Thank you for your letter of 6 July to Michael Wills, on behalf of your constituent Mr *******, about a recent libel case brought against Mr Simon Singh. As Duty Minister for the Ministry of Justice during the Summer Recess, I am replying on behalf of Bridget Prentice, who is the Minister responsible for civil justice issues. Please address any further correspondence to her.
As a Government Minister I am unable to comment on individual cases which are or have been before the courts. In that context, I understand that this case may be subject to appeal. However, it may be helpful if I begin by explaining the law in this area in general terms.
It is important that people have an effective right to redress through the law of libel where their reputation has been damaged as the result of the publication of defamatory material. Whether material is defamatory is a matter for the courts to determine based on all the relevant circumstances. The main tests established by the courts in determining whether material is defamatory are whether the words used "tend to lower the plaintiff in the estimation of right-thinking members of society generally", "without justification or lawful excuse [are] calculated to injure the reputation of another, by exposing him to hatred, contempt, or ridicule", or tend to make the claimant "be shunned and avoided and that without any moral discredit on [the claimant's] part."
Mr ********* is concerned about the effect of the libel laws on freedom of speech and scientific debate. The Government firmly supports the right to freedom of expression, which is protected by Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). In addition, section 12 of the Human Rights Act 1998 requires courts to have particular regard to the importance of the right to freedom of expression, particularly in relation to the freedom of the press. Of course, the exercise of this right carries with it duties and responsibilities that are expressly recognised in the law. It is not an absolute right, and can be restricted for a number of reasons set down by law, such as public safety, the prevention of crime, or respect for the rights or reputations of others. Often, the right to freedom of expression may need to be balanced against other rights, like the right to respect for private and family life, home and correspondence, which is protected by Article 8 of the ECHR
As you may be aware, the Department for Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee is currently conducting an inquiry into Press Standards, Privacy and Libel and is considering a wide range of issues in this area of law. The Justice Secretary gave evidence before the Committee on 19 May and the Government will consider carefully any recommendations that the Committee may wish to make in its forthcoming report.
I hope you find this information helpful, and I enclose a copy of this letter for you to forward to Mr ******* , should you wish to do so
