Investigative journalist could (but shouldn’t) face prosecution

According to Press Gazette today, an undercover BBC journalist who worked on a Panorama investigation into sub-standard homecare has been arrested in connection with the report. The article read:

Arifa Farooq was working on a Panorama Special called Britain’s Homecare Scandal in which she worked as a carer for Domiciliary Care, which had won the contract to provide at-home care in South Lanarkshire by charging just £9.95 an hour.

Farooq was arrested after voluntarily attending an interview at a police station in Glasgow and spent one hour in a police cell. It is understood that police received a complaint about her securing her undercover job using a false identity.

I can understand the arrest. The Police have to follow up complaints and I’m sure Farooq would have admitted to the charges brought against her. However, the worrying thing is the prospect of prosecution in a court. Surely the COPFS (basically the Scottish CPS) will drop the case before it goes that far? The public interest defence in this case is so glaringly obvious that it would be a show of contempt to proper investigative journalism if they took it through to the courts.

Fortunately, according to Press Gazette:

Journalists working in England have previously been arrested for “obtaining pecuniary advantage by deception” after working in jobs as part of undercover investigations. But the charges in most cases have been thrown out if judges believe they were acting in the public interest.

So, arrests are common but guilty verdicts aren’t. As General Secretary of the NUJ Jeremy Dear puts it:

The only people who would benefit from legal action in these circumstances are those who want to stop the kind of vital journalism that has been undertaken by Arifa.

Let’s hope the case is thrown out very quickly. The last thing the public need from this is for Farooq to lose her case. It could put future investigations by journalists in jeopardy, as they may be risking their own freedom to expose the truth. It could potentially prevent big public-interest scoops.

It’s definitely not in the interests of the public for Farooq to be prosecuted. It seems unlikely that she will, but this is still one to watch.