Building a Better Jamaica

BY Balford Henry Observer writer balfordh@jamaicaobserver.com
Wednesday, April 30, 2008

 A committee commissioned by Prime Minister Bruce Golding to review the defamation laws has recommended that the distinction between slander and libel should be abolished and that a single civil action of defamatory publication that requires no proof of special damages be established.

The recommendation was included in the report tabled in the House of Representatives, yesterday.

The committee, chaired by Justice Hugh Small, also recommended that the limitation period for an action of defamation be reduced to one year from the publication of the defamatory statement, down from the current six. However, the committee suggested that provisions be put in place fixing an appropriate formula for the extension of that period by the Court, "where the interests of justice so require".

Defamation is suffered when words or other matter containing an untrue allegation that is damaging to someone's individual reputation are published to a third party. Libel occurs when it is published in a permanent form such as a newspaper or a book and slander occurs when it is transient such as in a speech.

The committee has also recommended that the common law offences of criminal libel, including blasphemous, obscene and seditious libel be abolished.

However, it was unable to decide on the level of protection, if any, that should be afforded public officials who claim defamation.

Instead, the committee suggested that Jamaica could either follow the principle in the United States based on New York Times v Sulivan (1964) in which the Supreme Court held that libel proceedings were subject to the First Amendment whenever they involve public officials, or the House of Lords development on qualified privileges, or leave things as they are.

The 12-member committee was appointed by Golding to review the laws in order to facilitate greater openness and transparency in governance with a view to empowering the Press as a component of modern democracy.