Campaign group to challenge ban on TV political advertising in European Court of Human Rights
The UK’s ban on broadcasting TV advertisements by ‘political’ groups, which can include charities, is to be challenged by Animal Defenders International (ADI) at the European Court of Human Rights. The campaign group will argue that the UK’s advertising laws do not comply with the right to freedom of expression guaranteed by the European Convention on Human Rights.
ADI was prevented from broadcasting a TV advertisement in the UK, part of its ‘My Mate’s a primate’ campaign. It was responding to a TV advert by soft drinks company Pepsi which used a performing chimpanzee. ADI’s advert featured a voice-over by comedian Alexei Sayle and highlighted abuses of performing apes. In 2008 the House of Lords today dismissed an appeal by ADI to have the ban overturned.
The campaign group’s challenge will now be heard on 7 March 2012 by a seven judge Grand Chamber, bypassing the usual procedure because it is deemed to raise a serious question affecting the interpretation of the Convention.
ADI is being represented in Strasbourg by Tamsin Allen, Media partner at Bindmans LLP. She said: “The UK is defending a very wide blanket ban on broadcast advertising by campaign groups, which includes many charities. ADI, a peaceful campaigning group, has been banned from broadcasting its advertisement on the grounds that the group seeks to influence public opinion on a matter of controversy. This cannot be justified given the importance of freedom of expression in a healthy democracy.
“Commercial companies are free to advertise their products no matter how controversial they may be, but charities and campaign groups cannot. This is fundamentally unfair and creates a distorted message for UK TV viewers.”
Jan Creamer, ADI’s Chief Executive, is confident that the case will be won, saying that this “will allow ADI, and similar campaign and advocacy groups to put their message across on television and radio, and continue to be allowed to enrich the UK’s democratic life. It is unfair that companies can place advertisements that cannot be challenged.”
www.ad-international.org