THE SUN SAYS

The Government must act NOW to protect the free press and keep our important investigative journalism alive

MPs are considering forcing newspapers to pay celebs and politicians who sue - even if cases are thrown out

The Sun

Published: 2:53, 17 Dec 2016
Updated: 23:02, 17 Dec 2016

IMAGINE a judge threw out a case against you because you were completely innocent, then made you pay every penny of your costs and the prosecution’s.

Such a clear injustice couldn’t happen here, could it?

Yes it could. MPs are considering imposing just such a law on the Press.

The idea that the press should pay court costs even when cases against them are thrown out is simply astonishingCredit: Alamy

We’ll explain why in a moment. But it would mean anyone could sue newspapers for libel on a whim. Even if their case was non-existent, and they lost, the paper would have to pay the entire bill.

A crooked politician could sue the publication that exposed him and bankrupt it even when he lost.

If MPs vote through the new Crime and Courts Act, papers could be bankrupted over legitimate investigative journalismCredit: Getty Images

Section 40 of the Crime and Courts Act would be the instant death of investigative journalism. Newspapers could no longer afford to expose scandals in the public interest and provably true.

The only safety would be under a new industry regulator, Impress — a dubious outfit bankrolled by Max Mosley, a tycoon with a vendetta against the Press.

Newspapers will never sign up to it. Chiefly because it is backed by a Royal Charter, giving politicians control over the Press for the first time since 1695.

This was the bizarre scheme cooked up by David Cameron’s panicked Government and the leftie celebrity Press-haters of Hacked Off, who hope to neuter newspapers they disagree with.

Hammer blow to freedom of speech

Section 40 is thus naked blackmail: submit to Mosley’s Impress, or else.

This is not the only threat from politicians, who seem oblivious to radical improvements in how newspapers are run, our already effective regulator IPSO and the Wild West of comment and fake news which Facebook and Google churn out unpoliced.

Read more about the campaign here:

They are also pondering a SECOND part of the Leveson Inquiry, into the Press’s relationship with the police during the phone hacking scandal.

Why should the public pay millions for that? Hacking was minutely examined in the first part and the criminal trials.

Politicians are also pondering a second Leveson inquiry to look into the relationship between police and press when phones were hackedCredit: Times Newspapers Ltd

But hacking was examined in minute detail in the first enquiry and there is no need to go back into this subjectCredit: Reuters

And any relationship papers once had with the police is ancient history. Cops barely now speak to the Press. They are so paranoid about leaks they abuse anti-terror laws to hack reporters’ mobiles.

The Government, in the form of Culture Secretary Karen Bradley, could yet trigger Leveson 2 and Section 40.

The first would be a monstrous waste of time and public money, the second an indefensible hammer blow to freedom of speech and our democracy itself.

She must reject both.