Peers have debated Northern Ireland’s rejection of the Defamation Act 2013. Padraig Reidy reports
Will free speech be chilled at Stormont? (Pic: Johnny McGinley/Demotix)
The Northern Ireland Executive’s refusal to sign up to the Defamation Act 2013 was the subject of a considered debate in the House of Lords yesterday (27 June).
The short debate makes for interesting reading, in spite of the fact that no peers from the Northern Irish parties spoke — with crossbencher Lord Bew, the noted historian, the only Northern Irish peer to raise his voice.
Lord Bew pointed out the irony of the Democratic Unionist party rejecting the new law, putting Northern Ireland at odds with the rest of the UK: “The current First Minister [DUP leader Peter Robinson] is famous, above all,” Bew pointed out, “for one phrase in the aftermath of the Anglo-Irish agreement of 1985, when he complained that he regarded Northern Ireland as having been pushed on to the window ledge of the union. In this case, it looks as if he himself is scrabbling out of the main room of the house to get himself on to the window ledge of the union.”
Lord Lexden, who had requested the debate, suggested Stormont’s refusal to adopt the new law “stirred memories of that great film, ‘Passport to Pimlico’, in which Pimlico — where I happen to live now — suddenly becomes part of the Kingdom of Burgundy and subject to ancient Burgundian law. By the end of the film the Burgundians are cut off from electricity, food and water and become dependent on people tossing food parcels over the wall they have put up to keep the rest of the world out.”
Lord Black, executive director of the Telegraph Media Group, warned of the dangers to Northern Ireland’s economy, saying that information-based industries would be wary of setting up in a jurisdiction perceived as hostile to free speech, saying:
“I can see no circumstances in which Google, Yahoo!, AOL, Twitter or others would establish businesses in an area that tied them to an out-of-date, repressive libel jurisdiction. This decision in effect rejects the high-end jobs that the Province desperately needs. The Executive decision will therefore have real human consequences for the people of Northern Ireland.”
The Lords were united in their call for the bill to be properly debated at Stormont. Martin McGuinness, republican deputy first minister in the power-sharing executive, has said:
“We have had no discussions with the Minister of Finance and Personnel on that matter … It is very important to say that the Executive have not taken any decision in relation to a Defamation Bill. It never appeared on the agenda of any Executive meeting.”
Lord Lester of Herne Hill, who has been a crucial figure in delivering the much needed reform in England and Wales, told peers of a letter sent by Sammy Wilson, the DUP minister responsible for the Defamation Bill in Northern Ireland.
Wilson wrote to Liberal Democrat Justice Minister Lord McNally: “I have noted that the new provisions will be brought into force later this year and it will be interesting to see how they operate. However, at this stage, I have no plans to review the law on defamation in Northern Ireland.”
Some of the peers suggested vested interests could be behind Wilson’s reluctance to introduce the bill. Viscount Colville of Culross, a BBC journalist, said: “Journalists and writers complain of their easy resort to the threat of defamation and keep Mr Paul Tweed… busy issuing threats of defamation”, while Lord Black suggested the mysterious reluctance to introduce the new law “may be because a handful of lawyers and claims farmers — the Tweed brigade — in Belfast are intent on trying to make it the world’s libel capital, as if that is a title to be proud of.”
Paul Tweed, the high-profile defamation lawyer to whom the lords referred, insisted at a Stormont committee hearing earlier this week that he had not lobbied Sammy Wilson regarding the libel bill, saying he had never met Wilson.
Index on Censorship will give evidence to the Finance and Personnel committee at Stormont on 3 July.
