Libel Tourism

Over the weekend, I read this piece on libel tourism in the Economist. What’s libel tourism? As you may have guessed it, it’s a form of forum shopping, where plaintiffs are looking to file a complaint in a jurisdiction which will give them the best shot at winning. In this case, the Economist points to London, England. Cost of litigation in London can be prohibitively high, especially for small players, which often results in a default judgment for the plaintiff.

Costly litigation and steep default judgments, the magazine argues, may have a chilling effect on free speech on a global scale. One good example is a default judgment against an American author who, in her book titled “Funding Evil”, implicated a certain Saudi national who sued and won. Aside from the fact that it is often difficult to collect on such judgments, the article reminds me once again of the power of some courts and the extraterritorial reverberations their judgments may have.

The effect of such libel judgments has been felt strong enough to stir both the US and England into action. Seems like both countries are pushing bills that aim to protect the free speech of writers, the media and NGOs. I am curious if bloggers, as the newest and most dynamic section of the media, are going to be dragged into court for some of their writings?