Leveson hears call for news outlets to face Motorman questions

A lawyer acting for alleged victims who are core participants in the Leveson inquiry has applied for media outlets to face two questions relating to their actions in response to Operation Motorman.

Operation Motorman was the 2005 investigation into the use of a private investigator by the media.

Addressing the inquiry today David Sherborne outlined two questions which he applied for core participant media organisations to answer.

The first asks what steps were taken in relation to those journalists who used the private investigator's services and secondly, what steps were taken to identify whether any of the information obtained through the private investigator "was and is still being used by the newspaper".

"These are questions which are relatively easy to answer because core participant media organisations have all the information they need."

He added these are "questions that need to be answered, and need to be answered before the end of the inquiry".

"What we are asking the Inquiry to do is to require these core participant media organisations to answer what we say are relatively straightforward questions which they have not done so far."

Leveson noted the value of the second question in that it "affects the here and now".

"And I can see an argument that, although I'm not descending into detail, the here and now is important," he added.

But he did ask Sherborne "to what extent, for example, your first question helps me solve what I've got to do".

Sherborne told the inquiry: "As important, I say, in terms of shining a light on what the practices, culture and ethics - and I apologise for repeating that phrase so often - but as important in shining a light on that as the actual facts of what Operation Motorman revealed is the way in which the newspapers themselves dealt with what was revealed."

He later added that the question for Leveson is "was it cover-up or clean-up once Operation Motorman had revealed what it revealed?"

Leveson ended the day's hearing by stating: "I can understand why the second question could legitimately call for an answer for all sorts of reasons, which would not trespass on the overall impact of the work of the inquiry but might come under the description 'fair enough'."

He added that he was "not ruling upon it" but could "see the point Mr Sherborne makes because it just provides another couple of dots for me to join up in the analysis".

"But on the other hand I'm sure you've understood that I am focusing very much on the recommendations that I have to make and that must be in the context not merely of Motorman, but also Caryatid and all that has flown since, including the many stories that we've had of less than satisfactory journalism to put alongside, I say immediately, the very fine journalism about which others have spoken."

The inquiry heard from counsel for Associated Newspapers Jonathan Caplan that he planned to reflect on Sherborne's application and would "certainly wish to respond, if I may say so, forcibly".

Free daily newsletter

If you like our news and feature articles, you can sign up to receive our free daily (Mon-Fri) email newsletter (mobile friendly).