Superinjunctions and sound of silence.
Lots of speculation on social media concerning the existence of an alleged “Super Injunction” and the Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer.
So let’s start of by asking what IS a Super Injunction. precisely?
“A super-injunction is a type of injunction that prevents publication of information that is in issue and also prevents the reporting of the fact that the injunction exists at all”
Got that? Yes, as clear as mud. So IF there was a Super-Injunction in place there is no way of knowing it. The ONLY clue that there may be such a legal instrument in place is the conspicuous absence of discussion in the mainstream media of a particular topic, if you follow my drift. But then again, there just might be nothing to discuss in the first place.
It seems to me that a Super Injunctions seems to be a weapon of last resort for public figures who wish to ensure that certain information never comes out about them. I am aware of suggestions that at least ONE such Super Injunction may exist here in Northern Ireland but of course we do not know to be true and it is only speculation. I suspect many other journalists know what I know.
The question NOW posed on social media is whether Sir Keir Starmer, or someone close to him, has taken out this legal instrument. I don’t know but one thing I do know is that all he has to do to prove the rumours wrong is to confirm he has no knowledge of any such thing. For a man who came to office promising to level with the British public he has been curiously silent.
Of course you may feel that a politicians private life is precisely that and none of our business. However I think that’s naive and the reality is that those who attain power on the promise of openness and transparency should do their best to live up to that lofty ideal.
A Super Injunction, were it to exist, would prove them to be unspeakable hypocrites.
The Tories were corrupt, but Labour are on a whole different level of corruption.
We are rapidly heading towards a totalitarian government, and I find that frightening!
The problem is that we have no way of knowing whether a super-injunction exists, other than triggering the sanctions dependent upon it. Worse, we have no way of knowing whether and injunction is political dynamite, or merely a thin-skinned individual seeking to protect his reputation and personal life. I doubt if voters would have cared about an unorthodox sexual or private life, so the irony is that people will assume the political worst of him.
Anyway, a beautiful example of the biter bit. Powerful people invent these mechanisms to protect their wrongdoing, but are powerless against the speculation that they cause.