Indymedia UK Facing Legal Censorship… again!

Indymedia UK has been issued with a takedown notice [10th of September & 21st of September] from lawyers acting for Alisher Usmanov. The notice served to Indymedia charged Indymedia with publishing allegedly libellous accusations about Usmanov, one of the richest men in Russia, recently linked to a possible hostile takeover of Arsenal FC.

The author of the posting, Craig Murray, is a former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan and claims to have inside knowledge of the businessman’s allegedly illegal dealings. Murray was sacked by the UK government for exposing the Uzbek government’s use of torture to attain ‘intelligence’ information, and for exposing and criticising UK-US support for a vicious dictator in pursuit of resources.

Murray’s allegations are that Usmanov “is a criminal”, “a gangster and racketeer”. Allegations of criminality seem partly to have been inferred from his connections to “Uzbek mafia boss and major international heroin overlord Gafur Rakimov”. However, Murray also suggested that Usmanov has a criminal past, having been charged with “various offences” in the Soviet Union.

Usmanov’s lawyers minded Murray that Usmanov was pardoned, and all charges against him were removed from police records. However, in response to what seems an inaccurate statement from Usmanov’s lawyers, Murray alleged that "Usmanov is a criminal. He was in no sense a political prisoner, but a gangster and racketeer who rightly did six years in jail. The lawyers cunningly evoke 'Gorbachev', a name respected in the West, to make us think that justice prevailed. That is completely untrue". Furthermore, Murray implies that the pardon was spurious because the real source was the Dictator of Uzbekistan, Islom Karimov.

Karimov himself is an unsavoury character. On completing his investigation into allegations of torture in Karimov’s Uzbekistan, the United Nations Special Rapporteur noted that the use of torture was ‘pervasive and persistent’. He also reported that he had ‘no doubt that the system of torture is condoned, if not encouraged, at the level of the heads of the places of detention where it takes place or of the chief investigators’

Though evidence to support Murray’s allegations has not yet been presented directly to Indymedia UK (but has been collected in his book "Murder in Samarkand"), the Daily Mail informs us that, ‘[r]eports years ago claimed Britain's National Criminal Intelligence Service was monitoring him for alleged links — never proven — to suspected mafia figures.' More recently, the allegations have been repeated by Tom Wise MEP in the European Parliament

Indymedia UK is now waiting for Usmanov’s lawyers to confirm exactly what information posted on the web site is defamatory, and it looks like they have resolved to remove any defamatory material. Indymedia, as with other small non-commercial media groups, has very limited options available to them due to the UK’s archaic and elitist libel laws.

Indymedia hopes, however, to avoid the forms of complete censorship that other web hosts have pursued.

For further information on this case, see Bloggerheads | Chicken Yoghurt | Moscow Times.

For further information on Murray’s research on UK-US (at least tacit) support for terrorism in Uzbekistan, see

Legality, Morality and the War on Terror: [ video | audio | report ].

No to Torture - former British ambassador to Uzbekistan speaks out against UK/US torture collaboration [ audio 1 | audio 2 | report ]

Torture and The "War on Terror": [ audio 1 | report ]

IMC UK legal

Additions

Craig Murray: Back and Unbowed

09.10.2007 10:02

Craig's site is back at a new address and he has reposted the article that caused all the fuss with this introduction:

October 9, 2007
Back and Unbowed

It is good to be blogging again. Many thanks to everyone for your tremendous support while I was down, and especially all those bloggers who protested against this censorship, achieved just by the layout of cah, with nothing being tested in court. I have still had no contact at any time from Usmanov or the shysters of Schillings.

We are back on craigmurray.org.uk. We hope that craigmurray.co.uk will be back too very soon. I have a plan for dealing with Usmanov and getting this matter into court, but am holding fire for a couple of days until we get the co.uk address back, where most people look for me. Meanwhile anyone remember this?

http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2007/10/back_and_unbowe.html

IMC'er
Homepage: http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/

Comments

Hide the following 24 comments

Like Indymedia being pulled

06.10.2007 12:31

will pull it all off the net.Google him with keywords like gan----r or rackat--r and the results get to become astronmical.Now this is going to fire everyone up again and make the results go off the scale.Well done his lawyers,not

So sue me

06.10.2007 12:33

I was one of the people who initially posted about that here. I'm also perfectly happy to supply my contact details to Usmanovs lawyers with regard to what I posted if that saves IM any legal hassle at all.

Danny

we ll said

06.10.2007 12:43

that man

Spiv Britain.

06.10.2007 15:25

How is it that the British government let these spivs buy up this country, what with properties and football clubs, amongst many other things?

Their money comes from very questionable sources but that is all that seems to count. How many British officials and politicians get a pay off to allow this to happen?

Apart from bring corruption, what do these people do for Britain? They pay no taxes and contribute nothing of value.

Linda

Who cares about Britain?

07.10.2007 09:37

"Apart from bring corruption, what do these people do for Britain"

You think there was no corruption in Britain before "these people" came? Is the money in Bishopsgate cleaner then that from Eastern Europe? Do you really think the money from British companies has less blood on it? Sometimes i'm shocked by the hidden nationalism here.

anne t. britain

Overnight consideration

07.10.2007 13:40

and Danny.Is this a good idea?danny has already had some flak and violence,if my memory serves me well.His courage is admirable but if you are going to use him this way i hope you give him protection.This is not just some bigot this time.But a much more dangerous foe.

dear anne britanica

07.10.2007 19:36

of course there was crap in britania before the mafeiya came.

but there were no freaks spreading radioactive death from cafe to hotel to....

Wake up sweetypie, just becasuse its stormed before, thats no protection against a worse storm a coming...assuredly it is, with mafeya types permitted in your kingdom

here they like slavery rackets and home invasion burglary.

perhaps they are kinder and gentler in britain, understanding your sensibilities and all? or do they get a pass because there is police brutality, or racist skin thugery, or some other target which your group approves of detesting?

I agree with those who bemoan the anachic and elitist brit laws invovled, but its self haters like you who undermine attempts to fix it, with your self loathing/national angst.

I invite you to come to the western usa and set your self straight about mans' relation to gov: opposition of a strong inferior (govt servant) and a weakened superior (citizen) and how we constantly try those bounds, disregarding left right, right wrong in past lifetimes.

In short, annie Britanica, i invite you to get over it, get real and get on with it.

Poining to other manure piles does not make the one i'm smelling any more appealing.

P.S. your not into moral equivalency are you? god help!

american reader

decisions

08.10.2007 08:54

We had a long discussion with lots of contradicting opinions. But in the end the main reason for pulling the article was that we did not (yet) get a response from Craig Murray, and in order to put up a good resistance we would need to have the original author on our side and willing to proof and defend the allegations for Indymedia.
Also, Craig Murray said he would be rather keen to be sued himself, and as he found a new home for his blog, it would be preferable if he would defend his potentially libelous allegations directly without an intermediate.

imc-uk-volunteer

Could you publish the takedown notice?

08.10.2007 10:47

Is there a chance that you could publish the notice you have received?

Thanks

Tom

Bottled?

08.10.2007 10:49

In other words, when IMC UK thought it was under threat, it bottled and complied?

Toxic Waste

Sensible move

08.10.2007 11:23

lets wait for Mr Murray's move.

Toxic Waste

08.10.2007 12:01

perhaps you would like to fund the legal costs for the IMC defence.

Homer

Has Indymedia bottled it?

08.10.2007 12:14

Let's wait to see -- Craig Murray hasn't reinstated the article on his site yet, this is the original URL:

http://www.craigmurray.co.uk/archives/2007/09/alisher_usmanov.html

He seems to be recreating his site with a new domain name:

http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/

And this article isn't on this site:

http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2007/09/alisher_usmanov.html

If Craig Murray reinstates the article and posts something in defense of it and if he responds to emails from Indymedia asking if he can back up his accusations and would be prepared to stand up in court with us then the article will hopefully be reinstated.

IMC'er

the

08.10.2007 12:35

.org site for craig murray is only a backup as the host was severely hacked on the 2nd of oct.so much in fact the hacker gained root privledges and destroyed the disk.It's on here

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2007/10/382659.html

Giving Mr Murray's position now

08.10.2007 12:38

he has the human resources to defend himself like the two who took on ronald macs,and won.

The sum of 0

oh

08.10.2007 13:29

Anne.T Britain >You think there was no corruption in Britain before "these people" came?

You infer nationalism a little easily, "these people" seems to refer to the ultra-rich in this context. The British ultra-rich are as bad as any other nationalities, but no one can emerge a billionaire from the wreckage of the Soviet Union without blood on their money. This guy certainly is proving his worth to the UK, shutting down websites and blogs while enriching his lawyers.

M>His courage is admirable but if you are going to use him this way i hope you give him protection.

I have no fear of being sued, I have no money, although I realise his lawyers aren't his biggest threat.

IMCista> Also, Craig Murray said he would be rather keen to be sued himself, and as he found a new home for his blog, it would be preferable if he would defend his potentially libelous allegations directly without an intermediate.

Fair enough. When I get a bit of time next week I'll stick up a website or three with Craigs article and my contact details.

Danny

legalities, obfuscations and the privvy set

08.10.2007 15:54

As an acknowledged media and news outlet, IndyMedia along with other similar organisations is al liberty to include and so reproduce items from other published news stories if doing so is germaine to the content of the story being published.

In this case IndyMedia was reporting on actual events, namely those associated with the closure of Craig Murray's website as a result of actions bought by lawyers acting for one Alisher Usmanov.

In such circumstances, IdyMedia's actions are fully defensible unless lawyers can prove that libel or defamation was present in the facts of the initlal reports.

There can be no case against IndyMedia unl;ess such proof is forthcoming.

Regards
Keith Harris
editor
newsmedianews.com

Keith Harris
Homepage: http://www.newsmedianews.com

Funda-istas now?

09.10.2007 08:01

You only do political stuff if someone is bankrolling you?

At least bloggers have been prepared to stand up and be counted. Indymedia seems to have taken the SWP route of subservience to authority.

Toxic Waste

Craig Murray wasn't just sacked by the UK Government...

09.10.2007 09:58

...he was 'recalled' and put in a mental hosptial. He would not have been there unless the UK (Bliar) government hadn't maliciously fitted him up. He was not, in actual fact, 'sick' at all - just a dissenter. All that business was kept VERY quite by everyone in the UK. A few Tory MP's pressured for his release. A regime/order/reality of ultimate bad karma, I'm telling you.

Jah Bless

ibex2000

Move IMC UK to an offshore server

09.10.2007 10:15

Given the threats from Usmanov's lawyers, I would have thought your easiest option would be to move Indymedia UK to somewhere beyond the reach of the UK's unfair libel laws, as all the bloggers originally threatened have done.

woodsy
mail e-mail: woodsy@bristolwireless.net

Just how real was the legal threat?

09.10.2007 11:10

Craig Murray has always made it clear that he wanted to defend what he has written in court, he said to The Register:

"If the man believes he was libelled then he should take me to court"

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/09/25/murray_usmanov_defiant/

And Shillings have never wanted him in court, they said to The Guardian that they:

"did not intend to sue Murray directly because they did not want to give him a platform to express his views"

http://football.guardian.co.uk/News_Story/0,,2177271,00.html

And according to the FT Usmanov isn't very keen on the legal action route either:

"Usmanov says he is tiring of firing off various law suits."

http://b-heads.blogspot.com/2007/10/alisher-usmanov-begins-new-pr-push.html

And The Times has reported that Usmanov has said:

"It is beyond my dignity to respond to all these allegations . . .
I don’t want even to qualify what Mr Murray says about me."

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article2604053.ece

Today Craig Murray has said on his blog:

"I have still had no contact at any time from Usmanov or the shysters of Schillings...

"I have a plan for dealing with Usmanov and getting this matter into court, but am holding fire for a couple of days until we get the co.uk address back, where most people look for me."

http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2007/10/back_and_unbowe.html

It seems clear to me that the threats from Shillings were just that -- threats, they never had any intention to carry them through, they just hoped that they could scare people into taking down Craig Murray's article, the last thing they want is a court case over this.

In some cases the Shillings scare tactic worked, hopefully lessons will be learnt from this experience...

Observer

Cite one

09.10.2007 12:16

of the some case's.They turned a molehill into a mountain.

Mines Mine

09.10.2007 14:00

The very man himself is named in the case at the Denver district court
04SC455 (1/2 HOUR)

Petitioner:

ARCHANGEL DIAMOND CORPORATION,

v.

Respondents:

LUKOIL and ARKHANGELSKGEOLDOBYCHA.
)))))))))))))))))))))))
For the Petitioner:

Tucker K. Trautman

Van Aaron Hughes

Dorsey & Whitney, LLP

For the Respondent Arkhangelskegeoldobycha:

Tom McNamara

Anthony Shaheen

Andrew M. Low

Davis Graham & Stubbs, LLP

and

Linda Coberly

Scott Glauberman

Winston & Strawn, LLP

For the Respondent Lukoil:

Frederick J. Baumann

Douglas B. Tumminello

Rothgerber Johnson & Lyons, LLP

Certiorari to the Colorado Court of Appeals, 02CA2368

Docketed: July 16, 2004

At Issue: June 10, 2005

ISSUE(S):

Whether the court of appeals erred in concluding a trial court may decide a C.R.C.P. 12(b)(2) motion by weighing and resolving factual issues without an evidentiary hearing.

Undesirable.

19.10.2007 09:16

Look at the piece on this person in Private Eye dated 12 October. Gives a good idea of his background and character. He hasn't sued them, so take it that it is an accurate account.

According to recent press reports, he has bought Sutton House, former home of Getty in Surrey. Despite various other countries barring him from entry, the UK lets him in because of his money.

Jim