Section 32 DPA Amendment
Leveson Inquiry · An Inquiry into the Culture, Practices and Ethics of the Press · Issued 29 November 2012 · Addressed to: UK Government
Source — verbatim from the inquiry
●Inquiry recommendation
The exemption in section 32 of the Data Protection Act 1998 should be amended so as to make it available only where: (a) the processing of data is necessary for publication, rather than simply being in fact undertaken with a view to publication; (b) the data controller reasonably believes that the relevant publication would be or is in the public interest, with no special weighting of the balance between the public interest in freedom of expression and in privacy; and (c) objectively, that the likely interference with privacy resulting from the processing of the data is outweighed by the public interest in publication.
Leveson Inquiry, An Inquiry into the Culture, Practices and Ethics of the Press · 29 Nov 2012 Source PDF →
Published evidence summary
Publicly available evidence relating to this recommendation:
- The journalism exemption was replaced by Schedule 2, Part 5 of the Data Protection Act 2018, which provides that the exemption applies only where processing is carried out "with a view to the publication by a person of journalistic, academic, artistic or literary material" and the controller "reasonably believes that the publication of the material would be in the public interest" (Data Protection Act 2018, Schedule 2, Part 5, legislation.gov.uk).
- The new provision requires controllers to have regard to relevant codes of practice including the Editors' Code of Practice and the Ofcom Broadcasting Code when determining whether publication would be in the public interest (Data Protection Act 2018, Schedule 2, Part 5, paragraph 26(3), legislation.gov.uk).
Response — verbatim from government
●UK Government
The Prime Minister stated on 29 November 2012: "I am instinctively concerned about this proposal. There is a real danger of this recommendation being used to curb freedom of the press. We need to consider this very carefully - particularly the impact this could have on investigative journalism." The Data Protection Act 2018 retained a broad journalism exemption (Schedule 2, Part 5) and did not implement this specific recommendation. Source: https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/david-cameron-statement-in-response-to-the-leveson-inquiry-report
UK Government · 29 Nov 2012 Written response →
Evidence trail — what's actually happened since
- 23 May 2018 · UK Parliament The Data Protection Act 2018 retained a broad journalism exemption (Schedule 2, Part 5). The exemption applies where processing is 'with a view to publication' -- broader than Leveson's recommendation that it should only apply where processing is 'necessary for publication.' The exemption was not narrowed as Leveson recommended. View source → Not Implemented
Each entry above links to a primary source — gov.uk written statement, consultation response document, or inspection report. The Index does not characterise government intent; it tracks what has been published.
How this page is built
Source and Response are verbatim from primary documents. The Evidence trail records published activity since — written statements, consultation outcomes, inspection findings, parliamentary references. The Index does not paraphrase or characterise intent; it tracks what has been published. Where the evidence is the absence of action (a missed deadline, a slipped timetable), that absence is documented from primary sources rather than inferred.
This recommendation's data is verified periodically against primary sources. The Index is monitored for staleness weekly.