Mariângela Galluci, from O Estado de S.Paulo
According to Gilmar Mendes, requiring a diploma is against the Federal Constitution which guarantees freedom of expression
BRASÍLIA - The Supreme Federal Court (STF) decided this Wednesday, the 17th, that journalists do not need a diploma to practice their profession. By 8 votes to 1, the STF overturned the journalism diploma requirement. This obligation had been imposed by a decree-law in 1969, during the period when the country was governed by a military dictatorship.
The rapporteur of the case at the STF, the President of the Supreme Court, Gilmar Mendes, stated that journalism is a distinct profession, linked to the broad exercise of freedom of expression and information. According to him, requiring a diploma from those practicing journalism goes against the Federal Constitution, which guarantees these freedoms. The diploma requirement had already been suspended since 2006, by an injunction granted by the STF.
"Journalism is the very manifestation and dissemination of thought and information in a continuous, professional, and remunerated manner. Journalists are those individuals who professionally dedicate themselves to the full exercise of freedom of expression. Journalism and freedom of expression, therefore, are activities intertwined by their very nature and cannot be conceived or treated separately," stated Mendes.
He believes that the 1969 decree-law requiring a journalism diploma for those working as journalists was not upheld by the current Constitution, which dates back to 1988.
"In this area, concerning this matter, society's safeguard is not to restrict anything," agreed Minister Carlos Ayres Britto.
Although he voted against the diploma requirement, the President of the STF acknowledged that it is undeniable that attending higher education with technical courses on writing and editing, ethics, and communication theory can provide a professional with solid training for the daily practice of journalism. "And this is an important reason to dismiss any assumption that undergraduate journalism courses will become unnecessary after the declaration of non-reception of article 4, item V, of decree-law no. 972/1969 (which established the diploma as mandatory)," he stated.
He indicated that diplomas should not be mandatory for other professions either.
"Such courses are extremely important for the technical and ethical preparation of professionals who will work in the field, just as are higher education courses in communication in general, culinary arts, marketing, industrial design, fashion and sewing, physical education, among many others, which are not indispensable requirements for the regular practice of professions related to these areas," he said.
To exemplify this thinking, he discussed the profession of a chef in more detail. "An excellent chef can certainly be trained in a culinary college, which does not legitimize the state to require that every single meal be prepared by a registered professional with a higher education diploma in that area. Certainly, public authorities cannot restrict professional freedom in the culinary field in this way, and no one doubts this, which does not, however, preclude the possibility of abusive and unethical practice of this profession, with risks to the health and lives of consumers," he stated.
The ministers stated that there is an excess of professional regulation.
During the trial, the President of the STF recalled that several journalists well-known to the general public work or have worked in Brazil and abroad without a journalism diploma. He cited the Colombian Gabriel Garcia Marquez, the Peruvian Mário Vargas Llosa, and the Brazilians Machado de Assis and Nelson Rodrigues as examples. Mendes stated that in 1992, a police inquiry was initiated against two journalists working in São Paulo without having completed their journalism degrees.
The only minister to vote in favor of the diploma requirement, Marco Aurélio Mello, stated that journalists must have the technical skills to interview, report, and research. "I must presume what normally occurs, not the exceptional: that a professional with the said higher level will be better qualified to provide beneficial services to Brazilian society," said Marco Aurélio.
The Federal Public Prosecutor's Office, which filed the action questioning the diploma requirement for practicing journalism, argued that the obligation violated the current Federal Constitution, which guarantees freedom of profession and the press and provides for the right to free work and the free expression of intellectual, artistic, scientific, and communication activities.
During the trial, the Attorney General, Antonio Fernando de Souza, argued that the Constitution establishes the freedom to exercise any work, provided professional qualifications are met.
"This restriction, however, relates only to professions whose practice requires specific technical knowledge, not referring to journalists. This is because journalism constitutes an intellectual activity, devoid of specificity, not requiring a higher education diploma, given the free manifestation of thought, as a corollary of freedom of expression, guaranteed in every democratic state of law," argued the Public Prosecutor's Office.
The lawyer for the Union of Radio and Television Companies of the State of São Paulo (Sertesp), Taís Gasparian, agreed with the Attorney General.
In her oral argument before the STF plenary, Taís also observed that the decree-law requiring the journalism diploma was issued during the military regime and aimed to control the dissemination of information and the expression of thoughts.
Taís further argued that it was impossible to prevent individuals without diplomas from practicing journalism, especially on the internet.
In favor of the diploma requirement, the lawyer for the National Federation of Journalists (Fenaj), João Roberto Piza Fontes, stated that the obligation did not prevent other people from writing in newspapers.
In favor of the diploma requirement, the lawyer for the National Federation of Journalists (Fenaj), João Roberto Piza Fontes, stated that the obligation did not prevent other people from writing in newspapers.
Source: Estadão
Mariângela Galluci, from O Estado de S.Paulo
According to Gilmar Mendes, requiring a diploma is against the Federal Constitution which guarantees freedom of expression
BRASÍLIA - The Supreme Federal Court (STF) decided this Wednesday, the 17th, that journalists do not need a diploma to practice their profession. By 8 votes to 1, the STF overturned the journalism diploma requirement. This obligation had been imposed by a decree-law in 1969, during the period when the country was governed by a military dictatorship.
The rapporteur of the case at the STF, the President of the Supreme Court, Gilmar Mendes, stated that journalism is a distinct profession, linked to the broad exercise of freedom of expression and information. According to him, requiring a diploma from those practicing journalism goes against the Federal Constitution, which guarantees these freedoms. The diploma requirement had already been suspended since 2006, by an injunction granted by the STF.
"Journalism is the very manifestation and dissemination of thought and information in a continuous, professional, and remunerated manner. Journalists are those individuals who professionally dedicate themselves to the full exercise of freedom of expression. Journalism and freedom of expression, therefore, are activities intertwined by their very nature and cannot be conceived or treated separately," stated Mendes.
He believes that the 1969 decree-law requiring a journalism diploma for those working as journalists was not upheld by the current Constitution, which dates back to 1988.
"In this area, concerning this matter, society's safeguard is not to restrict anything," agreed Minister Carlos Ayres Britto.
Although he voted against the diploma requirement, the President of the STF acknowledged that it is undeniable that attending higher education with technical courses on writing and editing, ethics, and communication theory can provide a professional with solid training for the daily practice of journalism. "And this is an important reason to dismiss any assumption that undergraduate journalism courses will become unnecessary after the declaration of non-reception of article 4, item V, of decree-law no. 972/1969 (which established the diploma as mandatory)," he stated.
He indicated that diplomas should not be mandatory for other professions either.
"Such courses are extremely important for the technical and ethical preparation of professionals who will work in the field, just as are higher education courses in communication in general, culinary arts, marketing, industrial design, fashion and sewing, physical education, among many others, which are not indispensable requirements for the regular practice of professions related to these areas," he said.
To exemplify this thinking, he discussed the profession of a chef in more detail. "An excellent chef can certainly be trained in a culinary college, which does not legitimize the state to require that every single meal be prepared by a registered professional with a higher education diploma in that area. Certainly, public authorities cannot restrict professional freedom in the culinary field in this way, and no one doubts this, which does not, however, preclude the possibility of abusive and unethical practice of this profession, with risks to the health and lives of consumers," he stated.
The ministers stated that there is an excess of professional regulation.
During the trial, the President of the STF recalled that several journalists well-known to the general public work or have worked in Brazil and abroad without a journalism diploma. He cited the Colombian Gabriel Garcia Marquez, the Peruvian Mário Vargas Llosa, and the Brazilians Machado de Assis and Nelson Rodrigues as examples. Mendes stated that in 1992, a police inquiry was initiated against two journalists working in São Paulo without having completed their journalism degrees.
The only minister to vote in favor of the diploma requirement, Marco Aurélio Mello, stated that journalists must have the technical skills to interview, report, and research. "I must presume what normally occurs, not the exceptional: that a professional with the said higher level will be better qualified to provide beneficial services to Brazilian society," said Marco Aurélio.
The Federal Public Prosecutor's Office, which filed the action questioning the diploma requirement for practicing journalism, argued that the obligation violated the current Federal Constitution, which guarantees freedom of profession and the press and provides for the right to free work and the free expression of intellectual, artistic, scientific, and communication activities.
During the trial, the Attorney General, Antonio Fernando de Souza, argued that the Constitution establishes the freedom to exercise any work, provided professional qualifications are met.
"This restriction, however, relates only to professions whose practice requires specific technical knowledge, not referring to journalists. This is because journalism constitutes an intellectual activity, devoid of specificity, not requiring a higher education diploma, given the free manifestation of thought, as a corollary of freedom of expression, guaranteed in every democratic state of law," argued the Public Prosecutor's Office.
The lawyer for the Union of Radio and Television Companies of the State of São Paulo (Sertesp), Taís Gasparian, agreed with the Attorney General.
In her oral argument before the STF plenary, Taís also observed that the decree-law requiring the journalism diploma was issued during the military regime and aimed to control the dissemination of information and the expression of thoughts.
Taís further argued that it was impossible to prevent individuals without diplomas from practicing journalism, especially on the internet.
In favor of the diploma requirement, the lawyer for the National Federation of Journalists (Fenaj), João Roberto Piza Fontes, stated that the obligation did not prevent other people from writing in newspapers.
In favor of the diploma requirement, the lawyer for the National Federation of Journalists (Fenaj), João Roberto Piza Fontes, stated that the obligation did not prevent other people from writing in newspapers.
Source: Estadão
