‘A draconian measure that would take us back to the dark ages’
The Society of Editors is leading the fight against section 40.
Its director Bob Satchwell said: “This is an issue that will affect everyone. The decision about the introduction of crippling costs orders would inhibit the ability of people’s favourite papers and magazines to inform their readers of issues that seriously affect their lives.
“Despite what you may have heard, the threat remains very real.
“Everyone, not just journalists and publishers, must respond to the consultation and write to their MPs to persuade politicians and the government to step back from a draconian measure that would take us back to the dark ages of press censorship, stifle freedom of expression and the public’s right to know what is done in their name and with their money.
“It is a battle which goes back to the 1600s, a century in which a king lost his head for ignoring the interests of the people.
“Those who seek to neuter the press and whistleblowers must not be allowed to win this fight for fundamental freedoms that are important for everyone but which are too easily taken for granted.”
Speaking to the KM, Mike Dodd, Press Association’s legal editor and co-author of McNae’s Essential Law for Journalists, added: “Introducing the penalties in section 40 of the Crime and Courts Act 2013 would not merely be a gross injustice, it would also pose a threat to the freedom of the press and to the very existence of many newspapers.
“There is no justification for trying to corral the press into the arms of a regulator such as Impress when Ipso is doing a good job and is now piloting an arbitration scheme.
“Provisions to make newspapers pay all the costs even when they win a case demonstrate just how utterly hollow are the protestations of ministers, MPs and so many others who proclaim their love of a free press while demanding that it be shackled at every turn.”
‘It would pose a threat to the freedom of the press and the very existence of many newspapers’