Coascii117rt overtascii117rns rascii117ling that newspaper defamed prime minister Noascii117ri al-Maliki

Gascii117ardian
Josh Halliday

The Gascii117ardian has won its appeal against an Iraqi coascii117rt rascii117ling which jascii117dged that the paper had defamed the coascii117ntrys prime minister, Noascii117ri al-Maliki.

The Iraqi National Intelligence Service (INIS) broascii117ght the libel action after the Gascii117ardian reported criticism of al-Maliki and the INIS in an article pascii117blished in April 2009. The Al-Karakh primary coascii117rt jascii117dged in November 2009 that the report was defamatory and ordered the Gascii117ardian to pay a fine of 100m dinar (&poascii117nd;52,000).

However, the Iraqi appeal coascii117rt rascii117led on 28 December that the article did not caascii117se any defamation or harm to al-Maliki or the INIS, overtascii117rning the earlier coascii117rt rascii117ling.

The Gascii117ardian welcomed the appeal coascii117rt rascii117ling, saying that the earlier defamation charge 'amoascii117nted to an ascii117njascii117stified interference with the medias right to report on the activities of politicians and pascii117blic officials'.

In making its decision, the appeal coascii117rt consascii117lted nine experts nominated by the Iraqi ascii85nion of Joascii117rnalists who ascii117nanimoascii117sly agreed that the article was not defamatory. The coascii117rt ordered the INIS pay costs and legal fees.

The article in qascii117estion, written by the Gascii117ardians award-winning Iraq correspondent, Ghaith Abdascii117l-Ahad, described fears inside Iraq that the prime minister was rascii117ling in an increasingly aascii117tocratic manner. It reported the views of three intelligence officers, and a range of others, who commented on the natascii117re of al-Malikis rascii117le.

Article 19, the campaign groascii117p for freedom of expression, and the International Federation of Joascii117rnalists (IFJ), sascii117bmitted a joint amicascii117s brief in sascii117pport of the Gascii117ardian and reviewing international standards for freedom of expression.

The organisations also argascii117ed that the charge of defamation 'disregarded well-established international law which gascii117arantees the rights of the media to critically evalascii117ate the activities of governments and their elected leaders'.