Appointment Panel Composition
Leveson Inquiry · An Inquiry into the Culture, Practices and Ethics of the Press · Issued 29 November 2012 · Addressed to: Press
Government responsePrime Minister's Office, 10 Downing Street: Accepted in part (Nov 2012)
DeliveryNo statement from Press found
Recommendation, verbatim from the inquiry
●Inquiry recommendation
The appointment panel: (a) should be appointed in an independent, fair and open way; (b) should contain a substantial majority of members who are demonstrably independent of the press; (c) should include at least one person with a current understanding and experience of the press; (d) should include no more than one current editor of a publication that could be a member of the body.
Leveson Inquiry, An Inquiry into the Culture, Practices and Ethics of the Press · 29 Nov 2012 Source PDF →
Published evidence summary
AI-generated evidence summary
The Inquiry asked the press to establish independent, fair regulatory appointment panels. In a statement to the House of Commons on the Leveson Inquiry report in November 2012, David Cameron, Prime Minister, accepted the report's regulatory principles, including independence of appointments, stating that the onus was on the press to implement them (David Cameron response, Nov 2012). The Royal Charter on Self-Regulation of the Press, granted by the Privy Council in October 2013, specified that an appointment panel must be appointed openly and fairly, maintain a substantial majority independent of the press, and contain at least one experienced industry member and at most one serving editor (Royal Charter on Self-Regulation of the Press, Oct 2013).
AI-generated summary of the record on this page, checked by a second model and automatic checks, 2 Oct 2026.
Report-level response context
Government response
●Prime Minister's Office, 10 Downing Street · Accepted in part · 29 Nov 2012
In volume IV of the report, Lord Justice Leveson sets out proposals for independent self-regulation organised by the media. He details the key “requirements” that an independent self-regulatory body should meet, including independence of appointments and funding, a standards code, an arbitration service, and a speedy complaint-handling mechanism. Crucially, it must have the power to demand up-front, prominent apologies and impose up to million-pound fines. These are the Leveson principles. They are the central recommendations of the report. If they can be put in place, we truly will have a regulatory system that delivers public confidence, justice for the victims, and a step change in the way the press is regulated in our country. I accept these principles, and I hope that the whole House will come in behind them. The onus should now be on the press to implement them—and implement them radically.
Response document: Leveson Inquiry (House of Commons statement)
Delivery
No statement on delivery from Press has been found in the sources searched. This is separate from the response above.
What other bodies have found
●UK Government · 30 Oct 2013
3. The appointment panel: a) should be appointed in an independent, fair and open way; b) should contain a substantial majority of members who are demonstrably independent of the press; c) should include at least one person with a current understanding and experience of the press; d) should include no more than one current editor of a publication that could be a member of the body.
How this page is built
The recommendation and the government responses are verbatim from primary documents. Delivery statements and other bodies' findings are shown in their own words, each with its source. The summary is written by this site and labelled as such. The Index does not paraphrase sources or characterise intent; it records what has been published.