DEFAMATION
to audiences that included young
Muslims who wanted to learn more
about Islam. One of the speeches
took place outside Belmarsh prison,
where a number of those convicted
of serious terrorist offences have
been held, including Abu Hamza.
In that speech the Court found that
Mr Begg had indicated his support
for the Muslim prisoners held in
Belmarsh and their crimes.
The Court found Mr Begg to be a
‘Jekyll and Hyde’ character. He was
a respected figure in the Lewisham
community and had undertaken a large amount of
stantially true, which
inter-faith, community
following a trial the
and youth work. This
court accepted.
contrasted sharply
The Court highThe
Court
found
with his extremist
lighted 10 exMr Begg to be a
speeches and other
amples of claspublications. The
sic extremist
‘Jekyll
and
Hyde’
Judge found that
Islamic posi‘when
it has suited
tions, and then
character
him… he has shed
examined a numthe cloak of respectber of Mr Begg’s
ability and revealed the
speeches,
finding
horns of extremism’. Howevthat he had indeed eser, this cloak of respectability made
poused extremist Islamic pothe effect of his extremist speeches
sitions and promoted or encouraged
even more dangerous, as his messages
religious violence.
would have been all the more compelMr Begg’s speeches were made
ling and effective to his audience.
The BBC accepted that there were
two errors of detail in its broadcast
relating to the precise timing and
location of Mr Begg’s speeches, but
the Court found that neither of these
errors made any difference to the
case: the allegations made against Mr
Begg were substantially true. The
Judge concluded: ‘In my judgement,
taken cumulatively, the Claimant’s
speeches and postings represent an
overwhelming case of justification
[truth] for the BBC.’
The law of defamation protects the reputation of individuals and
companies. Statements are defamatory if they adversely affect a
person’s or company’s reputation in the eyes of reasonable people. A
person or company can sue over defamatory statements in England and
Wales if they cause or are likely to cause serious harm to the person or,
in the case of companies, cause or are likely to cause serious financial
loss. Journalists – indeed, all those publishing content – need to be
aware of the law, and confident that what they are publishing is either
not defamatory or, if it is, that they can avail themselves of one of the
defences to defamation. In this section, we look at some recent notable
defamation decisions involving those in the media and the public eye.
BBC wins libel action
brought by imam
n The BBC has won a libel action
brought by Shakeel Begg, chief imam
at the Lewisham Islamic Centre. Mr
Begg sued over an edition of the BBC’s
Sunday Politics programme in which
presenter Andrew Neil made remarks
that accused him of being an extremist speaker who espouses extremist Islamic positions, and of having recently
promoted and encouraged religious
violence. Neil also said Mr Begg had
“hailed jihad as ‘the greatest of deeds’”.
The BBC defended the claim on
the basis that the allegations were sub-
JonBenet Ramsey’s
brother to sue CBS over
killing claims
SPEAKING THE TRUTH: ANDREW NEIL
20 | zoom-in Winter 2016
n JonBenet Ramsey’s brother Burke
is to bring defamation proceedings against CBS. The murder of