A court this morning decreed that blogger Daphne Caruana Galizia should enjoy journalistic freedom under the Press Act, and consequently she is not bound to reveal her sources.
The decree was handed by Magistrate Francesco Depasquale during libel proceedings instituted by Energy Minister Konrad Mizzi and his wife Sai Mizzi Lang, and the minister’s communication coordinator Lyndsey Gambin.
The three had instituted libel proceedings against Ms Caruana Galizia, who in November 2014 had uploaded a post on her blog stating that the Energy Minister and Ms Gambin had been seen in an intimate embrace.
Lawyer Aron Mifsud Bonnici, appearing for Dr Mizzi, asked her to reveal the identity of her source, whom she had previously described as a “very high-ranking police officer” who has since retired.
Ms Caruana Galizia refused, arguing that, as a journalist, she had every right to protect her sources. Asked whether her blog was registered under the Press Act, she replied that it could not be registered.
In the decree, Magistrate Franceso Depasquale pointed out that the Press Act did not speak of “journalists” but of “authors.” In the absence of a definition under Maltese law, the court referred to that adopted by the European Council’s Committee of Ministers, which defined the term “journalist” as “any natural or legal person who is regularly or professionally engaged in the collection and dissemination of information to the public via any means of mass communication".
The plaintiffs had also argued that the blog was not covered by the Press Act, arguing it only referred to “newspapers or broadcasts.” However, the court noted that another provision in that Act defined “printed matter” as “writing printed in typographical characters...or other means whereby words or visual images may be heard, perceived or reproduced.”
By this definition, the magistrate said that Ms Caruana Galizia's blog did in fact fall under the remit of the Press Act.
“There is no reason for which the electronic means used by the defendant should not be not considered as a newspaper,” the court said.