December 2, 2004 - George Galloway has won a complete victory in the High Court this morning in his libel case against the Telegraph. For the Telegraph it is complete humiliation. Below is the initial report from the BBC website. We are told the judge has awarded the largest settlement in a libel case since the cap on libel cases was introduced. A PA reporter says it's the most decisive verdict for a litigant they have heard in a libel case. Not only was George awarded £150,000 in damages, the Telegraph will have over £1 million costs to pay. They were denied leave to appeal, although they claim they are going to try to overturn the judge's ruling.

Tonight George will address Tower Hamlets members about his intentions with regard to standing in the general election. The meeting will be at 6.30pm at the Cafe Naz Express, 16-18 Brick Lane, Tower Hamlets, nearest tube Aldgate East. All members and supporters are very welcome to attend but we strongly advise getting there for 6pm.

From the BBC website: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4061165.stm (which also includes a video of George's reaction to the verdict).

Galloway wins Saddam libel case

George Galloway had denied receiving Iraqi funds.

MP George Galloway has been awarded £150,000 in libel damages from the Daily Telegraph over claims he received money from Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq.

The Glasgow Kelvin MP was awarded the damages in compensation for articles published by the paper in April 2003.

He had denied ever seeking or receiving money from Saddam Hussein's government, which he said he had long opposed.

The newspaper had said it was in the public interest to publish the claims, based on documents found in Baghdad.

Mr Justice Eady said he was "obliged to compensate Mr Galloway in respect of the publications and the aggravated features of the defendants' subsequent conduct, and to make an award for the purposes of restoring his reputation".

The Telegraph had denied libel, saying during the case that it had not intended to "suggest guilt", but published the story because there was a case to answer.

The judge said the allegations were "seriously defamatory" of Mr Galloway.

He said readers of the Telegraph claims may have understood them to mean:

* Mr Galloway had been in Saddam's pay, secretly receiving about £375,000 a year.
* He diverted monies from the oil-for-food programme, thus depriving the Iraqi people of food and medicines.
* He probably used the Mariam Appeal, a campaign Mr Galloway launched to raise money for an Iraqi girl with leukaemia, as a front for personal enrichment.
* What he had done was tantamount to treason.

Judge Eady said: "It was the defendants' primary case that their coverage was no more than 'neutral reportage' of documents discovered by a reporter in the badly-damaged foreign ministry in Baghdad, but the nature, content and tone of their coverage cannot be so described."

Telegraph foreign correspondent David Blair had earlier told the judge how he had found the documents inside the Iraqi foreign ministry.

They included a five-page memorandum from the head of Iraqi intelligence which the journalist thought "had the makings of a major story about Mr Galloway's links with Saddam Hussein's regime".

'No opportunity'

The judge said that although Mr Galloway was interviewed by telephone on 21 April, he was not given an opportunity to read the Iraqi documents beforehand, and neither were they read to him.

The reporter who contacted him, Andrew Sparrow, only summarised the claims relating to funding of the Mariam Appeal, but did not tell him the newspaper was planning to publish claims about personal enrichment, the judge said.

"[Mr Galloway] did not therefore have a fair or reasonable opportunity to make inquiries or meaningful comment upon them before they were published."

He added: "In all the circumstances, it cannot be said that the defendants were under a social or moral