15 Apr 10 | Uncategorized
This article first appeared on liberty central
Simon Singh’s bogus journey has finally come to an end. Almost two years to the day since Singh first wrote an article in the Guardian questioning the claims made for spinal manipulation by the British Chiropractic Association, the organisation has dropped its libel case.
There is no way the BCA could have anticipated what would follow from bringing their claim against Singh. In the last year, Singh’s case has become a rallying point for free expression organisations such as Index on Censorship (who formed the libel reform coalition last December with Sense About Science and English PEN), scientists, bloggers, comics, and what Ian Sample described in the Guardian this week as a “rising army of sceptics“.
One in four British chiropractors is now under investigation by the General Chiropractic Council following a campaign by Singh’s sceptical supporters. Singh was brave in standing up to the BCA. But he was exemplary in insisting from day one that the case was not just about him. The absurdity of this case highlighted to many the injustices of English libel law, from the grossly inflated costs, to the utter inadequacy of our concepts of fair comment and public interest. In the court of appeal ruling handed down on 1 April, Lord Chief Justice Lord Judge emphasised that Singh had written an honest opinion, based on reasons, and suggested that this should be the future template for “fair comment” defences.
This is a day to celebrate for anyone interested in free expression in England and beyond. In fact, it has been an amazing week for libel reform campaigners: as the main political parties rolled out their manifestos, all three made commitments to libel reform. Meanwhile, the petition for reform passed 50,000 signatures.
What we should not imagine for one moment is that the BCA climbdown suggests that our libel laws work. The case has taken up masses of time and energy for all concerned. Meanwhile, NMT’s case against Peter Wilmshurt, another clear demonstration of the law meddling with medical science, rumbles on. And the solicitors’ letters keep turning up in the mailboxes of writers, bloggers and activists without the nerve or resources of Simon Singh.
Free expression in the UK remains threatened. Next week, the Libel Reform Coalition hosts a hustings at the Free Word Centre in London, where all three parties will be grilled on their commitment to free speech. Manifesto pledges are one thing; but we must continue to push for a genuine rethinking of UK citizens’ ability under the law to debate, argue and learn.
15 Apr 10 | News and features, United Kingdom
Simon Singh wins! The British Chiropractic Association(BCA) has today served a Notice of Discontinuance bringing to an end its libel claim against Dr Simon Singh. The science writer was accused of libel for an article in which he cast doubt on chiropractors’ claims of success in treatment of childhood conditions including colic, ear infections, asthma.
Earlier this month Simon Singh scored a crucial victory in his libel defence against the British Chiropractic Association. In a judgment handed down by the court of appeal, the Lord Chief Justice ruled that Singh’s contention that the BCA promoted “bogus” treatments was “a statement of opinion, and one backed by reasons”.
The judgment allowed Singh to pursue a defence of “fair comment”, the ruling could have a defining effect on the entire concept of “fair comment” in English libel law.
Update: Read the BCA’s statement here
PLUS: A good week for libel reform. All the major political parties now back change — and the campaign celebrates 50,000 signatures in support of libel reform
From the Index on Censorship archives: Floyd Abrams’s on libel Through the looking-glass
Timeline
2008 April Singh publishes an article about chiropractic in the Guardian
2008 July The British Chiropractic Association (BCA) sues Singh personally for libel
2009 May High Court gives a negative ruling on the meaning of Singh’s article
2009 June Singh asks for permission to appeal the ruling on meaning (paper application)
2009 July Mr Justice Eady rejects the application to appeal
2009 August Oral hearing on leave to appeal
2009 October Leave to appeal granted
2010 February Lord Chief Justice says he is “baffled” by case
2010 April 1 Decision on meaning of original Singh article
01 Apr 10 | News and features, Uncategorized, United Kingdom
Simon Singh today scored a crucial victory in his libel defence against the British Chiropractic Association.
In a judgment [PDF 73KB] handed down at 9.30 this morning, the Lord Chief Justice ruled that Singh’s contention that the BCA promoted “bogus” treatments was “a statement of opinion, and one backed by reasons”. Singh may now pursue a defence of “fair comment”.
The judgment criticised the BCA, saying its action had created an “unhappy impression” that the case was “an endeavour by the BCA to silence one of its critics”.
The judge added: “if that is where the current law of defamation takes us, we must apply it.”
Addressing the effect of lengthy, costly libel trials on public debate and medicine, the judge commented: “It is now nearly two years since the publication of the offending article. It seems unlikely that anyone would dare repeat the opinions expressed by Dr Singh for fear of a writ. Accordingly this litigation has almost certainly had a chilling effect on public debate which might otherwise have assisted potential patients to make informed choices about the possible use of chiropractic.”
Speaking outside the court, alongside MPs from all three major parties, Singh stressed that while he was pleased with the ruling, the case for libel reform remained. Singh’s case could still potentially continue for another two years.
Full PDF of Court of Appeal judgment BCA vs Singh [73KB]
The BCA has issued a statement saying it is considering its position in the light of the ruling. Richard Brown, President of the BCA concludes:
We are of course disappointed to lose the appeal, but this is not the end of the road and we are considering whether to seek permission to appeal to the Supreme Court and subsequently proceed to trial. Our original argument remains that our reputation has been damaged. To reiterate, the BCA brought this claim only to uphold its good name and protect its reputation, honesty and integrity.
Simon Singh Statement
READ SIMON’S STATEMENT HERE
Former Minister Denis MacShane MP, who was at the Court of Appeal this morning to support Simon Singh’s successful appeal said :
“This is an important victory but it should not be an excuse to lessen the pressure for a major overhaul of libel law. London remains the libel tourist capital of the world and it is time the oligarchs and pharmaceutical companies stopped hiring London lawyers and finding London judges to attack journals and journalists who may not even be based in London. When parliament comes back after the election all three parties should commit to an immediate reform of libel law to allow swift settlements at reasonable cost and to uphold freedom of expression rather than weaken it as the present libel law system operating in London allows.”
MacShane is Labour MP for Rotherham and a former president of the National Union of Journalists.
For all the related tweets, quotes and coverage scroll through our live coverage
23 Feb 10 | News and features, United Kingdom
The Lord Chief Justice expressed surprise today at the BCA’s libel suit against Simon Singh. Padraig Reidy reports
(more…)
