23 March 2018
In today's The Times, in print and online, I comment on a recent decision balancing the right to privacy against the right to free speech and the public interest. In Guard privacy to avoid nips from the press I discuss the balance being struck by the courts in a privacy case concerning the paternity of a child and her politician father. While the rights of children must be protected, the girl's right to privacy had been reduced by comments that her mother had made about the paternity. While neither have commented publicly about the issue of paternity, the fact that the child is said to have been fathered by the married London Mayor, Boris Johnson, was 'a public interest matter which the electorate was entitled to know when considering his fitness for high public office' which outweighed the child's reducted expectation of privacy.