![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
May. 7th, 2010
== from cbc ==
The Supreme Court of Canada says journalists have no constitutional right to protect confidential sources at all costs, in a ruling against the National Post that could have major implications for press freedom.
"The law should and does accept that in some situations, the public interest in protecting the secret source from disclosure outweighs other competing public interests – including criminal investigations," Justice Ian Binnie wrote on the Ottawa-based court's behalf, in a ruling released on Friday.
The Supreme Court's justices said claims of immunity can be argued on a case-by-case basis, but there is no broad legal protection to shield sources. In certain cases, such as this one, the court said police investigation needs override confidentiality.
====
The Supreme Court decision
The Supreme Court of Canada says journalists have no constitutional right to protect confidential sources at all costs, in a ruling against the National Post that could have major implications for press freedom.
"The law should and does accept that in some situations, the public interest in protecting the secret source from disclosure outweighs other competing public interests – including criminal investigations," Justice Ian Binnie wrote on the Ottawa-based court's behalf, in a ruling released on Friday.
The Supreme Court's justices said claims of immunity can be argued on a case-by-case basis, but there is no broad legal protection to shield sources. In certain cases, such as this one, the court said police investigation needs override confidentiality.
====
The Supreme Court decision