Key arguments in support of source protection

Journalists depend on their sources to inform the public - their ability to do
so is compromised when forced to reveal confidential sources.

- Journalists have a duty to protect confidential sources as part of the protection
to whistleblowers and to defend the public’s right to know and
access to information.

- The independent status of journalists is compromised when their sources
and material becomes readily available to the police.

The principle of source protection is under increasing pressure from governments
and companies and will continue to be so due to:

- Weaknesses in national legislation that fail to meet standards set by the
European Court of Human Rights,

- Poor awareness by police officers and the judiciary about European and
national legislation,

- New legislation introduced as part of the security response to terrorism.

Warning to journalists:

New strategies have been adopted by the police and authorities to circumvent
source protection. They include:

- phone tapping, monitoring internet traffic and mobile telecommunications,

- seizures of journalists' material including computer files, etc.,

- requiring media to provide film as evidence - eg. following violent
demonstration,

- turning a journalist witness into a defendant — journalists' are increasingly
prosecuted for possession of 'stolen property' received from whistleblowers.

Recommendations and campaign tips for unions

1. Defend individual cases — pursue them to the ECHR if necessary.

2. Raise public awareness — winning the public debate can have a significant
impact on the progress of individual cases.

3. Campaign on the basis of the journalist’s duty to protect confidential
sources and the public ‘right to know’.

4. Don't forget the journalist in the dock — provide on-going moral support.

5. Don't rely on media owners to pursue cases - take on the case yourself.