Morning:
8°c
Law Lords back calls for BBC to release file on anti-Israeli bias
Paul Cheston11 Feb 2009
The Law Lords today backed an attempt to force the BBC to release an internal report which critics claim proves its news coverage has an anti-Israeli bias.
In a surprise move, the judges ruled by a three to two majority that a case brought under the Freedom of Information Act had been wrongly blocked in the High Court. The legal bid by lawyer Steven Sugar now returns to the lower court for further argument before a final decision is made on the case.
Mr Sugar, a commercial solicitor from Putney, argues that the 20,000-word report by senior news editor Malcolm Balen should be published as part of the debate about perceived bias in the BBC's coverage of the Middle East.
Mr Balen's report, commissioned in 2004, examined hundreds of hours of BBC television and radio broadcasts for alleged anti-Israeli bias. The BBC claimed that under the Act it is exempt from disclosing information held for the purposes of "journalism, art or literature".
It argued the report was always intended as an internal review to help shape future policy on Middle East coverage and was never intended for publication.
Mr Sugar initially took his complaint to the Information Commissioner, who agreed with the BBC that, although it is named as a "public authority" under the Act, it should not have to disclose material relating purely to its journalism.
Mr Sugar appealed and won the backing of the Information Tribunal.
The BBC then took the case to the High Court, where a judge concluded that the tribunal had no jurisdiction because the case fell outside the scope of the Act. The Court of Appeal upheld that conclusion.
The judges in both courts agreed with the BBC that it was a "hybrid" authority and that, in its capacity as holder of journalistic material such as the Balen report, it was not a "public authority" and therefore not subject to the provisions of the Act.
But today the Law Lords found the tribunal did have jurisdiction and that the case should be sent to the High Court for a decision on the other issues raised in the BBC's defence.
Lord Phillips said it was quite wrong to treat Mr Sugar as having made a request to the BBC other than in its capacity as a public authority, simply because of the nature of the information that he was requesting.
Lord Hope and Lord Neuberger agreed, in allowing Mr Sugar's appeal, and Lord Hoffmann and Baroness Hale were against it.
Reader views (3)
its been so obvious the bbc has a problem with being fair when i comes to israel. i can't recal them ever looking at the point of veiw from the israeli side of the fence.
- Gary, sydney australia, 12/02/2009 09:22
Report abuse
It wasn`t the BBC that killed 1000 civilians in Lebanon, or 1200 innocent women and children in Gaza. It was Isreal. What does bias have to do with a crime against humanity ?
- Clive Sutton, Dereham, UK, 11/02/2009 18:44
Report abuse
The bbc have for many years been bias on a number of issues, which has been passed on for many years, by promoting people within the bbc who share the same biases, Jewish , Conservative party, Israel,Margaret Thatcher, and others have been highlighted over many years. it is about time that this was brought out into the open and let the public who pay their wages see what they are trying to achieve by trying to enforce their beliefs, and bias on the general public, using the media as their vechicle.
- Barry Arnold, Chelsmford Essex , UK., 11/02/2009 16:38
Report abuse
