British journalist celebrates victory in Thai libel battle

British freelance journalist Andrew Drummond has won a long-running criminal libel battle in the Tha

The stories related to two expatriate Scots involved in the sex industry.

Drummond has been cleared of two counts of criminal libel brought by James Lumsden, 59, from Falkirk, and Gordon May, 67, from Edinburgh - two businessmen involved in the sex industry in the resort of Pattaya.

Legal action was brought against Drummond after he wrote a series of articles describing the misfortunes that befell Britons who went into business with Lumsden and May.

In April 1990, Iain Macdonald, 28, died in a fire at the Ambiance Hotel in Pattaya. A second businessman Kevin Quill, 39, from Bradford, Yorkshire, invested money with May and Lumsden and was jailed for six years for drug possession after he was arrested by police in 2000.

The Appeal Judges, Seramee Sirimankarak, Sittisak Wanachkij and Ariya Navintum ruled: "The defendant was doing his job as a journalist, making facts public for foreigners doing business in Thailand. There is nothing defamatory in what he wrote."

Marwaan Macan-Markar, president of the Foreign Correspondents' Club of Thailand, said: "We welcome these two court rulings in favour of Andrew Drummond, particularly since the alleged libels involved were criminal offences under existing Thai law.

"The verdicts demonstrate a fundamental respect for investigative reporting in the public interest. This is a good day for journalism and the law in Thailand."

The original reports were printed in London and Glasgow but Lumsden chose to sue in Thailand, which he considered his home, after the Bangkok Post printed similar stories. Drummond was subsequently given two two-year suspended prison sentences.

Drummond said: "I'm of course very pleased. But this is small consolation for the families of Iain Macdonald or Kevin Quill. Their lives have been devastated.

"My thanks must go to Steve Turner former president of the BAJ for his never ending support and encouragement and my colleagues on newspapers in the UK and their bosses who helped pay my expenses."

Andrew Chant writes for Press Gazette.


Photo: Dan Kitwood/Getty Images
Show Hide image

Conservative disunity is not all good news for Labour

The Tory leadership election could squeeze Labour out of the conversation, just like Blair and Brown did to the Tories.

The first test of opposition politics is relevance. Other key yardsticks - political plausibility, economic credibility, setting the agenda and developing a governing vision - all matter greatly. But making yourself a central part of the relentless cycle of daily politics, the terms of which are generally set by the governing party, is the first hurdle. It matters not whether you sign up to new politics or old: be relevant or wither. 

The issue of relevance is becoming a pressing issue for Labour. Take George Osborne’s favoured issue of the so-called national living wage.  Leave to one side the rights, wrongs and nuances of the policy and just consider the basic political dynamic it creates.  Osborne has, quite deliberately, set up a rolling five year argument over a steadily rising wage floor. On one side, is the Chancellor arguing that his policy is the right thing for Britain’s ranks of low paid workers. Pitted against him are ranks of chief executives of low-paying big business. With each impending hike they will holler at Osborne to go no further and the media will happily amplify the row. In response the Chancellor will quietly smile.

Sure, on occasions this will be uncomfortable stance for Mr Osborne (and if the economy takes a downward turn then his pledge will become incredible; there are always big risks with bold strokes).  Yet the dominant argument between the Conservatives and big business leaves Labour largely voiceless on an issue which for generations it has viewed as its own.

We may well see a similar dynamic in relation to the new national infrastructure commission – another idea that Osborne has plundered form Labour’s 2015 manifesto. It’s far too early to say what will come of its work looking at proposals for major new transport and energy projects (though those asserting it will just be a talking shop would do well not to under-estimate Andrew Adonis, its first Chair). But there is one thing we can already be confident about: the waves of argument it will generate between Osborne’s activist commissioners and various voices of conservatism. Every big infrastructure proposal will have noisy opponents, many residing on the right of British politics. On the issue of the future of the nation’s infrastructure – another touchstone theme for Labour – the opposition may struggle to get heard amid the din.

Or take the different and, for the government, highly exposing issue of cuts to tax credits. Here the emerging shape of the debate is between Osborne on one side and the Sun, Boris Johnson, various independent minded Conservative voices and economic think-tanks on the other. Labour will, of course, repeatedly and passionately condemn these cuts. But so have plenty of others and, for now at least, they are more colourful or credible (or both).  

The risk for the opposition is that a new rhythm of politics is established. Where the ideological undercurrent of the government steers it too far right, other voices not least those within the Conservative family - moderates and free-spirits emboldened by Labour’s current weakness; those with an eye on the forthcoming Tory leadership contest – get reported.  Where Osborne consciously decides to tack to the centre, the resulting rows will be between him and the generally Conservative supporting interests he upsets. Meanwhile, Labour is left struggling for air.

None of which is to say there are no paths back to relevance. There are all sorts of charges against the current government that, on the right issues, could be deployed - incompetence, complacency, inequity – by an effective opposition.  Nor is the elixir of relevance for a new opposition hard to divine: a distinct but plausible critique, forensic and timely research, and a credible and clear voice to deliver the message. But as yet we haven’t heard much of it.

Even in the best of times being in opposition is an enervating existence. Those out of power rarely get to set the terms of trade, even if they often like to tell themselves they can. Under Ed Miliband Labour had to strain – sometimes taking big risks - to establish its relevance in a novel era defined by the shifting dynamics of coalition politics. This time around Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour is up against a Chancellor willing to take risks and pick big fights: often with traditional Tory foes such as welfare claimants; but sometimes with people on his own side.  It’s also a new and challenging context. And one which Labour urgently needs to come to terms with.   

Gavin Kelly is chief executive of the Resolution Foundation