Reject press laws

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2013/jan/08/reject-press-laws

Version 0 of 1.

Brian Cathcart (A subversion of Leveson, 7 January) deplores the idea of the prime minister and other politicians "meddling" with the future of press regulation in the UK, while simultaneously calling for statutory underpinning of a press regulator.

He also derides as mere "scruple" the view held by many, including Index on Censorship, that the independence of the press from political interference is a fundamental aspect of freedom of expression.

As Index on Censorship has pointed out since the beginning of the Leveson process, any statute, however "light-touch", will inevitably give politicians the ability to meddle with a free press. And the 24 paragraphs that Leveson put forward to describe his desired statutory underpinning anyway belie the idea that this is light-touch at all. The only way to avoid this meddling is to refrain from creating any law specifically drafted for the press.<br /><strong>Kirsty Hughes</strong><br /><em>Index on Censorship</em>