Council threatens Hackney Citizen with legal action
Town Hall seeks to silence evidence of its blunder over Boff’s mayoral bid
Hackney Council has today written to Hackney Citizen asking us to remove two audio recordings from our website.
The audio clips are recordings of a Hackney Council employee wrongly informing a caller that there was no Conservative party candidate standing in the Hackney Mayoral election.
The Council says that it will apply for an injunction and its legal costs if we do not comply with its request forthwith.
We take the view that it is in the public interest to disclose the way the Council was dealing with the issue, as evidenced by the audio clips.
The recordings can be found on our website here.
The letter to Hackney Citizen from Hackney Council’s legal department is reproduced below.
Follow up story here: Hackney Citizen launches fighting fund for legal battle with Council
© 2012 Citizen Media |
Designed by
Legally I believe they’re in the right, but in terms of the actual story this is only making them look even worse. When you’re in a hole, stop digging!
Offensive comment?
Is there anyone left at Hackney Council who doesn’t have ‘interim’ in their job title?
The council’s actions to prevent voters hearing from Andrew Boff are a disgrace.
Hackney residents deserve better.
Offensive comment?
hummm…
if what Boff did was “unlawful”, I am wondering why Hackney don’t tell the Citizen the exact section and Act that makes it unlawful.
But hey, we are always left expecting more from Hackney.
Offensive comment?
http://www.yourrights.org.uk/yourrights/privacy/other-types-of-surveillance/recording.html
Offensive comment?
From wikipedia:
A recording made by one party to a phone call or e-mail without notifying the other is not prohibited provided that the recording is for their own use; recording without notification is prohibited where some of the contents of the communication—a phone conversation or an e-mail—are made available to a third party.
However, I’d imagine there’s a public interest defence there – which this would surely fall under.
Offensive comment?
I’d have thought that the law was there to protect the employee, not the council.
So I suppose the question is whether it was the employee who initiated the action? Could you try a freedom of information request on who was involved in making the decision? Would be a bit slow though.
Are there any lawyers out there who can help you out?
Offensive comment?
Like Denny I’m worried that the “without consent” part might be a sticky issue. Still, the only people or entity who will be worse off is Hackney council.
Legalized gangsters is what they are.
Offensive comment?
Why don’t you people ask Shami C? She knows all.
http://www.yourrights.org.uk/yourrights/privacy/other-types-of-surveillance/recording.html
Offensive comment?
And like ben points out, interim head – I thought Gifty Edila was head of legal services at Hackney, is she not there any more?
Offensive comment?
Whoopsie. Looks like Hackney may have the law wrong. May follow this up.
Offensive comment?
seems suspect to me…
(here’s to a free press)
Offensive comment?
Hackney Council should celebrate the beacon of information that is the Hackney Citizen!
Offensive comment?
“and there is no public interest in such disclosure or the invasion of the person’s privacy is otherwise unjustified”.
case closed.
Offensive comment?
whoomp, there it is.
Hackney can’t even get their lame bullying right.
Offensive comment?
the funny thing is that if you ring the hackney service number they tell you that the call is being recorded. So if hackney tells you the call is being recorded do you have also to tell that the call is being recorded because they already know….
reminds me of that song “whispering grass don’t tell the trees because the trees already know”
Offensive comment?
I believe that now that this has become a ‘news story’ regarding the threatened legal action, the audio recordings are now classed as “news” and “in public interest” and thus are protected from removal.
Refer to the case of the scientologists demanding a tom cruise related video was taken down by youtube (?), when it became a news story, their demand to remove the video actually became second to the demand of the law to keep the video up so that people could see the news.
Offensive comment?
Assuming the Boffmeister has no objections, why doesn’t everyone who has a blog or website post the “Boff-doesn’t-exist” audio recording on their own website? If there are scores or hundreds of websites out there, hosting copies of the recording, our Interim Head may have to give up and eat humble pie.
Can this get more Orwellian?
Offensive comment?
Don’t forget to buy your copy of Private Eye tomorrow (Wednesday) and check out the Rotten Boroughs page. Tee hee!
Offensive comment?
I can’t believe that in an attempt to discredit the Council Hackney Citizen is overlooking the fact that some poor lowly paid staff who was trying to earn an honest living is being made a fool of instead.
How can you be partisan and support a candidate in the elections? I got my copy of the mayoral booklet and noticed 4 of the candidates managed to get their message in there without a fuss. Why couldn’t Boff get his act together and do the same? After all I understand he is GLA member?
Offensive comment?
Which “lowly paid staff” is being made a fool of?
The call centre operative remains anonymous.
The only people making fools of themselves are Hackney Labour.
Offensive comment?
Would that it were legal and democratic.
Offensive comment?
I don’t think Kristin understands the point.
Boff was not allowed to include his statement because the incumbent [...] deemed that it criticised them.
Whereas it was a statement of fact – albeit unflattering to the council.
I don’t think anyone is holding the staff member to account – actually for that matter no one is holding the council to account either.
Democracy only matters to socialists if you vote the right way of course.
Offensive comment?
Will be writing on this extraordinary threat this week.
Please send any relevant material to me at jackofkent [@] gmail.com
Offensive comment?
I’m gonna enjoy this.
Thanks, Jack.
Offensive comment?
Surely, the threat is a dead letter by now?
Offensive comment?
In its most recent (3 June 2010) letter to us, Hackney Council said:”As it is the matter remains unresolved and I am having to consider the options available to the Council”.
However, the Council has now (8 July 2010) told blogger Jack of Kent that: “The case is closed from the Council’s point of view”.
Jack of Kent states: “this was complete news to the Hackney Citizen which still believes it was facing the threat of legal proceedings. To threaten a misconceived and baseless injunction application is one thing; to not bother to tell the potential defendant that the case has been dropped is quite another.”
http://jackofkent.blogspot.com/2010/07/improper-and-disgraceful-conduct-of.html
Offensive comment?