The Deputy Chief Justice, Lord Justice Judge, has reminded journalists of the public service they provide.

At the Newspaper Society/Press Gazette Law for Journalists conference, he said their “constitutional role” came from the freedom the press enjoyed – which were way above the rights of an ordinary citizen.

And he said it was only the media itself – by its own conduct, such as malicious or over-intrusive reporting – which caused the public to believe that press freedom should be constrained in some way.

He said: “Just as a judge is a public servant serving the community, so journalists and editors of newspapers and television programmes perform a public service. All their work has that additional dimension.

“I see no relevant distinction arising from the fact that whereas I am paid from public funds to exercise my constitutional responsibilities you are not, and that an independent press does not survive on good will alone. I know perfectly well that if your articles do not sell, you do not survive.

“Although the principle of press freedom is founded in the right of each individual citizen to think and speak freely, the freedom of the media is one of the constitutional defences which enables individual citizens to speak and think as we will, and to warn us when those freedoms are being threatened, so that, acting as a community, we may choose freely to accept or reject restrictions on our liberties.”

He said the idea of self-regulation was acceptable it if was shown to work.

And he added: “No-one can tell you what to print, what angle to choose.

“But you do have a responsibility to your own pride and your own ethic, and, critically, to the preservation of your institutional independence.

“You do have a responsibility to provide accurate, truthful information to your readers and listeners.”

To bring home the point about reporting the courts, he asked his audience to answer a short series of questions about whether sentencing was lenient, or harsh, and about the percentage of defendants jailed for different offences.

If those taking part got their answers wrong, he said they had to question where their information was coming from – and guessed it was not directly from the court.

He added: “I do wonder whether the way in which the media sometimes comments on the administration of justice does not significantly damage the confidence of the public in the principle of judicial independence, and if does, whether simultaneously there may not also be an erosion in the public’s confidence in the principle of an independent press.”

Back to the law index

Do you have a story about the regional press? Ring 0116 227 3122/3121, or
e-mail [email protected]