PRIVILEGES OF THE PRESS

Southland Times, Issue 24055, 20 February 1940, Page 8

PRIVILEGES OF THE PRESS

COMMENT ON DUNEDIN INQUIRY “LEGAL OPINION SHOULD BE SOUGHT” In sporting journalism the Press throughout the British Empire has always possessed important privileges, privileges that have long been supported by legal decisions and from time to time extended by statute law, comments The Evening Post, Wellington. It is rarely that anybody has the temerity to attack these privileges, but a recent inquiry into some comment published by a Dunedin sporting critic might be viewed as an attempt to interfere with the established rights of the Press. In the latest issue of The New Zealand Journalist the propriety of the action of the Dunedin Jockey Club in instituting the inquiry is critically examined and questioned. At the inquiry held by the committee of the Dunedin Jockey Club, on the instigation of a stipendiary steward, it was unanimously resolved that the sporting writer of The Evening Star, Dunedin, committed an offence when he wrote: “In Australia jockeys who take wrong positions at the barrier are subject to a severe penalty, but in the Otago district there are one or two jockeys who make a practice of edging in towards the rails, and apparently get away without any reprimand. Several breaches of this rule went unchecked by the authorities at Wingatui on Saturday.” STILL NO RECOGNITION This decision was appealed against, and though it was allowed by the Dunedin district committee on the grounds that, “although it was admitted by Saunders that the statement was erroneous in the particular instance, it was not wilfully and corruptly made and therefore the rule does not apply,” there was no vindication of the right of a journalist to comment on sporting matters, and no suggestion that the jockey club committee had in the first place wholly

overstepped the bounds of its proper jurisdiction in calling the journalist before it for comment he had written ap.d his paper had approved for publication. Neither of the committees seems to have had the least idea that it was possibly attacking privileges that are ages old; or,’ if either of them did, then neither made the least gesture in its deliberations or decision that it recognized the existence of, or did not intend to interfere with, such privileges. The original inquiry was instituted under rule 338, sub-clause h, of the Rules of Racing, which provides that ‘‘every person commits a corrupt practice within the meaning of these rules who in New Zealand or any other country wilfully and corruptly supplies any false declaration, respecting any matter connected with racing, or directly or indirectly in any manner procures, instigates, or aids or abets the supplying of such false information or the making of such false declaration by any other person.” The Rules of Racing of course have no legal significance except in the internal control of the sport itself, and they cannot operate against ordinary rules of law. LEGAL OPINION SUGGESTED The article (written by a contributor) in The Journalist, after stating the facts as they stood before the appeal, goes on as follows: “Whether comment of the nature of that objected to by the club comes within the definition of a ‘corrupt practice’ is a point for lawyers to settle, and the writer of the article suggests that the Journalists’ Association would be performing a useful service to the Press and to the members of the profession if it sought a legal opinion on this noint.

“But irrespective of its legality, this incident raises a question of utmost importance to the freedom of the Press. If the Dunedin decision is sound, it means that racing journalists are indeed the servants, not of the public, but of the Racing Conference. If it be illegal for a journalist to comment upon such a common offence as cribbing positions at the barrier, journalists might just as well stay at home as go to the races for all the good they will ever be able to accomplish in the interest of the public.

“The writer is not a racing journalist nor even a consistent racegoer, but, in the course of a fairly long journalistic experience, he has had some contacts with the racing game and knows that there is a section of racing officialdom by which the Press is tolerated only as long as it does what it is told. In the interests of a free Press and in the interests of the dignity of the profession, the writer is strongly of the opinion that the action taken in Dunedin should be tested for its legality, and if it be found that the club was within its rights to hail a journalist before it for making fair comment upon the results of his own observations, then journalists should attack the law fiercely. “For various reasons the writer cannot reveal his identity, but he gives his assurance that he does not know the sporting writer who has been judged ‘guilty,’ nor has he ever worked in Dunedin.” INVERCARGILL T.C. NOMINATIONS TODAY Nominations for the Invercargill Trotting Club’s meeting close at 5 p.m. today.