Guardian gagged from reporting on UK Parliament

[Sisyphus]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/oct/12/guardian-gagged-from-reporting-parliament

 

For the first time possibly ever, the media are being forcibly prevented from reporting proceedings of the UK Parliament. The gag order is directed at a specific question in the Commons, and prevents the Guardian from saying what the question was, who asked it, who it was directed to, or the reason for the gag order. I don't know much about British law, but a lot of people are saying it's a violation of the 1688 bill of rights, and a dangerous precedent. I hope they have a really good reason.

 

So, all you British people, what do we think of this? Is this acceptable?

[JillSwift]

I'm not British, but that still bothers the living hell out of me.

 

Please don't stand for this. I don't want our politicians getting any ideas.

[SH3RL0CK]

It would appear the gag order has been lifted:

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/oct/13/guardian-gagged-parliamentary-question

[Sisyphus]

Well, good! The question:

 

"To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of legislation to protect (a) whistleblowers and (b) press freedom following the injunctions obtained in the High Court by (i) Barclays and Freshfields solicitors on 19 March 2009 on the publication of internal Barclays reports documenting alleged tax avoidance schemes and (ii) Trafigura and Carter-Ruck solicitors on 11 September 2009 on the publication of the Minton report on the alleged dumping of toxic waste in the Ivory Coast, commissioned by Trafigura."

 

Rather ironic. I still don't understand how it was (briefly) gagged in the first place. But, hey, Streisand effect on Carter-Ruck. Hehe.

[JillSwift]

Was that gag order in violation of the 1688 bill of rights, after all?

 

 

Hip hip for the "Streisand Effect"!