News

Hacked Off respond to PRP discovery that the Panel has been “designated as within the Ministry of Justice boundary”

11/01/2019

Hacked Off

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

The Chairman of the Press Recognition Panel has written to the Government regarding the Panel’s apparent “designation” within the “boundary” of the Ministry of Justice.

The Press Recognition Panel is an independent body established by Royal Charter. Its role is to “recognise” regulators established by or on behalf of publishers of news-related material, which meet basic and specified standards of independence and effectiveness.

The Panel enjoys absolute protection from Government and political interference through several mechanisms, in order to protect the freedom of the press.

Most of the largest publishers have instead set up IPSO, an industry complaints-handler which does not meet the requirements for “recognition”, and whose rules can only be changed with the agreement of the Regulatory Funding Company (RFC). The RFC consists of 6 press executives, 1 editor, and 1 politician.

Hacked Off’s Director of Policy Nathan Sparkes said,

“The unimpeachable independence of the Press Recognition Panel is one of the distinguishing features of the Leveson model of press regulation, which sets it apart from the industry-controlled complaints-handler IPSO, whose rules must be agreed with a committee of newspaper executives and a working politician.

Putting a politician in the position of vetoing a complaints-handler’s rules, as with IPSO, is like putting Dracula in charge of the blood bank – an element of political control which is a danger to press freedom, and which the Panel is protected against.

“It would violate the terms of the Royal Charter, itself protected by primary legislation, for the Government to have any oversight of the Panel, through the Ministry of Justice or otherwise.”

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