We are naturally disappointed by this judgment, which we believe is a blow to the principle of freedom of expression in this country. We will be seeking leave to appeal from the Court of Appeal.

The Daily Telegraph published genuine documents that emanated from the highest levels of the Iraqi government and raised questions about the activities of Mr Galloway, a British Member of Parliament.

If, as we understand the Court to have held, English law offers no real protection to newspapers that publish documents which raise such important questions about the conduct of an elected Member of Parliament, then freedom of expression is an illusion.

Following the discovery of the documents, an investigation into Mr Galloway has been launched by Sir Philip Mawer, the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards.

One of those documents, which was quoted in the judgement in full, said that Mr Galloway, and I quote:

"…obtained through Mr Tariq Aziz three million barrels of oil every six months, according to the oil-for-food programme. His share would be only between 10 and 15 cents per barrel. He also obtained a limited number of food contracts with the Ministry of Trade." ...

...It has never been The Daily Telegraph's case to suggest that the allegations contained in the documents are true. These documents were published by us because their contents raised very important questions at a crucial stage of the war against Iraq. The Daily Telegraph did not and could not perform a detailed investigation into their contents. Newspapers have neither the power nor the resources to carry out such an investigation in a war-torn country. The Iraq Survey Group took over 18 months to investigate the abuse of the "oil-for-food" programme...

In other European freedom-of-expression news, Dutch Muslim groups are suing MP Ayaan Hirsi Ali - writer of Theo van Gogh's Submission - to keep her from making a sequel, and from "making unnecessarily hurtful or offensive remarks, or blasphemous statements, against Islam."