Requires reform of England’s libel legal guidelines to forestall abuse by rich litigants

A British journalist who confronted a barrage of litigation from Roman Abramovich and different oligarchs over her e-book detailing the rise to energy of Russia’s president Vladimir Putin has instructed MPs that libel instances in England and Wales are stacked in favour of “deep-pocketed litigants”.

Catherine Belton, writer of Putin’s Folks, instructed the Home of Commons international affairs committee on Tuesday that her case was the “tip of the iceberg”. She stated there wanted to be higher defences for journalists who face being sued for libel in English courts by wealthy and highly effective litigants utilizing so-called Strategic Lawsuits in opposition to Public Participation (SLAPPs).

MPs have raised considerations that rich corporations and people, together with Russian oligarchs, have been utilizing England’s strict libel legal guidelines to sue journalists and silence their critics. There have been requires ministers to introduce laws to forestall the misuse of the authorized system to intimidate reporters.

Belton, a former Monetary Instances reporter who now works for Reuters, and her writer had been sued for libel final 12 months by 4 oligarchs, together with Roman Abramovich, and Russian oil firm Rosneft over her e-book. She instructed MPs that her case price her writer HarperCollins £1.5mn in authorized charges to defend and will have price £5mn if the case had gone to trial. Abramovich settled his lawsuit final December and the opposite lawsuits had been additionally settled or withdrawn.

“The case reveals simply how essential it’s that there are higher defences for journalists as a result of regardless of how good the sourcing is on a few of these claims and the way nice the general public curiosity is, the instances are simply too costly to defend,” Belton instructed MPs, including that the “system is stacked in favour of deep pocketed litigants from the outset.”

Belton stated the reporting by the press since Russia invaded Ukraine and oligarchs with hyperlinks to the Kremlin, together with Abramovich, had been sanctioned, was as “completely different as night time from day.”

She instructed MPs: “Earlier than it was virtually a reign of terror. A variety of these oligarchs had been deploying these aggressive repute managers, the legal professionals . . . You actually by no means heard about Abramovich being near Vladimir Putin or being an enabler of his regime till very not too long ago,” she stated.

Tom Burgis, a Monetary Instances journalist, who additionally gave proof, dubbed the English libel system “warfare by prices” and stated it was having a “chilling impact” on free speech. He described an “inequality of arms” between the restricted assets of publishers to defend instances and the “limitless cash” of world kleptocrats to carry lawsuits.

Burgis and the FT had been sued by Eurasian Pure Assets Company Ltd (ENRC), a part of a Kazakh mining group, over his e-book Kleptopia: How Soiled Cash is Conquering the World. ENRC dropped the lawsuit this week simply days after a Excessive Courtroom decide threw out one other lawsuit introduced in opposition to Burgis and HarperCollins, which revealed his e-book.

Burgis known as for reform of the authorized system to permit SLAPPs to be dismissed at an early stage within the courts earlier than prices received too excessive for publishers. He spoke of the “psychological strain” of receiving intimidating letters from regulation corporations representing oligarchs.

Arabella Pike, writer at HarperCollins, known as for a “tweak within the regulation” to permit public curiosity standards so a decide might determine whether or not a libel case was within the public curiosity and permit them to dismiss lawsuits if a person might be given a proper of reply as a substitute.

Liz Truss, international secretary, has signalled that she desires to discover a method of curbing the proliferation of SLAPPs. Some US states have handed laws to discourage lawsuits by giving the courts the ability to dismiss instances or cap authorized prices if the lawsuits contain issues of public curiosity.