Index on Censorship » Press Releases

Index welcomes newspapers’ rejection of cross-party approach to press regulation

Pam Cowburn — Thu, 25 Apr 2013 13:15:05 +0000

Index CEO Kirsty Hughes said:

‘The Royal Charter introduces unwarranted government interference into the process of press regulation. Index welcomes the industry’s rejection of this approach. All those who refuse to sign up to the regulator will now risk facing exemplary damages, which means there will be a continuing chill on press freedom in the UK.

A truly independent and voluntary system is needed and must be one that offer tough standards and complaints procedures.

Index is concerned, however, that the industry appear to want to use the vehicle of a Royal Charter, which we believe would still allow an undesirable political influence.’

The post Index welcomes newspapers’ rejection of cross-party approach to press regulation appeared first on Index on Censorship.

Index criticises amendments to the Courts and Crime Bill

Pam Cowburn — Mon, 22 Apr 2013 10:49:12 +0000

Index on Censorship has criticised amendments to the Courts and Crime Bill, which propose that media organisations that employ more than ten people and have an annual turnover of more than £2 million could face exemplary damages if they don’t join a press regulator. The amendments were passed by the House of Commons this evening.

Index CEO Kirsty Hughes said: “The vote today means that a wide range of organisations, both online and off will face the threat of exemplary damages if they don’t join the new regulator. The attempt to exempt some small bloggers from exemplary damages is muddled and risks leaving many groups unsure whether they risk exemplary damages or not. The overall outcome will be chilling in its effect on free speech.”

Index opposes the statutory underpinning of a press regulator by Royal Charter. Read our full response on Leveson, the Royal Charter and press reform and the potential impact upon free speech in the UK and beyond.

The post Index criticises amendments to the Courts and Crime Bill appeared first on Index on Censorship.

House of Lords debate is last chance to protect citizens’ freedom to criticise big business

Pam Cowburn — Thu, 18 Apr 2013 10:47:33 +0000

News release: House of Lords debate is last chance to protect citizens’ freedom to criticise big business

Defamation Bill does not contain any specific measures to prevent companies from using libel law to bully critics
Government to allow taxpayers’ money to be used for libel claims
Multi-nationals like ATOS free to bully those who criticise state-funded services
Companies free to sue their critics without having to show any financial harm
Church of scientology able to silence critics by libel threats
Case that sparked the campaign (BCA vs Singh) could happen again

The House of Lords has one last chance to protect citizens’ right to criticise corporations. In a debate next Tuesday, amendments to the Defamation Bill that would limit companies’ and other corporate bodies’ use of the libel laws will be debated. The amendments will include a clause that requires companies to demonstrate financial harm before they can sue. Also to be debated is a proposal that corporations which receive taxpayers’ money to deliver public services cannot sue for libel.

Similar amendments were rejected by the government in a House of Commons vote on Tuesday April 16. As it stands, the Defamation Bill would give private companies that deliver public services an advantage over government bodies, which are barred by the common law Derbyshire principle from suing for libel if they are criticised by members of the public. The Libel Reform Campaign believes that corporations which receive taxpayers’ money should receive the same treatment as public bodies.

Case study: ATOS forces disability support forum to close

ATOS Healthcare used libel law to silence its critics on CarerWatch, a closed forum where carers go to share experiences. Users’ posts had criticised how ATOS was running a state-funded contract to assess disability claimants fitness for work. In August 2011, ATOS’s lawyers sent a legal threat to myfreeforum.org, the host of the carer’s forum. Myfreeforum.org, fearing an expensive libel action, closed the forum. Frances Kelly, the founder of CarerWatch, said at the time: “The sudden disappearance of a support group has caused a lot of distress and fear. Some (members) are ringing us in tears.” After public outcry, CarerWatch is now back online.

The Libel Reform Campaign was founded in 2009 to call for reform of England’s outdated libel laws to protect open debate and the public interest. Since then we have heard from hundreds of scientists, human rights NGOs, journalists, consumer watchdogs and parenting forums about cases and threats of libel action from companies that are chilling debate. We can share some of these stories. Please get in touch.

The House of Lords debate will take place on Tuesday April 23.

Simon Singh, author and libel defendant in BCA v. Singh, said:

“The majority of the cases that galvanized public support for libel reform involved corporations, so the final Defamation Bill must include a clause that limits the powers for corporations to bully their critics into silence. The proposal on the table is reasonable, modest and fair. Ignoring this proposal on corporations would leave the door open to further abuses of libel law by those who want to block the public’s access to information concerning everything from consumer issues to medical treatments.”

Jo Glanville, Director of English PEN said:

‘If this is going to be a Bill that delivers the commitment promised by all three parties, then it must include reform that addresses the bullying libel tactics of companies. There must be a higher hurdle that makes it less easy for companies to silence whistleblowers. Some of the most egregious libel cases have involved companies suing individuals for speaking out in the public interest. It’s now down to the Lords to deliver the reform that’s needed.’

Kirsty Hughes, Chief Executive of Index on Censorship, said:

‘Powerful corporations can use libel law to pressurise people who legitimately criticise them. In the past, we have seen libel law being used to silence doctors, scientists and consumers. We cannot continue to protect the rights of corporations at the expense of freedom of expression.

Tracey Brown, Director of Sense About Science, said:

“While it is deeply disappointing that the corporations clause has been removed from the Defamation Bill, the efforts of MPs who recognise the need for corporations to show actual financial harm have at least led the Government to concede that this should be revisited in the Lords. It cannot be right that the court is not asked to consider whether companies have faced loss, or are likely to, before a case can go ahead. It cannot be right that citizens can’t criticise delivery of public services whether by private companies or by the Government.”

Notes to editors

The Libel Reform Campaign is a coalition of three charities: English PEN, Index on Censorship and Sense About Science. In November 2009, after a year-long inquiry, the ‘Free Speech Is Not For Sale’ report was published by English PEN and Index on Censorship. In June 2009, Sense About Science launched the Keep Libel Laws out of Science campaign publicising libel threats against scientists such as Simon Singh and Peter Wilmshurst.

In December 2009, the three charities came together to form the Libel Reform Campaign. Over 60,000 supporters and more than 100 organisations have joined the campaign. www.libelreform.org

The post House of Lords debate is last chance to protect citizens’ freedom to criticise big business appeared first on Index on Censorship.

F1 should not host the Grand Prix in Bahrain

Pam Cowburn — Thu, 18 Apr 2013 10:46:07 +0000

The Bahraini government is using excessive and uncalled for force to suppress pro-democracy protests in the lead up to Sunday’s Grand Prix. The Gulf regime is still refusing to respect the basic human rights of the Bahraini people, including the right to free speech and to the right to protest peacefully. Earlier this week former racing driver Damon Hill called on F1 to take an ethical stance on
hosting the race in Bahrain.

Kirsty Hughes, Index CEO said:
‘Yet again the Bahraini Government is using the Grand Prix to present a favourable image of itself to the international community. In reality the regime suppresses protest, silences dissent and imprisons activists on trumped up charges. While people are being denied their basic human rights, F1 should not host the race in Bahrain and the race’s sponsors should withdraw their support.

Pro-democracy demands have been brutally suppressed in Bahrain since uprisings began on February 14, 2011. The Bahrain Centre for Human Rights (BCHR), which received an Index Freedom of Expression Award in 2012,estimate that there have been 89 deaths over the last two years. One of the many people imprisoned by the regime is Nabeel Rajab, currently serving a two-year sentence for organising so-called “illegal gatherings”. In March 2012, while accepting the Index award on behalf of BCHR human rights activist Rajab said that the international community heard little about uprisings in Bahrain because ‘we have oil’.

The post F1 should not host the Grand Prix in Bahrain appeared first on Index on Censorship.

Index on Censorship defends right to protest ahead of Margaret Thatcher’s funeral

Pam Cowburn — Tue, 16 Apr 2013 10:44:34 +0000

Index on Censorship has defended the right to protest ahead of Margaret Thatcher’s funeral tomorrow.

Index CEO Kirsty Hughes said:

‘Some may feel it is distasteful to protest at a funeral but the right to protest is fundamental to a democracy. The role of the police is to maintain order not to prevent legitimate protest by those who wish to show dissent.’

The funeral has re-ignited the debate over Section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986, which could be used by the police to arrest anyone causing ‘alarm’ or ‘distress’. In February, MPs agreed to remove ‘insulting words and behaviour’ from Section 5 of the Act but this will not become law until later in the year.

The post Index on Censorship defends right to protest ahead of Margaret Thatcher’s funeral appeared first on Index on Censorship.

Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Bill debate – changes to Royal charters will allow political influence over press

Pam Cowburn — Tue, 16 Apr 2013 10:42:20 +0000

Index on Censorship has warned of threats to the freedom of the press, in advance of today’s debate on the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Bill. The Bill includes an amendment, which proposes that a two-thirds majority in both houses will be needed to change Royal Charters in the future, and follows cross party agreement for a Royal Charter to underpin press regulation in the UK.

Index CEO Kirsty Hughes said: ‘This statute will allow politicians to vote on the specifics of press regulation, whether now or in the future. It will impact upon one of the most important roles of the media in a democracy – to hold politicians and governments to account – and is a threat to free speech in the UK.’

Index on Censorship has published a full response on Leveson, the Royal Charter and press reform and the potential impact upon free speech in the UK and beyond. Read it here.

The post Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Bill debate – changes to Royal charters will allow political influence over press appeared first on Index on Censorship.

Index on Censorship calls on Bahraini government to free Nabeel Rajab and other imprisoned activists

Pam Cowburn — Thu, 28 Mar 2013 11:41:01 +0000

Index on Censorship has called upon the Bahraini government to release 2012 Index Freedom of Expression Award winner Nabeel Rajaband other prisoners of conscience, as well as to honour its promises to uphold freedom of expression. According to the Project on Middle East Democracy, the government of Bahrain has only succeeded in fully implementing three of the 26 recommendations made by the Bahrain Independent Commission for Inquiry (BICI) report in November 2011.

Index’s Chief Executive Kirsty Hughes said:
“The continued imprisonment of Nabeel Rajab and other activists shows that Bahrain is not serious about reform. The targeting of human rights activists and imprisonment of prisoners of conscience shows that government commitments to reform are for now meaningless.

Index calls on the Bahrain government to respect the right to peaceful protest and the right to free speech, to end its violations of these rights and to implement fully the BICI report recommendations.”

The Bahrain Centre for Human Rights’ members have faced brutal repression from Bahrain’s regime for their tireless work documenting human rights violations committed by the government, which has been actively attempting to suppress the continuing demands for change in Bahrain, which first began with popular protests on 14 February 2011. According to BCHR, there have been 89 deaths since the start of the country’s uprising.

In March 2012, while accepting the Index on Censorship Advocacy award on behalf of the Bahrain Centre for Human Rights (BCHR), human rights activist Nabeel Rajab said that the international community heard little about uprisings in Bahrain because ‘we have oil’. He is currently serving a two-year sentence for organising so-called “illegal gatherings”. The founder of BCHR, Abdulhadi Alkhawaja, is on hunger-strike to protest about his ill-treatment in prison. Alkhawaja is currently serving a life sentence for allegedly plotting to overthrow the ruling regime. His daughter, activist Zainab Alkhawaja, is also on hunger strike and serving a three-month jail sentence.

In April, international attention will once again turn to Bahrain when it hosts the Grand Prix. Last year, the Bahraini government attempted to use the race to gain positive international attention while continuing to clamp down on protestors who are critical of the regime.

The post Index on Censorship calls on Bahraini government to free Nabeel Rajab and other imprisoned activists appeared first on Index on Censorship.

Index on Censorship magazine launches new magazine design

Pam Cowburn — Wed, 27 Mar 2013 14:47:03 +0000

To celebrate more than 40 years as the world’s most influential free speech magazine, Index on Censorship has launched a new magazine design.

Index Chief Executive Kirsty Hughes said:

‘The magazine’s fresh new look reflects Index’s increasingly international outlook and role in setting the agenda for freedom of expression. The magazine will continue to build on its unique literary heritage with intelligent content from the world’s best authors, writers and thinkers, bringing readers the sharpest journalism, comment and analysis on the key free speech trends of the day.’

Index on Censorship will continue to publish ground-breaking serious journalism with an in-depth report on a pertinent topic or specific region in each issue. In addition, there will be up-to the minute news, opinion pieces and views from the ground. ‘In Focus’ will explore Index’s global themes – from digital censorship, government censorship and surveillance to religious and cultural pressures, restrictive laws and access to information. There’s interviews with high profile artists, activists and politicians as well as news of how Index is challenging censorship and supporting those on the frontline of the fight for free expression.

The magazine was designed by Matthew Hasteley, who said:

‘Tackling a brief to modernize a magazine of Index’s heritage is not a task you can approach without a great degree of care and respect. The magazine balances the weight of its past accomplishments with its current, ongoing struggle against censorship around the globe, and the design need to reflect that tension – honouring the gravity of its editorial content.’

The Magazine is published by SAGE, a leading independent academic and professional publisher. Global Publishing Director, Ziyad Marar said:

“We at SAGE are incredibly proud to publish Index’s award-winning magazine. It perfectly exemplifies our belief that the free expression of ideas leads to healthy minds and healthy cultures. We hope this new design will ensure the range of important work we publish receives an even more engaged and wider readership. As one of this year’s awards judges my personal sense of the hugely important contribution that Index can make has never been more strongly underscored.”

The latest issue looks at new threats to free expression posed by the economic crisis, from restrictions on reporting and demonstrations to the rise of extremism. Is a decline in trust and a climate of self-censorship dominating the political, cultural and media landscape?

The post Index on Censorship magazine launches new magazine design appeared first on Index on Censorship.

Malala Yousafzai, Kostas Vaxevanis, Bassel Khartabil and Zanele Muholi honoured at Index on Censorship awards

Pam Cowburn — Wed, 27 Mar 2013 14:42:22 +0000

Pakistani schoolgirl Malala Yousafzai, Greek journalist Kostas Vaxevanis, Palestinian-born Syrian internet activist Bassel Khartabil and South African photographer Zanele Muholi were honoured at this year’s Index on Censorship Freedom of Expression Awards in London on March 21, 2013.

The ceremony was hosted by Index’s Chair Jonathan Dimbleby, who dedicated the evening to ‘a celebration of freedom of expression – that fundamental human right to write, blog, tweet, speak out, protest and create art and literature and music’.

Index CEO Kirsty Hughes commented: ‘This year’s winners have shown incredible bravery and courage in the face of extreme adversity – they are an inspiration to all of us who value free speech.’

In the keynote speech, actor Simon Callow declared that ‘the price of liberty is eternal vigilance – Index on Censorship pays that price’. Fellow actor Juliet Stevenson also addressed the ceremony saying: ‘the right to free speech depends on speaking about that right and arguing for it – that’s what Index does’.

These were the last awards as Index Chair for Jonathan Dimbleby. He introduced incoming Chair, journalist David Aaronovitch, who said about his new role: “The world is changing rapidly and we are, perhaps more than ever, confused about free expression and in danger of surrendering it. That’s why I am honoured to become Chair of Index on Censorship, which challenges threats to free speech, day in day out.”

THE WINNERS

Doughty Street Advocacy award: Malala Yousafzai
In October 2012, a Taliban gunman shot education campaigner Malala Yousafzai in the head and chest for her activism, as she was returning home from school in Pakistan’s Swat district. After months of treatment, she returned to school in Birmingham earlier this week. The schoolgirl’s father, Ziauddin Yousafzai, accepted the award on his daughter’s behalf saying: ‘I want to give a message to the world. I didn’t do anything special. As a father, I did one thing, I gave her the right of freedom of expression. All fathers and mothers, give your daughters and sons freedom of expression. Freedom of expression is a most important right. The solution of any conflict is to say the right thing, to speak the truth.’

Journalism award sponsored by the Guardian: Kostas Vaxevanis
Greek investigative journalist Kostas Vaxevanis was arrested in October 2012, days after he published the “Lagarde List” of wealthy Greeks with Swiss bank accounts in his weekly magazine Hot Doc. He was found not guilty of breaking data privacy laws in November 2012, but the Athens public prosecutor subsequently ordered a retrial. Accepting the award, Kostas said: ‘Journalism has been either invested with magic powers, or has been blamed for everything. Both positions are wrong. Journalism is the way, lonely most of the times, of truth.’

Digital freedom award sponsored by Google: Bassel Khartabil
Palestinian-born Syrian software engineer Bassel Khartabil is a champion of web freedom and a computer engineer, who specialises in the development of open source software. Khartabil has been held in prison in Syria for over a year. Accepting the award on his behalf, his friend Dana Trometer said: ‘Bassel is aware of this award and he would like to thank the judges and audience for trusting him with such an honour. He would also like to pay respect to all the victims of the struggle for freedom of speech, and, especially for those non-violent youths who refused to carry arms and deserve all the credit for this award.’

Index Arts award: Zanele Muholi
South African photographer and LGBT activist Zanele Muholi challenges traditional perceptions of the black female body — and specifically black lesbians — through her work. She has faced considerable opposition in South Africa where lesbians have been the targets of horrendous hate crimes including murders and “corrective rape”. Dedicating the award to two friends who were victims of hate crimes and later succumbed to HIV complications, Muholi said: ‘To all the activists, gender activists, visual activists, queer artists; writers, poets, performers, art activists, organic intellectuals who use all art forms of expressions in South Africa. The war is not over till we reach an end to ‘curative rapes’ and brutal killing of black lesbians, gays and transpersons in South Africa.’

The post Malala Yousafzai, Kostas Vaxevanis, Bassel Khartabil and Zanele Muholi honoured at Index on Censorship awards appeared first on Index on Censorship.

Index on Censorship: Royal Charter is statutory underpinning

Pam Cowburn — Tue, 19 Mar 2013 11:53:10 +0000

Responding to the party leaders’ comments in parliament today, Index on Censorship CEO Kirsty Hughes said:“In spite of David Cameron’s claims, there can be no doubt that what has been established is statute underpinning of the press regulator. This introduces a layer of political control that is extremely undesirable. On this sad day, Britain has abandoned a democratic principle”

“But beyond that, the Royal Charter’s loose definition of a “relevant publisher” as a “website containing news-related material” means blogs could be regulated under this new law as well. This will undoubtedly have a chilling effect on everyday people’s web use.

“Bloggers could find themselves subject to exemplary damages in court, due to the fact that they were not part of a regulator that was not intended for them in the first place. This mess of legislation has been thrown together with alarming haste: there’s little doubt we’ll repent for a while to come.”

The post Index on Censorship: Royal Charter is statutory underpinning appeared first on Index on Censorship.