Mr Gerry Adams TD and the Sunday Independent

The Press Ombudsman has decided to uphold complaints by Mr Gerry Adams TD, that statements in an article about him in the Sunday Independent on 18 May 2014, headlined “Adams tries to gag Independent” were in breach of Principles 1 (Truth and Accuracy) and 4 (Respect for Rights) of the Code of Practice for Newspapers and Magazines.

Mr Adams complained, through his solicitors, that statements in the article that he had tried to “gag” the Independent and “ silence its reporting” on another matter were inaccurate, in breach of Principle 1, and based on unfounded accusations, in breach of Principle 4,  because the correspondence to which the newspaper had referred was a formal letter of complaint to the editor of the newspaper made in accordance with the complaints procedures of the Office of the Press Ombudsman. 

The newspaper responded that the letter that it received from Mr Adams’ solicitors was, in its genuine and honest opinion, an effort by their client to gag the Irish Independent and prevent it from proceeding with a legitimate and reputable opinion poll.  It further stated that the letter asked specifically that the newspaper delete a question from the opinion poll in question.

It is clear that Mr Adams’ solicitors and the newspaper were referring to two different letters, sent by the solicitors to the editor of the newspaper on the same date.   The letter referred to by Mr Adams’s solicitors was a formal letter of complaint from them to the editor of the newspaper made in accordance with the complaints procedures of the Office of the Press Ombudsman.  The letter referred to by the newspaper was a second letter from Mr Adams’s solicitors to the editor, on the same date, requesting the deletion of a particular question from the opinion poll which it was in the process of conducting.  

Neither of the letters in question contained a threat of legal proceedings and, in the opinion of the Press Ombudsman, could not reasonably be interpreted as trying to “gag” the newspaper, or to silence its reporting.   The complaints under Principle 1 and Principle 4 of the Code are therefore upheld.     

Mr Adams’ solicitors also complained under Principle 2 of the Code about statements in the article that “half the country believes Adams is lying when he says he had no role in the murder of Jean McConville” and  “less than a quarter of people believe that he wasn’t involved”.  

The newspaper responded that the article made it explicitly clear that the statements in question were understandable by reference to the findings of a Millward Brown opinion poll, which had been reported extensively in the previous day’s newspaper, and which it said was referenced explicitly in the article itself. 

The Press Ombudsman said that while it is clear that  the poll in question asked 1,500  people whether or not they believed Mr Adams had been involved in the murder of Jean McConville, it did not ask “half the country”  or “less than a quarter of the people”,  nor did it ask the  1,500 people whether or not Mr Adams had been lying.  Although the newspaper argued that the reference to the opinion poll in the article under complaint justified the statements complained of, the Press Ombudsman decided, on the evidence available to him, that these statements were not factual statements about the survey in question, but comments on, conjectures about, or unconfirmed reports about it, reported as fact, and therefore in breach of Principle 2 of the Code of Practice. 

20 August 2014

The newspaper appealed the decision of the Press Ombudsman to the Press Council of Ireland.