Gerry Adams awarded €100,000 in damages in libel case against BBC

Extra.ie​

5 days ago

Former Sinn Fein leader Gerry Adams has been awarded €100,000 in damages after winning his libel action against the BBC.
Mr Adams said that a BBC Spotlight programme, and an accompanying online story, defamed him by alleging he sanctioned the killing of former Sinn Fein official Denis Donaldson, for which he denies any involvement.
A jury at the High Court in Dublin found in his favour on Friday, after determining that was the meaning of words included in the programme and article. Gerry Adams. Pic: Brian Lawless/PA Wire
It also found the BBC's actions were not in good faith and that it had not acted in a fair and reasonable way.
Mr Donaldson was shot dead in Co Donegal in 2006, months after admitting his role as a police and MI5 agent over 20 years.
In the programme broadcast in September 2016, an anonymous source given the pseudonym Martin claimed the shooting was sanctioned by the political and military leadership of the IRA and that Mr Adams gave 'the final say'. Gerry Adams. Pic: Brian Lawless/PA Wire
In 2009, the dissident republican group the Real IRA claimed responsibility for the killing and a Garda investigation into the matter remains ongoing.
Mr Adams said the allegation was a 'grievous smear' while the BBC has described the legal action as a 'cynical attempt to launder his reputation'.
The high-profile republican sought damages of at least €200,000 from the BBC. Judge Alexander Owens. Pic: Brian Lawless/PA Wire
However, the British public service broadcaster had argued it would be a 'cruel joke' to award the former Sinn Fein president any damages.
The jury determined that Mr Adams should be awarded 100,000, which the jury heard falls on the medium scale for defamation.
Trial judge Mr Justice Alexander Owens sent the jury out to begin deliberations at 10.25am on Thursday morning, in the fifth week of proceedings.
The 12 members were also provided with exhibits in the case and the means to re-watch the programme.
At one stage in the deliberations, one of the jurors was released from the process due to other commitments, including a camogie match.
The remaining 11 members continued their consideration of the issues before delivering the verdict.
They were tasked with determining whether the words in the BBC spotlight programme and accompanying article, on which Mr Adams brought the complaint, mean that he sanctioned and approved the murder of Mr Donaldson.
Mr Owens said they were to consider whether it was 'more likely than not' that a 'hypothetical reasonable reader' would take that meaning from the words.
The BBC had argued that the jury should not find that this was the meaning of the words, instead saying the claim had been put forward as an allegation that was immediately followed by Mr Adams' denial.
Having agreed with Mr Adams on that point, they then had to consider whether the broadcaster's actions were fair and reasonable as well as whether it acted in good faith.
They determined that the BBC had not acted in such a manner.
They returned with their verdict on Friday after six hours and 49 minutes of deliberations in total.
Mr Owens told the jury that the BBC had put forward the position that Mr Adams had 'no reputation at all' and the broadcaster had argued to the jury that it should award only nominal damages, putting forward the option of just one euro.
Mr Adams' team had argued that the defamation fell within the 'very serious' or 'exceptional' end of the scale – seeking at least €200,000.
Solicitor Paul Tweed said his client Mr Adams is 'very pleased with this resounding verdict', adding the award of damages 'speaks for itself'.
'The jury, 12 people from different walks of life, having listened to extensive evidence during the course of the past four weeks, has come to the unequivocal conclusion that the subject allegation was highly defamatory,' he said outside court.
'It therefore follows that the BBC Spotlight team at the time should not have included it in their broadcast. Not only had the false allegation regarding our client been the focus of the Spotlight documentary, but it had been utilised to sensationalise and publicise their programme.
'Furthermore, the fact that the false allegation has been left online for almost nine years has, in my opinion, done much to undermine the high standards of accuracy that is expected of the BBC.
'This case could and should have been resolved some considerable time ago.'