Clause 70 - Offences in connection with reporting
Criminal Justice Bill
4:00 pm
Mr Dominic Grieve (Beaconsfield, Conservative)
I have to admit that I have not discussed the amendments with the industry—certainly not at what I should call an official level.
The issue to which the amendments relate is of long standing—whether restrictions should be applied to those who distribute as well as those who publish newspapers. It could be argued that distributors are not normally likely to peruse the contents of newspapers in great detail, as they pass through their hands at 2 am, to see whether one or another reporting restriction order has been breached. On the other hand, the amendment is intended to highlight the importance of the issue.
I am perhaps focusing on a slightly different aspect of the matter from the one about which the hon. Member for Southwark, North and Bermondsey has expressed concern, but it seems to me that we are living, at the start of the 21st century, in an age in which reporting restrictions are increasingly being flouted with impunity. For a variety of reasons, newspapers seem to have got it into their heads that they can get away with it. They have become either sloppy or deliberately contemptuous of the court's power to control their publications. What I would have regarded 15 or 20 years ago as the blanket silence that descended when court proceedings began—when a matter was considered to be sub judice—has been substantially eroded, both in what is said and the manner in which it is said.
Of course, one can say certain things in certain circumstances. All kinds of devices seem to be employed to try and get around reporting restrictions. There are exceptions, but on the whole, it strikes me that the Attorney-General—whoever he or she may be at the time—has shown marked reluctance to bring proceedings in order to remind newspapers of their duties. If one were to extend those duties to distributors, the cat would truly be among the pigeons. Newspapers would find it very difficult to continue getting around reporting restrictions,
although to make distribution an offence might be harsh on distributors.
We may have an opportunity with what is a particularly important provision. Even more so than in the case of the ordinary criminal trial, unless we can get observance of the reporting restrictions, the whole procedure is doomed, so it is singularly important that Parliament look afresh at how reporting restrictions operate. If it is felt that the restrictions need to be toughened up, we now have an opportunity to consider how that might be done.