Category: Defamation

FoE in the EHRLR

| 3 Comments
| Blasphemy, Censorship, criminal libel, Defamation, ECHR, EU media policy, Freedom of Expression, Human Rights, Legal Journals and Law Reviews, libel tourism, Sedition

EHRLR cover, via ECHR BlogThe current issue of the European Human Rights Law Review ([2009] 3 EHRLR | table of contents (pdf) | hat tip ECHR blog) contains a wonderful piece by my colleague Dr Ewa Komorek entitled “Is Media Pluralism a Human Right? The European Court of Human Rights, the Council of Europe and the Issue of Media Pluralism” [2009] 3 EHRLR 395.

Here is the abstract (with added links):

The need for pluralist media stopped being purely a national concern a long time ago and thus it has for decades been subject to scrutiny by the Council of Europe and the European Court of Human Rights. Media pluralism has always come to their agenda as a prerequisite for freedom of expression guarded by Article 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights. It is important to distinguish the two ‘faces’ of media pluralism: internal (which may also be called content pluralism or diversity) and external (or structural). This article focuses on television broadcasting and argues that while the Court of Human Rights has essentially been successful in safeguarding internal pluralism, the protection of structural pluralism proved more difficult to achieve by means of the Court’s case law. This prompted the Council of Europe to step in and attempt to fill the gap with regulatory proposals.

…

Read More »

President signs Bills

| 6 Comments
| Blasphemy, Defamation, Defamation Bill 2006

President McAleese via WikipediaFrom the Irish Times breaking news site:

President McAleese signs controversial Bills into law

President Mary McAleese has this morning signed the Defamation Bill 2006 and the Criminal Justice (Amendment) Bill 2009 into law. …

Updates: from RTÉ news: President signs controversial bills into law; and from the Irish Times: Ahern welcomes Bills’ enactment; see also Belfast Telegraph | BreakingNews.ie | CCJHR blog | IrelandOnline | Irish Election | New Humanist | New York Times | Press Association | Slugger O’Toole | Tribune.ie. Further update: it’s now listed on the official list of Acts signed by President McAleese, as the Defamation Act, 2009 (No 31 of 2009) / An tAcht Um Chlúmhilleadh, 2009 (Uimhir 31 de 2009).

In a press release, the Minister for Justice welcomed both enactments, and he had this to say about the new Defamation Act, 2009:

Modernisation of our Defamation law is now complete on the enactment of the Bill. I believe the legislation in what is a complex area strikes the right balance in the public interest.

For Michael Nugent, the campaign to repeal the new blasphemy law begins now.…

Read More »

Another twist in the tale of the Defamation Bill

| 13 Comments
| Blasphemy, criminal libel, Defamation, Defamation Bill 2006, Freedom of Expression, Human Rights, judges

Áras an Uachtaráin = Residence of the President of Ireland, via the President's siteThe saga of the Defamation Bill, 2006 is not over yet. Article 26 of Bunreacht na hÉireann (the Irish Constitution) allows the President, after consultation with Council of State, to refer a Bill to the Supreme Court for a determination of its constitutionality. President McAleese has chosen to convene the Council of State to advise her on the qustion of whether to refer not only the (controversial) Criminal Justice (Amendment) Bill, 2009 (an unsurprising move) but also the (equally controversial) blasphemy elements of the Defamation Bill, 2006 (which has come as a great surprise). (See Belfast Telegraph | BreakingNews.ie | Bock the Robber | ICCL | Irish Emigrant | Irish Independent | RTÉ news | Irish Times | PA | Slugger O’Toole. Update (18 July 2009): see also Irish Examiner | Irish Times here and here | Irish Independent | MediaWatchWatch).

There have been 15 such references to date. If the Court holds that a Bill is unconstitutional, the President must decline to sign it; whilst if the Court decides a Bill is constitutional, the President must sign it into law, and the resulting Act is immune from constitutional challenge in the future.…

Read More »

The template for journalism?

| 1 Comment
| Blasphemy, Defamation, Defamation Bill 2006, journalism, Press Council

Irish Times clock, image originally hosted on Irish Times websiteA Leader in today’s Irish Times welcomes the passing of the Defamation Bill, 2006, and argues that it will set an appropriate template for the practice of journalism in Ireland:

The template for journalism

The Defamation Bill has concluded its passage through the Oireachtas, with a few deserved wobbly moments on blasphemy, and now awaits the signature of President McAleese. It will set the template for the practise of journalism in the years ahead. …

The new regime for journalism will operate on twin pillars. The Bill attempts – quite successfully – a balancing of constitutional rights: between the public’s right to know and the citizen’s right to a good name. … The concession to the practise of journalism is the new defence of “reasonable publication” allowing newspapers to publish stories of public importance for the public benefit if they can be shown to have been thoroughly investigated and done in good faith – even if allegations made in them turn out to be untrue.

The quid pro quo for these changes is the Office of Press Ombudsman and an independent Press Council which are given legal privilege for their findings in the Bill. These offices give readers a formal and free complaints system which has been in operation for more than a year.

…

Read More »

Defamation Bill passed by the Seanad

| 1 Comment
| Blasphemy, Defamation, Defamation Bill 2006

A guillotine, via The Guillotine Headquarters websiteHaving been passed by the Dáil (lower house of parliament) earlier this week, today’s papers are full of the news that the Defamation Bill, 2006 was passed yesterday by the Seanad (upper house of parliament) (the full debate is here); all that is now required for it to become law is the signature of the President.

However, even at this late stage, there was still time for another twist on the Bill’s sinuous route into law. From the front page of this morning’s Irish Times:

Defamation Bill stumbles through Seanad after lost vote

The Government lost a vote in the Seanad yesterday on the Defamation Bill but managed to salvage the legislation by calling for a walk-through vote which gave enough time for two missing Senators to be found.

The Government defeat came on an amendment to the Bill proposed by Senator Eugene Regan of Fine Gael proposing to delete the provision in the legislation making blasphemy a crime.

In an electronic vote whereby Senators press a button, the Government was defeated by 22 votes to 21 in the 60-member upper house.

However, Fianna Fáil whip Diarmuid Wilson immediately requested a walk-through vote which takes about 10 minutes to complete.

…

Read More »

Pleading defamation defences

| No Comments
| Defamation, Irish cases

Quinn Insurance logoIn a recent post, I discussed newspaper reports of a recent High Court case in which Quinn Insurance Group lost a High Court bid to strike out parts of the Sunday Tribune’s defence to forthcoming libel proceedings taken against it by the insurance company; and I promised to return to the case as soon as a full report of the judgment became available online. I can now make good on that promise, as the judgment is available here and here. It turned on the question of how much detail must be pleaded before trial by a defendant claiming that an alleged defamation was either true or covered by qualified privilege.

Relying on an internal and confidential Garda (police) memorandum, the Sunday Tribune alleged that senior Gardaí had been recruited by Quinn to investigate insurance claims being made against it, and that the Gardaí not only relayed detailed information to Quinn, but also offered bonuses or sweetners to solicitors on behalf of plaintiffs to recommend early settlements in cases or claims against Quinn. The paper characterised this as “a scandalous subversion of garda independence” and resources. The Quinn Group disputed the authenticity of the memorandum and sued for libel; the paper defended the memorandum and pleaded justification (in effect, that allegations were true), or alternatively that the disclosures were in the public interest and thus protected by qualified privilege.…

Read More »

Defamation Bill passed by the Dáil

| 3 Comments
| Blasphemy, Defamation, Defamation Bill 2006

A guillotine, via The Guillotine Headquarters websiteAs recently prefigured on this blog, the Government has indeed used the legislative guillotine to force through their final amendments to the Defamation Bill, 2006. According to the RTÉ news website:

Libel law revisions pass the Dáil

The legislation to revise the country’s libel laws has been passed in the Dáil and will now go to the Seanad. …

Update (9 July 2009): Dáil debate focuses on Defamation Bill (Irish Times); Libel and blasphemy bill passed by the Dail (Irish Independent); Dáil Debate (Vol 687, No 4; 8 July 2009).…

Read More »

When is a guillotine a good thing? When it’s used on a Defamation Bill?

| 2 Comments
| Blasphemy, Copyright, Defamation, Defamation Bill 2006

A guillotine, via The Guillotine Headquarters websiteIn this morning’s Irish Times:

Defamation Bill to pass within weeks

The Bill to reform Ireland’s libel laws is likely to be enacted within a fortnight, three years after it was published. The Defamation Bill was introduced by then minister for justice Michael McDowell in 2006 to repeal the existing legislation which dates from 1961.

The original government decision to approve the drafting of the new Bill was made as far back as June 2005 … the remaining stages of the Bill will be taken in the Dáil and Seanad over the next two weeks, with the Bill expected to complete its passage through the Oireachtas on July 10th, the last sitting day before the summer recess.

After dragging their heels for so long, this is to be achieved by means of a legislative guillotine:

Guillotine allows ‘one minute 20 seconds’ per amendment

A guillotine on housing legislation allowed just one minute and 20 seconds for each of the 170 amendments to be dealt with, Labour whip Emmet Stagg told the Dáil in repeated criticism of end-of-term deadlines. …

A further sotry in the same edition of the Irish Times lists Bills which are likely to be guillotined, including the Defamation Bill:

Coalition to ‘guillotine’ debate on Bills

The Government will “guillotine” debate on at least 17 Bills in the last three weeks of the Dáil before the summer recess, Opposition parties have claimed.

…

Read More »

© cearta.ie 2025. Powered by WordPress