The Law Commission’s proposed overhaul of contempt laws is a breath of fresh air in a domain choked by ambiguity and inconsistency.
The current situation, as described by the Law Commission itself, is a disarray bordering on chaos. Social media’s unfettered commentary promotes discord around sensitive trials, like the ongoing Lucy Letby murder trials, while international news outlets publish what the UK media dares not. Take the example of the New Yorker article, detailing the inefficiencies of statistical evidence in the Letby trials – something that is not allowed in the UK in order to ‘comply with a court order’.
The crux of the reform lies in streamlining the categories of contempt. Replacing the archaic criminal/civil divide with clear-cut classifications – general contempt, breach of court order, and publication – brings much-needed clarity. This, coupled with the potential removal of imprisonment for minor free speech offenses, strikes a commendable balance between fair trials and robust public discussions.
The Attorney General’s unfettered power to initiate contempt proceedings by publication is also under scrutiny. The potential judicial review of this power or a permission-to-proceed system would inject much-needed transparency and accountability.
However, a key question remains: how receptive will Parliament be? While the Law Commission prides itself on having two-thirds of its proposals implemented into law, this reform will likely face resistance from those clinging to the status quo. Moreover, even if Parliament takes this on, finding the right balance between media freedom and the right to a fair trial will be a delicate act.
Ultimately, the success of this reform hinges on our collective appetite for change, for a more streamlined and effective system. It is also up to responsible media outlets to rise to the challenge and promote these proposals for increased media freedom in the UK. Ultimately, the Law Commission has laid out the groundwork and asks for public consultation on its proposals until 8 November 2024. It is yet to be seen whether this will gain traction or be forgotten in another flurry of news and political discourse.
How Gherson can assist
Gherson’s Litigation and Arbitration Team are highly experienced in advising on international commercial litigation and arbitration. If you have any questions arising from this blog, please do not hesitate to contact us for advice, or send us an e-mail. Don’t forget to follow us on X, Facebook, Instagram, or LinkedIn to stay-up-to-date.
The information in this blog is for general information purposes only and does not purport to be comprehensive or to provide legal advice. Whilst every effort is made to ensure the information and law is current as of the date of publication it should be stressed that, due to the passage of time, this does not necessarily reflect the present legal position. Gherson accepts no responsibility for loss which may arise from accessing or reliance on information contained in this blog. For formal advice on the current law please do not hesitate to contact Gherson. Legal advice is only provided pursuant to a written agreement, identified as such, and signed by the client and by or on behalf of Gherson.
©Gherson 2024