Mr Eddie Sheehy and Village
Decision of the Press Council
Mr Sheehy appealed that part of the Press Ombudsman’s decision made under Principle 1 of the Code of Practice that he had insufficient evidence to decide on the accuracy of a statement in the article that Judge Baker referred to extensive documentation available to a Senior Counsel for his review “but withheld from the Councillors”, and references in the article to a 2003 Manager’s Order.
The appeal was submitted on the grounds (i) that significant new information relevant to the original complaint was available that could not have been or was not made available to the Press Ombudsman before making his decision and (ii) that the procedures followed by the Press Ombudsman in making his decision were not in accordance with the published procedures for submitting and considering complaints.
At its meeting on 7 September 2018 the Press Council decided there was insufficient evidence to admit the appeal on the grounds that there had been an error in the published procedures, but admitted the appeal on the grounds of significant new information.
The Press Council decided to uphold the appeal on the grounds that the significant new information provided allowed them to decide that the two statements complained about were inaccurate and therefore a breach of Principle 1 of the Code.
Click here to read the Decision of the Press Ombudsman.