Board Appointment Independence
The appointment of the Board should also be an independent process, and the composition of the Board should include people with relevant expertise. The requirement for independence means that there should be no serving editors on the Board.
- IPSO states that its board has no serving editors and includes members with relevant expertise in areas including law, regulation, and public life (IPSO, About Us, accessed March 2026).
- IMPRESS states that its board includes no serving editors and has a majority of independent members (IMPRESS, Our Regulatory Scheme, accessed March 2026).
- The Press Recognition Panel confirmed in its third cyclical review of IMPRESS (2025) that IMPRESS continues to meet the Royal Charter criterion on board independence (PRP Cyclical Review, 2025).
How was this evidence gathered?
Response
Accepted in Part
Response
Accepted in PartThe Prime Minister stated on 29 November 2012 that he accepted "the principles that Lord Justice Leveson has laid out" for independent self-regulation, including "an independent board, a standards code, an arbitration service and the power to demand up-front, prominent apologies and impose million-pound fines." However, he rejected statutory underpinning, expressing "serious concerns and misgivings" about crossing "the Rubicon of writing elements of press regulation into the law of the land." The Royal Charter on Self-Regulation of the Press was granted on 30 October 2013, establishing the Press Recognition Panel as the recognition body. IPSO was established in September 2014 but has not sought Royal Charter recognition. IMPRESS was recognised by the PRP in October 2016. Source: https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/david-cameron-statement-in-response-to-the-leveson-inquiry-report
Published Evidence
Published assessments of progress from inspectorates, select committees, official progress reports, and other sources. Source type badge indicates whether each assessment is independent or government self-reported.
Both IPSO and IMPRESS have boards with no serving editors. However the fragmented system means neither body provides the single independent regulator Leveson envisioned.
View detailed findings
Board independence exists at both regulators but the fragmented regulatory landscape was not what the recommendation intended.