What are the benefits of the DA-Notice system?
- It provides a set of guidelines, agreed by representatives of both government departments and of the media, which inform editors, broadcasters, authors, publishers and others about what needs to be protected, and provide the basis for prior negotiation when there is disagreement about what should be published;
- It also provides a negotiator (the DA-Notice Secretary) who is available to both sides 365 days a year;
- Negotiation normally provides a solution acceptable to both sides, ie. the story goes out with only a few genuinely secret details removed;
- It is much quicker, cheaper and more satisfactory than going to litigation, which also tends to block a whole story or source rather than just a few details.
Do all editors, etc. have to use the system?
- No, it is voluntary, and even when they do use the system, they do not have to accept the advice of the DA-Notice Secretary nor accede to his requests; the final decision as to whether to publish something is the editor's.
What powers does the DA-Notice Secretary/Committee have?
- None, except those of persuasion.
Why do editors, etc. follow a voluntary code, surely they want to publish their story in full?
- All editors do indeed want to publish their story, but most do not want to publish something which really would be damaging to operations or to lives, and if therefore they are persuaded that some detail would do damage, they usually do not publish such detail.
If an editor does publish (or threaten to) something which is damaging, what does the DA-Notice system do about it?
Does the Government do anything if an editor decides to publish something possibly damaging?
- In serious cases, the government department concerned can initiate police and/or legal action, including seeking a court injunction to stop something being published.
Why does the government not always do this, rather than rely on a voluntary system?
- It is costly and time-consuming, and often creates adverse publicity, and there is no guarantee that the judge will uphold the government's case. It can also be taking a sledgehammer to crack a nut, when the government is usually concerned to protect some detail, eg agents' names, rather than stop a story completely, which injunctions tend to do.
What is meant by ‘slapping a D-Notice on’ something?
- This phrase is still used by people, and sounds dramatic, but it is no longer what actually happens! DA-Notices are not issued for particular incidents. The 5 standing Notices cover various eventualities, and, if necessary, the editor's’ attention is just drawn by the DA-Notice Secretary to the advice in the appropriate Notice.
Is the DA-Notice system not a form of censorship?
- A voluntary system cannot be censorship. It does sometimes provide reasons for self-censorship by editors and others, in the same way that they are faced with self-censorship for all kinds of other reasons – legal, moral, financial, public taste, etc.
Surely there are no real secrets needed now that the Cold War is over?
- There are certainly far fewer, and that is why - since the new system was introduced in 1993 - the DA-Notices has been revised only once (in 2000). Nevertheless, the public still has an interest that some matters are kept secret for the time being, for example measures to protect the public against terrorism, and some operations to gain intelligence about activities secretly carried out by others against British national and allied interests – economic and industrial, as well as military.
How does the DA-Notice Secretary know when his advice is needed?
- A request to get involved may come from the media, for example a news room ringing to say they intend to publish a particular story which they realise may contain matters covered by the DA-Notices;
- Or a request may come from officials, for example The Secret Intelligence Service being aware that a TV company has been filming activities that might reveal the identities of some of their agents;
- Or the DA-Notice Secretary himself might learn from his own contacts or reading, for example that a book about the SAS is to be published.
What does the Secretary do in such cases?
- He advises the media, if necessary after himself taking expert advice from the government department concerned, on what details would be damaging, for example something that would ‘blow’ a current or planned operation, or would endanger the life or effectiveness of an agent;
- He suggests how identities might be concealed, for example in photographs or film by pixelation;
- He negotiates if necessary between the media and the department concerned so that as much as possible can be published without genuine damage being done.
May not ‘damage’ just be official embarrassment when something has gone wrong?
- Not as far as the DA-Notices are concerned; political and official embarrassment are not reasons for excluding material.
Does the Secretary not have to accept the officials’ version of events, and support their line?
- No, the Secretary has to be convinced by officials of the need for secrecy, and to advise them if he believes either that their rationale is not in accord with the DA-Notices or that their view is unsustainable, for example because the facts are already widely in the public domain.
If a book or article or programme has been cleared through the DA-Notice system, does that mean that everything in it is true?
- No, only that there is nothing which is seriously damaging in DA-Notice terms.
If a fact has been published somewhere, does that mean that it can then be republished even if it is damaging to national security?
- It depends how and where it has been published. The DA-Notice 5 guidance specifies, for example, that something must be ‘been widely disclosed or discussed’ for it to be not covered. That said, there is an element of subjective judgement about what is ‘in the public domain’. A statement by a writer with no authority in an obscure publication, or even on a hard-to-find website, does not have the wide disclosure of a major British newspaper, or the authority of a reputable author of a book. Each case therefore has to be assessed on its merits.
Does the DA-Notice system apply to the Internet?
- It does, but, because of the international nature of the net, matters published on foreign websites, like matters published in foreign newspapers, are beyond the influence of the DA-Notice system. How the law (on libel, copyright, commerce, etc, quite apart from that on secrecy) is being applied to the Internet varies from country to country, and there is therefore considerable confusion at present. The position of UK Internet Service Providers as ‘publishers’ is also still unclear.
Doesn’t that mean that the DA-Notice system is now inoperable?
- The DA-Notice system has never been a watertight, 100% system. Not only its voluntary nature, but also the enormous diversity of the British media (including some small outlets that have never followed the DA-Notice guidance), mean that it has always been a ‘damage limitation’ system. The internet has produced some new considerations, and many unanswered questions about the future, but the very size and diversity of the net means that, just because something is on a foreign website, it does not necessarily mean that it has immediately been widely seen.
What is ‘National Security’?
- It is a phrase widely used in legislation, but there is in fact no definition. It is what lawyers call ‘an ambulatory concept’, to be interpreted by the courts or others in the light of particular circumstances that cannot be predicted. As far as the DA-Notices are concerned, although no definition of National Security is given, the Committee has provided instead a context of scale, that the threat must involve ‘grave danger to the State and/or individuals’, and it is in this context that areas of National Security covered with some precision in the Notices should be read.
Are all articles, books, etc, on DA-Notice subjects dealt with through the DA-Notice system?
- No. Books etc by ex-insiders (eg members of the Special Forces) have to be submitted to the parent department (in this case the Ministry of Defence), because of Official Secrets Act requirements and departmental confidentiality contracts. The DA-Notice Secretary only gets involved occasionally in these cases, if the Department concerned and the publisher/author ask for his help as an impartial negotiator in resolving differences.
What about when a government department initiates police/legal action against an editor or author?
- This usually happens when the DA-Notice system has not be used by the media for some reason, or when a government department is so concerned that serious damage is imminent that they wish to take immediate preventative action. The DA-Notice Secretary is not involved in police/legal action.
What happens if information provided by the media to the Secretary, when they are using the DA-Notice system, reveals a possible breach of, for example, the Official Secrets Act?
- All discussion between the media and the Secretary is carried out in confidence, and government departments do not subsequently initiate police/legal action unless they have information from some other source (possibly the published article or book, of course). The Secretary therefore makes every effort to point out to the media any material which he thinks might be in breach of an injunction or which might be an offence under some Act, but he is not himself a legal expert and therefore sometimes advises consulting the Treasury Solicitor for expert legal advice, in order to head off possible police/legal action.
Does any other country have a system similar to the D-Notices?
- No. Australia apparently did, but no longer does.
Why does the UK have a system like this if no other country does?
- Partly historical (see History), but we have it mainly because it seems to work for us, in a culture where voluntary systems are often preferred to mandatory ones, and where both media and government departments often find it useful to have a system of informal mediation between them over sensitive national security matters.
|
How are the five officials on the Committee chosen?
- They are ex-officio posts. The Chairman, for mainly historical reasons, is the Permanent Under Secretary of the Ministry of Defence. His deputy covers Ministry of Defence interests, in particular Special Forces and Defence Intelligence. The Cabinet Office Permanent Secretary covers the security interlligence coordination issues. The Permanent Under Secretary of the Home Office covers Security Service and legislative matters, and a Deputy Under Secretary from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office covers Secret Intelligence Service and Government Communications Headquarters matters.
How are the thirteen media representatives on the Committee chosen?
- They are nominated by the various media organisations, namely BBC, ITV, ITN, Sky TV, Periodical Publishers Association (2), Newspaper Publishers Association (3), Newspaper Society (2), Press Association, and Scottish Daily Newspaper Society. The media representatives choose one of their number as the Vice-Chairman of the Committee. The Vice-Chairman also maintains informal links with the Society of Editors. The Publishers Association have so far chosen not to be represented on the Committee, but their members nevertheless use the DA-Notice system. It is hoped that in due course Internet authorities will be represented on the Committee too. (Click here to see a full listing of the present Committee members).
Is the occasional description in the media of the media representatives as ‘token journalists’ on an official committee accurate?
- Obviously not! Quite apart from the media representatives being in a substantial majority, the Committee itself is independent, and is not responsible to any political or departmental organisation. The media representatives do not just respond to official initiatives, but also put forward their own, for example suggesting the recent revision of the DA-Notices. Discussion by both media and official representatives is ‘full and frank’, and agreements are arrived at mutually.
|
