Court overturns dismissal of lawsuit over Milei journalist insults

Appeals court judge Eduardo Farah has quashed a previous court decision acquitting President Javier Milei of charges in a case in which he accused Editorial Perfil co-founder Jorge Fontevecchia of being “on the take” and “living off” state advertising.

Farah, who issued his decision last Thursday, also decided to remove Federal Judge Sebastián Ramos from the case.

The decision is the latest in a series of back-and-forths between the head of state and critical journalists, whom he frequently insults.

Farah annulled last Thursday the decision to dismiss the case against Milei investigating him for calling journalist Fontevecchia of being “ensobrado” (“on the take”) and claiming that he lives off “the pauta” – a reference to national state advertising. 

The Appeals Court on Thursday declared the president's acquittal null and void. Farah, from Chamber I of the Court of Appeals, who held that the “resolution is null and void because it is extemporaneous (premature) and because it is confusing and generic,” according to the ruling.

The magistrate ruled in response to an appeal by the plaintiff, dismissed Ramos for “having anticipated an opinion” and ordered another judge to hear the case.

“The appealed decision therefore exhibits an argumentative vacuum that deprives it of meaning, it is dogmatic, therefore arbitrary and, therefore, null and void,” said the judge.

The lawsuit was filed because of Milei's statements on April 8, 2024, when he was already president. Appearing on Neura Media and FM 89.7 radio, the head of state made his allegations, prompting a lawsuit from Fontevecchia. 

Other journalists have also filed suit regarding comments about their characters. 

Milei's defence lawyers argue that these expressions were part of the “public interest” and therefore there was no crime due to the “public personality” status of the media businessman who was the plaintiff in the case.

But before dismissing the case, Judge Ramos had to “consider the implications of the jurisprudence on the protection of privacy and freedom of the press, especially when this could eventually lead to international liability,” ruled Farah.

– TIMES/NA/PERFIL