The Supreme Court has ratified the conviction against journalist Francisco Chavanel for attacking the honor of prosecutor Ignacio Stampa for years, disseminating information that has been proven to be "false." The ruling also confirms the conviction of his radio production company, El Escorpión de Jade, and the newspaper Canarias 7, where Chavanel also published articles.
Hiding behind the fact that what he was saying were "opinions," the journalist introduced data that was not true to question the investigation of the main corruption cases opened at that time in Lanzarote, the Unión case and the Stravs case, attacking the people who were investigating them.
In addition to this conviction, Chavanel already has two others for the same facts, since other affected parties also filed lawsuits. One of them was the judge who initiated the investigation of the Unión case, César Romero Pamparacuatro. In his case, the sentence also condemned another of the media in which Chavanel disseminated this smear campaign against the investigators, Editorial Lancelot. This group belongs to the businessman Juan Francisco Rosa, who was investigated in the cases that Chavanel was trying to discredit and is the main defendant in one of them.
"Mr. Chavanel, in his articles and radio programs, has expressed personal opinions and assessments, but has also transmitted information and propagated simple insidious rumors. And while the canon of veracity cannot be applied to the former, when information is transmitted, the requirement of veracity is required," says the new ruling issued on September 21 by the Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court.
"That requirement, that the information transmitted be truthful, has been breached by Mr. Chavanel since the information transmitted regarding the plaintiff has been revealed to be false and there is no evidence that the appellant had attempted to verify them in accordance with canons of professional diligence," the ruling adds.
This is how he responds to one of the arguments raised by Chavanel's defense in his appeal against the sentence previously issued by the Provincial Court. Both in the trial and in subsequent appeals, the journalist insisted that he only expressed "value judgments and opinions," using catchphrases such as "it is my theory," "I put it on the table as a working thesis" or "the thesis of this program." "The requirement of veracity is not relevant," his defense came to argue.
However, as the Investigating Court Number 5 of Arrecife had already done in the first instance ruling and later the Provincial Court, the Supreme Court concludes that Chavanel not only opined, but also disseminated "rumors and slanders about the plaintiff's actions as prosecutor." "That Mr. Chavanel's radio broadcasts or journalistic articles are labeled as "opinion" is irrelevant, since what is relevant is their content and real nature, not the label that one wants to attribute to them," he adds, pointing out that those "catchphrases" that he used to try to dilute his responsibility "do not exempt him from diligently verifying the veracity of the information he publicly communicated and that violated the honor of the affected people."
"These were facts that implied a serious discredit for the plaintiff, that questioned his moral integrity and his professional rectitude, and attributed to him the commission of illegal acts, when not directly crimes and, therefore, constituted an intrusion into his right to honor. As they are not truthful, since it does not appear that the defendant acted diligently to verify that his statements corresponded to reality, the intrusion into the honor of the plaintiff is illegitimate," the ruling concludes.
"The appeals modify the proven facts at the whim of the appellants"
In addition, he points out that the appeals repeated arguments that they had already raised in the trial and in the first appeal, but altering the reality of the facts. "The appeals modify, at the whim of the appellants, the proven facts established in the appealed sentence, in order to argue that the requirement of veracity was met, without adequately justifying it, and base their arguments largely on facts different from those established in the appealed sentence," the Supreme Court warns.
For this reason, he rejects his theses again and only partially upholds two of the appeals, in the sense of separating the compensations for which each one will have to respond. The Provincial Court had set those compensations to the prosecutor at 25,000 euros, of which both the radio production company and Canarias 7 should be jointly and severally liable.
Now, the Supreme Court separates the responsibility of each media outlet, and while Chavanel must respond for the total amount, El Escorpión de Jade and Canarias 7 must do so only in relation to the information from this journalist disseminated by each one.
In the case of the radio production company, "being more serious and repeated," they are set at 20,000 euros, of which they must respond jointly and severally with Chavanel. For its part, Canarias 7 will have to do so in the amount of 5,000 euros.
With this ruling, the sentence now becomes final, considering proven that campaign to attack the honor of the prosecutor who investigated the main corruption cases brought in Lanzarote, which have ended in numerous convictions for the accused for crimes such as embezzlement of public funds, bribery and prevarication.
