A High Court judge accused by newspaper chiefs of bringing in a privacy law by the back door has been defended by Lord Falconer, the former constitutional affairs secretary.
Daily Mail editor Paul Dacre has accused Mr Justice Eady of using the Human Rights Act to curb the Press's freedom to expose the moral shortcomings of those in high places.
In a scathing attack, he said the "arrogant and amoral" judgments of the judge were "inexorably and insidiously" imposing a privacy law on British newspapers.
But Lord Falconer, one of the New Labour architects of human rights protections in the UK, said the judge was legitimately interpreting a law which had been passed by Parliament.
Mr Dacre, who is also editor-in-chief of Associated Newspapers, lambasted the "wretched" Human Rights Act in a speech to the Society of Editors annual conference in Bristol on Sunday night.
Mr Justice Eady has presided over a string of high-profile newspaper cases, including this year's High Court action by Formula One boss Max Mosley against the News of the World.
Mr Dacre said that in supporting Mr Mosley the judge had "effectively ruled that it was perfectly acceptable for the multi-millionaire head of a multi-billion sport that is followed by countless young people to pay five women £2,500 to take part in acts of unimaginable sexual depravity with him".
Mr Dacre said that the "greatest scandal" was that Mr Justice Eady was given a "virtual monopoly of all cases against the media enabling him to bring in a privacy law by the back door".
Lord Falconer, who left the Cabinet when Gordon Brown took over as Prime Minister, said: "I think society now puts a value on privacy. There are certain things in life that should be private," he told Today.
Read More
Lord Falconer stressed that the Human Rights Act had been introduced by elected MPs and pointed out that any decisions could be taken to the Court of Appeal.
MORE ABOUT