Revisited: Opinion: “Anonymity versus Openness – why do parties need to be named?” by Alison Macdonald

13 04 2010

In this feature we revisit some older posts which may still be of current interest.  This was first posted on 2 March 2010

The decision of the Supreme Court in the case of In Re Guardian News and Media ([2010] UKSC 1; [2010] 2 WLR 325) has been met with almost universal approbation by the media and legal commentators.  For example, one of the applicants, the freedom of expression NGO “Index on Censorship” said “This is an important decision. For the very first case heard by the Supreme Court to be held under conditions of anonymity would have been a blow to the concepts of a free press and open justice, which should be at the core of the court’s operations.”.  Similar points were made in the press release of another applicant, Article 19. Read the rest of this entry »