2 Apr 2012 | Leveson Inquiry
A former senior executive of the News of the World who was contracted to provide PR advice to the Scotland Yard has defended his police contacts.
Recalled to the Leveson Inquiry today, Neil Wallis brushed off the suggestion by Robert Jay QC that dining with officers might lead to a perception of “over-cosiness”, rejecting the notion that experienced officers such as Lord Stevens were “going to be seduced by me taking him out for steak & chips”.
He said his going out for dinner with a police officer was no different from a civil servant doing so with a businessman. “Have you ever had a working lunch with somebody more than once?” he asked the Inquiry. “It is the way of the world.”
Defending his trade, Wallis said: “Journalists live and die by their contacts. I nurtured these contacts because that’s what journalists do. ”
“I’ve built relationships with the police, politicians,” he said, “I haven’t put an arm lock on these people.”
He emphasised what he saw as a greater need for public officials to talk to journalists. “We need more talking, rather than less,” Wallis said, arguing it was healthier for democracy and a free press.
The Metropolitan police has faced criticism for awarding Wallis’s company, Chamy Media, a £24,000-a year contract to provide communications advice to the Met on a part-time basis from October 2009 to September 2010. Giving evidence at the Inquiry last month, former commissioner Sir Paul Stephenson said that it was with hindsight that he regretted the force entering into a contract with Wallis. Last week, the Met’s communications chief, Dick Fedorcio, resigned after disciplinary proceedings were launched against him, with an inquiry by the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) into Wallis’ contract finding that Fedorcio had a case to answer for gross misconduct.
Discussing the arrangement, Wallis said his value was providing “crisis management” to the force.
He also described his working relationship with senior officers at the Met prior to his departure from journalism in 2009. Wallis dated this back to the the tenure of Lord Condon (1993-2000) and stressed the setup was “corporate, strategic” and not about “a quick hit for a story”.
“One benefit of my relationship with senior offices was, if I rang and said ‘we have situation Met needs to get involved with’, they’d take it seriously because they’d know I’m a guy who wouldn’t mess them about,” Wallis told the Inquiry.
He added that he advised Lord Stevens on his application as Met commissioner, advising him to emphasise he was a “coppers copper”. Wallis stressed he himself had “strong views” on what was happening at the Met at the time in light of the Macpherson report into the murder of Stephen Lawrence, and that whoever succeeded Lord Condon was an “important appointment” for the force.
In his witness statement Wallis wrote: “It should not come across that my involvement in advising the senior police officers from Scotland Yard was entirely altruistic. There was something in it for me and my newspaper.”
He added that when the paper was running a highly public campaign, senior officers would write exclusive articles of give quotes in support which would go into the tabloid.
Wallis was arrested in July 2011 as part of Operation Weeting, the Met’s investigation into phone hacking. He was bailed and has not been charged.
Also giving evidence this morning were Stewart Gull of Jersey States Police, Paul McKeever of the Police Federation, and Mark Burns-Williamson and Nathan Oley, both of the Association of Police Authorities. Oley, the APA’s head of press and public affairs, said guidelines for press-police contact as suggested in the Filkin report would be “helpful” for the future.
“We’re entering unchartered territory,” Oley said, citing greater media interest in policing. He said the Inquiry’s outcomes were crucial to ensure a “free flow of information” by both parties.
The Inquiry continues tomorrow.
Follow Index on Censorship’s coverage of the Leveson Inquiry on Twitter – @IndexLeveson
2 Apr 2012 | Index Index, minipost
Reports have emerged suggesting a Chinese blogger who criticised a public official in his personal blog was secretly sentenced to prison in 2010. Voice of America has reported that Gao Yingpu, a journalist who has written for the Asia Pacific Economic Times, was sentenced to three years imprisonment in a secret trial. It is believed Gao was imprisoned following his criticism of disgraced Communist Party Secretary Bo Xilai. Gao’s wife confirmed her husband was arrested in July 2010 and was sentenced for endangering state security. His former classmate told local media that the journalist’s wife signed a written promise not to publicise the case.
2 Apr 2012 | Russia
The Federation Council of Russia has passed anti-extremism legislation which rights activists consider threatening to Kremlin’s public critics. It prohibits people who were charged with extremism to work with children in such fields as education, medical care, social security, sports and recreation.
According to lawmakers, the new legislation aims to protect children from radicalisation. But human rights activists and a number of trade union leaders have expressed their concerns over such law: together with drug and defamation legislation, anti-extremism laws in Russia are often used against Kremlin critics.
The term “extremism” is defined vaguely in Russian law, making it easy for judges to condemn innocent people. For example, if a person publicly criticises police for dispersal of peaceful protesters, he might then be charged with extremism for “incitement to social hatred” according to Russian law.
Another example of anti-extremism law misuse is seen through the prosecution of libraries staff and internet providers for allegedly promoting extremist literature. In practice, some libraries and providers do not have access to information from law enforcement authorities detailing which books are extremist. Examples of this were analysed in detail by SOVA Center for information and analysis, who described anti-extremist legislative measures in Russia as repressive.
Education union leader Andrey Demidov called the new legislation an “employment ban”, explaining that due to the vague definition of extremism and corrupted law enforcement and judicial systems, any teacher who openly criticises the government is likely to be charged on extremism and loose their job forever.
Elections in Russia are mostly held in schools, and most local election commission members are usually teachers. After allegedly fraudulent parliamentary elections, opposition activists appealed to teachers asking them not to participate in fraud. Many supported that request, which, together with high activity from election monitors, led to Vladimir Putin not winning presidential elections in March in Russia’s “two capitals,” Moscow and Saint-Petersburg.
1 Apr 2012 | Americas, Mexico
Wiretapping has become so fashionable in Mexico that it could pose a problem for freedom of expression. The latest victim of this type of espionage was presidential candidate Josefina Vasquez Mota, of the ruling National Political Action Party (PAN). A telephone conversation in which Mota is heard complaining that National Security Secretary Genaro Garcia Luna spends more time spying on her than on fugitive drug kingpin Joaquin Chapo Guzman was released publically and made available on video sharing site YouTube.
Many of the wiretaps released in Mexico in the past have involved politicians or aspiring candidates during electoral periods. But in a country at war with organised crime, and where the number of journalists killed because of what they write or know is among the highest in the world, it is worrisome that nobody is alarmed by this eavesdropping fashionista streak.
Access to eavesdropping equipment in Mexico is easily done. US and Mexican authorities use eavesdropping to get access to information on organised crime cases, which is of concern as many times these wiretaps are carried out with information that might not be totally correct. However, both US and Mexican authorities say the practice is important and useful as it has helped them nab high-level organised crime figures.
What worries journalists and other freedom of expression advocates, however is how is organised crime and corrupt government officials use wiretaps to curb a free press.
