REPORT BY THE ACTING CHAIRMAN
by Robert Pinker, Acting Chairman

It would be folly to seek to pretend that the months since the publication of the PCC's last Annual Review have been straightforward ones. But the mettle of an organisation such as the Commission is to be found in the manner in which it conducts its day to day business - crucial to the general public - in turbulent times, as well as in calm seas. This Annual Review is testimony to that mettle.

I was struck by the remarks of HRH The Prince of Wales at the service in St Bride's, Fleet Street, earlier this year to mark three centuries of daily national newspapers. His view - indeed, it is mine - is that we sometimes neglect the mass of good news and seek to produce generalities out of transient difficulties. This Review is therefore unashamedly dedicated to some of the good news about the PCC that people hear about too little.
In particular, it highlights how we:

• resolved more complaints than ever before - and in record time;
• strengthened the protection for vulnerable members of the public; and
• dealt with more complaints from ordinary people - those who live their lives out of the public gaze - than in any previous year.

But far removed from the day-to-day business of serving the public - our core task - the months since the last Review have seen important, and by and large welcome, developments in the legal background against which self regulation operates. Three important cases - Anna Ford's attempted judicial review of the PCC, Naomi Campbell's action against The Mirror, and the case of A vs B & C (the footballer Gary Flitcroft) - have all had the effect, in my view, of buttressing self regulation.

These cases and their implications are spelled out in more detail later on in this Review. But from them all I draw one conclusion: that the Courts, in interpreting the Human Rights Act, are in my view disinclined to become involved in matters relating to privacy and the press Ð unless, of course, it becomes clear that the PCC is failing in its task of protecting the public. Both Mr Justice Silber's strong and comprehensive judgement in the case of Anna Ford - and also the Court of Appeal's ruling in A vs B&C - made it clear that the PCC has an important role to play in such matters. Crucially, the Court's judgement in this latter case, as well as in the case of Naomi Campbell, built in effect on the PCC's common sense case law fashioned as far back as 1995 - that celebrities who court publicity can undermine their long term rights to personal privacy.

These are welcome developments - but I am under no illusion about the heavy burden they place on the Press Complaints Commission and the effective functioning of self regulation. The task of the PCC in the years ahead is to show that we continue to be up to the difficult challenge of balancing the protection of individual privacy with the public's right to know (as well as delivering a first class service in all other areas of our work). Indeed, it is also up to the PCC to show that we will, in many ways, be tougher than the Courts in defining and outlining legitimate areas of public interest. I am confident that the pages of this Review will show that we are continuing to rise to these challenges.

In closing, I am conscious that this is the first Annual Review since 1995 without an introduction from John Wakeham - who was, of course, Chairman of the PCC throughout the entire period which this Review covers. There is a tribute to him in later pages, which I know all members of the Commission and its staff wholeheartedly endorse. His retirement - especially at a time of increasingly complex legal developments - has placed a huge burden on all my colleagues, and in particular on the PCC's staff. It is therefore right to record a tribute to Guy Black, Tim Toulmin and all their colleagues at Salisbury Square: their work is sometimes misunderstood, appreciated too little, but of huge importance to the thousands of people who complain to us every year.