British businessman Mohamed Amersi has cleared the first hurdle in his defamation lawsuit against the BBC with a judge finding that the broadcaster’s coverage of him could be interpreted as defamatory.
Amersi, who is a Conservative party donor, sued the BBC after its flagship documentary series “Panorama” accused him of being “involved in one of Europe’s biggest corruption scandals.” He also sued over an article published on the BBC News website on Oct. 4, 2021.
According to the documentary makers, Amersi was “involved” in a suspicious $220 million payment made to an offshore company 14 years ago. They found his name in the Pandora Papers leak, which detailed numerous offshore financial firms in far-flung locations, including Panama and Singapore.
According to the BBC program, the businessman was implicated in a bribe involving the daughter of former Uzbekistan president Islam Karmov. At one point, even the U.S. Department of Justice was involved in tracking the dealings of a Swedish telecoms company called Telia for whom Amersi worked as a consultant between 2007 and 2013.
“Panorama” worked on the investigation alongside the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists and the Guardian. The documentary aired in October 2021.
In Amersi’s lawsuit, which was filed in October 2023, he said his “established reputation as an anti-corruption campaigner” has been “seriously undermined and damaged” by the documentary.
Amersi was seeking damages up to £100,000 ($126,000), an injunction and an order requiring the news network publish a summary of the court’s judgment.
“I came away with the impression that [“Panorama”] was making very serious allegations about [Amersi], his involvement with Telia and the source of his wealth,” Judge Lewis said in his judgment, seen by PvNew.
“I am satisfied that each publication has the following meaning: ‘There are strong grounds for suspecting that, during his work for Telia, Mr Amersi had been involved in deals on its behalf which he knew or should have known were corrupt, or involved corrupt payments.’ It is agreed that this meaning is defamatory of the claimant at common law,” the judgment concluded.
The BBC can still try and defend the program and article by arguing the claims about Amersi were true.
The BBC has been approached for comment.
