Keywords

actual malice, international human rights law, Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Argentina

Abstract

The Inter-American Court of Human Rights decided four cases in recent years that represent a positive step for freedom of expression in nations that belong to the Organization of American States. In 2004 and again in 2008, the court stopped short of adopting a standard that would require proof of actual malice in criminal defamation cases brought by public officials. In 2009, however, the court seemed to adopt the actual malice rule without calling it that. The court’s progress toward actual malice is chronicled in this article. The article concludes that the court’s decision not to explicitly use the phrase “actual malice” may be a positive development for freedom of expression in the Americas.

Original Publication Citation

Edward Carter (2013) Actual Malice in the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Communication Law and Policy, 18:4, 395-423, DOI: 10.1080/10811680.2013.831308