PRIVACY

Over the past 15 years the judicial arena in Britain has seen number of cases in which prominent figures including politicians, celebrities, sport personalities fought to protect their private lives from intrusion by the press which relies on its right of free press.
No one can predict the courts final verdict of cases involving privacy and publicity because the British legal system protects privacy under Article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights 2000. However, section 12 of the Human Rights Act 1981 requires courts when dealing with privacy cases to put a special weight to the freedom of speech, which is provided by article 10 of the Convention. For this reason, British courts consider the balance between the two legal rights when issue a judgment for such cases. This view has been supported in the work of McNea's Essential Law for Journalists (2009)

Formula One former President Max Mosley's privacy case against News of the World in 2008 is a clear example of such cases. Mosley won a privacy action against the English tabloid that published a story with pictures and video of him having sex with five women and alleged it happened in a Nazi theme. Despite he admitted taking part of the sex session, he denied any sign of Nazi scenario during that night.
The significance of this case was not due to the high cost of compensation awarded by the Sunday tabloid to Mosley for the breaching his privacy, but also because the decision drew concern among journalists of the future effect of such ruling on the press freedom. This essay will discuss why journalists believed it was fair to expose Mosley's sex life and if it was, in fact, right. If he had been taking part in a Nazi situation of which he was accused by News of the World, but failed to provide evidence, would that have been a sufficient defense to legalize publication?

Journalists play a significant role in feeding the public curiosity for news, gossips and secret information especially the ones involving celebrities, politics, crimes and sex. In the light of that, it is legitimate to bring Mosley's sexual activities to the public eye because the motor sport boss's life a public interest.
Since Mosley was appointed to govern the International Federation of Automobile in 1993, his profession as well as his personal life have been under spotlight and this allowed media to reveal his news; both the good and bad.

Mosley's confession in participating in sadomasochistic orgy with five women is sufficient to publish the story because it was true story concerning a "public figure." Article 10 of the European convection of Human Rights 2000 grants journalists the right to report express freely and reveals wrongdoing. Although there are some restrictions on this freedom such as not to impair the reputations of others or libel them, but David bank and mark Hanna (2009, p.2) McNea's Essential Law for Journalists stated 'journalists can rely on the public interests concept in legal case to deliver private news although there is no official definition of it in law.

Featuring Mosley's sexual activities in the paper would prevent the public from being mislead. However, Mosley presented a popular sport that put high weight on the good reputation and morals. His status as the FIA boss requires him to respect these standers. If he didn't, motor sport fans must know. Regardless of the News of the World claims of the presence of a Nazi theme, Mosley was a married and a father when had multiple sexes with prostitutes. This is against the honesty and that his sport promotes.
When journalists criticized the decision that came in favor to Mosley, they feared that Mosley's successful action will encourage other celebrities to bring up similar cases and believed such ruling is against the core of their responsibilities and will hurdle their responsible reporting and investigating on the expense of saving celebrities private lives because

This is partly true, but in my opinion the importance of reporting should be done in a degree that respects people's private life. If we consider the true part of the case in which Mosley had sex with five women, then I think the News of The World had gone too far. No matter how much a publication gives to its reporters, a reporter breach people right to privacy which is echoed by Article 8 of the Convention of Human Rights which states that everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life.

Mosley is like any other human being has the right to live his life the way he chose. What he did in his bed room and how he liked to enjoy sex is his personal freedom. It is not suitable for a respectful paper to report from others bed rooms.

The claims of the Nazi scenario which the News of The World couldn’t approve eliminated the public interest in the case. It was expected from the paper to deliver true and accurate information in order to justify its intrusion in Mosley's life.

Mr. Justice confirmed that there were no such act and as a result there is no interest and a need for allegation publish or circulate a video of Mosley's night.