恐侵言論自由╱英媒調查報告出爐 促設獨立監督機構
〔國 際新聞中心、駐歐洲特派記者胡蕙寧／綜合報導〕英國大法官萊維森二十九日公佈歷時一年完成的媒體調查報告，建議制定法律要求成立全新媒體獨立監督機構，避免「世界新聞報」竊聽醜聞重演。此項建議立刻引發英國政壇對立，向來與媒體關係良好的保守黨籍首相卡麥隆表態反對，但執政聯盟的夥伴自由民主黨黨魁克雷格 和在野的工黨黨魁米勒班則全力支持，一場政治風暴已是山雨欲來。
因應竊聽醜聞 英大法官歷時一年調查
在 媒體大亨梅鐸旗下的「世界新聞報」等小報爆發竊聽醜聞後，為回應民眾對媒體改革的期望，卡麥隆授命萊維森展開相關調查，並於二十九日發表這份厚達近兩千頁 的報告。萊維森在報告中雖坦承英國媒體做了不少好事，但他也痛斥英媒不顧行為守則、漠視抱怨，過去十年間，在太多時刻「對無辜人民的生活造成莫大破壞」。
他說，過去有太多「優先處理灑狗血新聞的魯莽行為」，不顧此舉可能對故事主角造成傷害；他也表示，各政黨的政治人物「與媒體發展不符公眾利益的密切關係」。他呼籲徹底修改英國惡名昭彰的媒體監督制度，「如果新聞業不抓住這次機會，我不認為受害者或民眾會接受。」
萊維森建議設立一個自我監督、獲法律認可的獨立機構，該機構人士不能來自媒體與政府，不過不僅媒體業先前已表示不同意設立監督機構，就連卡麥隆所屬的保守黨黨內同志，包括一些高階大臣，都堅決反對這種會傷害英國數世紀媒體自由之舉。
萊維森在記者會上表示：「儘管反對者這樣認為，但這些建議不是、也不能被歸類為針對媒體的強制規範。保護媒體自由會是政府的司法責任。」「現在球丟回給政治人物的球場了，他們必須決定由誰來捍衛這些守門人。」
跨黨派八十多名議員 投書反對監管媒體
報告出爐之後，卡麥隆隨即發表聲明，指萊維森的建議令他「十分憂慮與不滿」，他強調立法監督媒體恐侵害言論與新聞自由，而且立法過程曠日廢時，但要求媒體加強自律，現在就可以做到。
在竊聽醜聞爆發後，英國民調曾顯示，有高達七成的民眾希望政府建立起一個獨立媒體監督機構，具法律實權來規範媒體。其中六成的人希望卡麥隆能採取萊維森在報 告中的建議。但在萊維森報告公布前，英國不同黨派的八十多名議員，紛紛在報紙上發表公開信，呼籲不要對新聞自由建立法律規範，以免毀損英國三百年來的新聞 自由傳統。連廣受歡迎的倫敦市長強森都表示，自由獨立的新聞是英國的光榮傳統之一，呼籲人民要一起捍衛媒體的言論自由，戰鬥到底。
Watchdog needed to curb press 'havoc'
Lord Justice Leveson: "It must protect both the public interest and the rights and liberties of individuals"
A tougher form of self-regulation backed by legislation should be introduced to uphold press standards, the Leveson report has recommended.
Lord Justice Leveson said the press had "wreaked havoc in the lives of innocent people" for many decades.But the report's recommendations have divided the coalition government.
David Cameron said he had "serious concerns" over statutory regulation but Nick Clegg said he supported some form of legal underpinning.
And Labour leader Ed Miliband urged the government to accept the report in its entirety.
Speaking in the Commons, Mr Cameron said he broadly welcomed Lord Justice Leveson's principles to change the current system.
But he said: "We should be wary of any legislation that has the potential to infringe free speech and the free press.
"The danger is that this would create a vehicle for politicians whether today or some time in the future to impose regulation and obligations on the press."
Continue reading the main story
Proposed new press law
Would:- Create a process to "validate" the independence and effectiveness of the new self-regulation body
- Validate a new process of independent arbitration for complainants - which would benefit both the public and publishers by providing speedy resolutions
- Place a duty on government to protect the freedom of press
- Establish a body to regulate the press directly
- Give any Parliament or government rights to interfere with what newspapers publish
Deputy Leader Nick Clegg said
changing the law was the only way to ensure "the new regulator isn't
just independent for a few months or years, but is independent for
good".
Mr Miliband described the report as "measured, reasonable and
proportionate" and said Labour "unequivocally" endorsed its
conclusions. After the first of cross-party talks, a senior Labour source said Mr Cameron had agreed to ask the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) to draft a bill to implement Lord Justice Leveson's recommendations.
The source added Labour would push for a Commons vote on implementing the recommendation in principle by the end of January.
The Hacked Off campaign, which represents victims of phone hacking said Mr Cameron's "failure" to accept the full recommendations of the report was "unfortunate and regrettable".
Continue reading the main story
Founder Brian Cathcart said:
"Despite their years of abuses and outrageous conduct, it seems that the
prime minister still trusts the editors and proprietors to behave
themselves. It seems that the prime minister wants self-regulation all
over again."
Madeleine McCann's mother Kate said she hoped the report
would "mark the start of a new era" for the press, in which it treated
those in the news "with care and consideration".
Continue reading the main story
The prime minister knows he has given his opponents yet
another stick to beat him with. He also knows, however, that the press
are firmly on his side.
Bob Satchwell, executive director
of the Society of Editors said he hoped any British politician would
hesitate before doing anything that "might in the slightest way threaten
the freedom of the media".
"What happens 20 years down the line if you have a different
government, which was upset by the press again, once you've given away
the principle and put a law in place, it's very easy to amend."Mr Cameron set up the Leveson Inquiry in July 2011 after it emerged journalists working for the Sunday tabloid the News of the World had hacked the mobile phone of murdered Surrey schoolgirl Milly Dowler. The paper was subsequently shut down by its owners News International.
'Accountable press' Among Lord Justice Leveson's findings:
- All of the press served the country "very well for the vast majority of the time"
- The press must create a new and tough regulator backed by legislation to ensure it was effective
- This cannot be characterised as statutory regulation
- Legally-binding arbitration process needed to force newspapers to deal effectively with complaints
- Some "troubling evidence" in relation to the actions of some police officers - but no proof of widespread corruption
- Over last 30 years all political parties have had too close a relationship with the press which has not been in the public interest
- Former Culture Secretary Jeremy Hunt was not biased in his handling of News Corp's BSkyB bid but failed to supervise his special adviser properly
- The tabloid press often failed to show "consistent respect for the dignity and equality of women", and there is a "tendency to sexualise and demean" women.
He said the press had failed to properly regulate itself in the past, but he believed the law could be used to "validate" a new body.
Continue reading the main story
The statute proposed by Lord Justice Leveson is intended to do
three things: Enshrine freedom of the press for the first time;
recognise the new regulator; and ensure it can be can be audited to
confirm it is performing to proper standards.
It also provides incentives to publishers to sign up. Incentives are needed because no serving newspaper editor can serve on the new body. The proposals amount to the press being allowed to set up its own regulator, but not sit on it.
Principally the incentives involve setting up an arbitration service to settle disputes with members of the public over privacy and libel. If a publisher isn't part of that service and has to go to court, it could be deprived of very considerable legal costs, even if it won. And if it lost, it could be made to pay additional, exemplary damages.
These proposals on arbitration represent a very large carrot and stick and that, says Lord Justice Leveson, needs legislation. But in addition, there's a shotgun in the cupboard. The broadcast regulator Ofcom could act as a backstop regulator for those publishers not persuaded by the Leveson carrot and stick.
Analysis
It also provides incentives to publishers to sign up. Incentives are needed because no serving newspaper editor can serve on the new body. The proposals amount to the press being allowed to set up its own regulator, but not sit on it.
Principally the incentives involve setting up an arbitration service to settle disputes with members of the public over privacy and libel. If a publisher isn't part of that service and has to go to court, it could be deprived of very considerable legal costs, even if it won. And if it lost, it could be made to pay additional, exemplary damages.
These proposals on arbitration represent a very large carrot and stick and that, says Lord Justice Leveson, needs legislation. But in addition, there's a shotgun in the cupboard. The broadcast regulator Ofcom could act as a backstop regulator for those publishers not persuaded by the Leveson carrot and stick.
He said: "There have been too
many times when, chasing the story, parts of the press have acted as if
its own code, which it wrote, simply did not exist.
"This has caused real hardship, and on occasion, wreaked
havoc with the lives of innocent people whose rights and liberties have
been disdained. "This is not just the famous but ordinary members of the public, caught up in events (many of them truly tragic) far larger than they could cope with but made much, much worse by press behaviour that, at times, can only be described as outrageous."
Lord Justice Leveson said putting "a policeman in every newsroom is no sort of answer," because legal powers were limited to allow the press to act in the public interest.
However, the press is "still the industry marking its own homework", and needs an independent self-regulatory body to promote high standards, he added.
The Metropolitan Police said it accepted the criticisms made against it in the report.
Commissioner Bernard Hogan-Howe said he had already taken "decisive action" on the issues raised and his priority was now ensuring phone-hacking victims got justice.
The chairman of the Press Complaints Commission, Lord Hunt, said the press had to seize the baton and make sure it "doesn't let Lord Justice Leveson down".
沒有留言:
張貼留言