APPENDIX 17
Memorandum submitted by the Newspaper
Society
I am writing on behalf of the Newspaper Society,
the association of publishers of the local and regional press,
in response to your call for written memoranda from interested
parties on the provisions of the Armed Forces Bill. Our concerns
are shared by the Society of Editors. The Society of Editors represents
the views of members drawn from national and regional newspaper
editors and their counterparts in broadcasting and electronic
media.
The media are becoming increasingly concerned
about the extent to which statutory and private bodies seek to
obtain access to journalistic material, and the concomitant risk
of prejudice to confidential sources.
We note that clause 6 of the Bill provides that
the Secretary of State may, by order, enable a service policeman
to obtain access to excluded material or special procedure material
on "relevant residential premises" for the purposes
of an investigation of a section 5 offence.
Presumably the power would not permit service
policemen to obtain access to material held at a journalist's
own home or workplace. However, journalistic material which is
created by, or in the custody of, service personnel would be caught
by the provisions of the Bill. They might also affect war correspondents
who accompany UK forces into the theatre of operations. The Regulations
for Correspondents contained in Annex A of the Green Book ("Working
arrangements with the media in times of emergency, tension, conflict
or war") state that accredited correspondents "will
be subject to Service Law while accompanying an operational force,
and while travelling to and from the operational area in Service
transport". Journalists cannot be accreditedand cannot
enjoy the resulting privileged statusif they refuse to
sign an undertaking to comply with the Regulations. We are uncertain
as to whether, during the period that they are accompanying an
operation Force, premises used by an accredited correspondent
as temporary living accommodation would constitute "relevant
residential premises" under the Armed Forces Bill. We would
like to see the definition refined in order to exclude such accommodation
in those circumstances.
In any event, it is important that the powers
are drawn with clarity, and clause 6 fails this test. The clause
is vague, stipulating that on order "may" provide for
the safeguards of Schedule 1 of PACE to apply, with "modifications".
The explanatory notes do little to assist interpretation, and
seem to imply that the Secretary of State will make an order on
every occasion that a service policeman wishes to obtain access
to excluded or special procedure material! We would wish to see
any statutory instrument issued in accordance with clause 6 made
subject to the affirmative resolution procedure.
The residual power in clause 7 enabling a commanding
officer to authorise the conducting of a search is worrying, and
potentially open to abuse. It is not clear whether this would
operate to permit access to journalistic material under clause
6, but if so it would be tantamount to a senior police officer
sanctioning access under PACE. As you will appreciate, access
to journalistic material (whether confidential or non-confidential)
can only be obtained by civilian police on application to a circuit
judge. This is the case even where the material contains information
which is subject to a statutory obligation of secrecy and is likely
to be disclosed in breach of that obligation. Clause 8 provides
for review of the commanding officer's action by a judicial officer,
but this is retrospective and limited.
I anticipate that this submission will be circulated
to the Select Committee. I will also be raising these points with
the Rt Hon Geoffrey Hoon MP, Secretary of State for Defence. Please
do not hesitate to contact me if members require any further information
about the Newspaper Society, the society of Editors or their concerns.
February 2001
|