The Case of Rajasingham Jeyadevan
Letter from Jeyadevan's Lawyers
re The Case of Rajasingham Jeyadevan
& Response on behalf of
tamilnation.org
Letter from Jeyadevan's Lawyers re tamilnation.org
Received on 3 May 2005
Date: 29 April 2005
Dear Sirs
www.tamilnation.org
We act for Mr Rajasingham Jayadevan who is a trustee of the
Eelapatheeswarar Aslayam Temple in Wembley. We understand that you maintain
the website named above. This site contains articles relating to "The case
of Rajasingham Jayadevan". This can be clearly seen on the opening page and
from there the site links to a series of articles by Sachi Sri Kantha. These
are found at www.tamilnation.org/ltte/05jathavan.htm#sachi1 . There are
three articles from Sachi Sri Kantha.
Our client is concerned that much of the articles are plainly defamatory
and damaging to our client's reputation. At one point Satchi Sri Srikantha
suggests that our client has been receiving an income from Temple
facilities. Such comments are seriously damaging to our client's reputation.
The natural and ordinary meaning of the words published, at its lowest, is
that our client has wrongly been taking income from the Temple. This
allegation is untrue and its publication along with the entire tone and
thrust of the article has caused our client distress.
Our client has sought the right to respond to the comments made and it is
a basic principle of responsible journalism that opposing views should be
put. Our client has twice written to you inviting publication of his
comments in reply yet such information has not been posted. In contrast
Sachi Sri Srikantha has been given the right to respond and has had three
articles published. Indeed the entry of 22 April is headed 'Sachi Sri
Srikantha responds to...'
Why has no corresponding right to reply
been given to our client. Our client values free and open debate but this
must be underpinned by the basic principles of responsible journalism.
In view of the defamatory nature of the articles and failure to balance
these with a response, our client is considering approaching the internet
service provider (ISP) to no longer allow the publication of such defamatory
comments. The purpose of this letter is to give you notice of the defamatory
material published on your site. Our client believes that those reading the
web site would be able to make a fair judgement but would need both sides of
the argument put. Although able to seek its removal and damages for such
publication our client invites his responses to be posted.
We should be grateful for your confirmation by return that the false
allegations about Mr Jayadevan on
http://www.tamilnation.org/ltte/05jayathevan.htm#sachi (three articles) are
met with our client's response. Checks on the site will be made regularly.
We look forward to hearing from you as a matter of urgency.
Yours faithfully
.
BINDMAN & PARTNERS
Response on behalf of
tamilnation.org
3 May 2005
Bindman & Partners
275 Grays Inn Road,
London
WC1X 8QB
Your Ref:44591.1 SC PR jw
Recorded Delivery
Dear Sirs,
www.tamilnation.org
We refer to your letter dated 29 April 2005,
which was redirected to us at this address - and received by us today.
We admit that we maintain the website named above. You state that your
client has 'twice written' to us. The fact is that we have not received any
letter from your client whether by e-mail or by post. When were these
letters sent? And were they sent by e-mail and/or by post - and to what
addresses? Whilst we may understand some of the concerns that your client
may have, it would have been helpful if you had
1.checked with your client whether he had received any confirmation
of receipt by us of any letter and/or email that he sent; and if your
client did not have such confirmation -
2. written to us on
behalf of your client to check whether we had in fact received the
letters in question, before writing to us in the way you have.
We are mindful that it would be gratuitous for us to advise your client
on the steps that he may have taken in this regard. But we are pained that
he chose to adopt the course of action that he has, without taking
sufficient care to check the facts.
Be that as it may, we now request
that you send us copies of the two letters in question (to the address
stated above and/or to the email address sathyam + @ + tamilnation.com with
request for confirmation of receipt) so that we may give our consideration
to publishing the same at
www.tamilnation.org.
We welcome your client's statement that 'those reading the website would
be able to make a fair judgment but would need both sides of the argument
put' and that he 'values free and open debate' and that 'this must be
underpinned by the basic principles of responsible journalism'.
Having said that, we would like to add that we will not be deterred from
providing a fair forum for discussion and fair comment on matters of public
interest by threats of approaches to internet service providers or for that
matter, because 'checks on the site will be made regularly'. We deny that we
have published any statement that is defamatory of your client and
additionally we deny that we have published any statement which gives rise
to any cause of action in favour of your client.
Yours faithfully,
