posted by:
McLibel Support Campaign/ London Greenpeace
post: 5 Caledonian Rd, London N1 9DX, UK
tel/fax: +44 (0) 171 713 1269
email: mclibel@globalnet.co.uk
web: www.mcspotlight.org
McLIBEL LEGAL UPDATE
- House of Lords/ European court
- Helen & Dave suing the police
- 'McCruelty To Go'
- Advertising to Children
HOUSE OF LORDS/ EUROPEAN COURT: In March this year the McLibel Appeal
resulted in further important victories for campaigners. The Defendants have
now lodged a petition to the House of Lords, and after that will go to the
European Court of Human Rights if necessary to seek to overturn the UK's
oppressive libel laws.
Helen and Dave, representing themselves, are seeking to defend the public's
right to criticise companies whose business practices affect people's lives,
health and environment, arguing that multinational corporations should no
longer be able to sue for libel. They will also argue that publishing
material about matters of public importance and interest should be protected
by 'qualified privilege' - a point related to the matters currently being
heard by the House of Lords in the libel case of the former Irish Prime
Minister Albert Reynolds vs The Sunday Times. Helen and Dave also seek an
end to unfair and oppressive defamation laws and procedures.
But most importantly for McDonald's they are seeking leave to argue that,
having now won the bulk of the issues in dispute with the fast-food
corporation, they should have won the case outright. After a controversial
314 day trial ending in June 1997, in which the defendants had been denied
Legal Aid and their right to a jury trial, Mr Justice Bell ruled that:
McDonald's marketing has "pretended to a positive nutritional benefit which
their food (high in fat & salt etc) did not match"; that McDonald's "exploit
children" with their advertising strategy; are "culpably responsible for
animal cruelty"; and "pay low wages, helping to depress wages in the
catering trade." Significantly McDonald's did not appeal over these damning
rulings against their core business practices, stating that the Judge was
'correct in his conclusions'! [McDonald's written submissions 5.1.99]. The
McLibel 2 failed to convince the judge on all issues, however, and so appealed.
On March 31st the Court of Appeal added to those damning findings, after a
23-day hearing earlier this year. Lord Justices Pill, May and Keane ruled
that it was fair comment to say that McDonald's employees worldwide "do
badly in terms of pay and conditions", and true that "if one eats enough
McDonald's food, one's diet may well become high in fat etc., with the very
real risk of heart disease.'" But despite these further findings the Appeal
Court only reduced Mr Justice Bell's original award of £60,000 pounds
damages to McDonald's (who'd spent an estimated £10m on the case) by
£20,000. The defendants believe, and will argue that it is an outrage that
McDonald's has been awarded any damages at all in the light of all the
serious findings made against the company and the fact that no sanctions
have been taken against them.
McLibel Trial general:
http://www.mcspotlight.org/case/
Appeal:
http://www.mcspotlight.org/case/trial/verdict/appeal.html
SUING THE COPS: In September 1998 Helen and Dave launched proceedings
against the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, claiming damages for
misfeasance in public office, breach of confidence and breach of their right
to privacy. Their claim results from actions of police officers, including
Special Branch officers, which came to light as a result of the McLibel
trial. Police officers had passed private and in some cases false
information about the McLibel 2 (and some other protestors), including their
home addresses, to McDonald's and to private investigators hired by
McDonald's to infiltrate London Greenpeace.
During the trial Sid Nicholson, McDonald's Head of Security and a former Met
Chief Superintendent, stated from the witness box that McDonald's security
department were 'all ex-policemen' and if he ever wanted to know information
about protestors he would go to his contacts in the police. This collusion
between the police and a multinational corporation against members of the
public exposes the political role of the police in ensuring the wheels of
big business keep turning. The case is expected to be heard later this year.
Exclusive interview with one of McDonald's spies:
http://www.mcspotlight.org/people/interviews/tiller_fran.html
PETA's "McCRUELTY TO GO" CAMPAIGN: In October in the USA, People For The
Ethical Treatment Of Animals (PETA) launched a nationwide billboard poster
campaign attacking Ronald McDonald's as 'The US No 1 Serial Killer' (in
response
they said to the McLibel verdict), with pictures of slaughtered chickens and
cows. When their UK branch publicised their intent to do the same in England
they were told by the regulatory authorities that they would be banned. This
year for the first time PETA joined the international anti-McDonald's
protests on October 16th.
PETA's site:
http://www.meatstinks.com/mcd.html
Ronald McDonald supports Peta's campaign (!):
http://www.mcspotlight.org/media/press/newmexalibi_10oct99.html
ADVERTISING TO CHILDREN: To expose the hypocrisy of the advertising industry,
and in the light of the McLibel ruling that McDonald's exploit children,
the McLibel
Support Campaign is calling on the public to send in letters to the Independent
Television Commission calling for a ban on all McDonald's advertising to
children. A 'standard letter' is available, or do your own. Legal action
against the ITC to achieve this is now being prepared.
http://www.mcspotlight.org/campaigns/current/itcadban_99.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Mar 05 2000 - 16:58:16 GMT