APPENDIX 86
Memorandum submitted by Mr Ian Lucas MP
INQUIRY INTO PRIVACY AND MEDIA INTRUSION
I was very interested to see that your Committee
has commenced an inquiry into privacy and media intrusion and
I wanted to raise one particular aspect of this issue which has
arisen recently in my constituency.
In December, the Daily Mirror newspaper
ran a large number of stories concerning a 14 year old constituent
resident, who was having a relationship with a Turkish bar owner.
The story was given blanket coverage, including front-page headlines
and interviews with former alleged sexual partners of the Turkish
bar owner. Not surprisingly, the story was given huge publicity
locally as a result of the interest of a major national newspaper.
I was not approached by the family nor by the
child herself but was very concerned about the effect the coverage
would have upon a juvenile. I looked at the Press Complaints Commission's
Code of Practice with a view to considering a complaint and noted
at paragraph one, that the Code states "the press must not,
even when the law does not prohibit it, identify children under
the age of 16 who are involved in cases concerning sexual offences,
whether as victims or as witnesses". I also note that in
the preamble to the Code of Practice, the Code states "it
is essential to the workings of an agreed Code that it be honoured
not only to the letter but in the full spirit".
It seems to me that the Code of Practice has
had absolutely no effect in this case. She is a child who, if
she had committed an offence herself, would have been protected
from media intrusion by the law under the provisions of the Children
and Young Persons Act and the procedures followed in the Juvenile
Courts. However, there is no legal right of privacy for juveniles
who are not charged with any offence and the Daily Mirror
was able to disclose the child's identity with impunity. The rest
of the press followed suit.
It seems to me this is a huge failing in the
current Code of Practice. It is difficult to anticipate what effect
the level of media coverage will have upon this girl but it seems
to me that the newspaper was irresponsible in the way it dealt
with the story and that the Code of Practice was entirely inadequate
in protecting a vulnerable young person.
17 January 2003
| 
