Absolute Privilege: Absolute Responsibility

Press, Volume CII, Issue 30289, 15 November 1963, Page 15

Absolute Privilege: Absolute Responsibility

(N Z.P.A.-Reuter—Copyright) LONDON, Nov. 14. Journalists should disclose their source. of information if it is in the public Interest, the international jurist. Lord Shawcross, said today. Lord Shawcross. who was chairman of the second Royal Commission on he press, also called for revision of the operation of Britain libel laws. He was writing in the tenth annual report of the Press Council He said it would be a retrograde move if the liberty of the subject teas cut down by the exemption of journalists from the application of the rule of law Lord Shawcross said: “Clearly, the claim of privilege from disclosure of sources must not be used as

a cloak for concealing the absence of any sources to disclose. “Yet this is what might occasionally occur, even in the best regulated profession, if any such privilege were made absolute and so absolute privilege might lead to absolute irresponsibility." Lord Shawcross said few. if any, journalists would assert such a privilege in cases of treason. Few would claim It where the conviction of a guilty man for nurder or the acquittal of an innocent one was involved. "Once, however, that is conceded, the criterion must be one of tiw public interest.” he said. ' "Where the public interest requires that information as to sources should be given, then the State is entitled to ask for it

“And although the actual legal position is stricter, that in practice is what happens today. “Courts do not press journalists, any i ore than priests, to disclose their sources unless they are satisfied that the public interest demands it.” Lord Shawcross said a curb upon the right and duty of the press to disclose matters of public concern arose from the present effect of the law of libel. "What is at fault is not so much the substance of the law as its administration and operation.” he said. Lord Shawcross said there was a risk of prejudice by juries against the press in libel cases. He urged that libel actions should no longer be tried by juries—or that the judge alone should rule on the meaning of particular words of which complaint was made. At the same time, he added, the Court of Appeal should be given full power to re-

assess damages to any figure they thought reasonableeven although damages were awarded by a jury. The Press Council’s report noted further losses of newspapers during the year and said:— "This trend, attributed to the pressure of economic circumstances, is deplored, because newspapers play a vital role in the life of the community." The trend to concentrate more newspapers and periodicals into fewer hands was also causing the Press Council increasing concern—“a concern which is undoubtedly shared by the public.” The report .said the Press Council had 231 complaints brought before it during 1962-63. It adjudicated on 56 of them and another '8 were being investigated when the year ended. The Press Council is the industry’s voluntary watchdog of British newspaper ethics.