Red Moon
17-06-2007, 09:24 AM
Channel 4 faces lawsuit over Big BrotherCHANNEL 4 is to be sued over the racial slurs suffered by Bollywood actress Shilpa Shetty on Celebrity Big Brother.
An English race equality group, advised by a leading Scottish Asian lawyer, is preparing a case for the High Court in London, claiming the broadcaster breached its legal obligation to protect the public from offensive material.
The South West Racial Equality Council Network (SWRECN) has hired Edinburgh-based advocate Dr Raj Jandoo, who rose to prominence after investigating police and prosecutors' handling of a racist murder in Scotland.
If Channel 4 loses the case - the first to arise from the notorious series - it faces a hefty fine. The broadcaster was recently criticised by regulator Ofcom over the episode and ordered to read the watchdog's adjudication on air.
A record 45,000 complaints were received over the incidents this January, including one in which Jade Goody referred to the Bollywood star as "Shilpa poppadom". During an exchange about Shetty's cooking, contestants discussed whether they should eat food the actress had cooked. Danielle Lloyd said: "They eat with their hands in India, don't they - or is that China? You don't know where her hands have been."
SWRECN will argue that Channel 4, as a public body, breached its duty under section two of the Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000 to eliminate unlawful discrimination, promote equality of opportunity and promote good relations between people of different racial groups. The organisation, which has statutory powers to raise such cases, will argue that Channel 4:
• Failed to protect Shetty from offensive language and humiliation;
• Did not protect the viewing public from harmful and offensive material;
• Allowed viewers, including those with links to the subcontinent, to be "demeaned" by the behaviour of the participants in the Big Brother house;
• Offended viewers "who held decent standards about fairness and human dignity".
SWRECN is asking the Commission for Racial Equality (CRE) to bring the action, because it has enough money to fund what is likely to be an extremely expensive case.
SWRECN vice-chairwoman Alexandra MacRae said: "We believe that the CRE has the funds to take this case on and are looking to them to take action. But be in no doubt that our position is to proceed with litigation, and if they do not go ahead then we will be looking to other options to fund a case.
"Ideally, this should have been solved by Channel 4 themselves at the time rather than by court action, and they are obliged to train their staff and draw up guidelines so that nothing like this could happen."
Scotland on Sunday understands that at least one Indian-run business is considering funding the lawsuit.
In an earlier letter to Channel 4, warning them they were preparing legal action, the group stated: "The behaviour exhibited towards Shilpa Shetty had the hallmarks of being calculated to violate her human dignity. The distress of Shilpa Shetty was apparent.
"Channel 4 displays an arrogance which is inconsistent with those who are conversant with generally accepted standards. It is our view that the stance taken by Channel 4 amounts to institutional racism."
They added that it was beside the point that Shetty won the show and has since tried to play down the affair.
Jandoo told Scotland on Sunday: "The victim's view is not always the test. In a racist incident, just as with other kinds of bullying, the victim is usually in a weaker position and is always under pressure to play things down."
He cited the definition of a racist incident used by Sir William Macpherson, who examined police handling of the bungled investigation of Stephen Lawrence's murder in 1993.
Macpherson found that the police were institutionally racist and held that a racist incident is any incident which is perceived to be racist by the victim or any other person.
Jandoo added: "Channel 4, as a named public body, under the Act has certain responsibilities and failed to uphold them. They failed in their duty of care to Shilpa Shetty and to the viewer, and offended hundreds of thousands of people."
In 2000, Jandoo investigated the police and the Crown's handling of the infamous Surjit Singh Chhokar killing and found that institutional racism was evident in both the police and the procurator fiscal system. The Crown failed to convict anyone of the murder of the Asian waiter.
A spokeswoman for Channel 4 said they would not be commenting at this stage.
Source: The Scotsman (http://news.scotsman.com/uk.cfm?id=946652007)
An English race equality group, advised by a leading Scottish Asian lawyer, is preparing a case for the High Court in London, claiming the broadcaster breached its legal obligation to protect the public from offensive material.
The South West Racial Equality Council Network (SWRECN) has hired Edinburgh-based advocate Dr Raj Jandoo, who rose to prominence after investigating police and prosecutors' handling of a racist murder in Scotland.
If Channel 4 loses the case - the first to arise from the notorious series - it faces a hefty fine. The broadcaster was recently criticised by regulator Ofcom over the episode and ordered to read the watchdog's adjudication on air.
A record 45,000 complaints were received over the incidents this January, including one in which Jade Goody referred to the Bollywood star as "Shilpa poppadom". During an exchange about Shetty's cooking, contestants discussed whether they should eat food the actress had cooked. Danielle Lloyd said: "They eat with their hands in India, don't they - or is that China? You don't know where her hands have been."
SWRECN will argue that Channel 4, as a public body, breached its duty under section two of the Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000 to eliminate unlawful discrimination, promote equality of opportunity and promote good relations between people of different racial groups. The organisation, which has statutory powers to raise such cases, will argue that Channel 4:
• Failed to protect Shetty from offensive language and humiliation;
• Did not protect the viewing public from harmful and offensive material;
• Allowed viewers, including those with links to the subcontinent, to be "demeaned" by the behaviour of the participants in the Big Brother house;
• Offended viewers "who held decent standards about fairness and human dignity".
SWRECN is asking the Commission for Racial Equality (CRE) to bring the action, because it has enough money to fund what is likely to be an extremely expensive case.
SWRECN vice-chairwoman Alexandra MacRae said: "We believe that the CRE has the funds to take this case on and are looking to them to take action. But be in no doubt that our position is to proceed with litigation, and if they do not go ahead then we will be looking to other options to fund a case.
"Ideally, this should have been solved by Channel 4 themselves at the time rather than by court action, and they are obliged to train their staff and draw up guidelines so that nothing like this could happen."
Scotland on Sunday understands that at least one Indian-run business is considering funding the lawsuit.
In an earlier letter to Channel 4, warning them they were preparing legal action, the group stated: "The behaviour exhibited towards Shilpa Shetty had the hallmarks of being calculated to violate her human dignity. The distress of Shilpa Shetty was apparent.
"Channel 4 displays an arrogance which is inconsistent with those who are conversant with generally accepted standards. It is our view that the stance taken by Channel 4 amounts to institutional racism."
They added that it was beside the point that Shetty won the show and has since tried to play down the affair.
Jandoo told Scotland on Sunday: "The victim's view is not always the test. In a racist incident, just as with other kinds of bullying, the victim is usually in a weaker position and is always under pressure to play things down."
He cited the definition of a racist incident used by Sir William Macpherson, who examined police handling of the bungled investigation of Stephen Lawrence's murder in 1993.
Macpherson found that the police were institutionally racist and held that a racist incident is any incident which is perceived to be racist by the victim or any other person.
Jandoo added: "Channel 4, as a named public body, under the Act has certain responsibilities and failed to uphold them. They failed in their duty of care to Shilpa Shetty and to the viewer, and offended hundreds of thousands of people."
In 2000, Jandoo investigated the police and the Crown's handling of the infamous Surjit Singh Chhokar killing and found that institutional racism was evident in both the police and the procurator fiscal system. The Crown failed to convict anyone of the murder of the Asian waiter.
A spokeswoman for Channel 4 said they would not be commenting at this stage.
Source: The Scotsman (http://news.scotsman.com/uk.cfm?id=946652007)