Now Carter-Ruck Hush Up is Forging the Parliamentary Agenda #carterruck #trafigura

You have got to hand it to Carter-Ruck, they are failing miserably to work for their current and future clients (should they get any) benefit.

Earlier this week they fought they would throw their hand in to hush the Guardian up about them publishing a Parliamentary Question relating to their clients Trafigura dumping toxic waste off the Ivory Coast. While they temporally silenced the mainstream media the blogosphere and Twitterverse jumped in.

Of course the next matter was the issue of the Bill of Rights in 1688. The freedom enshrined in that for Parliament to be reported in the press and the Lib Dem's Paul Burstow called for a debate on the freedom of reporting Parliament even before Carter-Ruck backed down initially. I'm glad to see that on Wednesday the Speaker John Bercow has scheduled a debate over the issue of super-injunctions and their attempt to keep the discussion of the law makers in Parliament out of the papers. He said:

"Debate in the house in such situations is governed by the sub judice rules which leaves the chair [the Speaker] with discretion to allow reference to cases within limits determined by the chair," he said. "I have exercised that discretion and a debate will take place on 21 October at 2.30pm on the 'effects of English libel law on the reporting of parliamentary proceedings'."

Even on Thursday of last week Carter-Ruck were still trying to get Parliament to keep schtum when partner in the firm Alan Tucker wrote to the Speaker, every MP and Lord on Thursday saying he believed a parliamentary debate should not go ahead because the case concerning the existing injunction was "sub judice". The following day his firms injunction was lifted.

Paul Farrelly the MP whose question caused the ructions last week said:

"Carter-Ruck have got a real nerve. Firstly they tried and failed to suppress news that they had obtained a gagging order against the Guardian. Then they tried to ask the Speaker to gag parliament itself. This affair has shown us that privileges protecting press freedom are sometimes only as strong as their assertion. The Speaker and parliament must stand up to people like Carter-Ruck who aggressively try to encroach on these freedoms."

On Wednesday it is the time for the House to do just that. Stand up and tighten the rights of the free press, yeah even if it allows the Daily Fail to print the words that come out of Jan Moir's keyboard. It is time to make that stance to stop law firms showing contempt of Parliament and trying to determine what can be discussed and therefore reported from within.

Parliament are the peoples' representatives not some big law firm, if they take an interest in the minutiae of something there is probably a reason. Sadly Carter-Ruck appear not to have learnt their lesson so it is right for Parliament to stress its authority and the right of the press to report back to the people of their proceedings.

Epic Fail by Carter-Ruck #carterruck #trafigura

As I reported earlier Carter-Ruck had an injunction to prevent this question:

61 N Paul Farrelly (Newcastle-under-Lyme): To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of legislation to protect (a) whistleblowers and (b) press freedom following the injunctions obtained in the High Court by (i) Barclays and Freshfields solicitors on 19 March 2009 on the publication of internal Barclays reports documenting alleged tax avoidance schemes and (ii) Trafigura and Carter-Ruck solicitors on 11 September 2009 on the publication of the Minton report on the alleged dumping of toxic waste in the Ivory Coast, commissioned by Trafigura.

Which was already in the public domain being reported in the Guardian. Under a barrage of Tweets using the #trafigura and #carterruck hashtags the lawyers have backed down. Not before many more thousands of people learn just what Trafigura were trying to hid. The D-Notice gagging the Guardian was lifted before the paper could get this raised in court.

The fight is not over though Lib Dem MPs were seeking an emergency debate of the Bill of Rights sovereignty over the reporting of matters in the Houses of Parliament, this I feel should still go ahead. You can sign the petition on the Number 10 Website here.

Transcripts From This Morning's Phone Log #Trafigura #CarterRuck

Carter-Ruck receptionist: (Anxious) Err....Hello Carter-Ruck partners of law.....may I help you?

Lord Alan Sugar: Yes it is Sir Alan, I mean Lord Sugar here, may I speak to Peter please, or someone else in charge.

Receptionist: (Relieved) Certainly Sir Alan. Hello Mr Carter-Ruck I have Lord Sugar on line one.

Mr Carter-Ruck: That's a relief you can put him through. Alan!

Lord Sugar: Peter. Look as you know I'm not one to beat about the bush.

Mr Carter-Ruck: Yes, of course Alan.

Lord Sugar: So to keep it sweet and to the point. I'm being retained by Trafigura. (there is a gasp on the line) And you're fired.

[Call Terminates]

When Parliamentary Reporting is Gagged in the 21st Century #Trafigura #CarterRuck #fail

People don't normally pay much attention to written questions in the House of Commons to the Secretary of State for Justice. But when one has been fielded, after 60 others, in this the first week of the new session and the Guardian is gagged from reporting that text people are likely to sit up and notice.

Bloggers from across the political blogosphere have rallied to the issue and the Twitterverse has lit up to many uses of the #Trafigura and #CarterRuck hashtags. So suddenly instead of solicitors Carter-Ruck trying to bury the fact that their client's actions are being questioned has actually highlighted the news to masses of people who would probably never have heard or read about it normally.

As many before me have pointed out the question from Paul Farrelly MP for Newcastle-under-Lyme is being gagged despite the 1688 Bill of Rights. One which provisions is "Freedom of speech and debates; or proceedings in Parliament ought not to be impeached or questioned in any court or place out of Parliament".

So obviously the lawyers are merely trying in vain to prevent the reporting of events in the House of Commons, thing is they cannot impeach the answer being published in Hansard. I expect that to be the most widely reported, or directed to answer in the history of the Parliamentary record being online.