shake-up of libel laws in England and Wales will ensure people can state honest opinions and facts in confidence, the justice secretary says.
The draft Defamation Bill, published on Tuesday, also aims to reduce "libel tourism" by overseas claimants.
Protections from libel - absolute and qualified privilege - will be extended.
But Ken Clarke said the bill would balance the needs of both sides, as it was never acceptable to harm someone's reputation without just cause.
He said in recent years the increased threat of costly libel actions had had a "chilling effect" on scientific and academic debate, and investigative journalism.
"The right to speak freely and debate issues without fear of censure is a vital cornerstone of a democratic society."
Mr Clarke added: "However it is never acceptable to harm someone's reputation without just cause, so the bill will ensure defamation law continues to balance the needs of both sides and encourage a just outcome in libel cases."
Substantial harm
The draft bill introduces new statutory defences to protect those writing about issues of public interest.
The current common law defences of "justification" and "fair comment" will be scrapped, replaced with new statutory defences of "truth" and "honest opinion".
There will be a new requirement in the bill that a statement must have caused, or be likely to cause, substantial harm to someone's reputation, if it is to be considered defamatory.
We cannot continue to tolerate a culture in which scientists, journalists and bloggers are afraid to tackle issues of public importance for fear of being sued”
Nick Clegg
Deputy PM
The government says the new laws will make it tougher for people to bring overseas claims which have little connection to the UK.
And the proposals include a "single publication rule" - to prevent claims being brought more than one year after publication. It could stop repeat claims being made related to material published on the internet. Libel actions can currently be brought years after a story is placed in an archive, as publication is considered to be continuous.
The bill also removes the presumption that defamation cases will be heard by a jury trial - instead the judge will be given discretion to order a jury trial when it is "in the interests of justice".
The government says the right to trial by jury is rare in civil cases and there are concerns that it can mean issues which could have been resolved by a judge early on instead cannot be resolved until the trial.
'Devil in the detail'
Lord Phillips, President of the Supreme Court, has said defamation cases can be so complex that a jury trial "simply invites expensive interlocutory battles".
But Mr Clarke said in exceptional cases there should be jury trials - as they were still one of the best ways to tell which one of two witnesses was telling the truth.
Deputy PM Nick Clegg said current "outdated" libel laws had "made it easy for the powerful and the wealthy to stifle fair criticism" and the proposals would restore "a sense of proportion to the law".
"We cannot continue to tolerate a culture in which scientists, journalists and bloggers are afraid to tackle issues of public importance for fear of being sued."
However, calls to give "secondary publishers" like internet service providers, internet discussion forums and booksellers greater protection has been put out to consultation, as have suggestions that specific restrictions should be put on the ability of corporations to bring defamation actions.
Shadow justice minister Rob Flello said the draft bill built on work that had begun under the previous Labour government.
"It is important we bring to an end libel tourism which damages Britain's reputation. Protection under the law must be available to everyone, whatever their means, while ensuring the public interest is served by a free press."
He added: "The devil will be in the detail of this bill and how it will bring libel laws up to date and in line with a growing online media."
0 comments:
Post a Comment