본문 바로가기
bar_progress

Text Size

Close

DP Pushes for Punitive Damages Against Media: "False Reports Subject to Damages Even Without Malice"

On September 5, the Democratic Party of Korea announced its intention to effectively introduce punitive damages for “false and manipulated reporting” by the media.

DP Pushes for Punitive Damages Against Media: "False Reports Subject to Damages Even Without Malice" Jeong Cheongrae, leader of the Democratic Party of Korea, is entering the National Assembly for the inaugural ceremony and first meeting of the Special Committee on People’s Sovereignty and Media Reform held on the 14th of last month. Photo by Yonhap News

The party’s Special Committee on Media Reform held a press briefing at the National Assembly on the same day, stating that it would seek to amend the Act on Press Arbitration to allow for claims of damages worth several times the actual loss in cases of false reporting caused by the media’s intent or negligence.


The committee explained that, as a first step, it would introduce a “multiple damages” system through legislative amendment, which would determine compensation at a multiple of the actual damages in cases where false or manipulated reporting by the media results in harm. There will be no separate cap on the compensation amount. The amount will be calculated differentially, depending on whether the reporting was intentional or grossly negligent, and whether it was direct, quoted, or mediated. Regarding the scale of punitive damages, the committee noted that while other laws such as the Personal Information Protection Act currently set the maximum at 3 to 5 times the actual damages, the new system would set it higher.


The committee also stated that it would leave room for further increases in compensation depending on the impact of the report and the degree of intent involved. However, the committee did not specify exactly how many times the damages could be multiplied.


The multiple damages system will apply if it is proven that the subject of the report, citation, or mediation was false, and that there was intent or gross negligence in the reporting, citation, or mediation process. Whether there was “malice” in the reporting will not be distinguished. Regardless of whether the false report was intentional or negligent, the committee’s intent is to effectively introduce punitive damages based solely on the fact that the media published a false report.


The committee decided to include YouTube as a target of regulation. To this end, it is considering either explicitly mentioning YouTube in the amendment to the Act on Press Arbitration, or amending both the Act on Press Arbitration and the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization simultaneously.


The committee argued, “The term ‘multiple damages’ is more appropriate than ‘punitive damages’ for this amendment,” and added, “Although the level of multiple damages under the revised Act on Press Arbitration under review by the committee is higher than the current 3 to 5 times, it does not reach the concept of ‘punishment.’”


The committee also stated that it has put in place measures to prevent reckless claims for damages by those in power. Before filing a claim for damages, an application for mediation must first be submitted to the Press Arbitration Commission. If the party does not accept the commission’s decision, only a general damages suit-not a multiple damages suit-will be allowed.


The committee is also considering allowing requests for an interim judgment in cases involving reports related to the public interest. The victim who files for multiple damages must prove the media’s intent or gross negligence, and separate requirements for presuming intent or gross negligence will be stipulated. However, the committee does not intend to prohibit those in power from filing “multiple damages” lawsuits against the media altogether.


Previously, Lee Guyoun, Senior Secretary for Public Relations and Communication at the Presidential Office, responded in a media interview on September 3 to a question about whether it would be problematic to introduce punitive damages for reports targeting the government or politicians, saying, “Shouldn’t we approach with caution the idea of allowing politicians to sue the media as well?”


© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.

Special Coverage


Join us on social!

Top