Word of libel tourism, the shady practice by which alleged terror financiers use the English courts to silence those who are working to expose them, is spreading, and none too soon. Here's the inimitable Mark Steyn on the subject:
Last week, the Cambridge University Press agreed to recall all unsold copies of "Alms for Jihad" and pulp them. In addition, it has asked hundreds of libraries around the world to remove the volume from their shelves. This highly unusual action was accompanied by a letter to Sheikh Khalid bin Mahfouz, in care of his English lawyers, explaining their reasons:"Throughout the book there are serious and defamatory allegations about yourself and your family, alleging support for terrorism through your businesses, family and charities, and directly.
"As a result of what we now know, we accept and acknowledge that all of those allegations about you and your family, businesses and charities are entirely and manifestly false."
Who is Sheikh Khalid bin Mahfouz? Well, he's a very wealthy and influential Saudi. Big deal, you say. Is there any other kind? Yes, but even by the standards of very wealthy and influential Saudis, this guy is plugged in: He was the personal banker to the Saudi royal family and head of the National Commercial Bank of Saudi Arabia, until he sold it to the Saudi government. He has a swanky pad in London and an Irish passport and multiple U.S. business connections, including to Thomas Kean, the chairman of the 9/11 Commission.
[...]
Because English libel law overwhelmingly favors the plaintiff. And like many other big-shot Saudis, Sheikh Mahfouz has become very adept at using foreign courts to silence American authors – in effect, using distant jurisdictions to nullify the First Amendment. He may be a wronged man, but his use of what the British call "libel chill" is designed not to vindicate his good name but to shut down the discussion, which is why Cambridge University Press made no serious attempt to mount a defense. He's one of the richest men on the planet, and they're an academic publisher with very small profit margins. But, even if you've got a bestseller, your pockets are unlikely to be deep enough: "House Of Saud, House Of Bush" did boffo biz with the anti-Bush crowd in America, but there's no British edition – because Sheikh Mahfouz had indicated he was prepared to spend what it takes to challenge it in court, and Random House decided it wasn't worth it.
As publishers quail before the prospect of losing their shirts to defend speech that implicates or offends wealthy magnates such as Mahfouz, we witness the English legal system collaborating in the demise of free expression in the West -- and, along the way, collaborating in the suppression of important and necessary contributions to our understanding of global terror.
As Steyn and others are realizing, if we want to be able to inform ourselves about terrorism, we need to protect the avenues of information -- and if we are to do that, we need to understand what libel tourism is and how English law sustains it. One important contribution to that understanding is an upcoming film by MPI fellow Jared Lapidus. Watch for The Libel Tourist--coming soon to a viral video venue near you.