Public Inquiry Recommendations

L1 Accepted in part

Leveson Inquiry (2012)

Independent Board Governance

An independent self regulatory body should be governed by an independent Board. In order to ensure the independence of the body, the Chair and members of the Board must be …

L2 Accepted in part

Leveson Inquiry (2012)

Chair Appointment Panel

The appointment of the Chair of the Board should be made by an appointment panel. The selection of that panel must itself be conducted in an appropriately independent way and …

L3 Accepted in part

Leveson Inquiry (2012)

Appointment Panel Composition

The appointment panel: (a) should be appointed in an independent, fair and open way; (b) should contain a substantial majority of members who are demonstrably independent of the press; (c) …

L4 Accepted in part

Leveson Inquiry (2012)

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 …

L5 Accepted in part

Leveson Inquiry (2012)

Board Member Composition

The members of the Board should be appointed by the same appointment panel that appoints the Chair, together with the Chair (once appointed), and should: (a) be appointed by a …

L6 Accepted in part

Leveson Inquiry (2012)

Funding Settlement

Funding for the system should be settled in agreement between the industry and the Board, taking into account the cost of fulfilling the obligations of the regulator and the commercial …

L7 Accepted in part

Leveson Inquiry (2012)

Standards Code Responsibility

The standards code must ultimately be the responsibility of, and adopted by, the Board, advised by a Code Committee which may comprise both independent members of the Board and serving …

L8 Accepted in part

Leveson Inquiry (2012)

Code Content Requirements

The code must take into account the importance of freedom of speech, the interests of the public (including the public interest in detecting or exposing crime or serous impropriety, protecting …

L9 Accepted in part

Leveson Inquiry (2012)

Internal Governance Processes

The Board should require, of those who subscribe, appropriate internal governance processes, transparency on what governance processes they have in place, and notice of any failures in compliance, together with …

L10 Accepted in part

Leveson Inquiry (2012)

Complaint Handling Mechanism

The Board should require all those who subscribe to have an adequate and speedy complaint handling mechanism; it should encourage those who wish to complain to do so through that …

L11 Accepted in part

Leveson Inquiry (2012)

Power to Hear Complaints

The Board should have the power to hear and decide on complaints about breach of the standards code by those who subscribe. The Board should have the power (but not …

L12 Accepted in part

Leveson Inquiry (2012)

Complaint Decision Responsibility

Decisions on complaints should be the ultimate responsibility of the Board, advised by complaints handling officials to whom appropriate delegations may be made.

L13 Accepted in part

Leveson Inquiry (2012)

Complaints Committee Composition

Serving editors should not be members of any Committee advising the Board on complaints and any such Committee should have a composition broadly reflecting that of the main Board, with …

L14 Accepted in part

Leveson Inquiry (2012)

Free Complaints Process

It should continue to be the case that complainants are able to bring complaints free of charge.

L15 Accepted in part

Leveson Inquiry (2012)

Power to Direct Remedies

In relation to complaints, the Board should have the power to direct appropriate remedial action for breach of standards and the publication of corrections and apologies. Although remedies are essentially …

L16 Accepted in part

Leveson Inquiry (2012)

Apology Placement Power

The power to direct the nature, extent and placement of apologies should lie with the Board.

L17 Accepted in part

Leveson Inquiry (2012)

No Prior Restraint Power

The Board should not have the power to prevent publication of any material, by anyone, at any time although (in its discretion) it should be able to offer a service …

L18 Accepted in part

Leveson Inquiry (2012)

Investigation Powers

The Board, being an independent self-regulatory body, should have authority to examine issues on its own initiative and have sufficient powers to carry out investigations both into suspected serious or …

L19 Accepted in part

Leveson Inquiry (2012)

Financial Sanctions Power

The Board should have the power to impose appropriate and proportionate sanctions, (including financial sanctions up to 1% of turnover with a maximum of £1m), on any subscriber found to …

L20 Accepted in part

Leveson Inquiry (2012)

Compliance Record Keeping

The Board should have both the power and a duty to ensure that all breaches of the standards code that it considers are recorded as such and that proper data …

L21 Accepted in part

Leveson Inquiry (2012)

Annual Report Requirements

The Board should publish an Annual Report identifying: (a) the body's subscribers, identifying any significant changes in subscriber numbers; (b) the number of complaints it has handled and the outcomes …

L22 Accepted in part

Leveson Inquiry (2012)

Arbitration Service

The Board should provide an arbitral process in relation to civil legal claims against subscribers, drawing on independent legal experts of high reputation and ability on a cost-only basis to …

L23 Accepted in part

Leveson Inquiry (2012)

Coverage of News Publishers

A new system of regulation should not be considered sufficiently effective if it does not cover all significant news publishers.

L24 Accepted in part

Leveson Inquiry (2012)

Open Membership Terms

The membership of a regulatory body should be open to all publishers on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory terms, including making membership potentially available on different terms for different types of …

L27 Accepted in part

Leveson Inquiry (2012)

Legislative Recognition Requirements

In order to meet the public concern that the organisation by the press of its regulation is by a body which is independent of the press, independent of Parliament and …

L28 Accepted in part

Leveson Inquiry (2012)

Recognition Body Role

The responsibility for recognition and certification of a regulator shall rest with a recognition body. In its capacity as the recognition body, it will not be involved in regulation of …

L29 Accepted in part

Leveson Inquiry (2012)

Recognition Requirements

The requirements for recognition should be those set out the recommendations set out above numbered 1 to 24 inclusive and more fully described in Part K, Chapter 7, Section 4 …

L30 Accepted in part

Leveson Inquiry (2012)

Periodic Review of Regulator

The operation of any certified body should be reviewed by the recognition body after two years and thereafter at three yearly intervals.

L32 Accepted in part

Leveson Inquiry (2012)

Multiple Regulatory Bodies

It should be possible for the recognition body to recognise more than one regulatory body, should more than one seek recognition and meet the criteria, although this is not an …

L34 Accepted in part

Leveson Inquiry (2012)

Compliance Reports and Senior Responsibility

In addition to Recommendation 10 above, a new regulatory body should consider requiring: (a) that newspapers publish compliance reports in their own pages to ensure that their readers have easy …

L35 Accepted in part

Leveson Inquiry (2012)

Kite Mark for Trusted Journalism

A new regulatory body should consider establishing a kite mark for use by members to establish a recognised brand of trusted journalism.

L36 Accepted in part

Leveson Inquiry (2012)

Code Review with Public Consultation

A regulatory body should consider engaging in an early thorough review of the Code (on which the public should be engaged and consulted) with the aim of developing a clearer …

L37 Accepted in part

Leveson Inquiry (2012)

Pre-litigation Complaints

A regulatory body should be prepared to allow a complaint to be brought prior to commencing legal proceedings if so advised. Challenges to that approach (and applications to stay) can …

L38 Accepted in part

Leveson Inquiry (2012)

Discriminatory Reporting Powers

In conjunction with Recommendation 11 above, consideration should also be given to Code amendments which, while fully protecting freedom of speech and the freedom of the press, would equip that …

L39 Accepted in part

Leveson Inquiry (2012)

Ring-fenced Enforcement Fund

A new regulatory body should establish a ring-fenced enforcement fund, into which receipts from fines could be paid, for the purpose of funding investigations.

L40 Accepted in part

Leveson Inquiry (2012)

Public Advice and Warning Service

A new regulatory body should continue to provide advice to the public in relation to issues concerning the press and the Code along with a service to warn the press, …

L41 Accepted in part

Leveson Inquiry (2012)

Strict Accountability for Published Material

A new regulatory body should make it clear that newspapers will be held strictly accountable, under their standards code, for any material that they publish, including photographs (however sourced).

L42 Accepted in part

Leveson Inquiry (2012)

Public Interest Guidance

A regulatory body should provide guidance on the interpretation of the public interest that justifies what would otherwise constitute a breach of the Code. This must be framed in the …

L43 Accepted in part

Leveson Inquiry (2012)

Public Interest Record Keeping

A new regulatory body should consider being explicit that where a public interest justification is to be relied upon, a record should be available of the factors weighing against and …

L44 Accepted in part

Leveson Inquiry (2012)

Advisory Service on Public Interest

A new regulatory body should consider whether it might provide an advisory service to editors in relation to consideration of the public interest in taking particular actions.

L45 Accepted in part

Leveson Inquiry (2012)

Source Transparency

A new regulatory body should consider encouraging the press to be as transparent as possible in relation to the sources used for stories, including providing any information that would help …

L46 Accepted in part

Leveson Inquiry (2012)

Whistleblowing Hotline

A regulatory body should establish a whistleblowing hotline for those who feel that they are being asked to do things which are contrary to the code.

L47 Accepted in part

Leveson Inquiry (2012)

Journalist Contract Protection

The industry generally and a regulatory body in particular should consider requiring its members to include in the employment or service contracts with journalists a clause to the effect that …

L85 Accepted in part

Leveson Inquiry (2012)

Plurality Focus on News

The particular public policy goals of ensuring that citizens are informed and preventing too much influence in any one pair of hands over the political process are most directly served …

L86 Accepted in part

Leveson Inquiry (2012)

Include Online in Plurality

Online publication should be included in any market assessment for consideration of plurality.

L87 Accepted in part

Leveson Inquiry (2012)

Plurality Measurement Framework

Ofcom and the Government should work, with the industry, on the measurement framework, in order to achieve as great a measure of consensus as is possible on the theory of …