http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13158087
Quote:
He argued that Parliament, not judges, should decide on the balance between press freedom and privacy. The courts are using human rights legislation "to deliver a sort of privacy law", he warned. His comments follow a number of recent injunctions which have banned the identification of celebrities.
On Wednesday, High Court judge Mr Justice Eady agreed to issue a "contra mundum" order - effectively a worldwide ban - in the case of a man who sought to prevent publication of material about his private life.
Such orders were previously used to stop the publication of details about the killers of James Bulger, when a court ruled that there was a "strong possibility" that their lives would be at risk if they were identified.
A contra mundum order is intended to apply forever, and applies to everyone - as opposed to forbidding the publication of details by a specific newspaper or journalist.
Giving his reasons for making the order, sought by the claimant at a hearing on 6 April, Mr Justice Eady said the High Court had the power to stop anyone and everyone from publishing material to protect an individual's rights.
PR consultant Max Clifford said: "The privacy of the rich and famous seems to be exactly what the courts are determined to achieve. What we've got in this country now is a privacy law that wasn't brought in by Parliament but the judges have decided what they want and that's what they've achieved."
|
IMO, the newspapers should "publish and be damned" .....
