This whole ridiculous situation, all stems from the UK's judiciary and legal fraternity, interpreting a provision of the "Human Rights Act" in a perverse manner, one which has once again turned it into nothing more than a charter for terrorists, criminals, illegal immigrants, and now, very rich men who can't keep their trouser zippers up, but want to be able to get away with this infidelity by hiding it from their wives, partners and their children. However if you are caught having an affair, there is no particular protection against the consequences of your actions ... well not unless you have upwards of £50k to spend on lawyers who can 'make it so'. So instead of a storm in chip paper wrapper, we have a fundamental challenge to the UK's (and Europe's) commitment to free speech, which may have implications for everyone.
The current English Law prevents me from even mentioning the names of the two footballers (even though I know one for sure, and the other by speculation), who are currently trying to hide their infidelities behind its highly paid skirts ... but in Scotland, I could now do so, as they are in the public record ....there is also a very thinly disguised picture of one of the footballers on the front of the Sunday Herald newspaper, which anyone with even an once of web savvy could find on Google. He and one of the actors concerned in an earlier injunction, were effectively both outed a week or so ago in an English Newspaper comment article, which ostensibly commented on the actors latest facebook contents, and then referred to the footballer, as a model of the family life the actor should be following .... this farce has been played out across the press, with enough oblique or cryptic clues, for anyone with half an interest to be able to interpret.
There is a simple but fundamental solution ... we must enshrine as absolute, the 'Right To Free Speech' in the UK, in the same manner as in the US ... Nothing else will stop the lawyers from trying to gag first the press, then the Internet, and eventually all of us, to the favour only of 'politicians, celebs, and sportsmen', but to the permanent detriment of an 'open government and society'. We don't need lip service paid to free speech, we need a robust and positive defence .... David Cameron can be the Prime Minister to free us from the threat of the tyranny of the gag, or be the Prime Minister who stands by and sees this 'freedom' extinguished.
In the UK, only justice should be blind .... we the British public shouldn't be.
Post Script: A few hours after I posted this, a Liberal Member of Parliament publicly named one of the footballers - only a few million people knew this name, but, it was about time that the issue was brought into the public sphere so that we can talk about the 'privacy laws' that have been brought in by the back door in the UK. NB: In more of a joke, The 'Super Injunction' remains in place.
Odd that its technically illegal to print a name that the BBC and press can now freely use. Its backfired on RG somewhat bigtime LOL. I hope it means is head is screwed when the scum play Barca!
ReplyDeleteCome on Messi ... a Blue moon on Saturday
Mr G is an amazing footballer, every time he plays away he scores LOL
ReplyDeleteBut seriously, the use of super-injunctions by so-called 'celebs' is beside the point. Their use by mega-corporations to hide their misdeeds is far more of an issue, and nobody mentions that. Like Trafigura, who tried to hide their criminal pollution-dumping by trying to gag PARLIAMENT!!! Not a good idea, their lawyer should be shot. (only joking)
Must be the first time we've agreed on politics, A
Why no name if you know me? Anyway its not good web manners to name people, or guess their names on anonymous blogs, unless they name themselves in the profiles. Email me if you think that you know me ...
ReplyDeleteI have edited your comment to remove two names, because although the world is naming the footballer, there is still an injunction in place (which makes using the name illegal - see my monitoring rules 'illegal statements'), and this blog stays on the correct side of that particular line, after a right leaning blogger was arrested in the UK last year.
We don't have 'free speech' in the US sense in the UK, which is why I believe it should be introduced as a written and guaranteed right in the UK and EU. Censorship is the first step to dictatorship.
Oh, and all human rights lawyers should be shot (not joking), 'M'
The US right to Free Speech, isn't as absolute as some of us may believe.
ReplyDelete"Freedom of speech" in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the US Constitution, and also by many state constitutions and state and federal laws. however there are exceptions for 'obscenity, defamation, incitement to riot, and fighting words,[1] as well as harassment, privileged communications, trade secrets, classified material, copyright, patents, military conduct, commercial speech such as advertising, and time, place and manner restrictions' .... more exceptions than you might have guessed.
But, maybe crucially from a blog / Internet point of view, criticism of the government, or advocacy of unpopular ideas that people may find distasteful or against public policy, such as racism, sexism, and other hate speech are almost always permitted, as would be naming names (aka whistle blowing)