This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48976780

The article has changed 5 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 2 Version 3
Ambassador row: Publishing leak 'not in public interest' says Met Police Ambassador row: Other leaks may be in circulation says Met Police
(about 3 hours later)
Scotland Yard has said it respects the rights of the media, but that the recent publication of leaked diplomatic memos was not in the public interest. Scotland Yard has said there may be more sensitive documents in circulation, as it warned media against publishing leaked diplomatic memos.
Police have launched a criminal investigation into the leak of diplomatic emails from the UK ambassador in the US, Sir Kim Darroch.Police have launched a criminal investigation into the leak of diplomatic emails from the UK ambassador in the US, Sir Kim Darroch.
Metropolitan Police Assistant Commissioner Neil Basu said publishing the emails could be a criminal offence.Metropolitan Police Assistant Commissioner Neil Basu said publishing the emails could be a criminal offence.
Editors criticised an earlier statement warning against further publication.Editors criticised an earlier statement warning against further publication.
Following the backlash, Mr Basu said police had "no intention of seeking to prevent editors from publishing stories in the public interest in a liberal democracy". Following the backlash, Mr Basu said police "respect the rights of the media and has no intention of seeking to prevent editors from publishing stories in the public interest in a liberal democracy".
However, he said the Metropolitan Police had been told that the publication of "these specific documents... could also constitute a criminal offence and one that carries no public interest defence". However, he added: "We have also been told the publication of these specific documents, now knowing they may be a breach of the OSA [Official Secrets Act], could also constitute a criminal offence and one that carries no public interest defence.
"We know these documents, and potentially others, remain in circulation," he added. "We know these documents, and potentially others, remain in circulation."
The government has already opened an internal inquiry into the publication of the memos, which saw the US ambassador refer to the Trump administration as "clumsy and inept".The government has already opened an internal inquiry into the publication of the memos, which saw the US ambassador refer to the Trump administration as "clumsy and inept".
The emails prompted a furious reaction from US president Donald Trump, who branded Sir Kim "a very stupid guy" and said he would no longer deal with him.The emails prompted a furious reaction from US president Donald Trump, who branded Sir Kim "a very stupid guy" and said he would no longer deal with him.
Sir Kim stepped down as US ambassador on Wednesday, saying it was "impossible" for him to continue.Sir Kim stepped down as US ambassador on Wednesday, saying it was "impossible" for him to continue.
'Ill-advised''Ill-advised'
A criminal investigation into the leak was launched on Friday by the Met Police Counter Terrorism Command, which takes national responsibility for investigating allegations of criminal breaches of the Official Secrets Act.A criminal investigation into the leak was launched on Friday by the Met Police Counter Terrorism Command, which takes national responsibility for investigating allegations of criminal breaches of the Official Secrets Act.
Mr Basu said he was satisfied the leak had damaged UK international relations and added that there was a "clear public interest" in bringing those responsible to justice.Mr Basu said he was satisfied the leak had damaged UK international relations and added that there was a "clear public interest" in bringing those responsible to justice.
He faced criticism, however, after he advised individuals and the media not to publish leaked government documents and to instead hand them over to the police or return them to their rightful owner.He faced criticism, however, after he advised individuals and the media not to publish leaked government documents and to instead hand them over to the police or return them to their rightful owner.
Evening Standard editor George Osborne described the Met statement as "stupid" and "ill-advised".Evening Standard editor George Osborne described the Met statement as "stupid" and "ill-advised".
Sunday Times political editor Tim Shipman branded it "sinister" and "anti-democratic". "Do you have any comprehension of a free society? This isn't Russia," he tweeted.Sunday Times political editor Tim Shipman branded it "sinister" and "anti-democratic". "Do you have any comprehension of a free society? This isn't Russia," he tweeted.
Mr Basu issued a further statement on Saturday afternoon saying he had received legal advice that led to the Met initiating an investigation into the documents as a potential breach of the Official Secrets Act (OSA).Mr Basu issued a further statement on Saturday afternoon saying he had received legal advice that led to the Met initiating an investigation into the documents as a potential breach of the Official Secrets Act (OSA).
"We have a duty to prevent as well as detect crime and the previous statement was intended to alert to the risk of breaching the OSA," he said."We have a duty to prevent as well as detect crime and the previous statement was intended to alert to the risk of breaching the OSA," he said.
What is 'in the public interest'?What is 'in the public interest'?
Journalists are not above the law, but it is understood "in a free, liberal and democratic society" that the media "should be free to report on leaked documents that they believe are in the public interest", says Ian Murray, executive director of the Society of Editors.Journalists are not above the law, but it is understood "in a free, liberal and democratic society" that the media "should be free to report on leaked documents that they believe are in the public interest", says Ian Murray, executive director of the Society of Editors.
Mr Murray maintains it is unlikely police are going to "shoot the messenger", adding that to hold authority to account journalists can't be allowed to be bullied into handing over documents.Mr Murray maintains it is unlikely police are going to "shoot the messenger", adding that to hold authority to account journalists can't be allowed to be bullied into handing over documents.
Who decides what is in the public interest, however, can be contentious.Who decides what is in the public interest, however, can be contentious.
"It's a difficult line to tread between what's in the public interest and what interests the public," Mr Murray says."It's a difficult line to tread between what's in the public interest and what interests the public," Mr Murray says.
However, he adds that the idea that one particular body would make that decision - or no-one would have to decide because journalists have "dutifully" handed in documents to the police is "appalling".However, he adds that the idea that one particular body would make that decision - or no-one would have to decide because journalists have "dutifully" handed in documents to the police is "appalling".