Skip to main content

You can't jail people for gossip, says MP John Hemming on Ryan Giggs injunction

The link is to Jonathan Walker's article on the Birmingham Post website.

This is a good summary. Most reports had lost track of the fact that enforcement activities had started on two injunctions. On both occasions against people who tweeted on twitter.


PoliticalHackUK said…
However, the journalist was not being pursued in relation to Giggs, but to a different case which is not quite so well known.

Have to say that I'm not convinced that this is the right way to defend parliamentary privilege. Just because you have the right to say anything you like in the House, does not mean that you should and there are time-honoured parliamentary rules about not prejudicing live cases. If the case has a superinjunction, then - in principle - it should be live and pending a full hearing (although that doesn't always happen).

Shouldn't you be upholding the rule of law - except for cases of clear injustice?

Popular posts from this blog

Standards Board and Ken Livingstone

The link is to the case where Ken Livingstone appealed the decision of the Adjudication Panel for England. The Standards Board and associated Adjudication Panel have done a lot of damage to democracy in the UK. The courts are, however, bringing them into more sanity. The point about Ken Livingstone's case is that it was high profile and he also could afford to appeal. The Standard Board has a problem in that those subject to its enquiries face substantial costs that they cannot claim back. This is an issue that needs further work. In essence the Judge found that what he said brought him into disrepute, but not the office of Mayor. We do need the machinery of the SBE and APE to concentrate on things that matter rather than people being rude to each other.