Eleven phone-hacking suspects referred to DPP
Director of Public Prosecutions Keir Starmer sets out guidance on prosecuting journalists, as he reveals he is considering four case files containing allegations of phone hacking.
Channel 4 News’ Home Affairs Correspondent Simon Israel said the four cases involve: a journalist and police officer for misconduct in public office, a journalist and six others for perverting the course of justice, a journalist on suspicion of witness intimidation and harrassment, and a journalist for allegedly breaching laws governing covert surveillance.
Keir Starmer also set out interim guidelines on the approach prosecutors should take when considering the public interest in cases affecting the media.
Scotland Yard’s wide-ranging investigation into phone hacking and corruption has led to the arrest of 46 people so far – with three told they face no further action.
The public interest served by journalists’ actions is a relevant factor in deciding whether they should be prosecuted in an individual case. Keir Starmer, DPP
Since a fresh inquiry into phone hacking was launched in January last year, there have been 22 Operation Weeting-led arrests, 23 Operation Elveden-led arrests and three Operation Tuleta-led arrests.
Former News of the World chief reporter Neville Thurlbeck and Rebekah Brooks, the ex- News International chief executive, have been held several times for different offences.
Under Operation Kilo – the inquiry into police leaks from Operation Weeting – Guardian reporter Amelia Hill was questioned last year under caution.
Balance
The DPP said the interim guidelines do not change the law but broadly reflect current thinking. Mr Starmer said: “Freedom of expression and the public right to know about important matters of public debate are an essential foundation of our society, but there are limits for those who cross the line into criminality.
“These guidelines will assist prosecutors in striking the right balance between those interests in cases affecting the media.
“Journalists, and those who work with them, are not afforded special status under the criminal law, but the public interest served by their actions is a relevant factor in deciding whether they should be prosecuted in an individual case.
“Under the guidelines, prosecutors are required to assess whether the public interest served by the conduct in question outweighs the overall criminality before commencing a prosecution. If so, a prosecution is less likely.”
The announcement also marks the launch of a public consultation on the guidelines, which will end on 10 July 2012.
Factors relevant in deciding whether media conduct has served the public interest
• Conduct which is capable of disclosing that a criminal offence has been committed, is being committed, or is likely to be committed.
• Conduct which is capable of disclosing that a person has failed, is failing, or is likely to fail to comply with any legal obligation to which they are subject.
• Conduct which is capable of disclosing that a miscarriage of justice has occurred, is occurring, or is likely to occur.
• Conduct which is capable of raising or contributing to an important matter of public debate.
• Conduct which is capable of disclosing that anything falling within any one of the above is being, or is likely to be, deliberately concealed.
(Source: Crown Prosecution Service)
