Inquiries Leveson Inquiry ReportedAwaiting response

Leveson Inquiry

The Leveson Inquiry examined the culture, practices and ethics of the British press following the News International phone hacking scandal.

Read the full description

The Leveson Inquiry examined the culture, practices and ethics of the British press following the News International phone hacking scandal. Part 1 made 92 recommendations on press regulation, data protection, police-media relations, and media plurality. Many recommendations were not implemented; the government rejected statutory press regulation in favour of the industry-created IPSO.

Where it stands

The inquiry has published 5 reports, most recently An Inquiry into the Culture, Practices and Ethics of the Press on 29 November 2012. The most recent government response on the record is Leveson Consultation Response, dated 29 November 2012. 12 of the 92 recommendations tracked here have no government response on the record yet.

ChairLord Justice LevesonJudge / Judiciary
Commissioned byCabinet OfficeCommissioned by the Prime Minister; secretariat provided via DCMS
Established28 Jul 2011
Final report29 Nov 2012
Duration1 year, 4 months
Total reported cost£5.4m
Inquiry website Terms of reference
Announced 13 Jul 2011
Hearings 14 Nov 2011
Final report 29 Nov 2012
Recommendations 92 tracked

Reports & recommendations

All 92 recommendations →
92 recommendations

Government response

Accepted 19
Accepted in part 46
Not accepted 5
Under consideration 5
Noted 5
No response yet 12
Latest statement by addressee
No statement from Press found in the sources searched: 38; another body’s finding on record for 38
No statement from UK Government found in the sources searched: 12
No statement from Information Commissioner found in the sources searched: 9
UK Government states no delivery position: 7
No statement from National Police Chiefs Council or Police found in the sources searched: 4; another body’s finding on record for 4
UK Government says not accepted: 4
Ministry of Justice says in progress: 3
No statement from Police or National Police Chiefs Council found in the sources searched: 3; another body’s finding on record for 3
No statement from Politicians found in the sources searched: 2
Department for Culture, Media and Sport says in progress: 1
Department for Culture, Media and Sport says partially delivered: 1
Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport (2017 to 2023) says not accepted: 1
Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport (2017 to 2023) states no delivery position: 1
Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport (2017 to 2023) says partially delivered: 1
Home Office states no delivery position: 1
Information Commissioner says completed: 1
Ministry of Justice says not accepted: 1
No statement from Ofcom found in the sources searched: 1; another body’s finding on record for 1
Ofcom says in progress: 1

"No statement found" means none was found in the sources searched, last checked 24 February 2026. Each figure is the latest statement from the body the recommendation is addressed to. Other bodies’ findings are shown on each recommendation and do not change these figures.

Data last updated: 14 Sep 2026 · Source
Checked against sources: 24 Feb 2026
About the blanket government response

PM David Cameron responded to all 92 recommendations with a single statement accepting them "in principle" or "in part". No per-recommendation response was published.

How to read this

Government Response tracks what the government said it would do (accepted, rejected, etc.).

Full methodology

Latest evidence

All 1 document →
Other · 1
Annex A: Terms of reference for the Leveson Inquiry
Other

Evidence & Impact

The Leveson Inquiry was established in November 2011 following revelations about phone hacking and other press misconduct. Lord Justice Leveson's report, published on 29 November 2012, made 92 recommendations covering press regulation, data protection, police-press relations, and media plurality.

The government's response was mixed. The Prime Minister stated on 29 November 2012 that he accepted "the principles that Lord Justice Leveson has laid out" for independent self-regulation but rejected statutory underpinning, expressing "serious concerns and misgivings" about crossing "the Rubicon of writing elements of press regulation into the law of the land." Of the 92 recommendations, the government accepted 19 (21%), accepted in principle 58 (63%), and did not accept 15 (16%).

The government's legislative response centred on establishing the Royal Charter on Self-Regulation of the Press (October 2013) and passing the Crime and Courts Act 2013. This created an alternative to Leveson's recommended statutory framework. The Press Recognition Panel was established under the Charter, though no major news publisher has joined a recognised regulator.

Specific reforms that followed include: the Data Protection Act 2018 incorporating some Leveson recommendations, including compensation for distress without pecuniary loss and requiring the ICO to produce a journalism code of practice; the College of Policing publishing guidance on media relations; and continued publication of ministerial transparency data.

However, a key provision - Section 40 of the Crime and Courts Act 2013, which would have created costs incentives for joining a recognised regulator - was never commenced and was repealed in 2024. The government stated this was because "this recommendation was contingent on a costs incentive framework that no longer exists."

Published evidence of progress is limited. Records indicate that 77 of the 92 recommendations (84%) remain listed as "Awaiting Action" with no documented evidence of implementation thirteen years after the report's publication.
Reforms Attributed to This Inquiry
- The Royal Charter on Self-Regulation of the Press was established (granted 30 October 2013), creating a framework for press regulation
- The Press Recognition Panel was created under the Royal Charter as the recognition body for press regulators
- The Crime and Courts Act 2013 was enacted, including provisions for exemplary damages against publishers not belonging to a recognised regulatory body (Sections 34-42 commenced 3 November 2015)
- The Data Protection Act 2018 (Section 168) provides for compensation for distress without requiring pecuniary loss
- The Data Protection Act 2018 (Section 124) required the Information Commissioner's Office to produce a data protection and journalism code of practice, published in 2023
- The College of Policing published Authorised Professional Practice on Media Relations in May 2013
- Quarterly publication of ministerial transparency data on meetings with media proprietors, editors, and senior executives (continuing since 2010)
- Ofcom developed a measurement framework for media plurality in 2015 and publishes regular Media Nations reports
Reforms Reversed or Weakened
- Section 40 of the Crime and Courts Act 2013, which would have created costs incentives for publishers to join a recognised regulatory body, was enacted but never commenced. The Secretary of State announced on 1 March 2018 that it would not be commenced and would be repealed. It was repealed by Section 50 of the Media Act 2024 (Royal Assent 24 May 2024)
Unfinished Business
- No published evidence has been identified for action on 77 of the 92 recommendations (84%), which remain recorded as 'Awaiting Action'
- The formal review of damages for privacy and data protection breaches recommended by Leveson was not conducted, though court awards have increased through case law
- The recommendation to remove the broad journalism exemption from data protection law was not accepted
- No evidence of implementation for recommendations on civil justice reforms beyond the repealed Section 40
Summary written by the tracker with AI assistance, 26 March 2026. Not part of the inquiry record; indicative, not authoritative.