22 Oct 2010 | Azerbaijan News, Events
Index on Censorship, together with ARTICLE 19, Media Diversity Institute, and Open Society Foundations, will explore the freedom of expression situation ahead of Azerbaijan‘s 7 November elections. This event will mark the launch of their joint report following their recent international freedom of expression mission to Azerbaijan.
Norwegian film-maker Erling Borgen’s documentary The Prisoner from Azerbaijan will be screened, followed by a discussion with Index on Censorship’s Natasha Schmidt, ARTICLE 19’s Rebecca Vincent, and Open Society Foundations’ Stewart Chisholm on the findings of the international mission in the context of Azerbaijan’s pre-elections environment.
When: 6:30pm, Thursday, 28 October 2010
Where: Free Word Centre, 60 Farringdon Road, London, EC1R 3GA
Ticket: Free. For more details, please contact Natasha Schmidt
[email protected] or 0207 324 2525
22 Oct 2010 | Azerbaijan News, Index Reports, News and features
Observers including Index on Censorship’s Natasha Schmidt report on the country’s climate of fear
Ahead of Azerbaijan’s upcoming parliamentary elections, nine organisations, including Index on Censorship, are launching a new report titled Free Expression under Attack: Azerbaijan’s Deteriorating Media Environment. The report findings come out of a joint freedom of expression mission to the country in September 2010 and highlight the Azerbaijani government’s failure to comply with its international commitments to promote and protect freedom of expression. (more…)
22 Oct 2010 | Uncategorized
Just back from the High Court, where Lady Justice Smith granted Indian national His Holiness Sant Baba Jeet Singh ji Maharaj the right to appeal in his libel case against journalist Hardeep Singh.
The case centres on an article that Singh wrote in August 2007 for the Sikh Times, a British newspaper, in which he claimed that Jeet Singh was an “accused Cult leader” whose teachings were not in line with mainstream Sikh doctrine. The article also connected his followers with conflict in UK temples. The claimant —a self proclaimed “Holy Man” — has never visited the United Kingdom.
In May 2010 a High Court judge threw out the case brought against freelance British journalist Hardeep Singh. Mr Justice Eady ruled for a permanent stay with no right to appeal. Eady’s judgment held that secular courts should not make a judgment on a religious dispute.
Today’s application for appeal was granted on the limited basis that there are arguable issues in Singh’s article that do not tread on the forbidden area of doctrinal dispute.
The appellant had previously made a written application for appeal that was refused by the Rt Hon Lord Justice Laws on the 30 July 2010.
UPDATE: Press release from the Libel Reform Campaign
Journalist faces £1 million bill in libel action – Appeal allowed in His Holiness vs Singh case
At the High Court in London this morning, Lady Justice Smith granted Indian national His Holiness Sant Baba Jeet Singh ji Maharaj the right to appeal in his libel case against British journalist Hardeep Singh. The case will now go before three judges at the Court of Appeal to decide whether it should proceed to a full trial.
Hardeep Singh said: “I’ve been fighting this case for three years already; this adds a minimum of another six months of torment. If I lose, it will cost me over £1 million, let alone my costs so far and a tenth of my life. This feels like the biggest game of poker you can possibly play: all for exercising my right to free expression.”
He added: “I’m hoping the government take reform of our libel laws seriously and we get a robust bill in the New Year.”
Mike Harris from Index on Censorship said: “When individuals like Hardeep Singh risk £1m and bankruptcy all for a single newspaper article, it really hits home how important libel reform is. I hope the government backs the Libel Reform campaign’s call for wholesale reform of our libel laws so free speech is protected.”
Síle Lane from Sense About Science said: ‘Change in the libel laws cannot come soon enough. Singh’s case highlights that the laws as they stand are unfair, unduly costly, out of date and against the public interest. Until we have a clear, strong public interest defence against libel actions writers, bloggers, NGOs and journalists will be forced to back down in the face of threats.’
1. The case centres on an article that Hardeep Singh wrote in August 2007 for the Sikh Times, a British newspaper, in which he claimed that Jeet Singh was an “accused Cult leader” whose teachings were not in line with mainstream Sikh doctrine. In May 2010 Mr Justice Eady threw the case out with no right to appeal. Eady’s judgment held that secular courts should not make a judgment on a religious dispute. Today’s application for appeal was granted on the limited basis that there are arguable issues in Singh’s article that do not tread on the forbidden area of doctrinal dispute. The appellant had previously made a written application for appeal that was refused by the Rt Hon Lord Justice Laws on the 30 July 2010.
The Libel Reform Campaign is being run by a coalition of three charities English PEN (Registered charity no. 1125610), Index on Censorship (Registered charity no. 325003) and Sense About Science (Registered charity no. 1101114). Together, the campaign is calling for parliamentary reform of the current libel laws, to make the law fairer to defendants and people without influence and resources, and to support and encourage the voices of citizen critics.
22 Oct 2010 | Uncategorized
Robert Mugabe: Guardian of electoral integrity. You heard it here first.
Sadly, this new found democratic fervour does not extend itself to Zimbabwe’s next election — just last week the president branded the current power-sharing agreement “foolish and stupid”. Instead, Mugabe’s allies are outraged by the African version of Big Brother. Following the Zimbabwean contestant’s fall at the final hurdle, Mugabe’s office demanded recordings of the show. Mugabe’s nephew, Phillip Chiyangwa, and other loyalists have declared that the voting was not “free and fair” and the Africa-wide voting system by mobile phone was blasted as a “disgrace”.
Fortunately, the injustice done by the Nigerian winner to 24-year-old Munyaradzi Chidzonga, who often appeared draped in the Zimbabwean flag and regularly expressed a desire to meet Mugabe, has been redressed. On his return to Harare and a hero’s welcome, Chidzonga received a high profile meeting with his supportive president and $300,000 raised in donations.
Mugabe and his Zanu-PF party have never been short of audacity, crushing expressions of dissent in everything from elections to cricket. We should not be surprised at this profession of respect for a fair franchise though. Slapstick hypocrisy appears the norm for Mugabe and his party.
The Big Brother incident mirrors Zanu-PF’s pathological aversion to the choices of the populace, especially when the outcome proves inexpedient. It will take quite a shift before we witness a magnanimous departure and hear the words, “Robert, you have been evicted. Please leave the building.”
