This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2013/may/26/leveson-courts-make-things-slower

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Leaving Leveson up to the courts? That will make things even slower Leaving Leveson up to the courts? That will make things even slower
(4 months later)
Shami Chakrabarti, battling director of Liberty, is an outsider – not an inside, quango-ish sort of person. Liberty works best when it batters at the doors of authority, not when slips into some soft seat at the table. So why did she join Lord Justice Leveson's slightly opaque team of assessors? And why is it only now that she's unleashed a Liberty response to the six months of wheeling, dealing and pizza-eating that has so far produced two rival royal charters but, as yet, no agreed solution on press regulation?Shami Chakrabarti, battling director of Liberty, is an outsider – not an inside, quango-ish sort of person. Liberty works best when it batters at the doors of authority, not when slips into some soft seat at the table. So why did she join Lord Justice Leveson's slightly opaque team of assessors? And why is it only now that she's unleashed a Liberty response to the six months of wheeling, dealing and pizza-eating that has so far produced two rival royal charters but, as yet, no agreed solution on press regulation?
Answers: She probably thought it would be a worthwhile/interesting/revealing experience. And perhaps she also feels sidelined in a debate where rival libertarian pressure groups – including a vibrant Index on Censorship – are making the running with a no-statutory-strings approach. But saying something, alas, isn't the same as saying something sensible.Answers: She probably thought it would be a worthwhile/interesting/revealing experience. And perhaps she also feels sidelined in a debate where rival libertarian pressure groups – including a vibrant Index on Censorship – are making the running with a no-statutory-strings approach. But saying something, alas, isn't the same as saying something sensible.
Why not sweep away the whole royal charter concept and its validation by recognition committees of the great and good, Liberty asks? Why not tell the press to get on with it and let the politicians draft their own regulation criteria, then ask the courts – not some confected body – to monitor and sanctify when necessary? There's clear value "in setting out broad principles that should guide the discharge of effective self-regulation such as effectiveness, fairness, objectivity, independence, transparency, credibility of powers and remedies, plus reliability of funding and accountability".Why not sweep away the whole royal charter concept and its validation by recognition committees of the great and good, Liberty asks? Why not tell the press to get on with it and let the politicians draft their own regulation criteria, then ask the courts – not some confected body – to monitor and sanctify when necessary? There's clear value "in setting out broad principles that should guide the discharge of effective self-regulation such as effectiveness, fairness, objectivity, independence, transparency, credibility of powers and remedies, plus reliability of funding and accountability".
Which sounds passably tempting until it's remembered that a dozen judges asked to decide on principles such as this might well produce a dozen conflicting verdicts as months of waiting turn to years. Just see the bizarre confusion – up to appeal court level last week – over whether Boris Johnson's baby from an extramarital affair can be mentioned in print or not.Which sounds passably tempting until it's remembered that a dozen judges asked to decide on principles such as this might well produce a dozen conflicting verdicts as months of waiting turn to years. Just see the bizarre confusion – up to appeal court level last week – over whether Boris Johnson's baby from an extramarital affair can be mentioned in print or not.
Let the courts decide? If Ms Chakrabarti finds the present delays wearisome, you may reluctantly bet that she ain't seen nothing yet. At least the current hiatus is political, as our government inertly wonders who, if anyone, shall be allowed to bring the two charters into single life. Throw in more trips up the legal ladder and somnolence will trump freedom every time.Let the courts decide? If Ms Chakrabarti finds the present delays wearisome, you may reluctantly bet that she ain't seen nothing yet. At least the current hiatus is political, as our government inertly wonders who, if anyone, shall be allowed to bring the two charters into single life. Throw in more trips up the legal ladder and somnolence will trump freedom every time.
Meanwhile, down a dusty Whitehall corridor, the charter "consultation period" is ending (with hacking complainants saying expected things) and the government has a month or so to decide what to do next. Time, at last, for negotiation. Time to bring the political parties realistically together to talk about points of difference, not posture. Time to remember that signing up for the official, unamended charter is a voluntary exercise – and that a regime nobody accepts is no regime at all.Meanwhile, down a dusty Whitehall corridor, the charter "consultation period" is ending (with hacking complainants saying expected things) and the government has a month or so to decide what to do next. Time, at last, for negotiation. Time to bring the political parties realistically together to talk about points of difference, not posture. Time to remember that signing up for the official, unamended charter is a voluntary exercise – and that a regime nobody accepts is no regime at all.
Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning.