Wednesday, December 12th 2012 - 07:59 UTC

Clarin/Cristina Fernandez legal battle rages on with a new appeal

The Argentine government submitted on Tuesday morning an extraordinary recourse before the Federal Civil and Commercial Court against the extension of the Clarín Group’s injunction to comply with the Media Law, granted by the Civil and Commercial Court N° 1.

Breaking up the Clarin media group, Cristina’s obsession

The new appeal was submitted by the Cabinet Chief’s office in another attempt to skip court N°1 and make the Federal Civil and Commercial Court take the case directly to the Supreme Court, even though the latter unanimously dismissed the government’s recourse to the legal mechanism called “per saltum” on Monday.

Furthermore, the administration of Cristina Fernandez will seek to impeach the judges of the Federal Civil and Commercial Court for ruling on the injunction extension. Judicial sources told the Buenos Aires newspaper Ambito Financiero that Judge Susana Najurieta will be denounced before Thursday in the hope of her revoking.

The Upper House Constitutional Affairs Committee chairman Senator Marcelo Fuentes (Victory Front— Neuquén) asserted that even though the decision to start an impeachment trial has already “been taken,” they have to “analyze” whether to charge all three members of the Civil and Commercial Court or only Najurieta.

After the Argentine government submitted the extraordinary recourse before the Federal Civil and Commercial Court, Justice Minister Julio Alak showed his disagreement.

“We are seeking for the annulment of the injunction extension that has already become eternal and only looks to deny the Media Law”, Alak told reporters.

“It’s been three years since the approval of the Media Law and the civil and commercial court in charge of the injunction extended to Clarín Group has shown nothing but contradictions. They have even gone against the Supreme Court that was very clear on May 22 when it indicated that the injunction was to last until December 7.”

“Furthermore, on November 27 the Supreme Court said that a final verdict should be given on the topic as an injunction extension was not an option.”

The administration of President Cristina Fernandez is obsessed with breaking up the Clarin media group, which is described as a monopoly and thus her intention to ‘democratize’ media access and coverage. However it is well known and there is abundant evidence to that effect that the Argentine president does not tolerate dissident much less opposition press and has targeted Clarin, until 2007 an ally of her deceased husband Nestor Kirchner government.

The Clarin group sins have been not to follow obediently the government’s interests and particularly since 2008 when it made an ample coverage of the farmers’ conflict, the first great political defeat of the Kirchner couple followed by the significant erosion suffered in the mid term elections of 2009, precisely the year when the Media Law was pushed through Congress.

But Cristina Fernandez managed a spectacular comeback in 2011 when she was re-elected with 54% of the vote and no opposition contenders on sight. Massive subsidies to keep public utility rates frozen and the spurring of the domestic market with generous salaries increases made the difference plus public opinion sorrow for the loss of her husband in 2010.

Since then the legal battle has raged with Clarin objecting the constitutionality of several articles of the Media Bill and the Cristina Fernandez administration threatening and bullying the Judicial branch to speed the break up of the group.

Clarin has an annual turnover of 2 billion dollars, over 240 licences and if not a monopoly a dominant position in radio, television and cable television which makes it a formidable enemy. Furthermore the Executive fierce, at times blind attacks have turned Clarin into the victim of government encroachment on freedom of the press and freedom of speech gaining international support.

27 comments Feed

Note: Comments do not reflect MercoPress’ opinions. They are the personal view of our users. We wish to keep this as open and unregulated as possible. However, rude or foul language, discriminative comments (based on ethnicity, religion, gender, nationality, sexual orientation or the sort), spamming or any other offensive or inappropriate behaviour will not be tolerated. Please report any inadequate posts to the editor. Comments must be in English. Thank you.

1 emerald (#) Dec 12th, 2012 - 09:15 am Report abuse
find new comment names from Argentina
altough we know you are not aware of this country.
2 Rufus (#) Dec 12th, 2012 - 10:00 am Report abuse
What she needs to do is appoint a new court with a seniority that outranks the Supreme Court, and stack it with her yes-men.

I know, it can be called “Maximo's Supremest Court”
3 Idlehands (#) Dec 12th, 2012 - 10:20 am Report abuse
They could call it the Ultra Super Dooper Maximum Supreme Court - but if that is too much of a mouthfull they could shorten it to “Kangaroo”

CFK is probably right that Clarin holds a monopoly position so it seems rather daft to break every rule in the book in her efforts to break it up.

What is particularly funny is that her tactic for all legal cases against Argentina is to kick it down the road with delay after delay and yet she has a temper tantrum when others use exactly the same tactic.
4 Welsh Wizard (#) Dec 12th, 2012 - 10:21 am Report abuse
I actually don't understand this. With the regards to the extension ruling and the indictment of the Judges, was it that they did not have the legal power to hear this case or was it that they didn't have the power make that ruling? If not why (as surely this would be an appeal against the original decision and kind of like Judical review prcoess)? If they didn't have the power to hear this, how did it get through the door in the first place?

Wasn't this an appeal against the constitutionality of the original judgement? Yes the Supreme Court has ruled on the media law but if they have not specifically ruled on the questions raised in this appeal then how can the judges be indicted. Won't this also go through to the Supreme Court on appeal if the ruling from the Appeal Court does not go the Governments way. I know we all say this but it is almost impossible to overestimate the importance of leaving the judiciary alone and allow due process to continue. It is evident that there is corruption in the Argentinean judicial system but the government needs to deal with it in a different way if there is. Sitting in my office in Whitehall I get a really uneasy feeling about this.
5 Mendoza Canadian (#) Dec 12th, 2012 - 10:42 am Report abuse
I just read in MDZ that the law allows the government access to 100% of the population, but only 35% for private they gave the right to monopoly to themselves??
6 Welsh Wizard (#) Dec 12th, 2012 - 10:44 am Report abuse

Any chance you could forward the story?
7 Shed-time (#) Dec 12th, 2012 - 10:45 am Report abuse
@4 With her $530million tucked away in a personal wealth fund she's basically the pot calling the kettle black. However, for her to ensure that the country is ready for Maximo's fourth reich she has to get the judicial branch aligned with her daily witch hunts, because they're the only people left who can deny her claims of having created the worlds greatest democracy (in a DPRK democracy style).

Argentina is such as lame horse waiting for the tractor and shotgun.
8 Idlehands (#) Dec 12th, 2012 - 12:54 pm Report abuse
An Argentine story that has made the UK press:

More threats to impeach judges - it seems to be the latest craze. Do they not have juries in Argentina?
9 Tobers (#) Dec 12th, 2012 - 01:10 pm Report abuse
Idlehands you must be mistaken.

We are -constantly- reminded by a certain poster here how this kind of thing only happens in our perverted sexually depraved anglo saxion culture.
10 Simon68 (#) Dec 12th, 2012 - 01:28 pm Report abuse
8 Idlehands (#)
Dec 12th, 2012 - 12:54 pm

To answer your question: No. Judgement is made by Tribunal, three judges, in the case heard in Tucuman, the plaintiff's witnesses were 5 young girls who had been kidnapped and sold into prostitution by the defendants, who were perfectly recognized by the witnesses, but all were cleared by the tribunal because the judges were bought by the defenants' boss who also owns the governor of Tucuman and his cabinet!!!!!

Back on thread: The whole idea that the Clarín group constitues a “monopoly” is ridiculous. To be a monopoly there would have to be no other newspaper but Clarín, no other TV chanels but those owned by Clarín Group, but in fact there are innumerable newspapers and TV chanels. So there is NOT a monopoly, not even a government monopoly... YET. But that is what this government wants, it NEEDS to only have ONE voice speaking to the people... CFK's voice.

I should explain that I am not a Clarín reader, I only read the “Río Negro” newspaper, but I DO watch a Clarín Group TV station, TN because it gives good news coverage and has extremely good, even handed op-ed programmes.
11 Raul (#) Dec 12th, 2012 - 01:29 pm Report abuse
5 Mendoza Canadian

26,522 law comunicaion Services is an excellent audiovisual law by eliminating private monopolies who supported coups and terrorism communications with its neoliberal policies (Clarín, La Nación, Group One, etc Newfoundland Andes.) These economic groups are aligned with global economic power factors aligned to the Washington consensus (BBC, CNN, ABC, NBC) and state terrorism (USA and England)

In the province of Mendoza MDZ Terranova group is linked to economic groups who support coups Institutional (Cobos, Moneta,) Work with the Los Andes which was bought by Clarín and favors institutional soft coups and Honduras and Paraguay.

The media law was worked for over 10 years and expresses the will of the people, voted on and approved by the National Congress against newspaper monopolies that supported coups in Argentina.

For more information I recommend the following link: EF% BF% BDN-audiovisual
12 Shed-time (#) Dec 12th, 2012 - 01:30 pm Report abuse
@8 I was wondering about that myself. Why were the juries not involved in deliberating upon a decision based upon the Judge's advice? Where are the 12 good men and true? If there wasn't any evidence, how did the prosecution take this to trial? Was this a civil action?

13 briton (#) Dec 12th, 2012 - 01:38 pm Report abuse
Would it not be fair to say,
That CFK wants a state /CFK controlled press , controlled judges / police / military,

Would this in fairness be called a dictatorship?
And would it also be fair to say that she wishes to become empress/ruler,

Or am I just imagining things.
14 Shed-time (#) Dec 12th, 2012 - 01:51 pm Report abuse
@13 I think what you described is called a 'Latin democracy' (i.e. a dictatorship)
15 Idlehands (#) Dec 12th, 2012 - 01:58 pm Report abuse
“In Economics, a monopoly exists when a specific individual or enterprise has sufficient control over a particular product or service to determine significantly the terms on which other individuals shall have access to it.”

You don't have to control 100% to be considered a monopoly.
16 Orbit (#) Dec 12th, 2012 - 02:00 pm Report abuse
@11 - Are the media organisations being investigated for supporting coups and terrorism ?
17 ElaineB (#) Dec 12th, 2012 - 02:16 pm Report abuse
Let us not forget that Nestor granted the licences to Clarin when all was sweet and cosy between them. This is CFKC on a personal vendetta.

@4 I understand the crux of the matter is that the government skipped over a lower court to get a ruling from the Supreme Court. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court needed a ruling from a lower court to make a ruling. At least, that was the get-out excuse they found to not make a ruling in favour of the government.

Once again CFKC ignores procedure and runs to the highest authority instead of the correct process. Impatient and ignorant.
18 MrFlagpole (#) Dec 12th, 2012 - 02:18 pm Report abuse
It's like a lesson in the opposite of democracy.
19 Simon68 (#) Dec 12th, 2012 - 02:39 pm Report abuse
11 Raul (#)
Dec 12th, 2012 - 01:29 pm

Raúl, your post is so biased it is not worth even reading!!!!!

Just how many monopolies are you talking about? How many can there be at one and the same time?

To say that Cobos supports institutional coups is certainly THE stupidest claim I have ever heard, the man is famed for being a fervent democrat!!!!!
20 emerald (#) Dec 12th, 2012 - 02:43 pm Report abuse
21 ChrisR (#) Dec 12th, 2012 - 03:15 pm Report abuse
I wonder if the AG lawyers will be able to get the wording to align with the law this time round?

You just couldn't make this up, unless you were in Cuba, Iran, Gaza, N. Korea or the old Russia.
22 Raul (#) Dec 12th, 2012 - 03:24 pm Report abuse
19 simon68

Saying that Cobos supports institutional shock is undoubtedly the stupidest statement I have heard, the man is famous for being an ardent Democrat!

You are very innocent. It is so stupid. She eventually learned that Julio Cobos work on a plan B, in the context of the conflict in the 125 field, along with rural society, chaired by Hugo Biolcati, the Church and the media monopolies Clarin and La Nacion and supported from abroad by CNN and the BBC, creating an atmosphere of chaos in public opinion to the coup in Honduras and Paraguay and I wanted to do in Ecuador with Correa and Chavez in Venezuela.

Not the first time that the media do. These means (Clarin and La Nacion) made ​​the economic blow to Raul Alfonsin in 1989, supported the rise of Menem and Duhalde with its neoliberal policies and silenced popular conflict in 2001.
It is one of the causes of the downfall of Cobos in national public opinion and in the radicalism of his position with silent undemocratic economic and media monopolies.

The journalist Mariano Grondona in Time Key program witnessed it.

If you do not believe me see for yourself at the following link:
23 Optimus_Princeps (#) Dec 12th, 2012 - 03:59 pm Report abuse
@22 I've been meaning to ask this for a while. If Menem was so horrible, why does he enjoy employment under Cristina. He generated a large portion of the debt that caused the default. Shouldn't he be placed in the stocks and pelted with rotten vegetables, or drawn and quartered for his stupidity?

You sound like a troll. Your sources sound overly biased like they were contrived by a hateful maniacal hack journalist working out of mom's basement for government scraps. Just sayin'. News is supposed to sound neutral as possible. Extreme emotional bias is highly suspect.
24 Simon68 (#) Dec 12th, 2012 - 06:02 pm Report abuse
22 Raul (#)
Dec 12th, 2012 - 03:24 pm

If you believe that conspiracy theory crap that you write in your second paragraph, there is no hope for you. Where the hell do the BBC and CNN come into a minor internal political fight in Argentina??????? And what did you want to do in Ecuador with Correa and Chávez in Venezuela?????

Raúl Alfonsin was ousted by the peronists with the support of the labor unions, La Nación and Clarín had very little to do with it and Julito Cobos has not had a downfall, he is still a hero to one hell of a lot of Argentines!!!!!
25 Orbit (#) Dec 12th, 2012 - 09:51 pm Report abuse
@23, @24 As there was no response to my question @16 one can only assume Raul is a delusional paranoid who thinks that a charge of 'being a monopoly', however ill-founded, carries more weight than charges of terrorism and constitutional over throw!
26 ProRG_American (#) Dec 13th, 2012 - 12:47 am Report abuse
Fight those bastards Cris!! Don't give up now. A small step at a time, you are certainly making progress. Those little steps will get bigger as time goes by.
27 Ayayay (#) Dec 13th, 2012 - 04:14 am Report abuse
If they wanted strong, independent communication/media for their citizens, why aren't they supporting Taringa! Why jail-time and hundreds of thousands in fines for an Argentine social network??

Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!


Get Email News Reports!

Get our news right on your inbox.
Subscribe Now!