
The Guardian says this morning that it "has been prevented from reporting parliamentary proceedings on legal grounds which appear to call into question privileges guaranteeing free speech established under the 1688 Bill of Rights."Guido points to this question on the Commons order paper and wonders if it is the source of the trouble
Paul Farrelly (Newcastle-under-Lyme): 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.
Surely it can't be. For what English judge would dare issue an order banning the reporting of a legitimate question by an elected representative?
Post your comment
Nick Cohen is a columnist for the Observer and the London Evening Standard. He is the author of Pretty Straight Guys, What's Left?, and Waiting for the Etonians.
For more information and his previous blog, visit nickcohen.net
- More Contempt
- Prosecutor Lives to Fight Another Case
- Is this Contempt of Court? Or Parliament?
- Guardian Gagged from Reporting Parliament (And to hell with the Bill of Rights)
- Ex-Wives Get Too Much
- Dressed for Success
- Tories and Oligarchs
- Questions Surrounding the Scottish Islamic Foundation Persist Among Scottish MSPs
- Assisted Suicide Still Illegal
- Chris Grayling Promises to Get Tough on All Types of Extremists
- War Crimes and the British Establishment
- Supreme Court: More Video
- A revolution in Saudi Arabia!
- A message from Mullah Omar
- Tough Judge on Gun Crime
- Supreme Court Sold
- Russian around...
- Why Aren't Judges Protecting Us from Terrorists?
- Even Better


















