Downing Street Says » Super injunctions/privacy law

Asked what the Prime Minister’s response was to the Master of Rolls’ report on super injunctions, in particular his point about MPs flouting court injunctions by using Parliamentary privilege, the Prime Minister’s Spokesman (PMS) said that it was important to find the right balance between individuals’ rights to privacy on the one hand, and the right to freedom of expression on the other. The report being published today was very useful and we would consider it carefully.

The PMS went on to say that on the issue of Parliamentary privilege the report did not make any recommendations for changes to take place, but that it had looked at the issue and they would be talking to the Speaker of the House Commons and the Lords Speaker.

Asked if the Prime Minister shared the Master of Rolls’ concerns expressed during his press conference about MPs using Parliamentary privilege to flout court injunctions, the PMS said that he had not heard the Master of Rolls’ exact comments but the report did not make any recommendations on the principle of Parliamentary privilege as it would not be the committee’s role to do that.

Put that the Master of Rolls seemed to be saying in his press conference this morning that action could be taken against peers who flout court injunctions, the PMS said that the report stated that Article 9 of the Bill of Rights 1689 recognised and enshrined a longstanding privilege of Parliament’s freedom of speech and debate. It was an absolute privilege and of the highest constitutional importance. Any attempts by the courts to go beyond that constitutional boundary would be unconstitutional.

Put that the Master of Rolls had also attacked the role of the media at his press conference, the PMS referred to the report which said that media reporting of what was said in Parliament was only protected if it was a summary of Hansard published in good faith. This is something we would consider, along with the rest of the report.

2 Comments »

To Honourable Elected Members of Parliament,

I would like to comment on today’s revelations in the press regarding
comments from today’s long awaited enquiry into injunctions.

It is the right of the people in the United Kingdom to speak with
members of parliament freely and without fear of any Judicial
dictatorship preventing this from happening.

As an elected member of Parliament Parliamentary privilege is a right
of elected members of parliament to disclose to parliament any
miscarriages of justice or any wrongdoings you see fit to bring to
parliaments attention, again without fear.

It has been reported a member of parliament may be in contempt of
court for doing so. I am aghast at the thought of selected Judges
running the United Kingdom and bypassing elected members who are
serving the people, it,s bad enough when this happens to
whisleblowers, you may think as a member of parliament there are laws
for protection of whistleblowers,

Well think again a judge without evidence and listening to evidence
from only one party can make a decision in secret to place an
injunction against the whistleblower.

I place a scenario to you! consider more options. there are many available.

A lawyer asks a judge in secret chambers etc he says he has a client who
has broken the law ( murder for example ), ( or take your pick on anything
that a client has done which is illegal, ) and the lawyer wants an
injunction to prevent anyone finding out about his clients law breaking!!!

Normal people would say a judge wont give out an injunction, but how
do you know?

Consider any Judge is elected into position to uphold the law without
favour and make judgement open justice, this is for a reason,
transparency!

Without transparency a judge could have already granted such an
injunction as above protecting a person who has committed murder, I
can suggest this as injunctions are everywhere now.”

Well what about corporates who break the law and hide behind Hyper
injunctions, without police and regulators having access to
investigate wrongdoings the judiciary are now involved in a conspiracy
with the corporate to cloak events , these judges should be brought to
account by parliament, no corporate power should hide behind
injunctions.

As members of parliament you are one of 650 who hold the balance of
democracy in this country, we have the right to speak with members of
parliament without fear, and members of parliament have the right to
free speech without fear in parliament.

I ask you all to rise up and protect our freedom, demand The Prime
Minister to act. Do not let the Judiciary wipe out centuries of
parliamentary and peoples rights.

I declare I have a vested interest in this topic but for the moment
can not say what.

kind regards

Brian Bradford
Comment by Brian Bradford — 20 May 2011 on 11:52 pm | Link
There must be a champion in the wings of Westminster, waiting to take back free speech for the British people, surely ??
Comment by matt — 23 May 2011 on 12:28 pm | Link

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Post a public comment

Name (required)
E-mail (required)
(You must give an email address, but it will not be displayed to the public.)
Website
(You may give your website, and it will be displayed to the public.)

Comments:

This is not a way of contacting the Prime Minister. If you would like to contact the Prime Minister, go to the 10 Downing Street official site.

Privacy note: Shortly after posting, your name and comment will be displayed on the site. This means that people searching for your name on the Internet will be able to find and read your comment.

Original PMOS briefings are © Crown Copyright. Crown Copyright material is reproduced with the permission of the Controller of HMSO and the Queen's Printer for Scotland. Click-use licence number C02W0004089. Material is reproduced from the original 10 Downing Street source, but may not be the most up-to-date version of the briefings, which might be revised at the original source. Users should check with the original source in case of revisions. Comments are © Copyright contributors. Everything else is © Copyright Downing Street Says.

» Friday, May 20, 2011

Super injunctions/privacy law

2 Comments »

Post a public comment

Search

Supported by

Recent Briefings

Archives

Links

Syndicate (RSS/XML)

Credits

Enquiries