CODE COMMITTEE REPORT

By Les Hinton, Code Committee Chairman

A practical and vibrant Code is the foundation stone on which effective self regulation stands.

There is one central reason for this. Written by editors, for editors, it binds all of us in the newspaper and magazine publishing industry to high ethical standards, and to the jurisdiction of the Press Complaints Commission. No legal or statutory Code could achieve that. Our Code works because it has moral authority: no editor can attack the rules because we write them.

As I noted in my report last year, I have no doubt that the Code works. All editors throughout the industry know the same: they, like me, will be able to tell tales of the substantial number of stories which never see the light of day because to publish them would breach the Code.

Part of the reason for the success of the Code is that it is responsive to changing needs and circumstances - and that is why in 1999 the Code Committee tackled a number of important issues.

First of all, we needed to look at the issues which arose during debate over the Government's proposals on youth justice and criminal evidence. It was clear from those debates that there was concern among some people about the vulnerable position of children who are involved as witnesses to crime, or victims of it. Responding to that concern the Code Committee amended the Code to include a provision that, while it should not be interpreted as restricting the right to report judicial proceedings

"Particular regard should be paid to the potentially vulnerable position of children who are witnesses to, or victims of, crime."

This provision is contained in Clause 10 of the Code, which has been re-titled "Reporting of Crime". The other provisions in that Clause - on the identification of innocent relatives and friends of those convicted or accused of crime - remain unchanged.

The second key change mirrored fresh legislation - namely the Human Rights Act 1998. During the passage of that legislation, the Government amended the Bill to enshrine in it the special importance of freedom of expression. It seemed sensible to the editors' Code Committee to do the same in our Code - and also to cover in it a new point about material in the public domain. We therefore added a new sub clause to the public interest defence - making clear that:

"There is a public interest in freedom of expression itself. The Commission will therefore have regard to the extent to which material has, or is about to, become available to the public."

In one other minor change to the Code, the Committee added public interest exemption to Clause 7 of the Code which covers the identification of children in sex cases. This exception now allows for those very rare cases where a Court itself might direct editors to identify a child.

These changes show that the Code continues to be responsive and up to date. Credit for that must go to all the editors on the Committee, who put a great deal of effort into ensuring that the Code remains a practical and effective set of rules. While it is invidious ever to single out any particular individual, I am particularly grateful to my Deputy, Ian Beales - who, as a veteran of the original Code Committee, brings a huge bank of experience to our work.