Index on Censorship and English PEN welcomed MPs’ robust response in yesterday afternoon’s adjournment debate to law firm Carter-Ruck’s challenge to Parliamentary reporting, and called on them to strengthen the public’s right to information by banning the use of so-called ‘super injunctions’ except in extreme circumstances.
Jo Glanville, Editor of Index on Censorship, said: ‘The widespread use of super injunctions is a serious threat to media freedom in this country – and to the fabric of open democracy. It is essential that this debate marks the beginning of reform, so that individuals and companies are no longer free to gag the press and prevent information that’s clearly in the public interest from coming under scrutiny.’
Jonathan Heawood, Director of English PEN, said: ‘The rights of Parliament are the rights of citizens. Unless Parliament is free to debate everything that MPs believe to be important, it can’t do its job properly. And unless the public is free to know what Parliament is talking about, we have closed government. Super injunctions compromise democracy and should be banned, except in extreme circumstances.’
Campaign against gagging won via Internet
MPs from the three main parties voiced their concerns about super injunctions and the impact of English libel law on free speech in an adjournment debate called by Evan Harris MP in the wake of the Trafigura affair, in which the law firm Carter-Ruck argued that a ‘super-injunction’ prevented the media from reporting on a Parliamentary question asked by Paul Farrelly MP.
They wrote to the Speaker of the House on 14 October suggesting that the issue might also be out of bounds for Parliament. Carter-Ruck withdrew the injunction in the wake of a global internet campaign.
