Broadcaster Andrew Marr has admitted having an extramarital affair after deciding to abandon a controversial injunction to ban the media from reporting it
With growing controversy surrounding the number of celebrities using injunctions to gag newspapers from exposing their infidelities, Andrew Marr has waived his right to privacy by revealing his affair.
The married 51-year-old BBC presenter won the High Court order in 2008 to block reports revealing his relationship with another journalist five years previously, believing he was father to her child.
Marr admitted being uneasy about the gagging order saying: ‘I did not come into journalism to go around gagging journalists. At the time there was a crisis in my marriage and I believe there was a young child involved.’
The former editor of the Independent admitted the injunction had allowed his family to repair and heal itself and said he agreed that privacy should be granted in a limited number of difficult cases.
‘I know these injunctions are controversial and the situation seems to be running out of control,’ he says. ‘They shouldn’t be forever and a proper sense of proportion is required.’
Over the past fortnight, a footballer and a well-known TV star have been granted gagging orders to protect their public identity and their private lives.
David Cameron has accused judges of using human rights laws to introduce privacy legislation without the approval of parliament. Lib Dem MP John Hemming claims that it’s the rich and famous who are usually granted gagging orders and that the cost of bringing legal action means the law only offers protection to the rich.
So should the law do away with injunctions completely? Or does everyone have the right to keep his or her private life under wraps? Let us know your thoughts by posting a comment below