News

Leveson responds to application for transparency on government core participants

09/05/2012

Newspaper
✕ Press claim

✓ The truth

Reach
Up to
people misled
Help us fight back

Join 71,384 others who are taking action to share the truth & raise standards in the press

1. Share the truth
Post this rebuttal on social media
2. Fund the fightback
Help us challenge more stories like this
Donate
3. Tell your MP
Send a ready-written email in 30 seconds
Email your MP

Lord Justice Leveson this morning addressed an application sent to the Leveson Inquiry by non-profit organisations, asking the judge to consider a ruling allowing government advisors early access to confidential inquiry documents.

Full Fact, The Media Standards Trust, Index on Censorship and English PEN made the application yesterday, urging Leveson to publish the names of any senior civil servants who will be able to see this material, to make sure the process remains transparent. It follows a ruling made last week, granting core participant status to David Cameron, Nick Clegg, Vince Cable, Jeremy Hunt, Michael Gove, Theresa May, Ken Clarke and George Osborne.

The judge said he would not publish names but expected government ministers granted core participant status to restrict their “confidentiality circle” to a minimum. He also said requests for redactions to evidence by ministers would be treated in the same way as those of other core participants.

He said: “There is the principled and strictly impartial approach for the redaction of documents submitted to the inquiry, which is in place in relation to evidence submitted by the government core participants, as it has been in relations to others.

“The practice adopted has worked well and I see no reason to take a different approach in relation to government core participants... It would more importantly give rise to a heighten risk of material which rightly deserved redactions being inadvertently disclosed in the public domain.

“I do not doubt the good faith of those who have raised these issues although in the light of the way that I have tried to conduct this inquiry throughout, I am somewhat concerned that it is thought that I might be party to reducing its transparency. Suffice to say I will not, and I would be surprised if I were asked to be.”

Leveson said if a minister seeks to provide a restriction notice, that will itself be the subject of discussion within the inquiry.

Hacked Off is funded by supporters, not newspaper owners. Help us take this to Parliament: give £10 a month.

Give £10 a month

Download the full report:

Download report

Queries: campaign@hackinginquiry.org

related Posts

Coverage of Professor Arday was not legitimate: the letter The Times refused to publish
Guest blog: Professor Paul Wragg replies to the letter published in The Times on 25 August defending the press coverage of Professor Jason Arday. The Times declined to publish his reply. We publish it here in full.
8/28/26
News
Defensive, evasive & hypocritical: The press reaction to the death of Jason Arday
The reaction of national newspapers to the death of Professor Jason Arday has exposed a brittle defensiveness at the heart of the press, and a determination to remain outside any meaningful accountability.
8/26/26
News
When media abuse of academics becomes the norm in HE
Following the death of Jason Arday, Corinne Fowler writes on the toll of media abuse on academics and what universities must do to protect their staff.
8/19/26
News
IPSO ties itself in knots over Telegraph complaint
Media lawyer Jonathan Coad complained to IPSO about a Telegraph article claiming Hacked Off wants "state control" of the press. IPSO's response contradicted itself within the space of a few paragraphs.
8/14/26
News