The Guardian Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.Anti-spam check. Do not fill this in! ====Gagged from reporting Parliament==== In October 2009, ''The Guardian'' reported that it was forbidden to report on a parliamentary matter – a question recorded in a Commons order paper, to be answered by a minister later that week.<ref>{{cite web |author=Table Office, House of Commons |url=https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmordbk2/cmob2.htm |title=Order Paper Part 2 |publisher=Publications.parliament.uk |date=12 November 2009 |access-date=6 March 2016 |archive-date=4 March 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160304221400/http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmordbk2/cmob2.htm |url-status=live }}</ref> The newspaper noted that it was being "forbidden from telling its readers why the paper is prevented—for the first time in memory—from reporting parliament. Legal obstacles, which cannot be identified, involve proceedings, which cannot be mentioned, on behalf of a client who must remain secret. The only fact ''The Guardian'' can report is that the case involves the London solicitors [[Carter-Ruck]]." The paper further claimed that this case appears "to call into question privileges guaranteeing free speech established under the [[Bill of Rights 1689|1689 Bill of Rights]]".<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2009/oct/12/guardian-gagged-from-reporting-parliament|title=Guardian gagged from reporting parliament|work=The Guardian|location=London|date=12 October 2009|last=Leigh|first=David|publisher=Guardian News and Media|access-date=13 December 2016|archive-date=5 October 2013|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131005045156/http://www.theguardian.com/media/2009/oct/12/guardian-gagged-from-reporting-parliament|url-status=live}}</ref> The only parliamentary question mentioning Carter-Ruck in the relevant period was by [[Paul Farrelly]] MP, in reference to legal action by [[Barclays]] and [[Trafigura]].<ref>{{cite web|url=https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmordbk2/91014o01.htm|title=Oral or Written Questions for Answer beginning on Wednesday 14 October 2009|work=UK Parliament|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20091016113956/https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmordbk2/91014o01.htm|archive-date=16 October 2009|url-status=dead}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|work=Press Gazette|date=13 October 2009|title=Guardian gagged from reporting Parliament|url=http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/node/44460|publisher=Progressive Media International|location=London|first=Dominic|last=Ponsford|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130513013753/http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/node/44460|archive-date=13 May 2013}}</ref> The part of the question referencing Carter-Ruck relates to the latter company's September 2009 gagging order on the publication of a 2006 internal report<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.wikileaks.com/wiki/Minton_report:_Trafigura_Toxic_dumping_along_the_Ivory_Coast_broke_EU_regulations,_14_Sep_2006 |title=Minton report: Trafigura toxic dumping along the Ivory Coast broke EU regulations, 14 Sep 2006 |publisher=WikiLeaks |access-date=6 March 2016 |archive-date=11 October 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171011225104/https://www.wikileaks.com/wiki/Minton_report:_Trafigura_Toxic_dumping_along_the_Ivory_Coast_broke_EU_regulations,_14_Sep_2006 |url-status=dead }}</ref> into the [[2006 Côte d'Ivoire toxic waste dump]] scandal, which involved a [[class action]] case that the company only settled in September 2009 after ''The Guardian'' published some of the commodity trader's internal emails.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/sep/16/trafigura-oil-ivory-coast |title=How UK oil company Trafigura tried to cover up African pollution disaster |work=The Guardian |location=London |date=16 September 2009 |last=Leigh |first=David |access-date=13 December 2016 |archive-date=2 February 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170202121632/https://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/sep/16/trafigura-oil-ivory-coast |url-status=live }}</ref> The reporting injunction was lifted the next day, as Carter-Ruck withdrew it before ''The Guardian'' could challenge it in the High Court.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2009/oct/13/guardian-gagged-parliamentary-question |title=Gag on Guardian reporting MP's Trafigura question lifted |work=The Guardian |location=London |date=13 October 2009 |last=Leigh |first=David |access-date=13 December 2016 |archive-date=7 April 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100407151912/http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/oct/13/guardian-gagged-parliamentary-question |url-status=live}}</ref> [[Alan Rusbridger]] attributed the rapid back-down by Carter-Ruck to postings on [[Twitter]],<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/libertycentral/2009/oct/14/trafigura-fiasco-tears-up-textbook |title=The Trafigura fiasco tears up the textbook |work=The Guardian |location=London |date=14 October 2009 |access-date=25 January 2010 |last=Rusbridger |first=Alan |archive-date=16 October 2009 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20091016065630/http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/libertycentral/2009/oct/14/trafigura-fiasco-tears-up-textbook |url-status=live}}</ref> as did a [[BBC News Online]] article.<ref>{{cite news |last=Higham |first=Nick |author-link=Nick Higham |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8304908.stm |title=When is a secret not a secret? |date=13 October 2009 |access-date=25 January 2010 |work=BBC News |archive-date=21 November 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201121073122/http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8304908.stm |url-status=live}}</ref> Summary: Please note that all contributions to Christianpedia may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here. You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see Christianpedia:Copyrights for details). Do not submit copyrighted work without permission! Cancel Editing help (opens in new window) Discuss this page