Mosley ‘using data protection law to gag the media’
Ex-formula 1 chief demands papers erase reports of orgy with prostitutes
MAX Mosley, the former head of Formula 1, has been accused of trying to gag the media, using data protection laws to “erase” his notorious sexual history.
Mosley’s lawyers have written to at least three newspapers, demanding that newspapers “block or erase” data that he believes is inaccurate.
If Mosley wins his case, newspapers would be forced to remove from the internet historic articles including reports on an orgy with prostitutes in 2008. Mosley won £60,000 damages from the News of the World for a breach of his privacy.
Mosley, a privacy campaigner and son of the fascist Oswald Mosley, is also attempting to stop newspapers reporting that he is bankrolling Impress, the only state-recognised press regulator. No national newspaper has joined Impress and many, including The Daily Telegraph and The Sunday Telegraph, are regulated by the industry-funded rival, the Independent Press Standards Organisation.
Experts said Mosley’s legal threat – if successful – would set a damaging precedent. Journalists are supposed to be exempt from data protection laws under the 1998 Act but Mosley’s lawyers argue the exemption does not apply in many of the articles about him.
Mark Stephens, head of media law at Howard Kennedy solicitors and a trustee of Index on Censorship, said: “This would set a very dangerous precedent if he won. It would drive a coach and horses through legitimate areas of inquiry and coverage by a responsible media.”
Sir Bill Cash, the Conservative MP, said: “The freedom of the press is paramount and it would be perverse to allow historical records to be removed on the basis of data protection. If data protection can be used to wipe out historical records, the consequences would be dramatic.”
The Information Commissioner’s Office declined to comment while the case was ongoing – albeit at an early stage – but pointed out the importance of the journalist exemption under the Data Protection Act. It does not provide newspapers with a blanket exemption and journalists must show the “data must be processed only for journalism”.
Mosley has provided £3.8million towards the running costs of Impress through two charities. Mosley is demanding that claims he “financed”, “funded”, or “bankrolled” Impress be erased from articles that continue to be published online.
Data protection laws are intended to determine how firms and other bodies handle private data held on individuals. The law has never been used before to attempt to restrict press freedom.
In the 2008 privacy case, Mr Justice Eady ruled the orgy was private and it was not “Nazi” themed as the News of the World claimed, so there was no public interest in publication. If Mosley wins his case, law reporting of the trial might have to be erased.
Mr Stephens insisted the principle of open justice should take precedence.