The UK law of defamation threatens democratic rights

The fear of being sued for defamation can have a very negative effect on free speech.

The complexity of the law, the often very long duration of a defamation court cases, and the often huge costs involved, creates a situation where the majority of people avoid defamation trials.
This all migh lead to journalists becoming overcautious, which in turn leads to less investigative journalism and more self-censorship of powerful and influential people.

The risk of today's defamation law is that some corporations now use the threat of a legal action to restrict the actions of groups or individuals campaigning against their activities.
The responsibility of media to report to the public in a professional way, is crucial.  And it's obviously important to avoid that unfounded claims damage a person’s, or an organisation’s reputation.

However, it's at the same time crucial for the law to balance the protections of human rights, such as privacy, with the rights of freedom of expression - a critical element of a democratic society.

Openess is crucial

Instead of potecting people, the law prevents a constructive dialogue and debate to find the truth.

Published statements, including libellous ones, are as they should, open and available to be criticised, scrutinized and defended.

The most effective back-lash for telling lies is most likely loss of credibility.

The defamation law on the other hand, with its reliance on complex and costly court actions, does not encourage an open and democratic society.