Gerry Adams' BBC manners remark 'chilling', says NUJ secretary

Gerry Adams' claim that his libel case was about "putting manners" on the BBC was chilling and unfair under the circumstances, the Irish secretary of the National Union of Journalists (NUJ) has said.

The former Sinn Féin leader won €100,000 (£84,000) in damages over a BBC story about the murder of a British agent.

A court in Dublin found the 76 year old was defamed in a BBC NI Spotlight programme broadcast in 2016 and an accompanying online article, in which an anonymous contributor alleged he sanctioned the 2006 murder of Denis Donaldson.

The NUJ's Séamus Dooley said the case showed the need for reform of Ireland's defamation laws.

He added that the public would never know why the jury made its decision.

Speaking to Irish broadcaster RTÉ, Mr Dooley said Gerry Adams was entitled to take his case but the verdict has "profound implications for the practice of journalism and I think it has implications both in of defamation law but also for me in of journalism in Northern Ireland and the relationship between Sinn Féin and journalists in Northern Ireland".

The director of the BBC in Northern Ireland said the implications of Mr Adams' court win were "profound".

Adam Smyth said the BBC's legal team had warned the jury's decision in the high-profile case could "hinder freedom of expression".

Sinn Féin Finance Minister John O'Dowd welcomed the jury's findings and said the BBC should "reflect on that court judgment".

"I think the upper echelons of the BBC in the north, and the reaction to the court judgment, show they are unwilling to learn lessons," he told Radio Ulster's Good Morning Ulster.

"They are unwilling to reflect on their own role and responsibilities".

The BBC has said: "We've nothing further to add at this stage."

The trial at the High Court in Dublin heard four weeks of evidence from 10 witnesses, including Mr Adams and BBC NI reporter Jennifer O'Leary.

The jury found words used in the programme and accompanying article meant Mr Adams sanctioned and approved Mr Donaldson's murder.

They also found the BBC did not report the allegations in good faith and settled on €100,000 in damages.

The 11-person jury came to its findings after six hours and 49 minutes of deliberations.

Speaking outside court on Friday, Mr Adams said taking the case was "about putting manners on the British Broadcasting Corporation".

He added: "The British Broadcasting Corporation upholds the ethos of the British state in Ireland, and in my view it's out of sync in many, many fronts with the Good Friday Agreement."

Mr Dooley said: "I found that a chilling comment actually. He referred to putting manners on the BBC, to me that means putting them back in their box.

"The reality is that Spotlight has, for over 40 years, done some of the most amazing investigative journalism."

He said Margaret Thatcher tried to ban Spotlight over its coverage of the Gibraltar Three and that it also "exposed Kincora at the heart of the British establishment" and noted its work on Stakeknife.

"I found the attitude quite chilling but also unfair and unreasonable in the circumstances."

Mr Dooley said Mr Adams was a figure of "huge significance" to journalists, historians and academics and had "influenced the shape of history in Northern Ireland".

"On that basis, any journalist has a right, any academic, to question and probe," he added.

Mr Dooley said the case underpinned the need for a review of defamation laws in Ireland.

"First of all we need to look at the defence of honest opinion and how you square that circle in the context of journalists' right to protect sources, it is a real difficulty," he said.

"For many years, the NUJ was in favour of retaining juries. I have now reached the conclusion in defamation cases that juries are not appropriate."

Mr Dooley said having a jury means you do not find out how a decision is made.

He added that if the case had been taken in Northern Ireland, it would have been heard before judges and "you have the benefit of a written judgment, you have the benefit of a detailed explanation of the reason why a verdict is given".

"That provides an insight and a guide. Here we don't know."