EDITORIAL - Let's get a move on libel reform

AMONG THE high ideals espoused by Prime Minister Bruce Golding during his campaign for the premiership was the need to reform Jamaica's archaic libel laws.

Public officials, he argued, should not be able to hide their misbehaviour behind defamation suits that tend to have a chilling effect on the ability of the press to search out, and shine the searchlight of truth on, those who would prefer to keep the facts and their implications hidden.

To Mr Golding's credit, he has fulfilled the first part of his promise. He established the Small Committee that reviewed the defamation laws and made a slew of recommendations for their overhaul.

But the process, Mr Golding must be aware, has moved torturously slow through a joint select committee of Parliament, set up to review the Small recommendations. Nor do we sense any urgency on the part of the administration to push things along.

The last substantive session of the committee was in September when a British barrister, Mark Stephens, who is an expert on defamation law, appeared before the committee.

Don't lose interest, Mr Golding

We hope that recent political events have not caused Mr Golding to renounce, go squeamish on, or lose interest in the fundamental principles which he articulated on the matter - and about which he was right. Principles, we remind, transcend opportunistic advantage or personal or political peeve.

We, therefore, urge Mr Golding to re-energise the defamation-reform process, as part of the reform process to which he committed himself when he sought to recommit his compact with Jamaica during the Coke-Manatt fiasco.

Key issues for new law

The prime minister hardly needs to be told, but we remind him of a few of the salient issues to be addressed in a new defamation law:

shifting the burden of proof from defendants to claimants in defamation cases;

limit to six months the period within which defamation suits can be filed;

make it more difficult to institute and succeed in a defamation claim when the matter discussed was of public interest, and especially if the person who claims libel was acting in his public capacity;

try defamation cases before a judge;

place a cap on defamation awards;

afford as a defence against defamation when a libel or slander is a rebroadcast from a contracted source of high repute and good standing, such as an international news agency or global broadcaster.

The ideas are, of course, not exhaustive, but may be contrary to the political instincts of some of those who advise Mr Golding.

But as we observed, and as the prime minister should remind the doubters, the efficacy of good policy and good law are beyond the immediate. Mr Golding and the Jamaica Labour Party will not always control the levers of power.

In any event, being able to hold our governors to account is of benefit to the society. Transparency is good.

The opinions on this page, except for the above, do not necessarily reflect the views of The Gleaner. To respond to a Gleaner editorial, email us: editor@gleanerjm.com or fax: 922-6223. Responses should be no longer than 400 words. Not all responses will be published.