Authors:LAG
Created:2014-06-26
Last updated:2023-09-18
Moral certainties and phone hacking
.
.
.
Administrator
The trial of the News of the World employees accused of hacking phones has dominated the headlines in recent days. The prime minister on Tuesday this week rushed to make a public apology for employing Andy Coulson as his chief spin doctor and condemned him as a liar. In doing this he had potentially prejudiced the final phase of the trial and was rebuked yesterday (Wednesday) by the judge, Mr Justice Saunders, for his mistake.
 
This must be the first time in history that a politician has made such a serious error by making an apology too soon. LAG asks why did none of the advisers in Number 10 realise that by going public before all the verdicts had been arrived at, the prime minister was potentially jeopardising a criminal trial? It seems to indicate a very basic lack of legal knowledge at the heart of government which is concerning, but perhaps not surprising given the cuts they have imposed on both legal aid and the wider justice system.
 
For those who followed it, one of the striking features of the trial, was the disparity between the resources the defence had at its disposal, underwritten by News International (NI), and the publicly funded prosecution. At one point, towards the end of the trial Andrew Edis QC, prosecuting barrister for the CPS, had to offer to pay for the preparation of an index of evidence himself- according to the Guardian two junior counsel were eventually found to do this.
 
Would the result have been different for Rebekah Brooks and the other defendants who were acquitted, if the prosecution had more resources? My feeling is probably not- the jury got it right and the system worked. However, the government is endangering equality before the law by starving both prosecution and defence services of resources. This risks creating a justice system in which the rich and powerful can place themselves above the law.
 
Every democracy depends on the state having the necessary resources to ensure large multi-nationals such as NI and their employees are prosecuted when they act illegally. Equally though, we are all reliant on a free press and media to hold the state and big corporations to account and this is where the morality of what the journalists did can in different circumstances be less certain.
 
Invading the privacy of a family whose daughter had been abducted was clearly wrong, as was hacking celebrity’s phones- though not comparable with the suffering of Milly Dowler's family. However, sometimes the law has to balance an illegal act against the greater good, if the News of the World or, other newspaper had exposed corruption in a police force or wrong doing by politicians by hacking phones, while still illegal, such actions might have be morally and legally justified.
 
Steve Hynes