Protests by a regional newspaper that keeping a paedophile’s identity a secret was against the principles of open justice have been ignored, and the prisoner allowed to remain anonymous.

The Eastern Daily Press made submissions to Norwich Crown Court to name a convicted paedophile when the man was sentenced to a year in prison for making, possessing and distributing indecent pictures of children.

But the judge ignored the paper’s pleas and refused to reveal the reasons for his decision.

It was the man’s second conviction, following similar offences in 2002.

Assistant editor Paul Durrant said: "It is extremely worrying that a man can go through the courts system without the public knowing who he is – particularly when he is taken off the streets and sent to jail.

"The fact that all discussion about why this man should be granted complete anonymity has taken place behind closed doors makes it impossible for anyone to form a view on whether this is reasonable or proportionate and flies in the face of the principle of open justice.

"The public has not even been given any reasons for the order. We are simply told to trust that ‘they know best’."

Judge Simon Barham held a hearing behind closed doors to discuss whether the man’s identity should be revealed, and afterwards explained that he could not set out the reasons for his decision, made under Section 11 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981.

Media law expert Walter Greenwood said: "This seems a very dubious decision.

"At the very least it should be incumbent upon the court to give its reasons for this decision."

He said the ruling was against the principle of justice being done and also being seen to be done.

"The law under which this order was made should only be applied when identifying an individual would render open justice impracticable. In this case that would not appear to be the situation."