ICO Advice for Data Subjects
Leveson Inquiry · An Inquiry into the Culture, Practices and Ethics of the Press · Issued 29 November 2012 · Addressed to: Information Commissioner
Source — verbatim from the inquiry
●Inquiry recommendation
In particular, the Information Commissioner's Office should take immediate steps to publish advice aimed at individuals (data subjects) concerned that their data have or may have been processed by the press unlawfully or otherwise than in accordance with good practice.
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:
- No published evidence of specific ICO advice aimed at individuals concerned that their data has been processed by the press unlawfully, as a standalone resource distinct from general complaints guidance, has been identified to March 2026.
Sources
Response — verbatim from government
●UK Government
The Prime Minister did not specifically address ICO operational recommendations in his 29 November 2012 statement. The Data Protection Act 2018 (Section 124) required the ICO to produce a data protection and journalism code of practice, which was published in 2023. The ICO has acted on several of these recommendations through its statutory functions. 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
- 27 Feb 2025 · ICO The ICO provides advice for individuals concerned about unlawful processing of their data, including by the press. Guidance and complaint procedures are published on the ICO website. View source → Confirmed Completed
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.