Day 312 - 11 Dec 96 - Page 17
1 clerks et cetera to proof our witnesses in the making of
2 their statements.
3
4 The next point of lack of safety in the proceedings, which
5 is very important -- we would argue this is a fundamental
6 point -- is the oppressive nature of the proceedings, and
7 I do not mean by that that people in the courtroom have
8 been jumping on us, you know, oppressively; I mean that as
9 well as all the other abovementioned relevant points the
10 case is clearly personally oppressive to each of the
11 Defendants who have to endure, we have to endure, the
12 relentless pressure and stress of such a long, detailed,
13 high profile, stressful, and continuous unbroken action,
14 unaided to any significant degree. Bearing in mind, of
15 course, the unprecedented length of this action.
16
17 The case has dominated our time and lives for at least four
18 years, and the paperwork has dominated our homes. Our
19 personal lives have suffered unacceptably. I am a single
20 parent with sole responsibility for a 7-year-old child,
21 obviously a major and continuous responsibility, throughout
22 the case and trial, and that relationship between myself
23 and my son has been affected negatively by this case.
24 Ms. Steel has suffered from stress related ill health and
25 exhaustion. Such a trial, we would submit, is an abuse of
26 the principle of a fair and equal hearing and... Yes,
27 basically.
28
29 Point 7: for about half of the case we have been denied the
30 official transcripts when available to the Plaintiffs.
31 This has inevitably resulted in an unfair advantage to the
32 Plaintiffs regarding preparations for cross-examination,
33 ability to take notes because we do not have clerks and we
34 do not have that training et cetera, and therefore to
35 prepare for closing submissions or dealing with the myriad
36 points of law that have come up, proofing our witnesses,
37 and so on. That is one of the reasons it has been such an
38 uphill battle to prepare our closing speeches, because we
39 have not been able to mark up transcripts as we were going
40 along for most of the time.
41
42 Although we have been able, through public donations, to
43 buy transcripts at a cheaper rate three weeks later by then
44 it is too late to go over that day's evidence or to use
45 them in any effective or convenient way. Obviously, we
46 have already made the submission that we believe the court
47 should intervene to ensure that all parties have what any
48 party has in the way of transcripts.
49
50 Point 8. We say that the politics of dissent should not be
51 -- sorry, I will start again. The purpose of defamation
52 proceedings is to protect reputation it is said. We say it
53 is an abuse of the court to use libel proceedings to
54 stultify political criticism, which is what we say has
55 happened in this case, and that is a matter of evaluation
56 for you. The court's duty is to protect the right to
57 express honestly held political beliefs except where
58 Parliament has legislated otherwise, for example against
59 racist literature, or whatever.
60
