Day 073 - 13 Jan 95 - Page 31
1 handed) I have highlighted certain bits but I have not
2 written on it. I notice it is not signed. Was it faxed to
3 you?
4 A. I was faxed to me.
5
6 Q. She has put her name on it but she has not signed it?
7 A. She has put her name on the bottom, yes.
8
9 Q. That was for the purposes of the preparation of this case?
10 A. It was, yes.
11
12 Q. If you quote something, can you just indicate where it is
13 in the document?
14 A. Yes. OK under the heading "Forestry and Biodiversity
15 in Sweden - some basic facts", it mentions first of all the
16 red data list. This is the RUCN's sort of publication of
17 endangered species and it is called the red data list.
18 Every country has one or every country should have one.
19
20 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Does it actually add to what you have put at
21 8.5.2?
22 A. I do not think so; it think it is really what is in --
23 basically, 8.5.2 covers it.
24
25 Q. Unless it adds something you specifically want to refer, it
26 may be sufficient that you just identify the source of
27 those figures.
28 A. Yes, I do mention on page 2 of Karin's document which
29 is not in the evidence here, this is the state of the
30 knowledge in 1990 and about that time of what was happening
31 in the forests because I gather this is the time of the
32 alleged libel, paragraph (4) -- excuse Karin's English; it
33 is not always perfect -- "Government officially recognise
34 the conflict between forest management policy leading to
35 'sustainable production' and maintenance of biodiversity,
36 (long term sustainable use).
37
38 The best documents where there problem - although the
39 knowledge was not new at all (see above) - is officially
40 admitted and clearly expressed, is in the summary of the
41 Governmental Commission on forest politics (Skogspolitiska
42 utredningen), 1992" -- Skogspolitiska means forest
43 politics.
44
45 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Do not bother with the Swedish.
46 A. OK. "The commission was set up to review the forest
47 politics of the 80s, as a basis for a new law proposal.
48 The commission concludes:
49
50 '... The commission does not find that forestry/forest
51 industry to full extent to have acted (or rather that the
52 results of their activities are not) in accordance with
53 existing, environmental and conservation goals. Continuous
54 improvements in the direction of conservation interests
55 have, however, been seen during the last years'." Really,
56 what she is saying is that there were some environmental
57 guidelines and, in her opinion or in the government's
58 opinion, these were not being adhered to. I think that is
59 really all I want to cover on that document.
60
