Page 73 - Law and the Media

Law and the Media
majority that it amounted to blasphemous libel. On appeal the House of Lords, again by a
majority, upheld the verdict. Gay News was fined £1000 and the editor was fined £500,
although he successfully appealed a suspended sentence of nine months.

Blasphemous libel only protects the Christian religion, especially in its Anglican form. In
1991 the Court of Appeal held that a prosecution could not be brought for perceived
blasphemous libels in The Satanic Verses by Salman Rushdie as the common law of
blasphemy did not extend to attacks on other religions such as Islam (R v Chief Metropolitan
Stipendiary Magistrate ex parte Choudhury (1991)).

Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights provides for the right to freedom
of expression, but this will not necessarily protect those who commit blasphemous libel. In
Wingrove v United Kingdom (1996), a video of the erotic story of an early-modern nun,
called Visions of Ecstasy, was refused a video recording classification certificate by the Video
Appeals Committee of the British Board of Film Classification on the grounds that it
infringed the criminal law of blasphemy. The decision resulted in an unsuccessful challenge
to the European Court of Human Rights. The Court held that the refusal of a certificate did
not amount to a violation of the right to freedom of expression under Article 10, as the
interference had a legitimate aim in protecting the rights of others and providing protection
against offensive attacks on matters held sacred by Christians.

2.3 Seditious libel

In many ways the law against seditious libel, like blasphemy, is a hangover from less tolerant
days. The purpose of the crime was to prevent the encouragement of active discontent
through attacks on the established order. The authorities and case law for seditious libel are
old, and the possible grounds for prosecution appear archaic in modern society.

2.3.1 What is seditious libel?

Seditious libel consists of a statement, in either spoken or written form, which is seditious
in content and published with a seditious intent. Seditious content includes promoting hatred
or ridicule against:

The sovereign or his heirs or successors
The government of the United Kingdom
The Houses of Parliament, or
The administration of justice.
Seditious content can also include promoting ill will, discontent or dissatisfaction between
the sovereign’s subjects, and inciting the sovereign’s subjects to use unlawful means to alter
any matter relating to church or state or a public issue.
36