Following many civil initiatives and protests against waning press freedom, Amara Khitabi, the editor-in-chief of Al-Umma who had been arrested for publishing a list of allegedly corrupt judges, was released on $ 300 bail and banned from leaving Libya. He was released by a decision of a special court formed after the resignation of the bench in early April.

Following many civil initiatives and protests against waning press freedom, Amara Khitabi, the editor-in-chief of Al-Umma who had been arrested for publishing a list of allegedly corrupt judges, was released on $ 300 bail and banned from leaving Libya. He was released by a decision of a special court formed after the resignation of the bench in early April.

Khitabi was arrested in early December 2012 on charges of defaming the judiciary and describing it as corrupt, after his newspaper published a list naming judges accused of corruption under Gaddafi, noting that everyone was entitled to respond to these accusations.

Unexpectedly, Khitabi was prosecuted under article 195 of the Libyan Criminal Code penalizing contempt of constitutional or people’s authorities, which dates back to the Gaddafi era and stipulates, “Without prejudice to any more severe punishment stipulated by another law, any person who insults the Fateh Revolution or its leader shall be punished with imprisonment. Any person who insults the people’s authority or any of the judicial, defense or security bodies and any similar regular entities or insults the Libyan Arab People or the state emblem or flag shall be punished with the same penalty.”

Double standards

Libyan human rights activists believe that arresting Khitabi promotes the double standards approach adopted in post-Gaddafi Libya, referring to previous statements of  the Chairman of the National Transitional Council and Gaddafi’s Justice Minister Mustafa Abdul Jalil, who have repeatedly stressed the corruption of the judiciary and demanded its purification, and also referring to the accusations made by President of the General National Council (GNC) who stressed at his first media appearance in August 2012 that judiciary purification was the government’s and GNC’s top priority.

Khitabi’s trial provoked media circles. Journalist Ismail Qriteley says he does not, in any way, accept arresting journalists, especially for exposing intensifying corruption at state institutions, or prosecuting them for questioning the integrity of the judiciary authorized to enforce the law.

According to Qriteley, there is no legislation to protect journalists, in addition to society’s ignorance of journalism’s mission and the consequent moral responsibility towards the protection of journalists. Qriteley stressed journalists’ acknowledgement of laws and regulations that may affect them, such as publishing names or pictures of suspects before being officially convicted, in order to avoid law suits of defamation and compensation when defendants are proven innocent. He explained that silence about arresting Khitabi suggested an absence of awareness and poor media coverage of his arrest and subsequent hunger strike.

Foreign intervention

Aljazeera.net reporter Kald Mhirey suggested that arresting an old journalist like Khitabi and imprisoning him along with Gaddafi’s remnants was unexpected after the revolution. The judiciary, says Mhirey should have figured an exceptional prosecution mechanism instead of detention, stressing that the influence of the intervention of Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International on the judicial authorities’ response was greater than local appeals, thus repeating the former regime’s experience in Libya.

Dilemma

Journalist Fath Ben Essa said Khitabi’s case reflected a dilemma in the Libyan legislation since prosecuting a citizen under laws incriminating all Libyans for rebelling against Gaddafi as well as publishing a blacklist of judges implicated in corruption without evidence should have prompted for legislative and structural reformation of judiciary in addition to issuing journalism-regulatory procedures. “We condemn the imprisonment of the journalist, but we also denounce his publishing of accusations without solid evidence,” he explained.

On the other hand, the Libyan Judges Organization denounced the newspaper’s published list, holding it legally liable for what it described as irresponsible action against honest judges.

Judge Marwan Tashani said Khitabi should be held accountable for publishing the list since he is Al-Umma newspaper’s editor in chief and legal representative. Khitabi, says Tashani, should have referred to the General Administration of Judicial Inspection to submit documents and evidence of corruption, since the judicial system is the only institution authorized to hold its members accountable in accordance with judiciary legislation that ensures monitoring, disciplining and dismissing judges.

He stressed that the lawsuit filed against Khitabi could be dismissed on its face, which could be later set right and that that fell within the jurisdiction of the Court of First Instance. He also underlined that the release decision was based on Khitabi’s health conditions and did not affect trial procedures, which would be just.