More information could be published when people are arrested under recommendations put forward in a review of contempt of court laws.
The Law Commission of England and Wales said publishing details such as a suspect’s name, age, nationality, ethnicity, religion or immigration status “will generally not create risk”, however, what can be published depends on the circumstances in any individual case.
Under its recommendations, published on Tuesday, criminal proceedings would become “active” when a person is charged, rather than at the point of arrest. Once proceedings are active, the test of contempt will be if a publication creates a “substantial risk” that justice and a fair trial will be “seriously impeded or prejudiced”.
The Law Commission review examined contempt laws in the age of social media and online communications after concerns were raised over the Southport attack last year. Contempt laws have “struggled to keep pace with the rise in online communications and social media”, which had changed the publication and information landscape, the body said.
Courts can act when people disrupt proceedings, breach a court order, publish material that risks seriously prejudicing a trial while proceedings are active, or act to deliberately interfere with the administration of justice.
There was a renewed focus on liability for contempt after the murders of Elsie Dot Stancombe, seven, Alice da Silva Aguiar, nine, and Bebe King, six, in Southport on 29 July 2024. After the attacks, significant and widespread public disorder unfolded across the UK, which led to hundreds of prosecutions. On 20 January 2025, Axel Rudakubana, 18, was sentenced to a minimum of 52 years.
Merseyside police was criticised for not revealing the ethnicity of Rudakubana when he was arrested on suspicion of murder. Within hours of the attack, posts spread on the internet that claimed the suspect was a 17-year-old asylum seeker who had come to the country by boat last year.
Riot police were deployed in Hartlepool after a violent protest took place over the Southport attack. Photograph: Owen Humphreys/PA
The Law Commission said it had been suggested the disorder was an indirect result of contempt of court laws: “In constraining what information public authorities could disclose in relation to the defendant (such as his ethnicity and immigration status), contempt law helped to create an information vacuum into which misinformation, disinformation and counter-narratives could spread unchecked.”
There was a “pressing need for clarity” on what can be published when proceedings are active, felt “particularly acutely by public authorities”, it said. “Some public statements in high-profile cases in recent years suggest that there may be a lack of understanding in some quarters of the law in this area.”
The commission said its approach was reflected in interim guidance issued by the National Police Chiefs’ Council and the College of Policing. In August, police forces were told to share suspects’ ethnicity and nationality with the public after authorities were accused of covering up offences carried out by asylum seekers.
The commission said guidance about what information is generally safe to publish provides “clarity and consistency” for the police and media, though any legal risk had to be assessed in context. It is estimated more than 100 people receive prison sentences each year for contempt of court.
Part Two of its report, covering powers, procedure, sanctions, costs and appeals, will be published in 2026. The government considers which recommendations to implement.
The commissioner for criminal law, Prof Penney Lewis, said the review found “significant problems with coherence, consistency and clarity across civil, criminal and family courts”.
The reforms “make contempt law fairer and more predictable,” said Lewis, adding: “The public, media and court participants will benefit from clearer, more consistent laws fit for the modern age.”
The News Media Association’s director of legal, Sayra Tekin, said: “We welcome continued engagement with the Law Commission as it moves forward with its important work to make the law of contempt clearer and simpler.
“Any reform must strengthen and enhance the vital principle of open justice, which underpins public confidence in our judicial system. An important part of this is ensuring timely, reliable access to information for journalists so they can report on the courts while complying with the law.”
