The briefs also show how defendants in similar cases in the United States have been afforded a host of legal protections, and urge that these protections serve as a model in cases where environmental defenders face such suits in the courts of other countries.
The court’s decision
On December 10, 2007 (Human Rights Day), the judge in the Philippines ruled in favor of Dr. Quijano and his daughter, dismissing the case. The judge ruled that there was "no convincing proof [of]...any malicious intent of defendants against the plaintiff," and ordered the company to pay the Quijanos a portion of their expenses.
The victory was short-lived, as the company has filed a notice of appeal. It appears that EDLC will be assisting in defending against the appeal. And in the meantime, EDLC has learned of nearly a dozen similar cases filed in the Philippines against environmental defenders. This has caused EDLC to hire a representative in the Philippines to coordinate American pro bono legal help for these defendants and their local lawyers.
The Case from Chile of Carlos Baraona Bray
While criminal defamation is no longer recognized in the United States and many other countries, a surprising number of jurisdictions still allow its use. One such country is Chile, where Carlos Baraona Bray, formerly a lawyer for the national forestry service and a vocal critic of illegal logging practices in Chile's forests, was charged and convicted of criminal defamation.
Baraona had asserted publicly that a Chilean Senator and other high-ranking government officials had coerced the forestry service and other governmental organizations into permitting and assisting in the illegal logging of the alerce tree, a rare and threatened species similar to the redwood. Believing this to be an intimidation lawsuit, EDLC agreed to help.
EDLC is appearing as amicus curiae in a case brought by Baraona before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights that claims that his conviction violates international human rights law. The lawyers at Covington & Burling who represent EDLC before the Commission have submitted a legal brief arguing that the defamation conviction represents an unlawful criminalization of “environmental speech,” and is part of a global pattern of misuse of defamation laws to attempt to silence environmental defenders. The Commission’s decision on the case is pending.
As this case demonstrates, the methods of chilling pro-environmental activities are not limited to overt violence, but include direct efforts to
quell speech.
- EDLC amicus curiae brief presented by Covington & Burling