Bill introduces 'public interest' defence, aims to end 'libel tourism' and signals end to use of juries in most libel trials

This article is more than 9 years old

This article is more than 9 years old

The government on Tuesday unveiled sweeping changes to the libel laws aimed at protecting freedom of speech and bringing an end to so-called "libel tourism" from abroad.

Ken Clarke, the justice secretary, published a draft bill that includes a new "public interest" defence which can be used by defendants in defamation cases and a requirement that claimants can demonstrate substantial harm before they can sue.

The bill will also signal an end to the use of juries in libel trials apart from in exceptional circumstances, and aims to end libel tourism by making it tougher to bring overseas claims which have little connection to the UK in the English courts.

Clarke, unveiling the draft bill on Tuesday alongside minister of state for justice Lord McNally, said the bill would "ensure that anyone who makes a statement of fact or expresses an honest opinion can do so with confidence".

"The right to speak freely and debate issues without fear of censure is a vital cornerstone of a democratic society," he added.

"In recent years, though, the increased threat of costly libel actions has begun to have a chilling effect on scientific and academic debate and investigative journalism."

The bill includes a new statutory defence of truth which will replace the current common law defence of justification. It also includes a statutory defence of honest opinion replacing the current common law defence of fair and honest comment.

In a bid to stamp out libel tourism, a court will not accept jurisdiction unless satisfied that England and Wales is "clearly" the most appropriate place to bring the action against someone who does not live in the UK or an EU member state.

The bill will also remove the presumption in favour of jury trial as part of a series of measures to cut costs and speed up court cases.

The government has also begun a consultation on issues not covered by the draft bill, including responsibility for publication on the internet.

It will ask whether the law should be changed to give greater protection to secondary publishers such as internet service providers and discussion forms.

Clarke said the changes to the libel law proposed in the bill were a result of "public concern brought to a head by attempts [by big corporations] to stifle scientific and academic debate ... Freedom of speech is absolutely essential in a democracy like our own."

McNally added: "We have been trying to get the balance right between proper protections and the oft-used accusation that the law as it operates now creates a chilling effect on free speech and on information right across the board, from academic and scientific work to proper investigative journalism.

"Media organisations are no longer the giants that they once were and they too can be intimidated by very large corporations threatening to take excessive action against them for what would be justifiable criticism. If that is the case it needs to be looked at."

The Libel Reform Campaign welcomed the draft bill but said the government needed to go further in key areas, including a stronger public interest defence and an end of the ability of corporations to sue for libel, a change resisted by the justice secretary today.

The campaign's Dr Evan Harris said: "Those campaigning for libel reform will want to see cross-party recognition that the draft bill is a welcome step forward, but also that it does not yet reflect the extent of full libel reform that is required to properly protect free expression."

• To contact the MediaGuardian news desk email editor@mediatheguardian.com or phone 020 3353 3857. For all other inquiries please call the main Guardian switchboard on 020 3353 2000.

• If you are writing a comment for publication, please mark clearly "for publication".