Not sure if this is quite the right place.
A little more....The Guardian has been prevented from reporting parliamentary proceedings on legal grounds which appear to call into question privileges guaranteeing free speech established under the 1688 Bill of Rights.
I look forward to Jack's comments, if he has the time.The Guardian has vowed urgently to go to court to overturn the gag on its reporting. The editor, Alan Rusbridger, said: "The media laws in this country increasingly place newspapers in a Kafkaesque world in which we cannot tell the public anything about information which is being suppressed, nor the proceedings which suppress it. It is doubly menacing when those restraints include the reporting of parliament itself."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009...ing-parliament
How very interesting!
My reading of the article suggests that the gag can only apply to reporting of the question to be answered by a minister later this week as published in today's Commons order papers. From the Lord Denning ruling it would seem that once it is openly mentioned in Parliament then it can be reported.
How would a gag have been placed on the Guardian ... would Carter-Ruck have known in advance what the paper was going to report, or is this a general gag?
It's difficult to comment since the article gives no details to consider, presumably because it is forbidden from doing so.
Re: Guardian gagged from reporting parliament
The current issue of Private Eye mentions a case that is being gagged at the moment but has no details.
It seems to be a growing phenomenon. Cases which have a gagging order on them cannot have their details discussed. But now some of these are restrictive that you cannot report that there is even a case being heard in court.
So much for justice being seen to be done.
The mist clears.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009...ntary-questionGag on Guardian reporting MP's Trafigura question lifted
The question from Paul Farrelly MP which was subject to a gagging order related to the Trafigura toxic waste scandal
BBC report HERE.
Norwegian report (mostly in English) here. Check out the "Kjennelse The Guardian" link.
What a superb piece!
Alan Rusbrudger has written a nice summary.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...rs-up-textbook
Something I don't understand. If I was an unscrupulous bastard with no concern for the environment and a ship full of toxic waste, then surely I would just sail out into the middle of the Atlantic, pump it out into the sea, and scarper. Why on earth did they hire some cowboys to dump it on land in an inhabited area?
£ £ £ £Originally Posted by Trinoc
Maybe. But I'm sure they sailed just as far trying to hawk the stuff in the Netherlands, Norway and the Ivory Coast as they would have done taking it straight out into the middle of the Atlantic. If they had simply turned right at the end of West Africa instead of left and gone about the same distance they would have been well out in international waters and virtually undetectable.
I enjoin you all to check out this link if you haven't already read the PDF linked to in the Norwegian article.
Yay -- Carter-Fuck have thrown in the towel!
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009...ton-injunction
http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-file...ntonreport.pdf
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks