Analysing the legal standard of defamatory conduct during national elections in Zambia

Abstract

Journalists generally face a number of challenges in their reporting during the period of national elections. This comes as a result of their duty to afford the public the best means of discovering and forming an opinion of the ideas and attitudes of Political Leaders vying for the various positions as well as their obligation to balance this amongst protecting the reputation of these candidates.This research has undertaken the task of looking into how much leverage journalists should be given in their reporting of election candidates. Particular attention will be paid to the historical perspective, looking at how the courts have dealt with defamation cases during elections in all three republics and their consideration of press freedom. Looking at this will as well necessitate a critical analysis of our current defamation laws and whether they are in touch with the reality on the ground during election period. Suggestions such as amendments to the Defamation Act and/or the Electoral Code of Conduct in respect to the media as a way curb this poblem.Furthermore, amongst the issues of great importance will be the amount of regulation that must be imposed on the media and just how far into the lives of candidates they should be allowed to explore. To achieve this, a comparative study with the United States, England and Australia has be made to see how much clout the courts have given the media. A questioner was also distributed among key informants so as to obtain their views around key topics concerning this research.It is recommended that greater latitude needs to be extended towards these statements made during elections, than at any other time. This has not been the case in Zambia with the result that cases of defamation have been on the rise during election periods.