Sir

Your editorial (April 12th) expresses concern about the consequences for freedom of speech of protecting privacy (Times Editorial April 12th). However, the fact that this raises genuine issues for the media does not justify ignoring the equally genuine and urgent need to protect privacy. The present regulatory framework, particularly the Press Complaints Commission, cannot properly protect privacy - a fact confirmed by the recent case of Peck v UK taken by Liberty to the European Court of Human Rights.

More important for the vast majority of people, however, is the increasing erosion of privacy by the police, secret services, government and other institutions. The appetite (official and commercial) and the technology for hovering up information on millions of people exists as never before. The systems, laws and institutions designed to protect our personal information against this assault are just not up to the job.

To protect our privacy and at the same time provide the authorities with the information they need about criminals and terrorists, we need to revert to first principles. People have a basic right to live their lives without unnecessary intrusion. The key exceptions are justifiable in the public interest - for investigative journalism, for the police and agencies investigating crime; and so on. A law that pulls together the concepts of individual privacy, free expression and freedom of information can genuinely protect them all - and protect us all from unjustified snooping by an over-zealous bureaucracy.


Yours
John Wadham
Director - Liberty