Non-disclosure of sources of information , also known as confidentiality of information , or journalistic privileges (amer.) - This is the right of a journalist , guaranteed to him by national and state legislation. In other words, power structures, including judicial ones, are not entitled to require a journalist to report data on the source of information. This right is based on the recognition of the fact that in the case of non-observance of confidentiality of sources, many people will refuse to communicate socially significant information to journalists. In turn, this will only exacerbate many social problems, including the fight against corruption and crime .
Examples:
The Watergate scandal that caused US President Richard Nixon to resign was preceded by a series of articles by Bob Woodward and Karl Bernstein published in the Washington Post . They published data coming from an “unknown” source, which became famous in the world as “Deep Throat”. Only in May 2005, the former FBI Deputy Director W. M. Felt made a statement that he was “Deep Throat”.
Woodward and Bernstein did not disclose information about the sources, as the US authorities did not require information about who is “Deep Throat”. An example of the disclosure of information about the sources is the case of journalists Bart Mos and Just de Haas of the weekly newspaper De Telegraf in Holland. In January 2006, an article was published in which two journalists reported a leak of information from the secret services of the Netherlands, among other things, information about the criminal Mink Koke was leaked. Journalists claimed that the case in question fell into the hands of Kok himself. During the investigation, it turned out that the leak was due to the fault of agent Paul H., who sold the dossier to Coca. At the insistence of the Prosecutor's Office and the defense, the court initiated the disclosure of information about the source of information in order to conduct a fair trial for the accused, and to ensure the national security of the country. Journalists refused to disclose the data, for which they were detained. However, they were soon released, since the Hague court ruled that national security interests should not violate the law on non-disclosure of information about sources.
International law
Most states recognize that the right to non-disclosure of source information is an integral part of freedom of expression .
In Europe , the European Court of Human Rights in 1996 ruled: “the protection of information sources for journalists is one of the basic conditions for freedom of speech ... Without such protection, the media may be deprived of information on issues of public interest. As a result, the media will lose their function of monitoring the activities of the state and society, and may be unable to provide verified and reliable information. ” The court ruled that disclosure of information sources would violate article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights on freedom of speech. Guided by this decision, the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe published recommendations on the application of the right to non-disclosure of information sources in member states. The Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) also called on countries to respect this right.
In America, the right to non-disclosure of information sources was recognized in the Inter-American Declaration of the Principles of Freedom of Speech, according to which "every member of the public has the right not to disclose confidential information, personal and professional data."
In Africa, the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights adopted the Declaration of Principles on Freedom of Speech in Africa, which also guarantees that this right is respected.