|
Letter to The Times, published on May 25 2005 Sir, You suggest (leading article, May 19) that because the odds are "uniquely stacked" in a claimant's favour in UK libel proceedings, this has led to libel tourism by endless foreign claimants. Yet this sits uncomfortably with your acceptance in the same leader that "protection for those who have been genuinely libelled is a mark of a civilised society". For those who have homes, business interests and reputations in the UK, the ability to vindicate their reputation here is, as you rightly recognise, essential and, as the High Court recently recognised in the case of Sheikh Khalid bin Mahfouz and his family, entirely appropriate. English law already provides ample safeguards to weed out cases and claimants with no real UK connection. The fact that someone who makes serious and very damaging allegations must prove they are substantially true does not mean that the odds are stacked; it is simply an adaptation of the universally accepted maxim that a man is innocent until proved guilty. In a civilised society freedom of speech should not be confused with freedom to defame, a distinction fortunately well understood in the UK. Yours faithfully Cherif Sedky Jeddah, May 22 |