Seven prominent writers are urging Tesco CEO Sir Terry Leahy to drop all libel actions against critics of the supermarket chain in Thailand.
The writers, all members of English PEN, have sent an open letter to Leahy to condemn Tesco’s heavy-handed attempts to silence its critics in south-east Asian country.
In particular the authors — who include Nick Hornby and Marina Lewycka, author of the best-selling A Short History of Tractors in Ukrainian — condemn the supermarket group’s use of a criminal defamation suit against Jit Siratranont, a former Thai MP, businessman, and current secretary-general of the Thai Chamber of Commerce.
The authors claim this aspect of Thai law is out of kilter with human rights legislation and could lead to Siratranont paying libel damages 1.1 billion baht (£16.4m) and languishing in a Thai jail for up to two years.
Jit has warned that the supermarket chain’s rapid expansion in Thailand, where it trades under the Tesco Lotus brand, risks sparking civil unrest among small traders, who could lose their livelihoods as a result. The former MP also inaccurately claimed that Tesco derives 37% of its profits from Thailand.
The actions of the supermarket chain — which is also suing the Guardian in the UK over articles relating to its overseas tax structures — do seem bizarre considering it claims to fully support the UN universal declaration of human rights.
Admittedly, there were inaccuracies in some of the reports that have spurred Tesco to seek apologies. But wouldn’t the UK supermarket chain be better off arguing its case in Thailand through the conventional channels, rather than destroying so much goodwill through these libel suits?
Letter to Tesco CEO Terry Leahy
Dear Sir Terry,
Freedom of Speech
We are writing to express our concern over the recent libel actions served by Tesco Lotus in Thailand against three critics of the store’s policy in that country – Jit Siratranont, Kamol Kamoltrakul and Nongnart Harnwilai. We understand that Tesco Lotus has been faced with considerable criticism in Thailand, and that there may be some errors of fact in aspects of this coverage. However, the scale of Tesco Lotus’s response seems grossly disproportionate.
To seek damages of £1.6m and £16.4m from Thai businesses and individuals, we believe, sends a deeply chilling message to others who seek, quite legitimately, to discuss Tesco’s impact on their local economy. This is at odds with our understanding of international human rights law, which recognises the need for individuals and organisations to protect their rights and reputations – so long as any protective action is deemed necessary and proportionate. Damages claims of this magnitude do not appear to be necessary or proportionate.
However, these civil claims pale into insignificance beside the charge of criminal defamation – section 328 of the Thai penal code – which has been brought against Jit Siratranont. This charge carries a maximum two-year prison sentence. The Asian human rights commission recommended the repeal of this archaic law in 2004, noting its failure to comply with Article 19 of the international covenant on civil and political rights, to which Thailand is a party.
We note in your corporate responsibility policy that “Tesco is committed to upholding basic human rights and supports in full the United Nations universal declaration of human rights”. However, international human rights bodies are agreed that the offence of criminal defamation does not comply with basic standards of human rights.
The European court of human rights has stressed that sanctions for defamation must always be proportionate to the gravity of the defamatory remarks in question. The court has consistently held that imprisonment is a disproportionate response to defamation. Meanwhile, the UN special rapporteur on freedom of expression, appointed by the UN human rights council, and the other international mandates for promoting freedom of expression – the OSCE representative on freedom of the media and the OAS special rapporteur on freedom of expression – have repeatedly called on states to repeal their criminal defamation laws.
As writers and members of the writers’ association, English PEN, we greatly value the tradition of free speech in Britain, and we would like to think that a leading international business like yours would be also concerned with exporting these values alongside your groceries. A strong democracy is one in which a diversity of voices are allowed to flourish, and we think Tesco, in line with your commitment to “treat people as we like to be treated”, could play an important role here.
In 2007, International PEN monitored the cases of more than one thousand writers who were persecuted because of their writing. Many of these writers were targeted as a result of their outspoken criticism of governments and corporations. At English PEN, we are hampered in our support for such writers of conscience whenever governments and corporations in the west endorse repressive laws such as criminal defamation.
In conclusion, we urge you to drop all actions in Thailand, and to impress your critics with the force of argument, not the threat of imprisonment. You will thereby impress us with your commitment to basic human rights. Any other course of action would, we believe, be damaging to Tesco’s brand in the UK and internationally and would be contrary to Tesco’s stated policy.
We would be happy to discuss this difficult situation with you in greater detail.
Yours sincerely,
Lisa Appignanesi, president, English PEN
Mark Haddon
Jonathan Heawood, director, English PEN
Nick Hornby
Anthony Lester, QC
Marina Lewycka
Deborah Moggach
Read a later article by David Leigh in the Guardian about alleged tax avoidance by Tesco.