Tuesday, 13 October 2009

Guardian gagged

The Guardian reports that it is unable to report on questions asked in the House of Commons. According to their story about the stroy they cant tell, they are "prevented from identifying the MP who has asked the question, what the question is, which minister might answer it, or where the question is to be found" (1). Mysteriously, they are permitted to reveal that "the case involves the London solicitors Carter-Ruck, who specialise in suing the media for clients, who include individuals or global corporations" (2).

This is odd, as this allows the information to be pin-pointed fairly easily, by checking freely avaialble sources. From the Commons Order Book for Tuesday, the 13th of October, 2009, part 2 (3):
60 Paul Farrelly (Newcastle-under-Lyme): To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the Court of Appeal judgment in May 2009 in the case of Michael Napier and Irwin Mitchell v Pressdram Limited in respect of press freedom to report proceedings in court.
(292409)

61 Paul Farrelly (Newcastle-under-Lyme): To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of legislation to protect (a) whistleblowers and (b) press freedom following the injunctions obtained in the High Court by (i) Barclays and Freshfields solicitors on 19 March 2009 on the publication of internal Barclays reports documenting alleged tax avoidance schemes and (ii) Trafigura and Carter-Ruck solicitors on 11 September 2009 on the publication of the Minton report on the alleged dumping of toxic waste in the Ivory Coast, commissioned by Trafigura.
(293006)

62 Paul Farrelly (Newcastle-under-Lyme): To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if he will (a) collect and (b) publish statistics on the number of non-reportable injunctions issued by the High Court in each of the last five years.
(293012)

63 Paul Farrelly (Newcastle-under-Lyme): To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what mechanisms HM Court Service uses to draw up rosters of duty judges for the purpose of considering time of the essence applications for the issuing of injunctions by the High Court.
(293013)
Obviously, some very powerful vested interests want to squash this issue. The Guardian has followed the Trafigura-Cote D'Ivorie toxic waste scandal for some time (4).
1 - "Guardian gagged from reporting parliament," by David Leigh, published in The Gaurdian, 12th of October, 2009.
2 - ibid.
3 - "Questions for Oral or Written Answer beginning on Tuesday 13 October 2009, Part Two," published on the British Parliament website, 12th of October, 2009. (http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmordbk2/91013o02.htm)
4 - "Papers prove Trafigura ship dumped toxic waste in Ivory Coast," by David Leigh and Afua Hirsch. Published in The Guardian, 14th of May, 2009. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/may/13/trafigura-ivory-coast-documents-toxic-waste)

2 comments:

lauraO said...

38 Degrees are currently running a campaign on this. Take action now by emailing your MP and asking them to take a stand to stop this happening again in the future. Take action now, it only takes 2 mins. Go to:

38degrees.org.uk/stop-the-gag

Anonymous said...

This will get the wind up Napier and Irwin Mitchell… uncovering more gremlins i wonder???

60 Paul Farrelly (Newcastle-under-Lyme): To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the Court of Appeal judgment in May 2009 in the case of Michael Napier and Irwin Mitchell v Pressdram Limited in respect of press freedom to report proceedings in court.”

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmordbk2/91013o02.htm

Cater Fuck lost this important case for Michael Napier and his precious legal firm in a huge way – here is the Bailli link:

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2009/443.html

it just shows how people and dishonest firms above the law think they can get way with anything they like…. just like Napier being given a gong in 2005 for his services to the legal profession (but forgot to tell anyone that he was being officially reprimanded for a so called “minor offense”)….now how does that work and what does jack straw have to say about that???

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/may/24/law-society-investigation-michael-napier