Recommendation L48: Section 32 DPA Amendment
From An Inquiry into the Culture, Practices and Ethics of the Press, published 29 November 2012.
Recommendation
The exemption in section 32 of the Data Protection Act 1998 should be amended so as to make it available only where: (a) the processing of data is necessary for publication, rather than simply being in fact undertaken with a view to publication; (b) the data controller reasonably believes that the relevant publication would be or is in the public interest, with no special weighting of the balance between the public interest in freedom of expression and in privacy; and (c) objectively, that the likely interference with privacy resulting from the processing of the data is outweighed by the public interest in publication.
In brief (written by this site)
The Inquiry recommended amending the Data Protection Act exemption for journalism. In December 2017, Lord Keen of Elie, Advocate-General for Scotland, responding for the UK Government, addressed the recommendation regarding special weighting, stating that weighting for freedom of expression and information was "an essential way of ensuring that information that is in the public interest is not buried" (Lord Keen of Elie, Dec 2017). In November 2012, Prime Minister David Cameron stated that proposals reducing the special treatment afforded to journalists under data protection legislation required careful consideration (David Cameron response, Nov 2012; David Cameron, Nov 2012).
AI-generated summary of the record on this page, checked by a second model and automatic checks, 1 Oct 2026. The record below is the sources' own words.
Government response
In support of this, Lord Justice Leveson makes some important proposals. First, he proposes some changes to the Data Protection Act that would reduce the special treatment that journalists are afforded when dealing with personal data. We must consider this very carefully, particularly the impact that it could have on investigative journalism. Although I have been able to make only preliminary investigations about that proposal since reading the report, I am instinctively concerned about it.
How this response relates to the recommendation
Site note: The Prime Minister's statement to the House of Commons on 29 November 2012, the day the report was published, and his answers to members' questions on it (Official Report, HC Deb vol 554, from col 446). He speaks for the Government; the site files his words under the Prime Minister's Office.
Site note: The Prime Minister speaks of the report's proposed changes to the Data Protection Act together (col 448), without naming a recommendation. The same words are recorded on recommendations 48, 49 and 51, the proposals that would change how journalists are treated under the Act. He states no position on them, so the site records the response as noted.
Blanket government agreement does not establish acceptance or delivery by each addressee. Some response passages cover groups of recommendations.
Scope of the 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.
Delivery
UK Government says not accepted (13 December 2017)
Amendment 53 would remove the requirement to give special weighting to the public interest in freedom of expression and information. This is something that we consider an essential way of ensuring that information that is in the public interest is not buried due to the data protection regime that is put in place.
From: Data Protection Bill [HL], Report (2nd Day) (Continued), Lords Chamber, Lord Keen of Elie, Advocate-General for Scotland, responding for the Government
Source
Responsible bodies
Themes and tags
Who has spoken
- Prime Minister's Office, 10 Downing Street
Response - UK Government
Delivery statement