Journalists could be hit with lengthy prison sentences if their stories upset the Government under ‘sweeping reforms’ to the Official Secrets Act, the newspaper industry warned yesterday.
Reporters given leaked documents would be treated similarly to spies and face jail sentences of up to 14 years under planned changes to the Official Secrets Act.
A consultation by Priti Patel ‘s Home Office closing this week wants to update the 1989 act to account for changes in the digital age, especially around data transfer.
Human rights groups and the Law Commission, which drew up the plans, called for a ‘public interest defence’ to prevent journalists with leaked papers being prosecuted.
But the Home Office insisted such a move would ‘undermine our efforts to prevent damaging unauthorised disclosures, which would not be in the public interest’.
Now the News Media Association, which represents the UK’s national, regional and local publishers, has said the plans will ‘deter whistleblowers from coming forward’.
NMA legal policy and regulatory affairs director Sayra Tekin said today: ‘As part of any thriving democracy, the public and a responsible press must be free to shed light on the state’s injustices.
‘The proposed measures will deter whistleblowers from coming forward with vital information which the public have a right to know and place a chill on investigative journalism which holds power to account.
‘We strongly urge the Government to reconsider these measures and instead work with the industry to place appropriate protections for journalism at the heart of the Official Secrets Act so that freedom of speech is enhanced by the new regime rather than weakened further.’
The organisation added that reforms could ‘criminalise public interest journalism by exposing journalists and whistle blowers to harsh new penalties’.
The NMA warned that proposals for stiffer custodial sentences and widening the scope for prosecuting individuals could ‘open the floodgates to the media and its sources being prosecuted despite acting in the public interest’.
It added that a public interest defence should instead be introduced to the regime to protect freedom of speech and a new Statutory Commissioner could be created to provide swift redress for whistleblowers caught by the Official Secrets Act.
It said the to the law ‘must not come at the expense of public interest press freedoms which do so much to expose wrongdoing’.
Veteran broadcaster John Simpson admitted yesterday that he ‘probably’ would have been prosecuted if this had been law at the beginning of his career in the 1970s.
And Laura Dodsworth, author of Sunday Times bestseller A State of Fear, said yesterday that ‘it shouldn’t only be the Government that decides what is in the public interest’.
She told talkRADIO: ‘This is in a bigger backdrop – we’ve also got the police crackdown bill which looks to avoid noisy and annoying protests.
‘Protests can be noisy and annoying, and that’s part of the point – and they don’t always work, they didn’t stop the Iraq War but we do have gay marriage. So protest is good, and it’s part of being in a democracy – as is a free press.
‘So the proposed changes to the Official Secrets Act could see journalists being jailed, being treated in the same way as spies, if they disclose leaked documents that are under the Official Secrets Act.
‘Now, the media should be there to hold the Government to account – it shouldn’t only be the Government that decides what is in the public interest, and that’s what the Government wants.’
And Mr Simpson tweeted: ‘Priti Patel’s Home Office wants to make it a crime for journalists to embarrass the govt by publishing leaked official documents. The maximum penalty would be 14 years in prison. This would put British journalists on a par with foreign spies.’
Quoting his tweet, ex-BBC Newswatch presenter Raymond Snoddy added: ‘And the government the equivalent of tinpot dictatorships everywhere.’
A Twitter user also asked Mr Simpson: ‘If this had been law at the start of your career, would you have been prosecuted?’ And he replied: ‘Probably.’
On a similar theme, Neil Mackay, writer at large at The Herald in Scotland, said: ‘I’d have been jailed under these changes to the Official Secrets Act for my reporting on the work of British intelligence in both Northern Ireland during the Troubles, and in the run up to the Iraq War. This is how democracies die: slowly and by 1,000 cuts.’
And Daniel Cuthbert, co-author of the Open Web Application Security Project, a project which works to improve software security, tweeted: ‘This isn’t getting enough exposure as it should.
‘What is being proposed is incredibly dangerous and is a direct attack against the free press. The official secrets act has a place but classifying journalists as spies to stem whistleblowing’
Omid Scobie, royal editor at Harpers Bazaar and friend of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, added: ‘This is how democracies die.’
Critics suggested that if the rules were in place now it could have led to a prosecution of the journalists who revealed last month that Matt Hancock was breaking Covid rules by having an affair with his married aide, because it relied on leaked CCTV footage.
The revelation prompted his resignation and the end of his marriage. But then the Information Commissioner’s Office faced criticism for searching two homes as part of an investigation into how the material emerged and found its way into The Sun.
And a Green Party spokesman said yesterday: ‘Proposed changes to the Official Secrets Act mean journalists who write articles that are embarrassing to the government could face up to 14 years in jail.
‘A free press is essential in a democracy. The government must do all it can to protect it.’
The National Union of Journalists said official secrets laws have been used to threaten journalists and editors to prevent them publishing stories.
It called on the Government to create a public interest defence for journalists.
An NUJ spokesman said: ‘Journalists have often proved to be the most effective champions of accountability, oversight and reform because the media has consistently exposed state misconduct.
‘The NUJ strongly believes that if the Official Secrets Acts are repealed with no public interest defence, it would have a chilling effect on public interest journalism and a consequential and detrimental effect on all UK citizens.
‘The proposals as they stand will have a detrimental impact on press freedom.’
Also among those who have criticised the proposed new laws are the Index on Censorship and the Open Rights Group, who view it as an attack on whistleblowers.
Click Here To Continue Reading
END
Be the first to comment