6 Oct 2011 | News and features
Defamation cases should be mediated, and if they are not, they should be the subject of an early neutral evaluation by a High Court Judge, say Index on Censorship and English PEN in their report on defamation procedure.
Funded by the Nuffield Foundation, the Alternative Libel Project’s first report published on 6 October also recommends that:
• judges must use stricter case management;
• litigants should be able to make a stand alone application to determine the meaning of the allegations in question; and
• a costs regime must be introduced to redress the inequality of arms between the parties.
John Kampfner, Chief Executive of Index on Censorship said:
Defamation procedure needs to change so the balance between freedom of expression and reputation is not affected by the relative resources of litigants but by the strength of their claims. The recommendations we have made will not only result in many more cases being resolved very early on, they will ensure that those cases that do go to trial in the High Court are dealt with more efficiently.
The report is a preliminary one and Index on Censorship and English PEN are inviting views on their proposals before the 18 November. To comment, please e-mail Helen Anthony at helen[@]englishpen.org.
The Alternative Libel Project Preliminary Report October 2011
10 Dec 2010 | News and features
As ideas move freely around the world attacks on writers continue, reports Lisa Appignanesi
(more…)
19 Nov 2010 | Uncategorized
Libel Reform Campaign has today published a new guide about libel laws for bloggers.
The guide, entitled ‘So you’ve had a threatening letter. What can you do?’ is published by Index on Censorship in association with Sense About Science, English PEN, the Media Legal Defence Initiative, the Association of British Science Writers and the World Federation of Science Journalists.
The report seeks to better explain English libel law for people who have been threatened with legal action for blogs, comments or articles they have posted online.
It addresses the essential questions, namely the strength of the claimant’s threat and how the defendant should respond. Today’s publication comprises just a part of the Libel Reform Campaign’s wider efforts to make English libel law simpler, cheaper, and less favourable to the claimant. If the campaign is successful, it is hoped changes will come into force that will better defend online publishers and writers against defamation actions.


19 Aug 2010 | Uncategorized
On Tuesday the Guardian ran a letter urging Waterstone’s to cancel its book-signing on 8 September for Tony Blair‘s memoirs. Iain Banks, AL Kennedy, Moazzem Begg, John Pilger, Michael Nyman and others described the event as “deeply offensive to most people in Britain.”
In today’s Guardian, Index editor Jo Glanville, Article 19 trustee Dr Evan Harris and Jonathan Heawood, director, English PEN respond.
We respect the writers of yesterday’s letter (18 August) and share their view on the illegality of the Iraq war and Tony Blair‘s nefarious role in engineering this country’s participation in it. But we can not share their call for Waterstone’s to desist from promoting it on the grounds that the event “will be deeply offensive to most people in Britain”, even if that were the case.
When it comes to literature, drama, journalism, artistic expression and scientific publication we must be consistent in our support for free speech. How can we defend the right of the Birmingham Repertory to put on and advertise a play like Behzti, despite it being deemed offensive to some Sikhs, and then call on a bookseller not to promote one of its books – or a library not to stock it — on the grounds of offence? The answer, in a liberal society, is to not read the book if it offends you, and to not buy a copy if you don’t wish royalties to go to the author.
While Iain Banks and colleagues say “Waterstone’s will seriously harm its own reputation as a respectable bookseller by helping him [Blair] promote his book”, we think its reputation would now be harmed by caving in to this sort of pressure.