TNAG-1693-FCO40-2343-Publication-of--Spycatcher--by-Peter-Wright-in-Hong-Kong-1987 — Page 37

POOL DE

- 3

doubt. The mere fact that no other newspaper has published the

news would fall far short of that. Scoops can and do happen

without there being any presumption that the story is false,

still less that the newspaper producers knew it was false.

Therefore even if it is subsequently shown that the story was

false, no inference can be drawn that the publisher knew it was

false. It follows that Mr. Martin Lee's amendment would rob the

proposed new section of almost all effectiveness because the

prosecution would rarely, and then only by chance, be able to

find the evidence to prove the necessary knowledge or

recklessness.

6.

It is

However, the Administration recognises that it would

not be right to impose strict liability for the publication of

false news, even where the publication is of such a sensational

character as to fall within the definition of the offence.

intended, therefore, as Members are well aware to move an

amendment at the Committee Stage to provide a defence whereby if

the publisher can show that, at the time of publication, he had

reasonable grounds for believing that the news was true, he will

be entitled to be acquitted. As is usual with statutory

But he

defences, and there are many of them on our statute book, the

burden of proving that defence rests upon the defendant.

does not have to discharge that burden 'beyond reasonable doubt' as does the prosecution. It will be enough if he can prove it on a balance of probabilities, in other words if he can show that it

is more likely than not.

/...4