Stunning courtroom victory for Gerry Adams

Despite a court finding that Gerry Adams had been defamed by the BBC in a high-profile television documentary in 2016, the broadcaster’s attacks on Adams and Sinn Féin have not stopped.

On Friday, a Dublin jury found in Mr Adams favour and awarded damages over a Spotlight documentary which carried the false and libellous claim that Mr Adams had ordered the Provisional IRA to execute British spy Denis Donaldson in 2006.

The documentary was part of a series of long-running current affairs investigations by the BBC NI – short for ‘British Broadcasting Corporation - Northern Ireland’. The British state broadcaster has never sought to hide it its pro-union view of the occupation of the Six Counties.

At the time of the broadcast in 2016, Mr Adams warned of legal action and said he suspected a deliberate state agenda behind what he called a “hatchet job”. In response, the BBC described the lawsuit by Mr Adams as a “cynical attempt to launder his reputation”.

In the programme broadcast in September 2016, an anonymous source given the pseudonym “Martin” and described as an admitted informer, claimed the shooting was sanctioned by the Provisional IRA and that the then Sinn Féin leader gave “the final say” for the killing.

Subsequently, the BBC claimed to have other sources, all anonymous, who claimed to have heard that Mr Adams had directed the IRA to kill Donaldson.

A trusted and top ranking Sinn Féin official, Donaldson was shot dead in Glenties, County Donegal, in 2006, months after admitting his role as an agent with MI5 and the RUC/PSNI police for over 20 years.

Little is still known about his long relationship with British state forces, which may have frayed in the months before he was exposed.

Three years later, a breakaway armed group, the Real IRA, claimed the killing, although suspicion continues to fall on the state agencies who had most to benefit from his death.

HATCHET JOB

Former Donaldson family lawyer Ciaran Shiels told the court that the BBC was not only “barking up the wrong tree” but was in the “wrong orchard” over the claims against Mr Adams.

He said that he didn’t think Mr Adams’ name “was even suggested” in discussions with the BBC when they were making the programme and that he “would have remembered if it had”, adding that Mr Adams was seen “as a family friend” of the Donaldsons.

Mr Adams told the court he remembered watching the programme and being “astonished” at what he called “an attempted hatchet job” and “bad, poor journalism”.

He described the BBC response when he attempted to raise a complaint as arrogant and insulting.

He said: “This is a public broadcaster. The public pay for all of this.

“They just dismissed it (the complaint), it was offensive, it was insulting and it is what has all of us here today.”

The jury heard Mr Adams role as a peacemaker, but the BBC barristers falsely claimed that it was “universally held” that he had a reputation of being in the IRA and on its Army Council.

They urged the jury to ignore its failure to support the libellous claims and focus instead on the history of the conflict and the IRA’s role in it. The questioning of Mr Adams saw a desperate attempt by the BBC’s lawyers to blame him personally for the conflict.

He was asked how many people had been killed.

“A lot – what has this got to do with the Spotlight programme?” Mr Adams responded.

The barrister listed some of the most infamous episodes of the conflict and asked Mr Adams how many victims were killed in each.

Mr Adams responded that it was not fair to ask him to remember every death that occurred, adding: “You’re trivialising those deaths, if you don’t mind me saying so.”

As the line of questioning continued into the second week of the trial, Mr Adams complained that an attempt was being made to “smother” the jury in history.

He repeatedly said he would not speculate when asked about members, structures or rules of the IRA.

“What on earth has this got to do with Denis Donaldson?” Mr Adams asked on several occasions.

Under cross-examination, the former Sinn Féin leader said: “I have never resiled from my view that the IRA’s campaign, whatever about elements of it, was a legitimate response to military occupation.”

He told the jury that IRA membership “wasn’t a path that I took”, saying he instead joined Sinn Féin, adding that the republican party “was not the political wing of any organisation”.

‘OUT OF SYNC’

The outcome of the case came as no surprise - the familiar smear that Sinn Féin and the Provisional IRA are one and the same has been promoted by the the pro-British establishment for decades.

The claim has been used to facilitate the most intense repression and acts of violence against nationalist representatives since Sinn Féin first entered politics, and Mr Adams had no problem challenging it.

The jury awarded damages of €100,000, as well as legal costs believed to run to seven figures.

The BBC wanted to call a series of witnesses who are deeply opposed to Mr Adams, but the trial judge ruled that three would testify - former Minister of Justice Michael McDowell, who admitted he had a “hatred” of Sinn Féin, Ann Travers, sister of IRA victim Mary Travers, and Trevor Ringland, a prominent unionist and former rugby player.

The court also heard testimony from former US Congressman Bruce Morrison that Mr Adams is an internationally acknowledged peacemaker and statesman.

Backing Mr Adams, the jury refused to accept that he had ‘no reputation to defend’, or that the BBC had published the smear in good faith.

The High Court trial lasted for 21 days and the costs must now be paid by the BBC, which is primarily funded by TV licence fee payers. The BBC has still failed to issue an apology or retraction.

In comments afterwards, Mr Adams said the case was “about putting manners” on the BBC, and again suggested that the broadcaster had been subject to political interference.

“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,” he said.

“It hasn’t caught on to where we are on this island as part of the process, the continuing process, of building peace and justice, and harmony, and, hopefully, in the time ahead, unity.”

On the suggestion of political interference at the BBC, he said: “I’m very mindful that licence fee payers are going to pay for this.

“The BBC aren’t using their own money, Spotlight aren’t using their own money. It’s the licence fee payers…this could have been sorted out a long time ago.”

Mr Adams spoke of a Supreme Court judgement in London, where it was found that he and others had been unlawfully detained “and the British Prime Minister is refusing to pay, I don’t mind, compensation to what are now quite elderly former internees.

“He has actually said that he would use every conceivable mechanism to prevent compensation being paid.

“So if you want an explanation as to why this gone on for nine years, and why we spent five weeks here, I think there is direct political interference with this.”

Asked how the verdict will affect his reputation, he said: “I’ve always been satisfied with my reputation…we all have flaws in our character, but the jury made the decision and let’s accept the outcome.”

A statement on his behalf read out by a lawyer said the outcome had “provided full vindication” for Mr Adams.

Thanking the court and jury, the statement added said Mr Adams was very pleased with the “resounding verdict”.

“The jury, 12 people from different walks of life, having listened to extensive evidence during the course of the past four weeks has come to the unequivocal conclusion that the subject allegation was highly defamatory.

“It therefore follows that the BBC Spotlight team at the time should not have included it in their broadcast.

“Not only had the false allegation regarding our client been the focus of the Spotlight documentary, but it had been utilised to sensationalise and publicise their programme.

“Furthermore, the fact that the false allegation has been left online for almost nine years has in my opinion done much to undermine the high standards of accuracy that is expected of the BBC.

“This case could and should have been resolved some considerable time ago, thereby ignoring these very significant financial consequences.

“And it begs a question as to whether there’s been any political or other outside pressure on the BBC to take the stand they have taken.

“Our client is relieved and satisfied that these legal proceedings have concluded overwhelmingly in his favour after arduous years of litigation.”

There have been claims by republicans that the BBC’s aggressive defence of their libel may have been motivated by a desire to undermine Mr Adams ahead of a possible run in the Irish Presidential election in November.

Sinn Féin TD Eoin Ó Broin said “everybody has a right to their good name, and the allegation that was in the programme was very damaging, as today’s verdict shows, for Gerry’s reputation, particularly among his peers”.

Urgent Appeal