An institution of British justice has suffered a significant blow from Britain’s scandal-focused news media, a vocal parliamentarian, and a legion of ordinary users on the Twitter micro-blogging platform, all of whom have disregarded a gag order imposed by one of the nation’s leading judges.
An injunction had been issued to Manchester United star Ryan Giggs, preventing news outlets from disseminating allegations regarding his supposed affair with Big Brother contestant Imogen Thomas. However, in recent days, his identity has surfaced increasingly on the internet, prompting newspapers to eagerly await as Twitter users exchanged jokes about the sportsman’s alleged misconduct.
Knowledge of the situation spread: journalists were aware, fans were aware, and even Prime Minister David Cameron commented on morning television, calling it “rather unsustainable where newspapers can’t print something everyone else is talking about.”
Breaking an injunction carries significant legal implications, and the floodgates truly opened only when British MP John Hemming mentioned Giggs’ name in parliament. Members of Parliament enjoy absolute immunity, meaning they can voice their opinions without the fear of facing contempt of court.
Up to that point, the British media had largely refrained from revealing Giggs’ identity, choosing instead to use indirect references and obscured profile images. Nonetheless, the intensity built over the weekend, leading to hundreds of tweets each hour pinpointing Giggs as the individual behind the injunction.
During United’s match against Blackpool over the weekend, football fans openly mocked Giggs regarding the situation. Furthermore, one journalist inadvertently mentioned part of his name in a live broadcast.
Giggs had initially approached the British legal system seeking to dissociate his name from Imogen Thomas.
His intent was to maintain his anonymity; however, this strategy backfired as the case became increasingly emblematic of discussions surrounding what Britons refer to as “super-injunctions”—extensive legal measures that prevent journalists from writing about certain subjects, or even mentioning that they cannot discuss those subjects.
The injunction relevant to the soccer star’s situation was more accurately described as an “anonymised injunction,” which allowed the media to report on him, provided they did not disclose his name.
While gag orders can pertain to various issues, the majority of approximately 30 such injunctions granted in Britain since 2008 have primarily benefited men, with only three exceptions.
This trend has prompted legal experts to argue that wealthy and influential men are using these injunctions to shield their alleged sexual misadventures from public exposure.
In this environment, Giggs’ name gradually emerged over the previous weeks. Whenever his legal team attempted to seal a leak, several more sprang forth.
Earlier this month, Thomas petitioned Britain’s High Court to overturn the injunction but was unsuccessful; however, a mysterious Twitter account disclosed Giggs’ name anyway, garnering national attention.
On Sunday, Scotland’s Sunday Herald became the first British newspaper to violate the injunction by publishing a lightly censored photograph of Giggs on its front page. The image showed only his eyes obscured, and the paper boldly stated beneath his unmistakable face, “everyone knows” this is the athlete “accused of using the courts to silence allegations of a sexual affair.”
In its editorial, the Herald stated that it was “unsustainable” for newspapers to refrain from printing information that is accessible on the internet.
The publication clarified it wasn’t suggesting the athlete was involved in an affair, yet remarked, “The truthfulness of the allegations against him is irrelevant to this discussion.”
“The matter at hand concerns the freedom of information and an escalating discussion advocating for tighter privacy regulations.”
Giggs’ identity was fully revealed, and David Cameron appeared on live television, urging a “time out” and suggesting to “evaluate this situation properly.”
Culture Secretary Jeremy Hunt assured lawmakers that he would establish a committee to look into possible changes to the rules surrounding gagging orders.
“We seriously consider the importance of striking the right balance between privacy and freedom of expression,” he mentioned.
Regarding Hemming, he received a reprimand from Speaker of Parliament John Bercow for his outburst. A representative for Giggs had not yet responded to an email requesting comment.
by Buford Balony
