England has become the leading destination for libel suits. Though in some cases libel law is a safeguard from dishonest and irresponsible information being published, English libel law is increasingly being used as a tool for censorship.

There can be many dilemmas when attempting to strike a balance with a responsible, professional and free press; however, there should never come a point when large corporations and organisations stifle the opinions and research of an individual writer simply because of a disagreement. So does the UK need a first amendment-style protection of free expression?

The US constitution is one of the first documents to state fundamental human rights. The very first amendment covers freedom of speech, press, religion and petition. Such a guarantee of rights is often portrayed as uniquely American, but its roots stretch beyond the shores of Massachusetts and Plymouth Rock.

Magna Carta Liberatum (The Great Charter of Freedoms) was the very first document to limited the powers of an English king. The document that held the English king under law was the first to state the protection of existing fundamental human rights: habeas corpus, protection of private property, reasonable limit on taxes and some promise to freedom of religion. These first documented human rights have influenced, and are the cornerstone of, other English language constitutions: such as the US constitution. The American legacy of free speech is steeped in the great British tradition.

An awareness of this tradition of freedom and the innate sense of democratic right that was exercised with great fervour during the general election, demonstrates that the people of this country truly have a right to responsibly choose and express their own opinions and beliefs. Reformation on UK libel laws should follow the great British tradition, that we so inherently understand; freedom and fairness.

Heather Blake is director of Reporters Without Borders in the UK