Privacy part 2 **

What does the protection from harassment act 1997 cover?

Introduced to tackle stalking including behaviour that alarms or causes distress, provides both criminal and civil remedies, acts as an effective deterrent against invasions of privacy, frequently used by celebrities to obtain injunctions against paparazzi including Lily Allen, Harry Styles and Hugh Grant

What does the data protection act do?

It is the main legislation governing the protection f personal data in the UK. Personal data must be processed fairly and lawfully, sensitive data requires extra care. Data may be processed with the individual's consent. E.g. Naomi Campbell + Micheal Douglas received damages for data protection and wider privacy infringements. Journalists have a public interest exemption under section 32 of DPA

How has the data protection act been applied in media law?

Naomi Campbell used the 1978 act to win damages because a report revealed sensitive personal data about her physical and mental health. Key point under 1998 act, schools and public bodies sometimes refused to release information to the media, citing data protection. GDPR impact: rights over stored personal info have been strengthened by the GDPR. Post Brexit a new UK data protection act embeds these protections in domestic law. Journalistic exemption: material held for journalistic purposes is exempt and journalists are not required to remove it on request. Journalists must still keep data secure. E.g. encrypting contact lists or info stored on memory sticks

What happened in David Walliams’ legal case against BGT?

David Walliams sued the BGT production team after his off air comments were leaked, claimed misuse of private info and data protection breaches. As a result he lost a £1 million a year job and several book deals, the case was ultimately settled

What happened in the case PJS v News Group Newspapers Ltf (2016)?

The supreme court upheld a privacy injunction sought by the married celebrity PJS to stop publication of a story about a threesome. The sun on Sunday wanted to publish the details, the injunction applied only in England and Wales, even though the info had already been published in Scotland, US, Canada and online. The court ruled that further publication would breach the private lives of PJ, his partner and their children

What key issues are considered in recent developments on privacy suspects and the press?

Landmark cases and how they affect journalism, what the media can report about suspects, what can be reported about arrests and how to report without breaching privacy and risking legal action

What did the Cliff Richard case establish about naming suspects?

Mr Justice Mann stated the ruling was NOT a blanket ban on naming individuals under criminal investigations. A person under investigation has a reasonable expectation of privacy, this privacy can be overridden by countervailing factors such as: public safety. They need to flush out witnesses or victims, In Cliff Richards case no such factors applied, so privacy prevailed

What have recent landmark rulings established about suspects and privacy?

Several major cases have confirmed that suspects and arrested individuals have a right to privacy. The Sircri case is a recent example supporting this principle

Does that mean ALL arrests are private?

No it doesn’t- a visible arrest in a public place where the reason for the arrest is obvious (e.g. during a riot, after a seige, robbery, or hostage incident) is not likely to be private. Publishing details of such arrests is generally safe unless exceptional circumstances apply (e.g. the person is mentally ill) Key point- visible arrest- no reasonable expectation of privacy

What if police name the suspect?

If police officially release the name of a suspect or arrested person, the info is not private and can be safely published. However police rarely do this and usually wait until suspect is charged, this follows official policing guidelines

What do the college of policing guidelines say about naming suspects or arrested individuals?

Police will not name people who are arrested or suspected of a crime. Exception- they may name someone only in exceptional circumstances where there is a legitimate policing purpose such as: a threat to life, prevention or detection of crime and when police issue a public warning or appeal a bout a wanted individual

What challenges do privacy rules create for the media when reporting on suspects?

Privacy rules add significant complications for journalists, especially since police are already reluctant to identify suspects or arrested individuals. Under college of policing guidelines (introduced after leveson inquiry) Police avoid naming people to prevent unfair damage to reputation if they are never charged. This protection applies to: dead people, suspects not under arrest, arrested individuals who haven’t been charged and may never be. Important- these restrictions do not apply to people who have not been charged

What is the police position on naming people who are arrested?

Police say naming arrested individuals risks unfairly damaging their reputation especially if they are nver charged. Their approach aims to avoid this harm, however the policy does not prevent the media from relying on non- police sources to confirm identities

What arrest info can safely be published?

Police may release the following non private info which is safe to publish: gender of arrested person, age, where they live (town or city only), nature of alleged offence, date and general location of alleged offence, date of arrest, whether they are in custody, bailed or released w/o bail, bail date (if applicable and whether no further action is being taken

What do police guidelines mean for naming arrested individuals?

Police will provide general details only and will not name arrested person. They will not give details if those details could indirectly identify the individual. Naming an arrested person before charge requires approval, journalists must wait until police identify person on charge

What is the key issue in naming suspects?

Courts (Cliff Richard, Sicri) say suspects usuallt have a right to privacy, police won’t normally name suspects until they’re charged. But media named Wayne Couzens on arrest due to strong public interest (serving police officer accused of very serious crimes) NO legal action followed, but the case shows journalists must personally judge when public interest outweighs privacy