Broadcast Code and the Constitution (Tony Fraser, May 2005)

"What if the invasion of the privacy of the member of the public, who happens to be a government minister/official, results in his/her indictment for stealing millions of dollars from the national Treasury, or for exercising bias in the distribution of benefits to the public from the country's national resources? Of course such action will result in "harmful consequences" to the individual concerned, but what weight should be given to the "harmful consequences" to the individual compared to abuse of public resources? Clearly, the public interest and the right of the public to know must rule in such circumstances. It does not however mean that media have the unqualified right to deprive citizens of their privacy on flimsy bases. Courts, even in the US where regulations are limited, have ruled against media for unnecessarily and maliciously violating the privacy of individuals. In a judgment a European court ruled that "the right to the freedom of speech does not provide justification for the infringement of privacy; however the right to privacy is not absolute."