All Posts Tagged With: "Data Protection Act"
WILL ANDY ALLOW THE TORIES TO DEFY MURDOCH?
Would a new Tory government defy the wishes of the Murdochs and press ahead with introducing custodial sentences for convictions under the Data Protection Act?
In early 2008, when the Labour government was about to enact a new Criminal Justice and Immigration bill, they were heavily leaned on by newspaper bosses, principally News International, to strike out Clause 77, which made persons found guilty of offences under the 1998 DPA liable to a term of imprisonment. The papers claimed that this would unreasonably restrain their journalists (despite the important provision of a public interest defence for bona fide investigative journalists).
Mr Brown, whom the Sun newspaper still purported to support at the time, caved in quickly and the clause, while not entirely removed from the bill, was relegated to the status of a mere order-making power, which simply gives the Justice Secretary the power ask Parliament (and other interested parties) at some later date if they wanted it activated.
Since the Sun declared last September for the other side (for all the help that may be), Mr Brown’s Justice Department announced the following month that it was launching a consultation paper with a view to reporting its conclusions on January 31st, and, if positive, putting the new DPA custodial penalties in place in April – this month. The results of the consultation have not been published and there is no sign that this important deterrent to data theft, especially by tabloid journalists seeking private details of celebrities’ lives, will ever be put on the statute book. In any case, in a month’s time there may be a Conservative Justice Secretary in place.
How easy would it be for him to pick up where Jack Straw left off and ignore the wishes of the Conservatives’ friends in Fleet Street?
The Shadow Justice Secretary since January 2009 has been Dominic Grieve. His relationship with News International is unclear. A rumour surfaced in the Observer last year that News International boss, Rebekah Brooks told her old chum and the Tories’ Director of Communications, Andy Coulson that they wouldn’t support the Tories unless Grieve was replaced as Home Secretary. “There is little doubt that the Sun’s support will give Murdoch leverage over a Conservative government, and that power is already being used,” the Observer added. This is a fuzzy story, since Grieve left the Shadow Home Office job in January ’09 when he became Shadow Justice Secretary, and Rebekah Brooks wasn’t elevated to her job as CEO of News International until September ’09 – unless, of course, Rebekah and the Tories had been pow-wowing for over 9 months before the deal was done.
However, there is clearly some lack of harmony between NI and the potential new Justice Secretary. In response to my enquiry as to whether, if he is the New Justice Secretary after May 6th, he would continue the consultation process over Clause 77 or abandon it, he said: “We agree with the Information Commissioner that custodial penalties should be available for deliberate or reckless misuse of personal data. The law provides the possibility of a defence for responsible journalism undertaken in the public interest and the Information Commissioner has advised that this defence should be made available.”
It looks as though under a new Tory government, there is at least one piece of the News International agenda that won’t be adhered to, if Grieve is given the Justice Department – in spite of the Murdoch’s wishes.
Popularity: 1% [?]
LET THE SWORD OF DAMOCLES DESCEND ON LAW-BREAKING HACKS.
In April 2008, the Government admitted that they had pathetically caved in to pressure from a powerful cabal of newspaper publishers – News International (Sun & Screws), Associated Newspapers (Mail) and the Daily/Sunday Telegraph – of whom they are manifestly terrified. They had planned to introduce jail sentences of up to two years for anyone – including journalists – who breached data protection laws by dealing in or obtaining personal information without the justification of public interest.
Richard Thomas, then Information Commissioner had been vigorous in his efforts to seal the breach in laws protecting privacy and, recognising the inexorable growth in data theft, had demanded that the penalty for offences under Section 55 of the Data Protection Act 1998 – currently fines of up to £5,000 in a Magistrates’ court, and unlimited in the Crown Court – be raised to a maximum of two years imprisonment. A clause to this effect, Clause 76 was embedded in the 2008 Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill. It was progressing through both houses of Parliament, and looked to be well on its way until, after the onslaught by the press, a shameful and compromising fudge was agreed by Downing Street. The clause would be put on the statute book, but then suspended, with the option for the Justice Secretary to invoke it at some future date.
The precise status of a suspended clause is obscure and the muddy waters stirred up by this last minute government U-turn made it unclear in what circumstances its invocation could be triggered. Before making such an order, the Justice Secretary must consult the Information Commissioner, such media organisations and other people he considers “appropriate”, and it could only come into effect if approved by an affirmative resolution by both Houses of Parliament – so not just a matter of pressing a button.
Although Richard Thomas, who had fought so hard for this new legislation, had been blatantly snubbed, he announced gamely, “Of course we would have preferred the clause to have remained unchanged, although we understand that the Justice Secretary will be able to introduce prison sentences if illegal activity continues. Our aim has always been to deter and this will now be a powerful Sword of Damocles hanging over the heads of anyone involved in obtaining personal data.”
After the astounding revelations of press misbehaviour, both old and new, triggered by the Guardian’s report this summer on the massive settlement agreed between PFA boss Gordon Taylor and the News of the World for their hacking into his voicemails, it’s more than clear that serious penalties – and not just fines which employers will pay – is required to deter effectively any of the many renegade hacks chasing after stories in any way they can in order to satisfy unscrupulous news editors.
It’s clear that the moment is more than overdue for the Sword of Damocles to fall. If the Justice Secretary wants to be taken seriously over Data Protection, he must act now.
Popularity: 1% [?]
The ICO get a Guilty Plea…
All power to the Information Commissioner, Richard Thomas who has instigated a fresh prosecution for offences against the Data Protection Act. Despite lack of resources, he has been resolute in bringing such prosecutions where he can, when he stands a chance of seeing a conviction.
Ian Kerr operates an organisation innocuously called the Consulting Agency which trades in personal, sometimes very long term personal information about British construction workers – particularly any items that might indicate a tendency to combat malpractice and injustice to members of the workforce.
Popularity: 1% [?]
Hello Peter
Listening to you at the Leveson Inquiry today, I thought you might be interested to have a look at ...
@Fleur,
I suspect he still has a job because he knows where the bodies are buried. 
Not much to write home about Neville? 
hi peter,great website. i bought your book news of the world and managed to get hold of CAMERA ASSASSIN 2 ...
they finally caught the little toad if he can lie at a small tribunal he certainly can rely on ...