LONDON – United Kingdom libel law, considered hostile to legitimate free speech internationally, was the subject of a Jan. 11 debate in London.
United Kingdom libel law, considered hostile to legitimate free speech internationally, was the subject of a Jan. 11 debate in London.
A packed house at the Honourable Society of Gray’s Inn sat in for the discussion “Libel Law: In the Public’s Interest.” It was chaired by noted lawyer Helena Kennedy, who said the U.K. law has a chilling effect on public debate. “People fearful of libel end up not writing about matters that should be in the public domain,” Kennedy said.
Evan Harris, a former member of parliament who is promoting changes to the law, said draft legislation will be ready in March. “I wouldn’t describe the current law as claimant friendly or even defendant hostile, but it is free speech hostile, it is chilling in many ways,” Harris said.
One of the main problems is the cost of defending libel suits. The U.K. uses “conditional fee arrangements” whereby solicitors can recover double their fees from a defendant if the claimant wins the case. In cases that go to trial, this can mean legal costs of more than $1.5 million.
Razi Mireskandari, speaker and managing partner of a law firm specializing in media litigation, said “claimants are now in the driving seat and their lawyers can make too much money out of these sorts of cases.”
Victims of the current system are numerous.
As well as the much-publicized phenomenon of “libel tourism,” in which foreign claimants have brought defamation cases in U.K. courts in disputes that take place in other nations, other problems were cited.
Harris said the onerous libel law has harmed the work of scientists, researchers and others. “The editors of even peer-reviewed scientific and scholarly journals find that they can’t afford the investment of two or three of their staff’s salaries to contest a case,” Harris said.
Speaker Kevin Marsh, executive editor of the BBC College of Journalism, provided a counterpoint. Marsh said that “not all journalism is honest, well-sourced, fair-minded or in the public interest.” He said malicious accusations are made by U.K. journalists “who have lost touch with the idea that they’re trading about honesty and their honestly checked facts.”
In the Internet age, Marsh said that “once you’re libeled, you’re pretty much libeled forever.”
Panelists such as Mireskandari said that damage awards should be lowered. Harris also said “libel tourism” could be reduced by judges dismissing “trivial yet bullying claims from powerful claimants.”
Speaker Charles Gray said settlements need to be encouraged. One way might be for judges to assess the case before having it heard by a jury. Gray, however, said that “the problem of libel tourism is grossly exaggerated.”
Roland Sylvester is a freelance journalist based in London.
Read also “Archaic libel laws in United Kingdom harm free speech“, and “Britain’s Clegg vows to end ‘libel tourism’ by foreigners“
