Animal rights group defeated in move that would have opened up paid UK political advertising

 

Brussels

An animal rights group has narrowly lost an attempt to open up paid political advertising in the UK.

Human rights judges in Strasbourg ruled in a 9-8 test case verdict that Government refusal to allow Animal Defenders International to screen a TV advert promoting animal rights was not a breach of ADI's freedom of expression.

The blanket ban in the UK is designed to prevent a political advertising free-for-all in which the richest have most access to promote their views - US-style aggressive political advertising.

Today's verdict rejected a complaint by the animal rights non-government organisation that denying it the possibility to advertise on TV or radio breached the European Human Rights Convention, which guarantees free speech.

The ruling by the smallest possible majority of the Strasbourg judges declared: "The court noted that both parties (ADI and the Government) maintained that they were protecting the democratic process.

"It found in particular that the reviews of the ban by both parliamentary and judicial bodies had been exacting and pertinent, taking into account the European Court's case law."

The judges said the ban only applied to advertising and ADI had access to "alternative media, both broadcast and non-broadcast".

The ruling also pointed out that there was a "lack of European consensus" on how to regulate paid political advertising in broadcasting - giving the UK Government "more room for manoeuvre when deciding on such matters as restricting public interest debate".

The verdict concluded: "Overall, the court found that the reasons given to justify the ban were convincing and that the ban did not therefore go too far in restricting the right to participate in public debate."

Culture Secretary Maria Miller said: "We welcome the fact the European Court has upheld the UK's blanket ban on political advertising.

"Political adverts are - and have always been - banned on British TV and radio. That ban has wide support and has helped sustain the balance of views which is at the heart of British broadcasting - and ensures the political views broadcast into our homes are not determined by those with the deepest pockets.

"This case was not about the particular views of this."

Ms Miller went on: "This case was not about the particular views of this organisation, but about the fact the Broadcast Advertising Clearance Centre considered that broadcasting this advert would breach the ban on political advertising in the UK."

The case was triggered by the BACC's refusal in 2005 to allow UK-based ADI, which campaigns against animal suffering, to run a TV advert juxtaposing images of a girl and then a chimpanzee in chains in an animal cage.

The BAAC said ADI's objectives were political in nature, and such a broadcast would breach the 2003 Communications Act.

The High Court and the House of Lords agreed and ADI went to the Human Rights Court.

Today's ruling said the Government and ADI had the same objective of "maintaining a free and pluralist debate on matters of public interest, and more generally, of contributing to the democratic process".

The human rights question was whether the ban went too far in restricting the right to participate in public debate.

The balance was between the NGO's right to impart information and ideas of general interest which the public was entitled to receive, and the authorities' wish to "protect the democratic debate and process from distortion by powerful financial groups with advantageous access to influential media".

The judges said they had taken account of the "complex" regulatory regime governing political broadcasting in the UK had been subjected to "exacting and pertinent" reviews and validated by both parliamentary and judicial bodies.

And at all stages, the compatibility of the law with the Human Rights Convention had been considered.

UK broadcast media was influential, with an immediate and powerful impact, and there was no evidence that this influence had been altered by the rise of the internet and social media to an extent which undermined the current broadcast restrictions.

Advertisers were well aware of the advantages of broadcast advertising, and continued to be prepared to pay "large sums" which went "far beyond" the reach of NGOs wishing to participate in the public debate.

The ruling pointed out that the ban was relaxed "in a controlled fashion" for political parties - the bodies most centrally part of the democratic process - by providing them with free party political, party election and referendum campaign broadcasts.

But, warned the judges: "Allowing a less restrictive prohibition could give rise to abuse and arbitrariness, such as wealthy bodies with agendas being fronted by social advocacy groups created for that precise purpose or creating a large number of similar interest groups, thereby accumulating advertising time."

ADI chief executive Jan Creamer said: "This is a profoundly sad day for democracy. It is unjust that companies can advertise without being challenged.

"This judgment has denied the right of ADI and other similar campaign and advocacy groups to refute advertising claims made by companies."

An ADI statement said the advert was tailored to comply with broadcasting rules but was banned because ADI was deemed to be a "political" group.

"At present, advertising laws effectively ban the broadcast of any advertisement on a matter of controversy. So, whilst primates and other animals can be used to sell products or services, it is not permitted to create awareness about the impacts of these actions on those animals.

"The injustice of the situation was highlighted at the time by the fact that soft drinks giant Pepsi were using a performing chimpanzee in a TV commercial," said the statement.

Tamsin Allen, a media partner at London law firm Bindmans LLP, which represented ADI, pointed out that the minority eight of the 17 human rights judges had accepted the case that the UK ban on all political advertising was an "inappropriate and unnecessary" restriction on free speech.

In their "dissenting judgment" the eight described the scale of the ban as "a harsher constriction of freedom than is necessary in a democratic society", adding: "Freedom of expression is based on the assumption that the speakers, not the Government, know best what they want to say and how to say it..."

Ms Allen said many small advocacy groups would be "extremely disappointed" that the majority of the judges had disagreed.

The Electoral Reform Society welcomed the verdict, saying that lifting the ban would have escalated an "arms race" on political spending.

Chief executive Katie Ghose said: This ruling should be welcome news to all democrats. Lifting the ban would have irrevocably changed the political landscape in Britain, and not for the better.

"The last Senate race in Pennsylvania cost more than our three main parties spent on the last General Election combined. And it didn't buy a higher quality of debate - just back-to-back attack ads."

She added: "The US experience shows the only people who would profit from TV attack ads are moneyed interest groups, TV networks and paid political consultants. The biggest loser would be democratic debate in Britain."

PA

PROMOTED VIDEO
Have you tried new the Independent Digital Edition apps?
News
ebooksAn unforgettable anthology of contemporary reportage
Latest stories from i100
Have you tried new the Independent Digital Edition apps?
Independent Dating
and  

By clicking 'Search' you
are agreeing to our
Terms of Use.

iJobs Job Widget
iJobs Media

Trainee Recruitment Consultant

£18000 - £30000 per annum + uncapped: SThree: Do you feel like your sales role...

International Promotions Manager - Consumer Products

competitive + bonus + benefits: Sauce Recruitment: A global entertainment busi...

Head of Finance - Media

£80000 - £90000 per annum: Sauce Recruitment: Working for an International Mul...

Media Sales executive - Crawley

£25k + commission + benefits: Savvy Media Ltd: Find a job you love and never h...

Day In a Page

How could three tourists have been battered within an inch of their lives by a burglar in a plush London hotel?

A crime that reveals London's dark heart

How could three tourists have been battered within an inch of their lives by a burglar in a plush London hotel?
Meet 'Porridge' and 'Vampire': Chinese state TV is offering advice for citizens picking a Western moniker

Lost in translation: Western monikers

Chinese state TV is offering advice for citizens picking a Western moniker. Simon Usborne, who met a 'Porridge' and a 'Vampire' while in China, can see the problem
Handy hacks that make life easier: New book reveals how to rid your inbox of spam, protect your passwords and amplify your iPhone

Handy hacks that make life easier

New book reveals how to rid your email inbox of spam, protect your passwords and amplify your iPhone with a loo-roll
KidZania lets children try their hands at being a firefighter, doctor or factory worker for the day

KidZania: It's a small world

The new 'educational entertainment experience' in London's Shepherd's Bush will allow children to try out the jobs that are usually undertaken by adults, including firefighter, doctor or factory worker
Renée Zellweger's real crime has been to age in an industry that prizes women's youth over humanity

'Renée Zellweger's real crime was to age'

The actress's altered appearance raised eyebrows at Elle's Women in Hollywood awards on Monday
From Cinderella to The Jungle Book, Disney plans live-action remakes of animated classics

Disney plans live-action remakes of animated classics

From Cinderella to The Jungle Book, Patrick Grafton-Green wonders if they can ever recapture the old magic
Thousands of teenagers to visit battlefields of the First World War in new Government scheme

Pupils to visit First World War battlefields

A new Government scheme aims to bring the the horrors of the conflict to life over the next five years
The 10 best smartphone accessories

Make the most of your mobile: 10 best smartphone accessories

Try these add-ons for everything from secret charging to making sure you never lose your keys again
Mario Balotelli substituted at half-time against Real Madrid: Was this shirt swapping the real reason?

Liverpool v Real Madrid

Mario Balotelli substituted at half-time. Was shirt swapping the real reason?
West Indies tour of India: Hurricane set to sweep Windies into the shadows

Hurricane set to sweep Windies into the shadows

Decision to pull out of India tour leaves the WICB fighting for its existence with an off-field storm building
Indiana serial killer? Man arrested for murdering teenage prostitute confesses to six other murders - and police fear there could be many more

A new American serial killer?

Police fear man arrested for murder of teen prostitute could be responsible for killing spree dating back 20 years
Sweetie, the fake 10-year-old girl designed to catch online predators, claims her first scalp

Sting to trap paedophiles may not carry weight in UK courts

Computer image of ‘Sweetie’ represented entrapment, experts say
Fukushima nuclear crisis: Evacuees still stuck in cramped emergency housing three years on - and may never return home

Return to Fukushima – a land they will never call home again

Evacuees still stuck in cramped emergency housing three years on from nuclear disaster
Wildlife Photographer of the Year: Intimate image of resting lions claims top prize

Wildlife Photographer of the Year

Intimate image of resting lions claims top prize
Online petitions: Sign here to change the world

Want to change the world? Just sign here

The proliferation of online petitions allows us to register our protests at the touch of a button. But do they change anything?