A Comparative Study On Different Countries’ Attitudes Toward Public Figures In Defamation Cases

Media defamation disputes have always been the legal field where the conflict between free speech and right of reputation is most prominent. Since there are always some overlap between free speech and the right of reputation, different countries’ attitudes toward public figure in media defamation cases can directly reflect different countries’tendency and attitudes toward the two most important values of free expression and personal reputation. Different countries take different legal mechanisms and attitudes when balancing the two values of free expression and personal reputation.Among all the western countries, the public figure doctrine taken by the US is the most representative one. Since 1964, the US gradually established a comprehensive legal mechanism protecting public figures’reputation, characterized with the "actual malice" burden of proof. The courts expect this doctrine to defend the free expression of the media when making criticisms and reports about public figures. The core of the mechanism is that when a public figure files a defamation case against the media, the court should adopt an entirely different set of legal criteria from the common citizens. In order to win the case, the public figure should not only prove the report is untrue, but also prove the actual malice of the media. This legal system aimed at lowering the winning rate of public figures especially the public officials who usually boast great influence and power in defamation cases. This system greatly protects free expression of the media and encourages open debate of the general public. The US contribution towards the legal mechanism protecting the public figures’reputation has been regarded as the most significant contribution next to the First Amendment of the Constitution.In order to form a comprehensive study of public figures’defamation issue, this thesis picks four most representative countries from both the west and east for study, which include the UK, US, South Korea and Japan. In the thesis, I take case study and comparative analysis methods to study the defamation law, defamation cases involving public figure of the four countries as well as their approaches toward public figures in defamation cases. This thesis takes a particular in-depth evaluation of the American legal system for public figures’reputation protection. I summarize the judicial practice of the US in various defamation cases and defend the strengths and advance of the US public figure attitude in defamation cases.Based on the study of the four countries’defamation legal systems concerning public figures, the thesis comes back at the public figures’defamation issue in China. This thesis holds that in recent years, the number of media defamation cases involving public figure in China is skyrocketing. Apart from movie stars, athletes and public officials, there are lots of government institutes and judges filing defamation cases against media. This thesis studies the defamation legal framework and respective court rulings in specific cases in China and finds there are several serious problems in the current public figure defamation legal system. These problems include no distinction of the plaintiff’s identity, lack of defenses for the media, judicial procedure problem as well as the disorder in the burden of proof. All these problems attribute to the low winning rate of media in defamation suits in China. The most direct consequence of media’s low winning rate is the chilling effect on news report. In another word, news media are afraid of making negative report on public figures. They keep their mouth shut when news comes to public figure and public matters. Eventually this effect may hamper the sound development of market economy and democratic politics.Based on the successful experience of the US in the legal system for the protection of public figures’reputation, this thesis holds that China can hardly establish its own legal system for the protection of public figures’reputation overnight. Still, there is urgent need for China to form a practical and consistent legal system for a better balance between free expression and protection of people’s reputation. To build the Chinese legal system for the protection of public figures’reputation, the first step for China is to optimize the atmosphere of free expression in China. It is necessary for the Chinese defamation law system to take an attitude more apt to the media defendant side. In addition, it is time for China to introduce the concept of public figure into legislation officially. Moreover, China should make its constitution judiciable. To be specific, on the one hand, the Supreme Court can make new rules for courts at various levels to deal with the application of constitution in proceedings. On the other hand, the Supreme Court can modify and perfect the judicial interpretation if the defamation case is hard to resolve in civil law.The good news is that with the development of democracy and globalization, in practice, some excellent Chinese judges have learned from the west and applied their discretion to make several remarkable and precedent rulings in defamation cases involving public figures. All these rulings represent desirable progress in the establishment of the Chinese legal system for the protection of public figures’ reputation.