According to Hugh Tomlinson QC, a future framework for press regulation should seek not only to protect press freedoms, but to balance several different rights, including the right to privacy and the public right to receive information.  For Tomlinson, it is important to consider who is doing the speaking and distinguish the rights of individual, natural persons from expression by powerful media corporations with commercial interests.

Tomlinson, as chair of Hacked Off, has been centrally involved in the negotiations over implementation of the Leveson Report. He argued that implementation of press regulation will require two general steps. First, it is up to political bodies to designate some form of press regulation. Second, the press needs to be willing to participate in it. That willingness may only arise when there is a united political front backing press reform. Nonetheless, the mixed political reaction to the Leveson Report suggests a state of disunity, Tomlinson explained. Indeed, the Labour Party has supported the recommendations, whilst Conservatives criticize the recommended framework as “crossing the Rubicon”.

Furthermore, the measure advanced by Conservatives – the institution of a Royal Charter – is inherently contradictory, Tomlinson points out. A Royal Charter, he explained, is nothing but a “posh way” to incorporate a new regulatory body in a manner that seeks to avoid a statute but is still vulnerable to government influence through the Privy Council. In order to avoid excessive governmental interference with the chartered body, statutory guarantees would be needed anyway, possibly to codify a requirement of parliamentary approval of any amendments.

But despite the conflicts and lack of unity, Tomlinson emphasized that the clock is ticking. Parliament is scheduled to go into recess later this month, and any legislation – including a complementary Defamation Bill – is expected to be finalized soon.

Tomlinson concluded with what is perhaps a critical point: The reality is that the majority of the public and Parliament in fact support press reform, whilst many Conservatives and members of the press do not. That alone is telling, and it may illustrate the penetrating influence of the press. According to Tomlinson, the press hold “enormous and decisive political power” in the debate and it is discomforting that it is one of the few industries not subject to regulation.

A victory here by the press would “itself demonstrate why press regulation is needed”, says Tomlinson.  “It shows that nothing has been learned in this process”..

Do you agree? Post your own thoughts about press reform below.

Jacopo Genovese, Alexandra Kulikova, Ying Huang and Paul Moura contributed to this post.