Ilana Dayan
Photo: Yossi Zebeker
Court orders journalist Ilana Dayan to pay NIS 300,000 in damages
Jerusalem District Court orders veteran journalist, ex-Channel 2 franchisee Telad to pay damages, legal fees of IDF officer who was focus of Dayan's TV show in 2004
Veteran journalist Ilana Dayan and Telad Television, a former Channel 2 franchisee, were ordered to pay NIS 300,000 (about $79,000) in damages to IDF Captain R. Tuesday, some five years after airing a show which he was the focus of.
In 2004, R. was charged with obstruction of justice and dead-checking in a case involving his brigade killing 13-year-old Iman al-Hams during an operation which took place near Gaza Strip's Philadelphi Route.
About six weeks after the incident, on the same day R. was indicted, Ilana Dayan's show, "Uvda" ("Fact") aired a special featuring evidence related to the case. R. was acquitted of all charges a year later and then-IDF Spokesperson Ruth Yaron accused Dayan of doctoring the tape heard on the show.
Several months after his acquittal R. filed a damages and slander suit against Dayan, claiming her report was libelous and defamatory. Dayan and Telad claimed that the report "was well balanced and worthy of airtime… the report was cohesive and fair journalistic work."
The Jerusalem District Court found in favor of the plaintiff and ordered Dayan and Telad to pay him NIS 300,000 in damages, as well as NIS 80,000 (about $21,000) in legal expenses. The court also ordered Dayan to air a segment about R.'s acquittal and clarify that the original segment had sent the wrong message.
"While there was no malice in the case, there was negligence and a grave one at that. We must warn and deter the journalistic public against such potential libel and clarify that they cannot use individual cases in order to send a message. The need to provoke discussion and send a message cannot come at the expense of one's reputation," said the court.
"We must also warn against the unbearable contempt for the purity of the criminal process; against the liberties taken by journalists, who publish evidence during an ongoing trial and disguise it as their public and moral duty.
"Since these things have already been done by the show and by such a reputable journalist, it is only fitting that the court awards such high damages."
Uvda released the following statement: "We believe this verdict is wrong and abundant with statements which do not concur with the fundamentals of free press and the values of a democratic society, as expressed by the many rulings of the Supreme Court.
"Uvda reserves the right to appeal the verdict before a higher judiciary and will make its decision on the matter in the next few days."
