The case of Twitter vs Trafigura continues even if it is really the Guardian newspaper and Wikileaks who led this incredible story that illustrates the complete lack of freedom of expression accorded to nationals of the United Kingdom.
For those who haven't been following the case: The Guardian was trying to report Trafigura, a multinational oil and commodity trader, but has received threats of legal action from Carter-Ruck.This led to an injunction to stop them to publish their discoveries yet not only were they prevented from publishing their article but the injunction also prevented them from reporting about the order!
These ' superinjunctions ' are incredibly draconian power and a strong democracy, that they should be used only as a last resort in more limited circumstances – and when you use this would be public knowledge. However, now shows that not only are these injunctions granted by the judges with seemingly not a second thought for Justice open, but there is no record of the actions of the judge either.
The Parliamentary Secretary, Bridget Prentice said yesterday, in response to a parliamentary question written that aren't currently available information and the Court has no intention of collecting such data:
Paul Farrelly MP: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if he shall be to collect and (b) publish statistics on the number of not-to consider the orders given by the Court in each of the last five years.[293012]
Bridget Prentice: the information requested is not available.The Court collects data about applications, however, orders are not separately identifiable, and currently there are no plans to modify the database to do so.
I agree with wikileaks: "Now for journalists UK grow some balls and start to violate injunctions of censorship"
It's bad enough that superinjunctions to everyone here, but it is absolutely awesome that there are also recorded as often uses pressure must be put into court to record these opportunities and make the details public as urgent.
No comments:
Post a Comment