''R (ProLife Alliance) v. BBC''
was a
House of Lords
The House of Lords, also known as the House of Peers, is the upper house of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. Membership is by appointment, heredity or official function. Like the House of Commons, it meets in the Palace of Westminste ...
case on the extent to which matters of good taste and decency are sufficient to justify the censorship of a
party political broadcast
A party political broadcast (also known, in pre-election campaigning periods, as a party election broadcast) is a television or radio broadcast made by a political party.
In the United Kingdom the Communications Act 2003 prohibits (and previou ...
.
The ProLife Alliance had submitted a video that showed the results of an
abortion
Abortion is the termination of a pregnancy by removal or expulsion of an embryo or fetus. An abortion that occurs without intervention is known as a miscarriage or "spontaneous abortion"; these occur in approximately 30% to 40% of pre ...
. The video was held to violate statutory regulations requiring public broadcasts to be decent. After extensive legal proceedings, the
Court of Appeal ruled in favour of the ProLife Alliance. However, the decision was overturned by the House of Lords.
Facts
The
ProLife Alliance is an advocacy group, and until 2004 a political party, that campaigns for "absolute respect for innocent human life from fertilisation until natural death and therefore opposes abortion, euthanasia, destructive embryo research and human cloning." (Paragraph 2 of the Court of Appeal judgment)
In 1997, the ProLife Alliance had enough support to be granted a Public Election Broadcast (PEB), subject to rules set out by the
BBC #REDIRECT BBC #REDIRECT BBC
Here i going to introduce about the best teacher of my life b BALAJI sir. He is the precious gift that I got befor 2yrs . How has helped and thought all the concept and made my success in the 10th board exam. ...
...
. The ProLife Alliance submitted a video that was graphic in nature. The video, the HL said, showed "the products of a suction abortion: tiny limbs, bloodied and dismembered, a separated head, their human shape and form plainly recognisable. There are some pictures showing the results of the procedures undertaken to procure an abortion at later stages... They are, I think, certainly disturbing to any person of ordinary sensibilities."
The broadcasters declined to show the video, on the grounds that it could have been offensive or disturbing to a large number of viewers. The ProLife Alliance sought permission for judicial review of their decision, which was refused. "A further application to the Court of Appeal was also refused. The appellant applied to the European Court of Human Rights, alleging a violation of Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights ("ECHR"). The application was declared inadmissible without the United Kingdom government being called on to put in observations." (Para. 7)
ruled in favour of the ProLife Alliance by stating that the BBC had acted unfairly in denying them one election broadcast in