Publishers fear that a government measure to prevent jurors from seeking online material related to trials could pose a threat to press freedom.
According to The Times's legal editor, Frances Gibb, the problem has emerged in a little noticed clause in the criminal justice and courts bill now going through its parliamentary stages.
The bill creates a new criminal offence for jurors, punishable with up to two years' jail, should they conduct research prohibited by a judge.
But the measure also gives the attorney-general the power to require publishers to take down material from their website archives. Publishers would be issued with a notice ordering them to remove material that is deemed by a judge to prejudice criminal proceedings
If they fail to do so they would face prosecution for contempt of court.
Gibb, pointing out that the measure has caused alarm for both print and broadcast outlets, reports that eight media organisations have warned of the potential "chilling effect" on the operation and accessibility of news archives.
She quotes Bob Satchwell, executive director of the Society of Editors, as saying that the new power is objectionable in both principle and practice.
He said: "The bill could have a highly restrictive effect upon the freedom to publish far beyond that intended and ultimately be capable of creating black holes in the historic record."
Gibb raises practical problems too. Although the attorney-general may not wish to issue blanket notices, it is a likely result of lawyers making a variety demands about specific passages in articles.
Similarly, how would such a law work in relation to websites located outside the UK jurisdiction?
The current attorney-general, Dominic Grieve, believes the measures provide a defence for publishers who face contempt prosecutions. But Satchwell thinks the new criminal sanctions for jurors are deterrent enough.
He is quoted as saying: "We are not convinced that this is a growing problem — nor that it can't be dealt with through the new criminal offences, powers to search and seize electronic devices and strong juror directions and juror education."
The bill, having gone through the commons, is due to go to the lords soon. Media lawyers and executives are likely to press peers to strike out the offending clauses.
Source: The Times
