LEVESON INQUIRY

[Important as role of media has been in limelight in India too]

What was the Leveson Inquiry?

·         It was a public, judge-led inquiry set up by Prime Minister David Cameron to examine the culture, practice and ethics of the press. It was established in the wake of the phone-hacking scandal at the now-defunct News of the World tabloid.

What did it look at?

It looked at the relationship between the press and the public, including phone-hacking and other potentially illegal behaviour, and at the relationships between the press and the police and the press and politicians.

What did Lord Justice Leveson recommend?

He made broad and complex recommendations relating to how the press is regulated:

·         Newspapers should continue to be self-regulated - and the government should have no power over what they publish.

·         There had to be a new press standards body created by the industry, with a new code of conduct

·         That body should be backed by legislation, which would create a means to ensure the regulation was independent and effective

·         The arrangement would provide the public with confidence that their complaints would be seriously dealt with - and ensure the press are protected from interference.

Why did he recommend reworking press regulation?

·         The current system, where the press is self-regulated voluntarily through the Press Complaints Commission (PCC), is widely agreed to be doomed - the PCC itself has agreed to move into a "transitional phase" until a long-term replacement can be established.

·         The chairman of the PCC, Lord Hunt, wants a new "tough, independent regulator with teeth". He told the Leveson inquiry there was a willingness among publications for a "fresh start and a new body" based on legally-enforceable contracts between publishers and the new body.

·         The Free Speech Network, which represents many editors and publishers, is vigorously opposed to any state involvement in press regulation. It says the press exists to scrutinise those in positions of power, and it could not do that if those it was scrutinising had authority over it.