Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

Judge is bringing in privacy law by the back door, editor warns

Ian Johnston
Monday 10 November 2008 01:00 GMT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

A High Court judge with a "hatred of free speech and the popular press" is bringing in a privacy law to the UK "by the back door", a national newspaper editor has claimed.

Paul Dacre, editor-in-chief of the Daily Mail, cited rulings by Mr Justice Eady in favour of the Formula One boss, Max Mosley, against the News of the World and an unnamed celebrity who had an affair with a married woman as examples of the erosion of freedom of expression. He claimed the judge had "a virtual monopoly of all cases against the media" and was therefore able to use the privacy clause of the Human Rights Act to thwart attempts to defend public decency by shaming those in high places found to have committed immoral acts.

Mr Dacre, who was speaking at the Society of Editors' annual conference in Bristol last night, argued that without the ability to report scandal popular newspapers would lose a mass readership with "obvious worrying implications" for democracy.

"If Gordon Brown wanted to force a privacy law, he would have to set out a Bill, arguing his case in both Houses of Parliament, withstand public scrutiny and win a series of votes," he said. "Now, thanks to the wretched Human Rights Act, one judge with a subjective and highly relativist moral sense can do the same with a stroke of his pen."

Mr Dacre added: "I personally would rather have never heard of Max Mosley ... It is the others I care about: the crooks, the liars, the cheats, the rich and the corrupt sheltering behind a law of privacy being created by an unaccountable judge." He said: "Since time immemorial public shaming has been a vital element in defending the parameters of what are considered acceptable standards of social behaviour, helping ensure that citizens – rich and poor – adhere to them for the good of the greater community."

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in