Reporter's rights 'violated'
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 JOURNALIST fined pounds 5,000 for refusing to reveal his sources is to have his case heard at the European Court of Human Rights in a legal battle which has important implications for the future of investigative reporting.
The European Commission of Human Rights is to refer the case after ruling that the British government violated the reporter's rights, it was disclosed yesterday.
Bill Goodwin, 27, was fined for contempt of court in 1990 when, as a trainee reporter for the Engineer, he refused to reveal who gave him financial information about a computer company. He claims the court order breached his freedom of expression safeguarded by the European Human Rights Convention.
The company, Tetra Ltd, said the details had come from a stolen copy of its confidential corporate plan.
The National Union of Journalists backed Mr Goodwin's appeal to the Commission, following unsuccessful challenges in the Court of Appeal and the House of Lords.
The Human Rights Convention, to which Britain is a signatory, includes an article guaranteeing 'freedom of expression' except in cases where restrictions are imposed which are considered 'necessary in a democratic society'.
In ruling that the Government had violated Article 10 of the Convention of Human Rights, the Commission said: '(We) consider that the protection of the sources from which journalists derive information is an essential means of enabling the press to perform its important function of 'public watchdog' in a democratic society.'
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments