By Gabriel Princewill-
Sir Brian Leveson’s has launched a scathing attack against ministers in response to the government’s axing of the Leveson inquiry into press ethics and practices.
Clashing With Ministers Over the announced decision today by Culture Minister, Matt Hancock, Leveson indicated the expectations of the hacking victims had been let down. The victims of the hacking scandal which prompted the 2012 Leveson public inquiry expected the inquiry to be completed, he said.
Culture Secretary, Hancock , today put the lid over original plans for the Leveson for the inquiry to have a second phase where it would further probe newspaper organisations and journalists about the practices they undertook in the past, and question them on the current practices used.
In addition to examining unlawful practices allegedly used, the second phase of the Leveson inquiry was also due to look into relations between journalists and the police. However, mr. Hancock today announced the decision of Parliament to discontinue to the Leveson Inquiry.
AD: Capeesh Restaurant
The rule in Section 40 of the Crime and Courts Act 2013 would compel newspapers to pay libel costs of their opponents even where the newspaper emerged victorious. This was the first pernicious flaw to emerge from the Leveson inquiry. One should be pressed to find an intelligent dispassionate observer who would deem this law remotely fair or rational, yet Parliament actually passed it. It wasn’t ever activated, but it is quite baffling to think a law laden with illogical flaws could even be considered, let alone passed.
The aim of the law was to eradicate cost concerns of libel which may prevent potential victims of press misconduct to lodge suits. However, the expected outcome was painfully riddled with glaring shortcomings.
The minister said “the world has changed” since Leveson reported in 2012. The Government is instead consulting on new measures to stop “clickbait” threatening “high quality journalism”
CONCESSION
AD: Oysterian Sea Food Restaurant And Bar
Today, Leveson tacitly conceded the error in the original scheduled plan to implement section 40 of the Crime and Courts Act – compelling media organisations to pay legal costs of libel cases irrespective of the outcome of the case . He vowed not to effect the highly contested statute under a framework in which the inquiry is re-opened. Ministers may have come to the conclusion that initial plans to put the expenses of libel suits at the doorstep of the press- win or lose- was draconian.
This may have been the point at which the ostensibly useful scrutiny and revelation of some of the indiscretions among media organisations had done its cause. Culpable individuals in each of the organisations were highlighted and held to account; journalists and key players in those organisations stepped down and felt the shame of the exposure.
Telephone hacking and all unlawful conduct is never justified, nor should ever be condoned. Yet, when outcomes or potential outcomes are unintelligible, it can make a mockery of an investigative process which could potentially otherwise have yielded several benefits.
BALANCE
A reasonable balance between the costs and benefits of any investigation is an ultimate outcome necessary to be factored in. This is why a costly enquiry to further the first part of the Leveson inquiry was adjudged not ideal, but the press like all organisations will always be subject to accountability whenever substantiated evidence of malpractice calls for it.
Leveson part two was due to examine unlawful action by media organisations, including relations between journalists and the police. Sir Brian Leveson proposed a resumption of the inquiry in a cost-effective way as he explicitly claimed there was new evidence of criminal behaviour by newspapers. which ought to be subject to public scrutiny.
In a letter to ministers, Sir Brian said “the extent of wrongdoing within News International (owners of The Sun and News of the World) has been far greater than the Inquiry was informed.” Stoking the fire for todays announcement to be reviewed, he said details of hacking at the Trinity Mirror group was still coming to light, he added.
There was still “a legitimate expectation on behalf of the public and, in particular, alleged victims of phone hacking and other unlawful conduct, that there will be a full public examination of the circumstances that allowed that behaviour” to take place, the serving judge said. Mr Hancock also announced that the government would not put Section 40 of the Crime and Courts Act – which would force media organisations to pay legal costs of libel cases whether they won or lost – into effect. The measure would be repealed “at the earliest opportunity”.
Watson ‘bitter blow’ Tom Watson, Labour’s deputy leader, said the decision to drop Leveson was a “bitter blow to the victims of press intrusion”. Watson is under fire after accepting £500,000 for his office from privacy campaigner Max Mosley, who was accused of publishing a racist election leaflet in the 1960s.
AD: Heritage And Restaurant Lounge Bar