Decisio N166
December 22, 2017
Case - Lasha Bordzikuli
vs. Khatuna Kontkhonjia
Head of Council: Giorgi Mgeladze
Council members: Tamar Uchidze, Jaba Ananidze,
Tazo Kupreishvili, Nino Jafiashvili, Maia Mamulashvili.
Applicant: Lasha Bordzikuli [Hegumen Dionise]
Respondent: Khatuna Kontkhonjia
Description
Hegumen Dionise applied to the Georgian Charter of Journalistic
ethics. He thought that the magazine “Tbiliselebi” issue of
September 25 – October 2 article: “What was the relationship of
model Koba Fartenadze with priest Giorgi Mamaladze and how was he
oppressed by father Andria Turmanidze” violated Charter’s 1st, 10th
and 11th principles. Article was by Khatuna Kortkhonjia.
Applicant Hegumen Dionise attended the hearing. Respondent did not
attend it or provide written statement.
Proven facts:
Magazine “Tbiliselebi” issue of September 25th – October 2nd had
the article: “What was the relationship of model Koba Fartenadze
with priest Giorgi Mamaladze and how was he oppressed by father
Andria Turmanidze”. Main part of the article was the interview with
Koba Fartenadze, who was in one of the photos which the accused in
relations with the “cianyde case” Giorgi Mamaladze said that
prosecutor’s office was blackmailing him with. The information
about interview was printed on the cover of the magazine
accompanied by the photo of Koba Fartenadze and Hegumen Dionise
together.
Article did not mention Hegumen Dionise or identify him in any
indirect way.
Findings of the Council
According to the first principle of the Charter “a journalist must
respect the truth and society’s right to get precise information”.
Facts make it clear, that Hegumen Dionise did not have anything to
do with the article, in relation to which his photo was printed on
the cover of the magazine. Charter mentioned in multiple of
decisions, that the printed photo on the cover, the title printed
there, can be considered as separate journalistic product, because
it is what creates first impression on the reader and there is a
chance that they might not read the rest of the article, which
leaves the chance that they will have incorrect opinions about the
fact.
To analyze the case example, the first and the second facts
mentioned in descriptive part create the perception that Hegumen
Dionise was connected with Giorgi Mamaladze of father Andria
Turmanidze oppressing Koba Fartenadze. The circumstances were made
more sensitive because Giorgi Mamaladze is accused in “cyanide
case”, where Koba Fartenadze was also mentioned. As a conclusion,
Council wants to say, that using Hegumen Dionise’s photo was not
connected to the journalistic product, created incorrect
perceptions and impressions, therefore it violated the first
principle of the Charter.
According to the 10th principle of the Charter: “a journalist must
respect personal life of a person and not violate privacy if there
is no specific public interest”. Charter contacted Koba Fartenadze
to understand how the photo was obtained. As Koba Fartenadze told
the Council, he had posted the photo publically on Facebook and
gave the journalist permission to use any photo from his Facebook
Page himself. Therefore, the Charter thinks that the privacy
violation did not take place.
According to the 11th principle of the Charter: “journalist must
consider the following as a severe work crime: distorting facts
deliberately”. Charter did not see a reason or any other
circumstances, which would have proven the journalist’s aim to
deliberately print a photo where Hegumen Dionise was depicted even
though he did not have anything to do with the product. In this
case, Council thinks that only 1st and not the 11th principle was
violated.
Resolution
From everything mentioned above:
- Khatuna Kortkhonjia violated the first principle of the
Charter.
- Khatuna Kortkhonjia did not violate 10th or 11th principles of
the Charter.