiated a major review of archaeological policy and practice in Ireland. The aim of the review was to make policy and practice in protecting Ireland’s archaeological heritage the best there could be and to draw from the experience and advice of experts both at home and abroad to achieve this,” added the Minister.

In order to ensure that every effort was made to properly define the nature and scope of the Review and to advise the Minister on the prioritisation of issues coming out of a consultation process, an Expert Advisory Committee was established to advise on how to respond to the issues that emerged. At the Minister’s request the Expert Advisory Committee concentrated, initially, on legislative provisions to up-date and replace the National Monuments Acts 1930, 1954, 1987, 1994 & 2004.

On the 24th February this year the Minister approved the preparation of drafts heads of a bill to replace the National Monuments Acts, 1930 to 2004, and related enactments, based on the recommendations of the Expert Advisory Committee on the Review of Archaeological Policy & Practice.

The main objectives of the Bill on publication may include the provision of:
· A single piece of consolidated and modernised legislation to replace the existing National Monuments Acts dating from 1930 to 2004.
· A single Register of Monuments to replace the existing statutory Record of Monuments and Places and the statutory Register of Historic Monuments, the non-statutory Sites and Monuments Record, the non-statutory lists of national monuments subject to preservation order or temporary preservation order and the non-statutory lists of national monuments in the ownership or guardianship of the Minister or local authorities.
· A new system for the identification, registration and conservation of historic landscapes.
· Improved recognition of and protection for archaeology under planning legislation.
· A statutory mechanism for dealing with all new discoveries of archaeological monuments and sites; current legislation only deals with discoveries made on approved road schemes.
· A single consistent system for regulating archaeological works in relation to all types of development both in the public and private sector; at present differing regimes apply to approved road schemes and other public infrastructure provision and private sector development.
· A more efficient licensing system for archaeological excavations, effectively providing for a single licence for all archaeological works relating to a particular scheme or project, rather than a multiplicity of licences which can be required at present.
· An appeals system where an application for a licence is refused.

The Bill may also provide for ratification of certain International Conventions including:
· The UNIDROIT Convention on Stolen and Illegally Exported Cultural Objects,
· The Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit, Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property and
· The UNESCO Convention on the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage.

While the aim of the Bill is to provide strong protection for Heritage it will also modernise and stream line certain procedures including procedures for licensing of works at Registered Monuments. Work is underway in relation to the preparation of the heads of the bill.

Tara-Skryne Landscape Conservation Area

“I am also pleased to announce details in relation to a proposed new landscape management project which has been initiated to establish a Landscape Conservation Area in the Tara-Skryne area. Much has been written about this coveted area and the detail announced today will be the start of the process to protect this historic landscape,” added Minister Gormley. “The new landscape conservation zone for Tara Skryne will protect the area from development damage. I am also ensuring that Tara will be on the updated tentative list of sites for future nomination for UNESCO World Heritage status when it is finalised later this year.”

Pilot Project:

The initiative is a partnership project between Meath County Council, the Heritage Council, and the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, working with the local community and all stakeholders in a collaborative and participative manner. The proposal to designate a Landscape Conservation Area for Tara-Skryne can be considered as part of the emerging National Landscape Strategy (NLS). The experience gained and the issues arising will provide a central input into the development of the necessary framework for the NLS.

Key Points

-The Tara-Skryne Pilot will cover all aspects of landscape, including archaeological and historic landscapes, take account of the relationships between these different landscapes, and their fit within the overall planning system.

- Any designation will follow on from an extensive consultation and involvement with all stakeholders and local community to determine their wishes for the landscape.
-Immediate funding of €50,000 has been made available by the Department and the Heritage Council to help get the Pilot underway.
-A Steering Group whose membership is drawn from Meath County Council, the Heritage Council and the Department has been established to oversee the Pilot. The Group has held three meetings to date.

The project will progress objectives and policies contained in the Meath County Development Plan 2007-2013 which seek to designate a Landscape Conservation Area for the Tara-Skryne Area.

The Minister also launched Bru na Boinne (Archaeological Ensemble of the Bend of the Boyne)
Research Framework

The framework summarises the current state of knowledge of more than 6,000 years of activity at Bru na Boinne, and highlights gaps in knowledge, presented as a series of 38 research questions. Questions cover a broad range of issues, such as –
· who were the first people to occupy the landscape?
· how were people disposing of their dead in early pre-history?
· what was the nature of the Iron Age, and in turn the Viking presence?
· what is the sequence for construction of the passage tombs?
· how was the land used during medieval and post-medieval periods?
· what is the extent of the aerial photographic resource for Bru na Boinne?
· does the built heritage of the area have any unique characteristics?
· how do different farming techniques impact on different types of monuments and cultural heritage?
· how can residential development be better managed?
· how can existing and future data be better integrated, managed and archived?

ENDS

Media queries:
Press and Information Office
Tel: (01) 888 2638 (direct)
(01) 888 2000
E-Mail: press-office@environ.ie
Web site: www.environ.ie

PRESS RELEASE – TARAWATCH – 17 July 2009

‘National Monuments Bill and Tara Landscape Conservation Area Contradict EU Legal Action’

The Minister for the Environment, John Gormley, today announced a series of measures, including a future National Monuments Bill, a future UNESCO nomination for the Hill of Tara, and a new Landscape Conservation Area for Tara-Skryne.

However, these proposed measures directly contradict the Minister’s actions over the last two years in the European Court of Justice, where he is defending the decision by the former Minister for the Environment, Dick Roche’s decision to demolish the Lismullin National Monument, near Tara, in 2007.

The Commission initiated a legal action against Ireland after Minister Gormley refused the Commission’s order to halt the demolition of Lismullin. The Commission took legal action, on the basis that the current National Monuments Act (2004), is in breach of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Directive. Arguments were submitted by the Commission on 15 July, and Ireland has until October to respond.

The National Monuments Bill announced today, was promised to be delivered last summer. The UNESCO nomination of Tara announced today, was supposed to have been completed already.

Vincent Salafia of TaraWatch said:

“Today’s announcements are completely disingenuous. The reality is that the Minister is actively defending the current Act and the M3 development in the ECJ.

“Huge amounts of taxpapers’ money is being spent defending the National Monuments Act case in Europe, while even more money is being spent changing the same law here.

“In reality, the Minister has spent two years actively prevented the European Commission and UNESCO from protecting the Tara Skryne Landscape, which he now claims to be protecting.

“What kind of Landscape Conservation Area has a motorway being built in the middle of it?

ENDS

Contact – Vincent Salafia 087-132-3365

New rules to protect Tara area – OLIVIA KELLY

The Irish Times – 18 July 2009

NEW PROTECTIONS for the Tara-Skryne Valley, which would prevent the construction of retail parks and superstores along the route of the M3, have been announced by Minister for the Environment John Gormley. Mr Gormley said he could not prevent the construction of the motorway near the Hill of Tara, which continues to be the subject of protests by environmental and heritage groups, but he could protect the landscape to prevent inappropriate development.

In conjunction with Meath County Council, Mr Gormley proposed to designate the Tara-Skryne Valley a Special Conservation Area. This would protect the archeological and historic landscape and make it difficult for any construction to take place within the zone. However, Mr Gormley said it would in particular stop the type of large-scale development, such as shopping centres, or retail parks, which have been built along motorways in the past.

“This will ensure that the very negative sort of development associated with motorways will not impinge on the area . . . the sort of motorway development we’ve seen in the past, the BQs, that would not be acceptable.”

The plans for the designation, which has been allocated €50,000 funding from the Department of the Environment and the Heritage Council, will have to be submitted for public consultation and agreed by Meath county councillors before the designation is confirmed. It is likely that the protection will be in place by the middle of next year.

Mr Gormley said he also intended to increase the protection for national monuments in the new National Monument’s Act, which is currently at draft stage.

Minister accused of delaying UNESCO bid

The Irish Times – Friday, 10 July 2009

Campaign group TaraWatch has accused Minister for the Environment John Gormley of delaying the nomination of the Hill of Tara as a Unesco World Heritage site in order to facilitate the construction of the M3 motorway, writes Olivia Kelly . However, a spokesman for Mr Gormley said the accusation was “utterly untrue”.

TaraWatch spokesman, Vincent Salafia said Mr Gormley had started the process of nominating the Hill of Tara as a Unesco site in December 2007 but had now delayed it until July 2010.The accusation was false and misleading, said a spokesman for Mr Gormley.

“It is the Minister who initiated this process, the Minister who kick-started it and pushed it forward and that he is being accused of delaying it is utterly untrue and very disappointing.”

LETTER SENT TO THE EDITOR OF THE IRISH TIMES ON FRIDAY 17 JULY 2009

[This letter was sent to The Irish Times on Friday 17 July at 2:08 PM, before the Ministers press release was put on www.environ.ie and long before we learned of it]

Right of reply. Accusations of the Minister for the Environment

Madam,

A spokesperson for Minister for the Environment, John Gormley, claims TaraWatch made “false and misleading” accusations, after we accused the Minister “of delaying the nomination of the Hill of Tara as a Unesco World Heritage site in order to facilitate the construction of the M3 motorway.” (10 July).

The Ministers own written responses on Wed 8 July to a series of Parliamentary Questions, submitted by Labour and Sinn Fein, prove otherwise.

The Minister admitted that he did not submit the nomination of Tara and other candidate sites to UNESCO , at their World Heritage Committee meeting in Seville, in June of this year, as was envisaged in the public consultation process. This is because “the review process and World Heritage Committee requirements for the tentative list process have been more complex than at first envisaged.” Now, he claims it “will be presented at the 34th Session of the World Heritage Committee in 2010.”

The Minister also revealed in a written response that in December 2007 he began the process when he arranged for “Dr Jukka Jokilehtto, a world heritage UNESCO expert, to visit a number of these sites to advise on their suitability.”

Submitting Tara to Unesco did not have to take three years. Minister Gormley became the Minister for the Environment in June 2007, after Green Party members were elected, partially on the basis that they would protect Tara. However, one condition the Green Party members agreed to, to enter Government, was that they would do nothing about the M3. (6 June 2007)

On his first day in office, the Minister claimed he could not reverse the decision of Dick Roche, made on his last day in office, to demolish the Lismullin national monument at Tara, without an Environmental Impact Assessment. Instead, Minister Gormley has spent the last two years defending that decision in a case taken by the European Commission, which is now before the European Court of Justice. If the Commission is successful, it will mean the National Monuments Act will have to be amended, and that the M3 was illegally planned.

Speaking of which, the Minister also promised that a new National Monuments Act would be published last summer, but nobody has seen that yet either.

The actions of the Minister have been the exact opposite of what we would expect from a Minister for the Environment and Heritage. Both Unesco and the European Commission are charged with protecting Tara, from the illegal actions of this Government. However, the Minister is actually preventing them from doing so by delaying the UNESCO nomination and by defending the decision of Dick Roche, as per the Green Party agreement with Fianna Fail.

Sincerely,

Vincent Salafia
TaraWatch
Suite 108
The Capel Building
Mary’s Abbey
Dublin 7
087-132-3365

RELEVANT CODES OF ETHICS PROVISIONS

Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights by the United Nations

“Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference, and impart information and ideas through any media regardless of frontiers”

UNESCO- International Principles of Professional Ethics in Journalism

Principle I: People’s right to true information

People and individuals have the right to acquire an objective picture of reality by means of accurate and comprehensive information as well as to express themselves freely through the various media of culture and communication.

Principle II: The journalist’s dedication to objective reality

The foremost task of the journalist is to serve the people’s right to true and authentic information through an honest dedication to objective reality whereby facts are reported conscientiously in their proper context, pointing out their essential connections and without causing distortions, with due deployment of the creative capacity of the journalist, so that the public is provided with adequate material to facilitate the formation of an accurate and comprehensive picture of the world in which the origin, nature and essence of events, processes and states of affairs are understood as objectively as possible.

Principle III: The journalist’s social responsibility

Information in journalism is understood as a social good and not as a commodity, which means that the journalist shares responsibility for the information transmitted and is thus accountable not only to those controlling the media but ultimately to the public at large, including various social interests. The journalist’s social responsibility requires that he or she will act under all circumstances in conformity with a personal ethical consciousness.

Principal VII: Respect for public interest

The professional standards of the journalist prescribe due respect for the national community, its democratic institutions and public morals.

Principle V: Public access and participation.

The nature of the profession demands that the journalist promote access by the public to information and participation of the public in the media, including the right of correction or rectification and the right of reply.”

Principal VIII: Respect for universal values and diversity of cultures

A true journalist stands for the universal values of humanism, above all peace, democracy, human rights, social progress and national liberation, while respecting the distinctive character, value and dignity of each culture, as well as the right of each people freely to choose and develop its political, social, economic and cultural systems. Thus the journalist participates actively in the social transformation towards democrative betterment of society and contributes through dialogue to a climate of confidence in international relations conducive to peace and justice everywhere, to détente, disarmament and national development. It belongs to the ethics of the profession that the journalist be aware of relevant provisions contained in international conventions, declarations and resolutions.

Principal X: Promotion of a new world information and communication order

The journalist operates in the contemporary world within the framework of a movement towards new international relations in general and a new information order in particular. This new order, understood as in integral part of the New International Economic Order, is aimed at the de-colonisation and democratisation of the field of information and communication, both nationally and internationally, on the basis of peaceful coexistence among peoples and with full respect for their cultural identity. The journalist has a special obligation to promote the process of democratisation of international relations in the field of information, in particular by safeguarding and fostering peaceful and friendly relations among States and peoples.

Code of Practice for Newspaper and Periodicals – Office of the Press Ombudsman of Ireland

Preamble

The freedom to publish is vital to the right of the people to be informed. This freedom includes the right of a newspaper to publish what it considers to be news, without fear or favour, and the right to comment upon it.

Freedom of the press carries responsibilities. Members of the press have a duty to maintain the highest professional and ethical standards. This Code sets the benchmark for those standards.

It is the duty of the Ombudsman and Press Council to ensure that it is honoured in the spirit as well as in the letter and the duty of publications to assist them in that task.

In dealing with complaints, the Ombudsman and Press Council will give consideration to what they perceive to be the public interest. It is for them to define the public interest in each case, but the general principle is that the public interest is invoked in relation to a matter capable of affecting the people at large so that they may legitimately be interested in receiving and the press legitimately interested in providing information about it.

Principle 1 − Truth and Accuracy

1.1 In reporting news and information, newspapers and periodicals shall strive at all times for truth and accuracy.

1.2 When a significant inaccuracy, misleading statement or distorted report or picture has been published, it shall be corrected promptly and with due prominence.

1.3 When appropriate, a retraction, apology, clarification, explanation or response shall be published promptly and with due prominence.

Principle 2 − Distinguishing Fact and Comment

2.1 Comment, conjecture, rumour and unconfirmed reports shall not be reported as if they were fact, but newspapers and periodicals are entitled to advocate strongly their own views on topics.

2.2 Readers are entitled to expect that the content of a publication reflects the best judgement of editors and writers and has not been inappropriately influenced by undisclosed interests. Where relevant, any significant financial interest of an organisation should be disclosed. Writers should disclose significant potential conflicts of interest to their editor.

Principle 3 − Fairness and Honesty

3.1 Newspapers and periodicals shall strive at all times for fairness and honesty in the procuring and publishing of news and information.

3.2 Publications shall not obtain information, photographs or other material through misrepresentation or subterfuge, unless justified by the public interest.

3.3 Journalists and photographers must not obtain, or seek to obtain, information and photographs through harassment, unless their actions are justified in the public interest.

Principle 4 − Respect for Rights

Everyone has constitutional protection for his/her good name. Newspapers and periodicals shall not knowingly publish matter based on malicious misrepresentation or unfounded accusations. Publications must take reasonable care in checking facts before publication.