On 26 April 2011, John Hemming MP used Parliamentary privilege to name a woman who, he alleged, was being taken to court by a local authority seeking to imprison her for speaking to him (which was, incidentally, a gross misrepresentation of the facts).
Widely reported (erroneously) as being an attempt by Mr Hemming to breach a so called ‘super-injunction’, this event is now oft-cited by those seeking to speak out generally about the current flow of privacy injunctions, including those in the ‘name and shame’ bracket.
Yesterday, a new Twitter account started sending out tweets containing details of what the user alleges are super-injunctions, including the case referred to by John Hemming on 26 April.
In referring to that case, the account publishes an address. An address which, if correct, is the home of a child.
I don’t know about you, but I care not about the sexual activities of footballers, comedians, bankers and pop stars et al. However, I do care about kids.
In his desire to undermine the ‘secrecy’ of the family justice system, Hemming has, quite possibly, put a child at risk. It was reasonably foreseeable, given what is out there about this case, that someone would do this.
Mr Hemming, it is time you stopped abusing Parliamentary privilege, and started to actually think about the consequences of your actions.