30/06/2008

Popular mythology portrays Defence Advisory (DA) Notices - commonly known as 'D-Notices' - as a cosy and very British form of censorship, 'slapped on' news stories by unaccountable officials intent on violating the media's duty to report in the public interest.  Apart from the 'very British' bit, none of this is remotely true. 

Firstly, the DA-Notice System is completely voluntary; the advice offered under it can be accepted or rejected in whole or in part. It's rare for any news organisation to ignore DA-Notice advice, but that's because it protects a narrowly-defined area which government and media alike recognise to be of vital public importance. The System doesn't cover corruption, politics, scandal, embarrassment or a host of other things that officialdom might wish to keep closeted; it just covers the truly core elements of national security.

Dating back to 1912, the System has been advisory and transparent since 1993. Although sometimes the subject of controversy, it mostly operates discretely and in the background. 

However, there is no lack of accountability, even though the DA-Notice advice given to individual journalists is strictly confidential. The system is overseen by the Defence, Press and Broadcasting Advisory Committee, composed of very senior officials from the Home Office, MoD, Foreign Office and Cabinet Office and media leaders from all the main news organisations. 

The Committee is chaired by the MoD Permanent Secretary, and the media provides the vice-chair (currently Simon Bucks of Sky News). You can read the minutes of the Committee's meetings on the DA-Notice website: www.dnotice.org.uk

Also to be found on the website are the five standing DA-Notices. This 'code' covers military operations, weapons, secure communications, sensitive installations and intelligence operations.

It falls to the DPBAC's Secretary and permanent executive to apply the code on the Committee's behalf and advise journalists on the content of their stories. Although paid as a civil servant, the Secretary has a remit from media and government to be strictly independent. 

He (to date all Secretaries have been male) has to report to the Committee every six months and is open to censure if anyone feels he has acted incorrectly. The media members of the Committee are no pussycats and demand firm evidence that national security has been threatened. 

The System is normally triggered when a journalist doing a story on an aspect of national security realises it might be covered by DA-Notice guidance. 

The acid test here is whether any part of the story might somehow put British troops, military or intelligence operations or members of the public at greater risk. 

The first thing to do is to check the 'dnotice' website; if still in doubt then simply call the DA Notice Secretary. He can advise from his own knowledge or - if necessary - check out the details (in strict confidence) with the relevant experts (e.g. in MI5, MI6, Whitehall or the Armed Forces).

The devil is always in the detail: not so much what is described but in what depth. It's very rare for an agreement not to be reached that allows the core story to go ahead. If journalists and editors are not convinced about any changes proposed, they are fully entitled not to accept them.

Sometimes the Secretary will take the lead and alert editors to national security sensitivities in an emerging story. He did this four times during the kidnapping of six British Embassy staff members in Ethiopia in March last year, and in each case his advice was followed.  

Of course, the System doesn't always work, but breaches of the DA-Notice guidance are normally the result of 'cock-up' rather than conspiracy. 

Pressing deadlines, late copy from overseas, off-the-cuff live transmissions and - in particular - lack of knowledge of the DA-Notice code can all lead to inadvertent damage to national security. 

In such cases, the Secretary contacts the editor concerned, and normally changes are made to prevent a recurrence. 

But any action taken by a newspaper or broadcaster is entirely voluntary; no form of sanction is ever applied or needed.  

For reputational, as much as commercial, reasons, no-one wants to be blamed for publishing or broadcasting something which - say - led to the death of British troops.

The DA-Notice system is the safety net that helps the media to avoid this. 

The current Secretary is Air Vice-Marshal Andrew Vallance; he is available 24/7 and his contact details are shown below and on the website.

The rapid growth of the internet adds a new dimension to arguments about the System. Some web information breaches DA-Notices, though generally not that on mainstream UK sites. The internet also raises questions about the meaning of 'public domain', one of the main conceptual planks of the system. Why should a British newspaper not report something if it's all over the net? There may be no clear answer to this, but at least the DPBAC is discussing it.

From time to time, other options have been considered, but media and government alike continue to see the DA-Notice System - imperfect though it is - as probably the best way to manage the disclosure of national security information in a 21st century democracy. 

Winston Churchill once said that 'democracy is the worst form of government.....except for all the others'. A similar thing could be said with equal justice about the DA-Notice System.

DA-Notice secretary: secretary@dnotice.org.uk, office: 0207 218 2206, mobile 07768 433005.