Julie Burchill to pay substantial damages & public apology to Ash Sarkar in defamation/harassment case

Julie Burchill to pay substantial damages & public apology to Ash Sarkar in defamation/ harassment case

Ash Sarkar’s libel and harassment case against Julie Burchill (aka Raven) has succeeded. Ms Sarkar has won substantial damages from Ms Burchill and an unreserved apology for publishing false and defamatory statements about Ms Sarkar. Ms Burchill has also entered an undertaking not to engage in harassment of Ms Sarkar. This comprehensive legal settlement, which includes payment for Ms Sarkar’s legal costs, and a further undertaking not to contact her again, brings Ms Sarkar’s defamation and harassment claims to a successful conclusion. She was represented by Zillur Rahman of Rahman Lowe Solicitors, and Counsel Mark Henderson of Doughty Street Chambers in all her claims.

Following the settlement, Ms Burchill has just published on Twitter and Facebook a statement which her tweet (here), and post (here) describe as a “full and wholehearted apology”. In her posts, Ms Burchill asks Twitter and Facebook users to “please retweet/share”. In her full statement, Ms Burchill confirms that “I unreservedly and unconditionally apologise for the hurtful and unacceptable statements I made to and about Ms Sarkar, particularly those concerning her religion and Prophet Muhammad”. She accepted that her claims about Ms Sarkar were defamatory, “included racist and misogynist comments regarding Ms Sarkar’s appearance and her sex life”, and “play[ed] into Islamophobic tropes”.

The original defamatory allegations were published by Ms Burchill on 13 December 2020, but Ms Burchill continued to post about and towards Ms Sarkar for many days during the Christmas period. Ms Burchill has accepted in her statement that, “I should not have sent these tweets, some of which included racist and misogynist comments regarding Ms Sarkar’s appearance and her sex life”.

Ash Sarkar is a British journalist and political activist. She is a senior editor at Novara Media which is an independent media outlet. She is of Asian (Bangladeshi) heritage and is Muslim.

Julie Burchill is a national newspaper columnist at the Sunday Telegraph and Spectator, and published author. She has maintained a high profile in the mainstream media for several decades.

The background to the claim is as follows.

The Defamation claims

On 13 December 2020, an article originally published on 12 September 2012 in the Spectator by Rod Liddle became the subject of public debate and attracted substantial commentary online, wherein Mr Liddle stated that the one thing stopping him from becoming a teacher was “I could not remotely conceive of not trying to shag the kids.”

Many expressed shock and concern about Mr Liddle’s article after it came to light. Ms Sarkar tweeted on 13 December 2020:

“Saw these screenshots pop up on TL, and thought they must be a parody. I checked and it turns out that yes, Rod Liddle really did write an article 8 years ago saying that he didn’t become a teacher because he “could not remotely conceive of not trying to shag the kids”

Ms Sarkar is Muslim which appears to have been the basis for Ms Burchill questioning her publicly on Twitter about the age of Prophet Muhammad’s wife [Aisha] and then posting a tweet alleging that being Muslim meant worshipping the Prophet Muhammad (itself wrong) and that Ms Sarkar therefore condoned paedophilia:

“But Ash … I don’t WORSHIP a paedophile. If Aisha was 9, YOU do. Lecturer, lecture thyself!”

Later, Ms Burchill took to Facebook to rally support by encouraging friends and followers to “wade in on Twitter” against “the Islamists”, thereby referring to Ms Sarkar as an Islamist. The next day, Ms Burchill posted to her Facebook followers asking them to send a message to “the nonces” on Twitter, again referring to Ms Sarkar.

Ms Sarkar brought defamation complaints about the Twitter and Facebook statements plus the innuendo allegation that she was a hypocrite. In her claim, she stated that although the causes of action were multiple, “the nub of this case is a national newspaper columnist using her platform to make unprovoked allegations against an Asian Muslim woman that she is an Islamist who worships a paedophile [and] thereby combined two of the most damaging tropes of anti-Muslim hate: support for extreme fundamentalism and Islamic terrorism, and support for paedophilia and child sex exploitation/rape” adding that “such tropes incite religious and racial hatred against Muslims, and against Asian people who are perceived to be of Muslim heritage”.

In her statement following the conclusion of the case, Ms Burchill admits that following Ms Sarkar’s comment about “my friend, Rod Liddle”, Ms Burchill “alleged that Ms Sarkar worshipped the Prophet Muhammad, that she worshipped a paedophile (referring to the Prophet Muhammad), that she was an Islamist, and that she was a hypocrite (the allegations).” She admitted that these allegations were all false and said that “although it was not my intention, I accept that my statements were defamatory of Ms Sarkar and caused her very substantial distress.”

The course of conduct and the harassment claim

Ms Sarkar realised upon receipt of the allegations that Ms Burchill had first targeted her 6 days before the defamatory statements described above, when she tweeted about Ms Sarkar:

“Did you start being shit in bed or did your co-religionists threaten you? Genuinely interested!”

In the weeks that followed, Ms Burchill continued to send messages targeting Ms Sarkar, extending through the holiday period. The subsequent targeting included disparaging references to her religious heritage, to her having a “tash” and degrading sexual comments about her, including the following examples.

“Drinks on me, @AyoCaesar, apparently you *fuck like a champion* – cant wait”

“Nevertheless, I wouldn’t mind *tashing on* with her – gonna ask her out for a *kebab* when I get my *winnings*!”

“Ash, O Ash. I’m not being flash

Just got my advance – thus behave rather rash

I know I’m not Woke

And that you’re not a bloke

But for you in your finery

I’d go quite non-binary.”

“I was sad the day came when you toyed with your bio

‘Fucks like a champion’ quite made me sigh – O

Ash, maybe you’ll one day be that good again

And we’ll have a gender fluid threesome with Marine Le Pen.”

As a result of Ms Burchill’s targeting of Ms Sarkar, a number of offensive, threatening and Islamophobic comments were posted on Facebook and Twitter, some of which were ‘liked’ by Ms Burchill, including the following:

“she needs to kill herself for shame for all that sex outside marriage”

“what Islamic religious procedures is it that cuts out all sexual pleasure from female? Could Ash have had FGM, prescribed by all schools of Sunni Islam, and obligatory in one of them?”

Ms Sarkar also brought a claim for harassment under the Protection from Harassment Act, seeking an undertaking, or failing that an injunction, that Ms Burchill cease this course of conduct. In her claim, she stated that “repeated sexual and degrading comments, played out for [Mr Burchill’s] audience, carried a persistent threatening undertone [and Ms Burchill] knew and ought to have known the implications of the encouragement [Ms Burchill was] giving to [her] fellow travellers on social media to “wade in” by weaponising [Ms Sarkar’s] religion/race and how you linked it to her appearance and sex life.” She argued that the Islamophobic abuse was not protected by Article 10. Ms Sarkar “had expressed no opinion about Islam [and] had commented on a controversial article by another national newspaper columnist which had nothing to do with Islam yet [Ms Burchiill] chose to use [Ms Sarkar’s] heritage to attack an Asian Muslim woman”.

In her public apology, Ms Burchill said of her own tweets that:

“I also accept that I was wrong to continue to tweet to and about her after that date. I should not have sent these tweets, some of which included racist and misogynist comments regarding Ms Sarkar’s appearance and her sex life.”

Of her endorsements of the posts of others, Ms Burchill says that:

“I was also wrong to have “liked” other posts on Facebook and Twitter about her which were offensive, including one which called for her to kill herself, and another which speculated whether she had been a victim of FGM. I regret that I did not pay much attention to them at the time. On reflection, I accept that these ‘liked’ posts included callous and degrading comments about Ms Sarkar and I should not have liked them.”

In the wake of Ms Burchill’s statements and ‘likes’ of “callous and degrading comments about Ms Sarkar”, Ms Sarkar received further abuse, including misogynist as well as racist abuse, which Ms Burchill has accepted was “abhorrent” in her statement. Such abusive messages included the following:

“AyoCaesar gone all quiet, for once. BUT WILL SHE SUCK D** FOR SOCIALISM…”;

“You are a dirty dirty brown whore who makes my white american c*** rock hard. I wanna ravage that sexy body baby! Are you into rape/raceplay? Don’t block If you don’t like my words. I support you causes! Let me breed you, put a white baby in you. Does your pu*** get wet thinking about an all white gangbang”.

Ms Burchill says in her statement:

“I have also now seen messages that were sent to Ms Sarkar following my posts about her which are abhorrent, and I wish to make clear that I do not condone any such messages. I did not know when I published my posts that Ms Sarkar had previously received death threats and other violent threats and abuse…”

So many messages were generated that the issue was trending on Twitter in the UK between 13 and 14 December 2020 where more than 3,000 tweets has been posted discussing the dispute.

In response to Ms Burchill’s statements to Ms Sarkar on 13 December 2020, her publishers, Little, Brown announced that they were withdrawing from publishing Ms Burchill’s latest book, stating:

“While there is no legal definition of hate speech in the UK, we believe that Julie’s comments on Islam are not defensible from a moral or intellectual standpoint, that they crossed a line with regard to race and religion, and that her book has now become inextricably linked with those views”.

This issue was covered by several major media outlets, including the BBC, Guardian, Independent, and the Times.

Little, Brown’s decision was subsequently portrayed by some in the media as ‘cowardly publishers bowing down to Islamic extremism‘. This exacerbated the harm done to Ms Sarkar by the allegation that she was an Islamist, permitting the misleading impression that she was involved in pressurising Little, Brown into cancelling Ms Burchill’s book in the name of Islam. This is all despite the fact that Ms Sarkar had never called for Little, Brown to take any action.

In Ms Burchill’s unreserved apology, she concluded that:

“I deeply regret having reacted in the way I did. I accept that I should have behaved better. On reflection, I accept that I misjudged the situation, and made statements that simply are not true, which I now want to put right. I also wish to make clear that I accept that Ms Sarkar did not call for my publisher to break ties with me and bears no responsibility for this.

I unreservedly and unconditionally apologise for the hurtful and unacceptable statements I made to and about Ms Sarkar, particularly those concerning her religion and Prophet Muhammad. I have undertaken not to repeat the allegations or any similar allegations about her, undertaken not to engage in any course of conduct amounting to harassment of Ms Sarkar, and undertaken not to contact her directly other than for legal reasons.

I have also agreed to pay substantial damages to Ms Sarkar for the distress I caused and her legal costs”.

Commenting on the conclusion of her case, Ash Sarkar said:

“I’m relieved that the Sunday Telegraph columnist Julie Burchill has apologised for claims made about me last December which she admits were defamatory and play into Islamophobic tropes. We should expect a writer at a national newspaper to uphold a basic commitment to honesty. But Burchill subjected me to days of relentless harassment and abuse (including making the absurd and false claim that I worship a paedophile) all because I’m Muslim.

We should not accept women of colour being hounded out of public life simply for expressing themselves. This outcome is a victory for anyone who believes that people shouldn’t have to face abuse, harassment or smears just because they are part of a minority community.

I’d like to say a big thank you to Zillur Rahman, the team at Rahman Lowe and Mark Henderson for their support and professionalism. All too often legal recourse is out of reach for those without wealth, so I am beyond grateful to them for taking on my case”.

Zillur Rahman, her solicitor, said:

“I am delighted for Ash, it really is a resounding victory. As a Muslim myself, this case meant more because of the grossly offensive comment made concerning Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessing be upon him), who is dear to all Muslims.

This case really does highlight the dangers of people thinking that the law does not apply to them on social media – the costs could be severe. It shows that words have consequences. We nevertheless welcome Julie’s approach in making a prompt concession of the claim, and her fulsome apology which starts to make amends for the harm done.”

Notes to Editors:

The apology has been posted by Julie Burchill on Twitter (here) Facebook page (here)

On 13 December 2020 I made defamatory statements about @AyoCaesar, which I sincerely regret and retract and have undertaken not to repeat. I have agreed to pay substantial damages to Ash Sarkar and her legal costs. Here is my full and wholehearted apology. Please retweet/ share.”

The statement (apology):

“On 13^th December 2020 I made statements concerning Ash Sarkar in response to her comment on an article by my friend Rod Liddle. I alleged that Ms Sarkar worshipped the Prophet Muhammad, that she worshipped a paedophile (referring to the Prophet Muhammad), that she was an Islamist, and that she was a hypocrite (the allegations).

Although it was not my intention, I accept that my statements were defamatory of Ms Sarkar and caused her very substantial distress. I wish to make clear on the record that I do not believe, have never believed and never intended to make any allegation that Ms Sarkar is a promoter, supporter and/or sympathiser of Islamists or fundamentalist terrorism or to suggest that Ms Sarkar condones paedophilia in any way. I also now understand that it is blasphemy for a Muslim to worship Prophet Muhammad and I had no basis for stating that Ms Sarkar does so. I accept that there is no truth in any of these allegations, and I recognise that such comments play into Islamophobic tropes and did so in this case.

I also accept that I was wrong to continue to tweet to and about her after that date. I should not have sent these tweets, some of which included racist and misogynist comments regarding Ms Sarkar’s appearance and her sex life. I was also wrong to have “liked” other posts on Facebook and Twitter about her which were offensive, including one which called for her to kill herself, and another which speculated whether she had been a victim of FGM. I regret that I did not pay much attention to them at the time. On reflection, I accept that these ‘liked’ posts included callous and degrading comments about Ms Sarkar and I should not have liked them. I can confirm that I have deleted all my posts and tweets and likes about Ms Sarkar.

I have also now seen messages that were sent to Ms Sarkar following my posts about her which are abhorrent, and I wish to make clear that I do not condone any such messages. I did not know when I published my posts that Ms Sarkar had previously received death threats and other violent threats and abuse, some of which emanated from a far-right conspiracy theory circulated about Ms Sarkar during summer 2020, of which I had not been aware.

I deeply regret having reacted in the way I did. I accept that I should have behaved better. On reflection, I accept that I misjudged the situation, and made statements that simply are not true, which I now want to put right. I also wish to make clear that I accept that Ms Sarkar did not call for my publisher to break ties with me and bears no responsibility for this.

I have also agreed to pay substantial damages to Ms Sarkar for the distress I caused and her legal costs”.

ENDS

Our extensive experience of acting in high profile defamation cases means that we are particularly well placed to advise clients whose case may reach the public eye, and to advise on associated matters such as reputation management.

For further information or to discuss a potential claim, please contact us on 0207 956 8699 or info@rllaw.co.uk. We are ranked as a ‘Leading Firm’ in the Legal 500 and Chambers and Partners independent guides to the UK Legal Profession.

More media coverage at:

Julie Burchill to pay substantial damages & public apology to Ash Sarkar in defamation/harassment case

Featured Articles

News