Companion website for
COMPARATIVE MEDIA LAW & ETHICS
by TIM CROOK
Published by Routledge on 15th December 2009
For details of the book, please visit Routledge.
Author's profile at Goldsmiths, University of London
Stop Press. Updates on cases and issues cited in the first edition of Comparative Media Law & Ethics.
Chapter 1. Primary Media Law of the UK and USA
Page 24-25 & 136 There is a narrow route of appeal from the Scottish Court of Justiciary to the UK Supreme Court on issues of devolution concerning Article 6 of the Human Rights Act.
Page 77. UK Supreme Court refuses leave to appeal for the Times Newspaper in its appeal against a conviction for contempt of court in reporting views of a jury foreman in a manslaughter trial. Report by PA Media Lawyer in UK Press Gazette.
Pages 101, 239-240. (Also Chapter 3. Defamation Law) S.L.A.P.P. Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation. The US House of Representatives is considering legislation that would create a federal anti-SLAPP law to protect individuals from lawsuits without merit that are filed to intimidate them into refraining from criticizing a person, company, or project. Report from the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. December 2009.
Page 135. Mr Max Mosley has begun an application at the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg against the United Kingdom arguing that the News of the World newspaper had a legal obligation under Article 8 to give him notice before publishing surreptitious footage and information about his private involvement in sado-masochism.
Pages 9-11 & 134. Mirror Group Newspapers have appealed the House of Lords ruling in favour of model Naomi Campbell to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. They argue that the majority Law Lords wrongly set the balance between their freedom of expression rights under Article 10 and her privacy rights under Article 8.
Pages 64-68. In December 2009 the body that oversees 15 US western federal trial courts announced a pilot program that will allow the videotaping of some civil trials.
The Judicial Council of the Ninth Circuit governs the administration of the federal courts in Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Washington, Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands. Report from the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. December 2009.
Pages 142-145 The Court of Criminal Appeal in Scotland has indicated it is minded to overturn the conviction of Atif Siddique for breaches of the Terrorism Act 2000. See the story 'Homegrown terrorist' Mohammed Atif Siddique in 'miscarriage of justice' by Lindsay McIntosh, The Times, January 29th 2010.
Appeal Court, High Court of Justiciary ruling on case MOHAMMED ATIF SIDDIQUE on 29th January 2010.
‘Laws should not criminalise Muslims for thought crime’. Mohammed Atif Siddique freed after first charge/conviction quashed and there will not be a retrial. Scottish Daily Herald 9th February 2010.
Freed terror student’s ‘stupid’ behaviour. Scottish Daily Herald 11th February 2010.
UK House of Commons Select Committee Culture, Media & Sport enquiry into press standards, libel and privacy 2nd Report 9th February 2010.
Press Statement from UK House of Commons Select Committee on their enquiry into press standards, libel and privacy. 24th February 2010.
US Supreme Court overturns anti-animal cruelty law in First Amendment case, Report by Washington Post 21st April 2010.
Supreme court ruling 8-1 given by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr is endorsement of the First Amendment's protection of even distasteful expression.
Law report from Cornell University Law School.
Chapter 2. Media jurisprudence, media ethicology and media ethicism
Chapter 3. Defamation Law
Page 261. European Court of Human Rights decision argues a distinction between right to reputation and right to Privacy in Hungarian defamation case.
CASE OF KARAKÓ v. HUNGARY
UK Libel lawyers' 'success fees' to be cut by 90% to aid investigative journalism. Jack Straw sets out 'urgent interim measure' to cut cost of losing libel cases following appeal court judge's review. Afua Hirsch, legal affairs correspondent guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 19 January 2010.
UK Minister of Justice announces plan to reform England & Wales libel law 23rd March 2010. Reform of libel laws will protect freedom of expression. Reforms of the law on libel will be taken forward in the next Parliament, Justice Secretary Jack Straw announced today.
Report of UK Ministry of Justice libel reform working party 23rd March.
Court of Appeal, Civil Division ruling on application of defamation/fair comment rule, 1st April 2010. The court ‘liberalises’ the interpretation to bring it more in line with US defamation position. The court had an influential panel including the Lord Chief Justice, Master of the Rolls and appeal court judge Lord Justice Sedley.
Court of Appeal Ruling 13th July 2010 in case of a police detective called Flood v The Times in which the newspaper lost its Reynolds style qualified privilege for reporting allegations against the claimant that proved groundless and did not remove or correct an Internet version of the story. Case being appealed to the UK Supreme Court.
Chapter 4. Contempt/protecting Fair Trial Law
Page 265-269. Distant relative of Dr Hawley Harvey Crippen unsuccessful in having a posthumous pardon referred to the English Court of Appeal. Bid turned down by Criminal Cases Review Commission. Report by BBC Online.
Page 273. [See also pages 117 to 119, and Chapter 5, Privacy] The UK Supreme Court’s ruling in the ‘Alphabet soup’ legal parties anonymity case was given on 29th January 2010 by Lord Rodger and is seen as a powerful assertion of the open justice principle in freedom of expression vis-à-vis privacy. It may be as significant as the 1913 House of Lords case in Scott v Scott.
Chapter 5. Privacy Law
Pages 274-279. Mr Justice Eady gives two further speeches analysing the background and reasons for the British development of a right to respect for privacy in media law.
Mr Justice Eady’s speech to the University of Hertfordshire 10th November 2009.
Mr Justice Eady. ‘Privacy and the Press: Where Are We Now’ His speech to the ‘Justice’ Conference 1st December 2009.
Mr Justice Eady. Speech to launch the new ‘Centre for Law, Justice & Journalism’ at City University 10th March 2010.
In January 2010 there have been 3 significant UK cases giving priority to freedom of expression over privacy. This may be part of a trend involving the British courts recognising the need to assert and support the idea that there should be a ‘particular regard for freedom of expression’ as indicated by Section 12.4 of the Human Rights Act 1998 and a greater importance given to media rights as part of the consideration of freedom of expression as a pressing social need and democratic necessity.
Lord Rodger giving the ruling of a 7 Justice panel UK Supreme Court in Guardian News et al in HM Treasury v Ahmed et al stated that the identity of parties in any legal case should only be anonymised in the most exceptional of circumstances i.e. where there was proven threat to life as a result of publicity.
Mr Justice Tugendhat has given priority to freedom of expression in two injunction/prior restraint cases. In Doncaster Council v BBC he lifted an injunction on reporting a confidential report about two young people convicted of a sadistic attack on two victims the same age.
In LNS and Persons Unknown he lifted an injunction on an injunction (otherwise known as a superinjunction) that enabled the media to report an allegation that the captain of the Chelsea and England soccer teams, John Terry had had an extra-marital affair with the girlfriend of a former team-mate.
Chapter 6. Media Regulation
US Supreme Court upheld FCC powers to punish broadcasters for allowing the use of spontaneous expletives during transmission that are judged to be obscene.
In a 5-4 decision, the Court in FCC v. Fox Television ruled that the FCC did not violate any procedural or administrative rules in 2004 when it began to fine television stations for spontaneous uses of indecent language on live television. It would appear that the Justices made their decision on the basis of administrative law rather than First Amendment constitutionality. Report from the Reporters Committee for the Protection of the Press April 2009.
Case summary from Oyez.
The opinions of the Supreme Court justices.
English High Court ruling in the case of broadcast presenter Jon Gaunt seeking a judicial review of an Ofcom regulatory ruling that his angry exchange with a London councillor on the national commercial speech station Talksport was ‘offensive’. Mr Gaunt had accused the councillor of being a ‘health nazi’ for instituting a policy to bar foster parents who smoked cigarettes from looking after children in care. In a ruling on 13th July 2010, the court ruled that the reprimand to the station was not a breach of Mr Gaunt’s human rights.
Chapter 7. State and National Security Law
Page 333. Former MI5 agent (A v B) is unsuccessful in his appeal to the UK Supreme Court to have a judicial review of his quest to have his memoirs published instead of it being decided by a secret tribunal hearing. [A is a former senior member of the Security Service, B its Director of Establishments.]
A US federal appeals court has ruled that the CIA did not violate the First Amendment rights of former undercover agent Valerie Plame Wilson when it refused to allow her to publish information about her work with the agency in her 2007 memoirs. The decision was made in November 2009 by U.S. Court of Appeals in New York City (2nd Cir.) Report from the Reporters Committee for the Freedom of the Press.
Page 327. In February 2010 the England and Wales Appeal Court (Civil Division) issued a ground-breaking ruling on the balance of powers between judiciary and executive in relation to the issue of national security. It had to rule on whether redacted paragraphs in a ruling concerning the case of Binyam Mohamed, who alleged MI5 complicity in his torture and extraordinary rendition by the CIA, should be released into the public domain. On 10th February 2010 a three-judge panel consisting of the Master of the Rolls, Lord Chief Justice and President of the Queen’s Bench Division ruled against the Foreign Secretary and wishes of the Security Service.
But a further and unprecedented dispute arose over a request from counsel for the Foreign Secretary that paragraphs critical of MI5 in one of the judge’s speeches should be withdrawn. The court investigated this issue further and on 26th February 2010 decided that all versions of Lord Neuberger’s critical paragraphs should be released in the interests of open justice. The judge’s criticisms of MI5 represent a robust assertion of the independence of the UK judiciary and a powerful expression of the open justice principle.
Anonymity for suspected terrorists subject to ‘control order’ in the UK sustained by UK Supreme Court 23rd June 2010 in the case of Secretary of State for the Home Department (Respondent) v AP. Media submissions not invited and neither did they intervene.
Chapter 8. Media law and ethics: four genres of jurisdiction
Chapter 9. The Legal Problematizing of Journalism
Pages 357-368. A US Federal shield bill for the protection of journalists’ sources makes critical progress with the Senate Judiciary Committee voting to present the bill to the full Senate. This is considered a new milestone this year for legislation that has been tabled, debated and amended for months in the committee. Report from the Reporters Committee for the Freedom of the Press in December 2009.
ECHR Grand Chamber ruling September 14th 2010 Protection of Journalists’ Sources
Holland- boy racers police enquiry. Powerful ruling underlying journalistic freedom of expression rights in refusing to disclose sources for publication.
Press release on court ruling.
Full ruling.
Video-cast of hearing held January 2010.
Chapter 10. Human rights and international law for journalists
Chapter 11. Racial and Religious Hatred
Page 394-397. Danish Cartoons phenomenon. Index on Censorship in 2009 Year in Review Jytte Klausen is interviewed about her new academic book on the Danish cartoons crisis and discusses why it was published without any illustrations. Yale University Press decided not to include the original cartoons against the author’s wishes and the recommendations of 4 academic peer reviewers.
Furthermore Index on Censorship decided not to publish the original cartoons in the context of Professor Klausen’s interview. Chair of Index Jonathan Dimbleby explained his position.
Index board member Kenan Malik disagreed with the self-censorship exercised.
Page 399. British Peers in the House of Lords (second unelected chamber) defeated the UK Government's attempt to overturn a "free speech" defence to the law on homophobic hatred in July 2009. But there is no information yet on when the new criminal offence of inciting hatred on the grounds of sexual orientation or gender identity will be enacted. Report from the Independent newspaper.
Chapter 12. Copyright and intellectual property law
Chapter 13. Freedom of Information Legislation
Pages 19-21 (Referred to in Chapter 1) & 428-429. The US Supreme Court decided not to hear the case of ACLU v Department of Defense over prisoner abuse photographs and video because President Obama signed legislation in October 2009 that blocked the release of material depicting the abuse of detainees in U.S. custody. The new law means the Supreme Court would not hear an appeal over the legal issue of whether the photos should be disclosed to the public. Reports from the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press in October and November 2009.
In November Supreme Court vacated and remanded a federal appeals court ruling that ordered the release of the images. The court ordered the appeals court to reconsider the case in light of a provision of the Homeland Security Appropriations Act signed into law by President Obama that specifically exempts the torture photos from disclosure.
The Homeland Security Appropriations bill Obama signed grants the Department of Defense authority to withhold the photos.
Index on Censorship’s Melissa Goodman reviews President Barack Obama’s decisions on freedom of information during 2009.
HOME PAGE
