Monday, October 12, 2009
Guardian Gagged from Reporting Parliament
Guido gives us another gem
"According to the Guardian, despite the 1688 Bill of Rights, it has been gagged from reporting a question to be asked in parliament later this week. The gag was obtained by Carter-Ruck. Wonder if it is this question:
Paul Farrelly (Newcastle-under-Lyme): To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of legislation to protect (a) whistleblowers and (b) press freedom following the injunctions obtained in the High Court by (i) Barclays and Freshfields solicitors on 19 March 2009 on the publication of internal Barclays reports documenting alleged tax avoidance schemes and (ii) Trafigura and Carter-Ruck solicitors on 11 September 2009 on the publication of the Minton report on the alleged dumping of toxic waste in the Ivory Coast, commissioned by Trafigura."
Other reasonably say: "Solicitors backed up by wealthy clients are getting more aggressive and judges seem to be getting weaker. Hence the emergence of “super-injunctions” which rather than get you to defend an apparently defamatory statement in court, prevents you from making that statement at all just in case it is defamatory.
But it is certainly a milestone when a newspaper cannot report what is said in Parliament. And a milestone when I sympathise with the Guardian."
Further comments here, filling in some information.
IMO: I understand that the toxic waste dumping has been going on for many years. Disgraceful. Good thing: The cat is partly out of the bag. Bad thing: As I've said for years, UK judges are seemingly getting more and more corrupt.
"According to the Guardian, despite the 1688 Bill of Rights, it has been gagged from reporting a question to be asked in parliament later this week. The gag was obtained by Carter-Ruck. Wonder if it is this question:
Paul Farrelly (Newcastle-under-Lyme): To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of legislation to protect (a) whistleblowers and (b) press freedom following the injunctions obtained in the High Court by (i) Barclays and Freshfields solicitors on 19 March 2009 on the publication of internal Barclays reports documenting alleged tax avoidance schemes and (ii) Trafigura and Carter-Ruck solicitors on 11 September 2009 on the publication of the Minton report on the alleged dumping of toxic waste in the Ivory Coast, commissioned by Trafigura."
Other reasonably say: "Solicitors backed up by wealthy clients are getting more aggressive and judges seem to be getting weaker. Hence the emergence of “super-injunctions” which rather than get you to defend an apparently defamatory statement in court, prevents you from making that statement at all just in case it is defamatory.
But it is certainly a milestone when a newspaper cannot report what is said in Parliament. And a milestone when I sympathise with the Guardian."
Further comments here, filling in some information.
IMO: I understand that the toxic waste dumping has been going on for many years. Disgraceful. Good thing: The cat is partly out of the bag. Bad thing: As I've said for years, UK judges are seemingly getting more and more corrupt.
# posted by uv : 7:50 PM
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]
