BBC faces criticism over delay in paying court-ordered damages to Gerry Adams
The corporation lost a major defamation case earlier this year after Mr Adams took them to court over a 2016 episode of its Spotlight programme and an accompanying online story.
They contained an allegation that Mr Adams sanctioned the killing of former Sinn Fein official Denis Donaldson. Mr Adams denied any involvement.
In May, a jury at the High Court in Dublin found in his favour and awarded him 100,000 euros (£84,000) after determining that was the meaning of words included in the programme and article.
The BBC, which was found by the jury not to have acted in good faith nor in a fair and reasonable way, was also ordered to pay the former Sinn Fein leader's legal costs.
Adam Smyth, director of BBC NI, expressed disappointment in the verdict and said the corporation believes it supplied extensive evidence to the court of the careful editorial process and journalistic diligence applied to the programme and accompanying online article.
After the decision, the broadcaster's legal team was granted a stay in the payment of the full award as it took time to consider an appeal, subject to paying half the damages (50,000 euros or £42,000) and 250,000 euros (£210,000) towards solicitors' fees.
In June, the BBC confirmed it would not pursue an appeal.
However, it is understood that by August 1 the BBC had not paid the damages.
Mr Adams previously indicated that he planned to donate what he receives to good causes.
He specified that these would include for children in Gaza as well as groups in the Irish language sector and those who are homeless.
A source close to Mr Adams told the PA news agency: 'The delay by the BBC is deplorable and it should move speedily towards discharging the order of the court.'
A BBC spokesperson said: 'Total costs will be finalised and payable in due course.'

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


CBS News
26 minutes ago
- CBS News
Former Gateway Church elders seek removal from defamation suit
Three former Gateway Church elders who church leaders said were aware of details involving the alleged sexual abuse by founding Pastor Robert Morris have asked to be removed from a civil suit in Dallas County. Gayland Lawshe, Jeremy Carasco and Thomas Miller have all filed motions in the defamation suit brought by Cindy Clemishire, the now-adult woman who said she was sexually assaulted by Morris four decades ago. The suit argues that Morris, along with his wife, Debbie, the church, and a group of former and current elders and staff, put out false statements as part of an effort to cover up what happened. In his filing posted Monday, Miller argued any statements he made "were without actual malice (i.e., in good faith)." "Specifically, the statements were made in the course of an investigation after a report an employee wrongdoing and updating the congregation," Miller argued. Last month, District Court Judge Emily Tobolowsky set trial in the case for June 2026. In his petition to the court, former elder Carasco argued that he did nothing to defame Clemishire. "Defendant denies that he made any defamatory publications whatsoever concerning plaintiffs," the filing said. "Alternatively, to the extent any statement made by defendant is alleged by plaintiffs to have been defamatory, any such statement was: true, substantially true ... (and) made without malice or neglect." Morris heads back to court Sept. 4 in Oklahoma, where he was indicted on five counts of lewd or indecent acts with a child. The Oklahoma attorney general has argued the statute of limitations does not apply since Morris was not a resident of the state at the time of the alleged crimes. Retirement dispute continues in Texas In Tarrant County, a dispute between the church and Morris over his multi-million-dollar retirement package continues. A hearing is set on that case for Sept. 17.
Yahoo
36 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump plans to meet Putin next week in Ukraine peace bid
President Donald Trump said Wednesday he plans to meet with Vladimir Putin as soon as next week in a fresh bid to broker a peace deal with Ukraine after U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff held a 'highly productive' meeting with the Russian president. Trump hailed the meeting as having made 'great progress,' but he didn't elaborate. A Kremlin spokesman said the meeting lasted three hours and was 'useful and constructive.' 'Everyone agrees this war must come to a close, and we will work towards that in the days and weeks to come,' Trump posted on his social media site. 'President Trump wants this brutal war to end,' added White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt. Trump told European allies about his plans to meet with Putin and his hopes to broker a three-man meeting between the two of them and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, several American and European media outlets reported. A face-to-face meeting between Putin and Zelenskyy could amount to a crucial crossroads in the war that Putin launched against neighboring Ukraine more than three years ago. In announcing his plans, Trump didn't mention his looming Friday deadline for Putin to start talking peace with Kyiv, raising obvious questions about whether the threat is still hanging over the Kremlin. Trump last week set a stricter deadline of '10 or 12 days' for Putin to wind down the war against Ukraine or start peace negotiations, threatening 'severe tariffs' and other economic penalties against Russia and its economic partners if it refuses. Zelenskyy, who also spoke with Trump on Wednesday, said Putin's agreement to meet could suggest that pressure from Trump is working, though he warned that the wily Kremlin leader could be raising hopes for peace as a negotiating tactic without any intention of agreeing to end the conflict. 'The main thing is that they do not deceive us in the details,' Zelenskyy said in his nightly address to the Ukrainian people. Moscow had so far shrugged off Trump's deadline as empty bluster, noting he has given numerous previous ultimatums on various issues that turned out to be toothless threats. Russia believes it has the upper hand on the battlefield, at least in the short and medium term, giving it little reason to agree to even a brief ceasefire. Its troops have made modest advances along the long front line in Ukraine's eastern Donbas region and ousted Ukrainian troops from a sliver of a Russian border territory that they had previously seized. Russia has also increasingly mounted deadly missile and drone attacks on Ukrainian civilian targets. Earlier on Wednesday, Witkoff took a morning stroll in Moscow with Kirill Dmitriev, the Russian president's envoy for investment and economic cooperation, which was captured in footage aired by a Russian news agency. Dmitriev played a key role in three rounds of direct talks between delegations from Russia and Ukraine, as well as discussions between Russian and U.S. officials, but the negotiations made no progress on ending the three-year war. Trump has recently flip-flopped to a much harsher stance on Russia after seeing Putin for months spurn his demands for concessions. Still, Trump has shown himself to be unwilling to take a firm stance of defending Ukraine and sticking to it, giving Putin an incentive to wait out any threats. The new deadline and threat to impose 'secondary sanctions' on nations that buy Russian energy, like India, China and Turkey, are particularly problematic because those economic powerhouses have no control over Russia's stance on Ukraine. They're unlikely to cut economic ties with Moscow in response to such U.S. demands, especially when Trump himself was cozying up to Putin just a few weeks ago. The White House announced it is tacking on a new 25% tariff on products imported from India, raising the total tax to 50%, which suggests it doesn't consider Putin has met the deadline. Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
40 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump escalates nuclear tensions as Russia deadline nears
President Trump is rattling the U.S.'s formidable nuclear saber amid his growing frustration with Russian President Vladimir Putin's refusal to halt the war in Ukraine, just days ahead of Trump's deadline for a ceasefire. Trump last week said he was moving two 'nuclear' submarines closer to Russia in response to threatening rhetoric from a top Kremlin official. On Sunday, he confirmed the vessels were now 'in the region.' It's not clear if Trump is referring to nuclear-armed submarines or nuclear-powered attack submarines, but the confusion adds to the threat, which coincides with the president's Friday deadline for Russia to end the war or face further economic isolation. Experts say it's a risky tactic unlikely to sway Putin, who has stood in the way of the president's campaign promise to end the war in Ukraine within 24 hours of returning to the White House. 'I don't see a lot of the benefits or the advantages, given that the Russians know very well that we have, for decades, had nuclear-armed submarines that could target what matters to them,' said Erin Dumbacher, the Stanton Nuclear Security Senior Fellow with the Council on Foreign Relations. 'I see more risk than reward to using statements like this.' While experts don't see an imminent threat, they warn against careless and bombastic statements that could lead to risky miscalculation and confrontation. 'Does this mean that all of a sudden we should all be going to the cellar and locking ourselves in? No,' said former Rep. John Tierney (D-Mass.), who is the executive director of the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation, in a call with The Hill. 'Of major concern is nuclear rhetoric that could all too easily lead to mistake or miscalculation resulting in catastrophe. Trump's verbal engagement with an essentially powerless Russian politician is inappropriate and unhelpful,' he said in an earlier statement. 'What is needed is a steady hand, not someone who allows his anger at a personal insult to risk escalating to a dangerous situation.' Steve Witkoff, Trump's special envoy for peace missions, is expected in Moscow later this week to push Putin to agree to a ceasefire. If that fails, Ukraine's supporters are hoping Trump will pull the trigger on 'secondary tariffs' on countries that import oil from Russia, in a bid to choke off the Kremlin's ability to finance its war. Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov on Monday downplayed the movement of the U.S. submarines to its nearby waters, saying it does not want to be dragged into a tit-for-tat escalation. 'In general, of course, we would not want to get involved in such a controversy and would not want to comment on it in any way,' Peskov told reporters, according to Reuters. 'Of course, we believe that everyone should be very, very careful with nuclear rhetoric.' Peskov added that Russia does not currently see the movement as an escalation. 'It is clear that very complex, very sensitive issues are being discussed, which, of course, are perceived very emotionally by many people,' he added. Trump announced the move after what he called 'highly provocative statements' from former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, who is now the deputy chair of the country's security council. Medvedev had criticized Trump's foreign policy and threat of sanctions. Earlier this week, Trump reduced a 50-day timeline for Russia to reach a ceasefire, after repeatedly lashing out at Putin for continued attacks on Ukraine. Medvedev, a frequent anti-Western critic seen as having little decision-making power in the Russian government, said Trump is 'playing the ultimatum game with Russia: 50 days or 10,' and he warned about the risk of war between 'nuclear-armed adversaries.' He also referenced Russia's 'dead hand' capabilities — a Cold War relic that describes Moscow's ability to launch a nuclear strike even if the Russian leadership is taken out. 'Words are very important, and can often lead to unintended consequences,' Trump responded in a Truth Social post. 'I hope this will not be one of those instances.' Trump has wielded America's nuclear arsenal in the past, particularly during his attempts to get North Korea to abandon its nuclear weapons ambitions during his first term. Trump often raised the prospect of nuclear war with Pyongyang, boasting he would unleash 'fire and fury' on the country, and that he had a 'much bigger' and 'more powerful' nuclear arsenal. Trump's latest move to send two U.S. nuclear submarines to circle near Russia is unlikely to cause major concern for Moscow, given that such vessels patrol oceans across the globe daily, experts said. But the heightened rhetoric and concerns for miscalculation are underscoring key gaps in nuclear arms control and nonproliferation efforts. The Russian Foreign Ministry on Monday said it was not bound by a moratorium on short- and intermediate-range missiles, in what Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said was a response to U.S. discussions to deploy long-range conventional missiles to Europe. The missiles were banned under the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, which Trump pulled out of in his first term in response to Russian violations of the treaty. And the New START treaty between the U.S. and Russia is set to expire in February. The treaty put restrictions on America and Russia's nuclear arsenals and allowed reciprocal inspection and verification. Russia suspended its participation in the treaty in 2023, and the U.S. took countermeasures that effectively suspended American participation, raising concerns among nuclear arms control experts about the next steps. 'I'm not seeing a lot of conversation about what would happen after that, in an effort to restrict or limit or even maintain the current levels,' said Dumbacher, who most recently was a CFR international affairs fellow with the Pentagon. In that role she helped craft language signed on by the U.S. and China that humans, and not artificial intelligence, should control nuclear weapons. Dumbacher pointed out Russia is not a party to that agreement, which speaks to Medvedev's threats of Russia's 'dead hand' capabilities. 'I think every nuclear weapons country should sign on to some sort of confidence building measure like that, where we say we're never going to hand this decision over to a machine,' she said. Even as Trump heightens his rhetoric against Russia, the president has highlighted nuclear arms control as a priority. In a speech to the World Economic Forum in Davos in January, he said he wanted nuclear arms reduction talks with both Russia and China. And Trump boasts of halting fighting between Pakistan and India as averting a nuclear war. Rose Gottemoeller, who served as deputy secretary-general of NATO from 2016-19, noted Trump's success in getting Putin in 2019 to a freeze on all nuclear warheads, as well as his signal more recently that he is not interested in the U.S. building more warheads. 'Today's U.S. political reality mandates that the next arms control treaty has to be wholly owned by President Donald Trump if it is to be successful,' Gottemoeller wrote in an article for the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists late last month, pointing out that any new arms control treaty will need the ratification of Congress. 'With the willingness that President Trump has already shown to take on the issue of constraining warheads, the current U.S. administration has the opportunity to forge into new territory on nuclear arms control.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Solve the daily Crossword