14 Apr 10 | Uncategorized
Traditional Ulster Voice leader Jim Allister has failed in his attempt to have leaflets printed by election rival Ian Paisley Junior banned.
Mr Allister, a QC hoping to win his young party’s first Westminster seat, maintains that the leaflets contain libellous material.
Mt Justice Gullen noted:
“It is open to argument that the words complained of do not amount to an untrue statement of fact but are part and parcel of the political opinions that seem to have been the hallmark of the campaign to date between these two candidates.
“In coming to this conclusion I am conscious of the need to ensure the free expression of opinion by those who put themselves into the democratic process for election by the population at large.
“I pause to observe again that I am far from ruling that these words may not be capable of defamatory meaning or that a jury may not come to a conclusion favourable to the plaintiff.
“I am not satisfied, however, that it is appropriate that an interlocutory injunction should be granted at this time and accordingly I refuse the plaintiff’s application.”
Mr Allister says he will press ahead with a defamation suit. So it seems, at least in North Antrim, libel is very definitely an election issue.
01 Jul 09 | Uncategorized
The price of source protection — a key tenet of a free, open press — is now approximately £43,000.
That is the cost Ian Paisley Junior will have to shoulder after being fined in Belfast High Court on 30 June for failing to disclose the identity of a source.
The source in question was a prison officer who Paisley Junior alleges told him that files relating to the 1997 murder of loyalist leader Billy Wright in the Maze prison had been destroyed.
At present, a public investigation, the Billy Wright Inquiry, is seeking all documentation and source material that may be related to the controversial killing inside a supposed top security prison.
From the outset Paisley Junior told the inquiry that he could not betray the source of his information and would rather go to prison than hand over the officer’s name.
The son of the Rev Ian Paisley lost his case on Tuesday and as a result was fined £5,000. The extra £38,000 is the legal costs he must pay for both the Crown’s and his own defence.
Although it has received less publicity than the case of Sunday Tribune journalist Suzanne Breen a fortnight ago, the Paisley Junior case is important for all of those who think the flow of information from anonymous sources is important in a free society. Breen won her battle to not hand over material related to interviews she conducted with the Real IRA on the grounds that her life could have been put in danger. Paisley Junior, while not under any physical threat, saw it as a matter of honour that he would keep his word and protect the identity of someone in the prison service whose exposure could have had serious consequences for his or her career.
The controversy also raises an important point about the role of public inquiries and the danger of them turning into inquisitors. Several journalists have come under pressure from inquiries such as the Bloody Sunday tribunal to reveal sources that preferred to remain anonymous. The argument from these reporters is essentially the same one as Paisley Junior mounted regarding the Bill Wright Inquiry — that to reveal the identities of sources is a betrayal of them and the slippery slope towards scaring off whistleblowers coming forward with information the public has a right to know.
30 Jun 09 | Index Index, minipost
Democratic Unionist Party politician Ian Paisley Jr has been ordered to pay a fine for contempt of court after his refusal to reveal the name of a prison officer who informed him of the destruction of files after the murder of loyalist paramilitary Billy Wright at the Maze prison in 1997.
Read more here
18 Jun 09 | Uncategorized
Suzanne Breen has won her right to withhold material from a police investigation in Northern Ireland after the court agreed with her that such action would be put her in the terrorist firing line.
Breen argued that not only was the hand over of such information a breach of journalistic confidentiality but it would also put her life in danger.
Today in Belfast’s Laganside Court the recorder, Mr Tom Burgess, concluded that the risk to her was “not just real and immediate” but also “continuing”.
Her legal team described his ruling as a landmark judgement in terms of press freedom in particular the protection of sources.
Joe Rice, a Belfast lawyer who has defended several reporters under similar pressure in Northern Ireland to disclose sources by the state and a number of public inquiries, said the significance of the judgment could not be underestimated.
Journalists operating in Northern Ireland are relieved that Suzanne Breen has won her case. The decision has major implications for other reporters here.
This not only includes correspondents who are under pressure from the state, principally the PSNI, but also from the range of public inquiries into a number of past crimes in the Troubles.
For instance, at least three correspondents have been subjected to the attempts by Blood Sunday Inquiry and the Billy Wright Inquiry to get them to hand over confidential material. When they refused, the legal teams acting for the inquiries have gone to court to force the journalists’ hand. At best, the reporters reluctant to reveal sources and confidential material to the inquiries face contempt of court charges.
The outcome of today’s case may have implications for them as well. And in addition for Ian Paisley Junior, the son of the Rev Ian Paisley, who is facing sanctions over his determination to protect sources. Paisley Junior will not disclose who leaked him details about the security regime inside the Maze prison at the time when Billy Wright, a loyalist killer, was murdered in the H-Blocks in December 1997. The DUP Assembly member, it should be remembered, is also trying to uphold the right of source protection and his case is as vital as the Breen case in terms of defending the free flow of information in a democracy. He goes to court on Monday week to find if his refusal to hand over sources and information to the Billy Wright Inquiry will either land him in jail or result in him paying a heavy fine.
Read the full judgment here
