Here’s a story from the London Times on how the Britain’s libel laws may be used to do their bit in stamping down free speech:
UP TO 95,000 descendants of the prophet Muhammad are planning to bring a libel action in Britain over “blasphemous” cartoons of the founder of Islam, even though they were published in the Danish press.
The defamation case is being prepared by Faisal Yamani, a Saudi lawyer acting for the descendants, who live in the Middle East, north Africa and as far afield as Australia.
Mark Stephens, a British lawyer who has seen a “pre-action” letter sent by Yamani to 10 Danish newspapers, said it “specifically says” he will launch proceedings in London.
Yamani is expected to justify the action by claiming that the cartoons, including one of Muhammad wearing a bomb-shaped turban, were accessible in Britain on the internet…
…Stephens said the descendants could argue that the cartoons — which first appeared in the Jyllands-Posten newspaper in 2005, sparking violent protests around the world — were a direct slur on them.
“Direct descendants of the prophet have a particular place within Muslim society . . . By effectively criticising and making fun of the prophet you are, by implication, holding them up to scandal, contempt and public ridicule,” he said. “So it may be that they will suffer some kind of damage among their own community. The question is, is that defamatory in English law?”
Good Grief
The bit about Muhammad’s descendants is downright wacky. Pretty much everyone on the planet is one of his descendants to at least some small fractional extent in some of their ancestral lines. Razib would be the go-to guy on the particulars, but the rule of thumb is that if somebody that ancient has any living descendants, they have a LOT of living descendants.
So as (probably) one of Muhammad’s distant progeny, I officially declare that I am offended by anyone who tries to prohibit his insult.
England is the mecca–pun intended–of what’s called libel tourism. Its libel laws are weighted, quite heavily, to favor the complainant. As I’m sure you know, it’s the opposite in the U.S., where cultural, political, and RELIGIOUS commentary receive special protection by the First Amendment. That’s why these crackpots don’t bother bringing suit here.
I read somewhere that London is known as “a town called sue.”
Even given Britain’s insane libel judges who creatively interpret libel laws I can’t see this action going anywhere, simply because even they can’t invent a right to sue on behalf of the dead.