British libel laws violate human rights, says UN英國誹謗的法律侵犯人權的行為，說聯合國
guardian.co.uk guardian.co.uk | Britain’s libel laws have come under attack from the United Nations committee on human rights for discouraging coverage of matters of major public interest. |英國的誹謗的法律來攻擊下，從聯合國人權委員會為令人沮喪的覆蓋面關係重大的事項，公眾的利益。 The use of the Official Secrets Act to deter government employees from raising important issues has also been criticised.使用官方機密法令，以遏止政府僱員從提高的重要問題也受到批評。
The intervention by the UN comes in the wake of international disquiet over the use of British courts for “libel tourism”, whereby wealthy plaintiffs can sue in the high court in London over articles that would not warrant an action in their own country.干預，由聯合國來在後，國際不安的使用，英國法院對“誹謗旅遊” ，即富裕的原告可以起訴，在高等法院在倫敦過的文章不會令的行動，在自己的國家。
The criticisms are made as part of the committee’s concluding observations on the report submitted by the UK on civil and political rights.批評作出的一部分，委員會的結論性意見就提交的報告是由英國公民權利和政治權利。 UN member states are required to submit reports on human rights in their jurisdictions every three years.聯合國會員國須提交人權報告在其管轄範圍內每3年。
The committee warns that the British libel laws have “served to discourage critical media reporting on matters of serious public interest, adversely affecting the ability of scholars and journalists to publish their work, including through the phenomenon known as libel tourism”.該委員會警告說，英國誹謗法“送達勸阻的關鍵媒體報導的事項嚴重的公眾利益，造成不良影響的能力，學者和新聞記者發表他們的工作，包括通過的現象，稱為誹謗旅遊” 。
The case that has provoked the most concern is that of an American researcher, Dr Rachel Ehrenfeld, who was sued in London by a Saudi businessman and his two sons over a book that sold 23 copies over the internet into the UK, where it was never officially published.此案已挑起最令人關注的是，一名美國研究員，博士，雷切爾ehrenfeld ，誰被起訴，在倫敦的沙特商人和他的兩個兒子超過一本書，出售23份，隨著國際互聯網進入英國，在那裡從來沒有正式出版。 One chapter of the book was available online.其中一章的這本書在網上提供。
The action led to the New York state legislature passing legislation to protect writers and publishers working there from defamation judgements in any country that does not give the same same freedom of speech rights as New York and US federal law.該行動導致新的紐約州立法機關通過立法來保護作家和出版商在那裡工作的誹謗判決在任何一個國家不給予相同的相同的言論自由的權利，作為新的紐約和美國聯邦法律。
The committee’s report highlights the grey area created by the internet whereby alleged libel can be read in different countries.委員會的報告突出了灰色地帶，所創造的互聯網，即所稱的誹謗可以看到在不同的國家。 There is a risk, warns the committee, that restrictive libel laws could affect legitimate international discussion, contrary to article 19 of the covenant on civil and political rights, which guarantees the right to freedom of speech “regardless of borders”.有一種危險，警告委員會，限制性誹謗的法律可能會影響合法的國際討論，相反，公約第19條關於公民權利和政治權利，保證言論自由權“不論國界” 。
The UK government has been urged to consider “a so-called ‘public figure’ exception” that would require a would-be claimant to prove actual malice by a publisher or author.英國政府一直敦促考慮“一個所謂的'公眾人物'例外” ，這將需要將要索賠人證明的實際惡意，由出版者或作者。
This would apply in cases involving public officials and prominent public figures, as currently exists in the US, where a public figure can only sue for libel if he or she can demonstrate malice, recklessness or indifference to the truth and that the statement is false.這將適用於案件涉及公職人員和突出的公眾人物，作為目前在美國，公眾人物只能控告誹謗，如果他或她能證明惡意，魯莽或冷漠的真相，並認為聲明是虛假的。
On the Official Secrets Act, the committee “remains concerned” that powers under the act have been “exercised to frustrate former employees of the crown from bringing into the public domain issues of genuine public interest, and can be exercised to prevent the media from publishing such matters”.就官方保密法，該委員會“仍然關注”的權力，根據該法案已“行使阻撓的前僱員官方攜帶進入公有領域的問題，真正的公眾利益，並可以行使，以防止媒體出版這些事情“ 。 The committee found the act is used even when issues of national security are not involved.委員會發現，該法是用，甚至當國家安全問題不涉及。
The 2006 Terrorism Act’s “broad and vague” definition of the offence of “encouragement of terrorism” was also criticised by the committee. 2006年反恐怖主義法的“模糊籠統的”罪的定義“鼓勵恐怖主義” ，也批評該委員會。
Media law specialist Mark Stephens, of legal firm Finers Stephens Innocent, said: “I think it is quite remarkable that the UK government has drawn these deficiencies in our libel laws to the attention of the United Nations, while at the same time libel lawyers in this country have remained insouciant to the deficiencies highlighted by the UN.”傳媒法專家馬克斯蒂芬斯，律師事務所finers斯蒂芬斯是無辜的，說： “我認為，這是很了不起的英國政府已制定這些缺陷在我們的誹謗的法律，向聯合國的注意，而在同一時間，誹謗的律師這個國家仍然insouciant向缺陷所強調的聯合國“ 。
Have Your Say: British libel laws violate human rights, says UN 你說：英國誹謗的法律侵犯人權的行為，說聯合國
Please read our請閱讀我們的 posting guidelines before posting發布指引，然後再發布 . 。
Alternatively或者 you can discuss this report here您可以討論此報告在這裡 . 。
This entry was posted on Thursday, August 14th, 2008 at 10:44 pm and is filed under 此項目被張貼在週四， 2008年8月14日在下午10時44分，並提交下 Surveillance, Civil Liberties & Human Rights News 監視，公民自由及人權新聞 . 。 You can follow any responses to this entry through the 您可以按照任何的反應，此項目通過 RSS 2.0 2.0 feed. 餵養。 You can 您可以 leave a response 留下的回應 , or ，或 trackback Trackback跟踪 from your own site. 從你自己的網站。
Translations 翻譯
Related News 相關新聞
- Government tries to abuse the Bill of Rights政府試圖濫用人權法案
- Secrecy: Update laws on openness保密：更新的法律就開放
- MPs raise fears over data protection for ID register強制性公積金計劃提高擔心數據保護為智障登記
- Charities ’should be subject to human rights’慈善' ，應該受到人權'
- Channel 4 journalist grills Olympics organisers over human rights第4頻道記者牛排奧運會主辦人權
Email This Page To A Friend 電子郵件此頁給朋友
Latest Headlines 最新的新聞標題
- Channel 4 journalist grills Olympics organisers over human rights第4頻道記者牛排奧運會主辦人權
- India to examine protest deaths印度研究抗議死亡
- Rwanda: Obscuring the Truth About the Genocide盧旺達：掩蓋真相的種族滅絕
- Another inconvenient truth: Fiscal Armageddon, coming to a cinema near you另一個不方便的真理：財政災難，來戲院附近的你
- British libel laws violate human rights, says UN英國誹謗的法律侵犯人權的行為，說聯合國
- What’s on Tap and What You Need to Know About Drinking Water什麼的就挖掘和您需要知道的關於飲用水
- BAE case in the Lords裴案件在上議院
- Guantanamo general calls 2nd general ‘bullying’關塔那摩一般號召第二一般'欺凌'
- Antiwar activists seek expanded police probe反戰活動家尋求擴大警方探針
- Is Perpetual War Our Future?是永久的戰爭，我們的未來？ Learning the Wrong Lessons from the Bush Era學習了錯誤的教訓，布什時代
More更多 Breaking News突發新聞
Archive 存檔
- August 2008 2008年8月
- July 2008 2008年7月
- June 2008 2008年6月
- May 2008 2008年5月
- April 2008 2008年4月
- March 2008 2008年3月
- February 2008 2008年2月
- January 2008 2008年1月
- December 2007 2007年12月
- November 2007 2007年11月
- October 2007 2007年10月
- September 2007 2007年9月
- August 2007 2007年8月
- July 2007 2007年7月
- June 2007 2007年6月
- May 2007 2007年5月
- April 2007 2007年4月
- March 2007 2007年3月
