Journalist Glenn Greenwald, co-founder of The Intercept, gestures during a hearing at the Lower House's Human Rights Commission in Brasilia, Brazil on June 25, 2019. (Photo: Evaristo Sa/AFP/Getty Images)
'Not Good Enough': After Judge's Ruling, Greenwald Vows to Take Press Freedom Case to Brazil's Supreme Court
"We want a clear ruling from the Supreme Court that will enduringly protect the right of a free press against further assaults from the Bolsonaro government."
Award-winning American investigative journalist Glenn Greenwald welcomed a Brazilian judge's decision Thursday to reject cybercrime charges that federal prosecutors brought against him last month but also promised to keep fighting against assaults on press freedom by the right-wing government of Brazil President Jair Bolsonaro.
The Intercept co-founder responded to the judge's decision with videos in both English and Portuguese posted to Twitter. "It's obviously good news, but not good enough for us," Greenwald explained. "Our lawyers are now going to go to the Brazilian Supreme Court and seek a much broader ruling."
"We don't just want to win on procedural grounds; we want a clear ruling from the Supreme Court that any attempt to criminalize my journalism or my relationship with my sources is a grave assault on core press freedoms guaranteed by the Brazilian constitution," Greenwald added. "We want a clear ruling from the Supreme Court that will enduringly protect the right of a free press against further assaults from the Bolsonaro government."
Greenwald lives in Rio de Janeiro with his husband, Brazilian Congressman David Miranda, and their two children. Their family has faced mounting threats from Bolsonaro's "vitriolic anti-LGBTQ+" and "authoritarian, dictatorship-supporting movement," culminating in the cybercrime charges. Human rights and press freedom groups called the charges "a straightforward attempt to intimidate and retaliate against Greenwald and The Intercept for their critical reporting" on key government officials.
In the video Thursday, Greenwald, who worked as a constitutional attorney in the U.S. for a decade before entering journalism, also vowed that The Intercept will continue to report on the archive that provoked the criminal charges and thanked everyone from around the world who has expressed support and solidarity with him and his colleagues in Brazil.
Murtaza Hussain reported on the limitations of the judge's decision for The Intercept:
Judge Ricardo Augusto Soares Leite ruled that Greenwald's prosecution would not go forward, but only on account of a previous finding by the Brazilian Supreme Court that The Intercept's reporting on Operation Car Wash had not transgressed any legal boundaries. In the absence of the injunction issued by a Supreme Court minister that prohibited investigations into Greenwald related to this case, Leite said he would have let the charges against Greenwald move forward. The judge also said that, if the Supreme Court injunction were to be overturned, he would be open to charging Greenwald.
"I decline, for now, to receive the complaint against GLENN GREENWALD, due to the controversy over the extent of the injunction granted by Minister Gilmar Mendes in ADPF no 601, on 08/24/2019," Leite wrote, referring to the ruling by Mendes, a Supreme Court minister.
Betsy Reed, The Intercept's editor-in-chief, welcomed the judge's ruling while noting that it "is narrow and procedural."
"There remains enormous pressure to prosecute Glenn in retaliation for his work on The Intercept's Secret Brazil Archive series," she said. "We will continue to fight for the complete exoneration Glenn deserves, and for the rights of all journalists to exercise the freedoms they are entitled to under the Brazilian constitution."
Responding to the news on Twitter, the Americas Program of the Committee to Protect Journalists also welcomed the judge's ruling and declared that "Brazilian authorities must respect press freedom and stop criminalizing journalists."
Earlier Thursday, human rights experts with the United Nations and Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) released a joint statement in which they raised alarm about the charges brought against Greenwald, disclosed that they were in contact with Brazilian authorities regarding the case, and demanded that criminal investigations not be used to threaten journalistic work.
"Legal threats like these put all reporting in Brazil at risk," said David Kaye, U.N. special rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression. "Journalists who investigate cases of corruption or improper actions by public authorities should not be subjected to judicial or any other types of harassment in retaliation for their work."
Edison Lanza, special rapporteur for freedom of expression at IACHR, added that "criminal charges of this nature can also have a general chilling effect on press investigations. In the case of any measure that may affect the exercise of freedom of expression, states must ensure that restrictions are provided by law, serve one of the legitimate interests recognized by international law, and are necessary and proportionate to protect that interest."
Urgent. It's never been this bad.
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission from the outset was simple. To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It’s never been this bad out there. And it’s never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed and doing some of its best and most important work, the threats we face are intensifying. Right now, with just three days to go in our Spring Campaign, we're falling short of our make-or-break goal. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Can you make a gift right now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? There is no backup plan or rainy day fund. There is only you. —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Award-winning American investigative journalist Glenn Greenwald welcomed a Brazilian judge's decision Thursday to reject cybercrime charges that federal prosecutors brought against him last month but also promised to keep fighting against assaults on press freedom by the right-wing government of Brazil President Jair Bolsonaro.
The Intercept co-founder responded to the judge's decision with videos in both English and Portuguese posted to Twitter. "It's obviously good news, but not good enough for us," Greenwald explained. "Our lawyers are now going to go to the Brazilian Supreme Court and seek a much broader ruling."
"We don't just want to win on procedural grounds; we want a clear ruling from the Supreme Court that any attempt to criminalize my journalism or my relationship with my sources is a grave assault on core press freedoms guaranteed by the Brazilian constitution," Greenwald added. "We want a clear ruling from the Supreme Court that will enduringly protect the right of a free press against further assaults from the Bolsonaro government."
Greenwald lives in Rio de Janeiro with his husband, Brazilian Congressman David Miranda, and their two children. Their family has faced mounting threats from Bolsonaro's "vitriolic anti-LGBTQ+" and "authoritarian, dictatorship-supporting movement," culminating in the cybercrime charges. Human rights and press freedom groups called the charges "a straightforward attempt to intimidate and retaliate against Greenwald and The Intercept for their critical reporting" on key government officials.
In the video Thursday, Greenwald, who worked as a constitutional attorney in the U.S. for a decade before entering journalism, also vowed that The Intercept will continue to report on the archive that provoked the criminal charges and thanked everyone from around the world who has expressed support and solidarity with him and his colleagues in Brazil.
Murtaza Hussain reported on the limitations of the judge's decision for The Intercept:
Judge Ricardo Augusto Soares Leite ruled that Greenwald's prosecution would not go forward, but only on account of a previous finding by the Brazilian Supreme Court that The Intercept's reporting on Operation Car Wash had not transgressed any legal boundaries. In the absence of the injunction issued by a Supreme Court minister that prohibited investigations into Greenwald related to this case, Leite said he would have let the charges against Greenwald move forward. The judge also said that, if the Supreme Court injunction were to be overturned, he would be open to charging Greenwald.
"I decline, for now, to receive the complaint against GLENN GREENWALD, due to the controversy over the extent of the injunction granted by Minister Gilmar Mendes in ADPF no 601, on 08/24/2019," Leite wrote, referring to the ruling by Mendes, a Supreme Court minister.
Betsy Reed, The Intercept's editor-in-chief, welcomed the judge's ruling while noting that it "is narrow and procedural."
"There remains enormous pressure to prosecute Glenn in retaliation for his work on The Intercept's Secret Brazil Archive series," she said. "We will continue to fight for the complete exoneration Glenn deserves, and for the rights of all journalists to exercise the freedoms they are entitled to under the Brazilian constitution."
Responding to the news on Twitter, the Americas Program of the Committee to Protect Journalists also welcomed the judge's ruling and declared that "Brazilian authorities must respect press freedom and stop criminalizing journalists."
Earlier Thursday, human rights experts with the United Nations and Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) released a joint statement in which they raised alarm about the charges brought against Greenwald, disclosed that they were in contact with Brazilian authorities regarding the case, and demanded that criminal investigations not be used to threaten journalistic work.
"Legal threats like these put all reporting in Brazil at risk," said David Kaye, U.N. special rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression. "Journalists who investigate cases of corruption or improper actions by public authorities should not be subjected to judicial or any other types of harassment in retaliation for their work."
Edison Lanza, special rapporteur for freedom of expression at IACHR, added that "criminal charges of this nature can also have a general chilling effect on press investigations. In the case of any measure that may affect the exercise of freedom of expression, states must ensure that restrictions are provided by law, serve one of the legitimate interests recognized by international law, and are necessary and proportionate to protect that interest."
Award-winning American investigative journalist Glenn Greenwald welcomed a Brazilian judge's decision Thursday to reject cybercrime charges that federal prosecutors brought against him last month but also promised to keep fighting against assaults on press freedom by the right-wing government of Brazil President Jair Bolsonaro.
The Intercept co-founder responded to the judge's decision with videos in both English and Portuguese posted to Twitter. "It's obviously good news, but not good enough for us," Greenwald explained. "Our lawyers are now going to go to the Brazilian Supreme Court and seek a much broader ruling."
"We don't just want to win on procedural grounds; we want a clear ruling from the Supreme Court that any attempt to criminalize my journalism or my relationship with my sources is a grave assault on core press freedoms guaranteed by the Brazilian constitution," Greenwald added. "We want a clear ruling from the Supreme Court that will enduringly protect the right of a free press against further assaults from the Bolsonaro government."
Greenwald lives in Rio de Janeiro with his husband, Brazilian Congressman David Miranda, and their two children. Their family has faced mounting threats from Bolsonaro's "vitriolic anti-LGBTQ+" and "authoritarian, dictatorship-supporting movement," culminating in the cybercrime charges. Human rights and press freedom groups called the charges "a straightforward attempt to intimidate and retaliate against Greenwald and The Intercept for their critical reporting" on key government officials.
In the video Thursday, Greenwald, who worked as a constitutional attorney in the U.S. for a decade before entering journalism, also vowed that The Intercept will continue to report on the archive that provoked the criminal charges and thanked everyone from around the world who has expressed support and solidarity with him and his colleagues in Brazil.
Murtaza Hussain reported on the limitations of the judge's decision for The Intercept:
Judge Ricardo Augusto Soares Leite ruled that Greenwald's prosecution would not go forward, but only on account of a previous finding by the Brazilian Supreme Court that The Intercept's reporting on Operation Car Wash had not transgressed any legal boundaries. In the absence of the injunction issued by a Supreme Court minister that prohibited investigations into Greenwald related to this case, Leite said he would have let the charges against Greenwald move forward. The judge also said that, if the Supreme Court injunction were to be overturned, he would be open to charging Greenwald.
"I decline, for now, to receive the complaint against GLENN GREENWALD, due to the controversy over the extent of the injunction granted by Minister Gilmar Mendes in ADPF no 601, on 08/24/2019," Leite wrote, referring to the ruling by Mendes, a Supreme Court minister.
Betsy Reed, The Intercept's editor-in-chief, welcomed the judge's ruling while noting that it "is narrow and procedural."
"There remains enormous pressure to prosecute Glenn in retaliation for his work on The Intercept's Secret Brazil Archive series," she said. "We will continue to fight for the complete exoneration Glenn deserves, and for the rights of all journalists to exercise the freedoms they are entitled to under the Brazilian constitution."
Responding to the news on Twitter, the Americas Program of the Committee to Protect Journalists also welcomed the judge's ruling and declared that "Brazilian authorities must respect press freedom and stop criminalizing journalists."
Earlier Thursday, human rights experts with the United Nations and Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) released a joint statement in which they raised alarm about the charges brought against Greenwald, disclosed that they were in contact with Brazilian authorities regarding the case, and demanded that criminal investigations not be used to threaten journalistic work.
"Legal threats like these put all reporting in Brazil at risk," said David Kaye, U.N. special rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression. "Journalists who investigate cases of corruption or improper actions by public authorities should not be subjected to judicial or any other types of harassment in retaliation for their work."
Edison Lanza, special rapporteur for freedom of expression at IACHR, added that "criminal charges of this nature can also have a general chilling effect on press investigations. In the case of any measure that may affect the exercise of freedom of expression, states must ensure that restrictions are provided by law, serve one of the legitimate interests recognized by international law, and are necessary and proportionate to protect that interest."