A newly published Ministry of Justice Structural Reform Plan shows that developing options for reform is expected to take from June this year until March next year.

The plan gives as a milestone the publication next March of a “draft Defamation Bill for the reform of libel laws published for pre-legislative scrutiny”.

But it gives no indication of a timetable for the introduction or passage of the actual legislation…

The Government announced on 9 July, towards the end of the second reading debate on the Defamation Bill introduced into the House of Lords by Lord Lester of Herne Hill QC, that it would reform the libel laws to provide a “fair balance” between freedom of expression and protection of reputation.

Justice Minister Lord McNally said there would be a wide-ranging consultation exercise over the summer with publication of a draft Bill early in the new year.

This was not a “vague promise” but a “firm commitment to act on this matter”, he told peers.

The move would give ministers a “strong case for making time in the 2011-12 legislative programme for a substantive Bill”, Lord McNally said.

You can read the full report here.

• Introduce a statutory defence of responsible publication on a matter of public interest;
• Clarify the defences of justification and fair comment, renamed as ’truth’ and ‘honest opinion’;
• Respond to the problems of the internet age, including multiple publications and the responsibility of Internet Service Providers and hosters;
• Protect those reporting on proceedings in Parliament and other issues of public concern;
• Require claimants to show substantial harm, and corporate bodies to show financial loss;
• Encourage the speedy settlement of disputes without recourse to costly litigation.

Of the bill Lord Lester has said:

The time is over-ripe for Parliament to replace our patched-up archaic law with one that gives stronger protection to freedom of speech. No Government or Parliament has conducted a thorough and comprehensive review. My Bill provides the opportunity to do so and to modernise the law in step with the technological revolution. It creates a framework of principles rather than a rigid and inflexible code, and it seeks a fair balance between reputation and public information on matters of public interest.

Robert Dougans, Solicitor-Advocate for Simon Singh in his recent case against the British Chiropractic Association has welcomed the bill:

Lord Lester’s Bill should be welcomed by free speech campaigners. The proposals follow on from the Singh decision in expanding and enhancing the defence of honest opinion. This ought to be good news for all those seeking to engage in hard-hitting debate. The most important legacy might simply be putting much of libel law on a statutory basis. Attempts by the courts and Parliament to reform the libel laws have just added layers of complexity, to the extent that only specialist lawyers are able to advise upon it. This naturally increases costs and makes it harder to give definite advice.

Meanwhile Evan Harris has said:

Libel law reform is needed to prevent the chilling of comment which is in the public interest. It is therefore essential for scientists and academics and giving their opinion in good faith and responsibly, and their publishers, to know at the time of publication that they will have an effective defence against an unjustified libel plaintiff. Lord Lester’s skilfully crafted bill is one way of doing that and also offers the Government a vehicle for legislation following their review.

A Liberal Democrat peer is to launch a libel reform bill in the House of Lords that would offer greater protection for scientific debate against defamation claims.

Lord Lester of Herne Hill said he was introducing the private member’s bill in order to encourage the government to act quickly on libel reform. He said his aim was to trigger the formation of a committee to take detailed evidence on the topic. He added that he hoped the government would adopt the final version of the bill.

Both the Conservatives and the Lib Dems made pre-election pledges to reform libel law in the wake of the Culture, Media and Sport Committee’s Press standards, privacy and libel report, which highlighted the current law’s potential to stifle scientific debate.

You can read the full story here.

Human rights barrister Lord Lester has drawn up a defamation reform bill which he says has cross-party support and would be available to whoever wins next year’s general election.

According to the Sunday Times, the Lib Dem peer’s “moderate” bill would tackle the issues of libel tourism and the huge costs to publishers of cases brought under no win, no fee rules…

Lord Lester’s bill would:

• Reform the no-win no-fee which makes the costs so high for publishers that they often settle just to minimise their risks.
• End the rule whereby every time a web story is downloaded it counts as a new publication, and so the time limit starts again on a possible libel action.
• Prevent foreigners from suing in the British courts unless they can demonstrate that they have suffered real harm in Britain.
• Give publications a stronger public interest defence in libel cases.
• End the cash damages for claimants, saying that in most cases an apology from the publication should suffice.

The second point – ending the idea that each new appearance of a web page counts as a new publication – would be a particularly welcome change to bring libel law up to date with the modern age. That, and also the last point, would also significantly reduce the risk for bloggers.

Libel law reform was debate at the Liberal Democrat conference in the autumn, as reported on Lib Dem Voice at the time.

There is much debate to be had over the details of Lord Lester’s proposals, but perhaps the most important point is that genuine cross-party support makes these reforms a real possibility.