|
Letter to The Spectator, published on November 21, 2007 Sir: If Melanie Phillips had checked her facts - or checked with the subject of her article - she would have avoided making assertions about Mr. Khalid Bin Mahfouz which are wrong ('The Lights go out in Britain', 20 November). Mr. Bin Mahfouz - who has publicly condemned terrorism-- has not used English libel laws "to suppress evidence about the alleged links between Saudi financing and terrorism," but to shed much-needed light on this topic. By openly confronting stories that had linked him to funding of terrorism through his role as head of the National Commercial Bank of Saudi Arabia, Mr. Bin Mahfouz has demonstrated convincingly that there is no factual basis for these claims. He has not sued 30 publications, as Ms Phillips suggests, but 4. In dozens of other instances, publications that have repeated these allegations have promptly and publicly apologized, usually without any threat of litigation, because it was evident from material publicly available that there was no evidence to support these sensational and extremely defamatory claims. Much of this material is summarized by Mr. Justice Eady in his Judgment against Rachel Ehrenfeld (posted at http://www.binmahfouz.info/news_20050503_full.html). As the Court made clear, Ms. Ehrenfeld is indeed "fighting a lonely battle" --not against "libel tourism," as Phillips suggests, but against the truth. Rather than check her facts, defend her statements in open court, or acknowledge her mistakes, Ehrenfeld hides behind a claim to free speech. Thank goodness, the legal lights remain on in Britain to expose such harmful journalism. Yours faithfully Laurence Harris Kendall Freeman Solicitors for Sheikh Khalid Bin Mahfouz London |