The Leveson inquiry commenced its public hearings in London on 14 November 2011.

The inquiry was established by David Cameron as prime minister in the wake of the News of the World phone-hacking scandal. It was tasked with investigating the culture, practices and ethics of the British press, as well as its relationships with politicians and the police.

The inquiry, chaired by Lord Justice Brian Leveson, was established under the Inquiries Act 2005, granting it the power to summon witnesses and compel the disclosure of evidence under oath.

The establishment of the inquiry came after reports alleged that journalists at the News of the World had hacked the voicemail of the murdered schoolgirl Milly Dowler in 2002. This revelation provoked public outrage and led to the closure of the 168-year-old Sunday tabloid by its owner, News International, on 7 July 2011.

The inquiry was announced on 6 July.

In a statement to the House of Commons on 13 July, Cameron said the country had been “shocked by the revelations of the phone hacking scandal”, which he labelled “disgraceful”.

He referred to “accusations of widespread lawbreaking by parts of our press: alleged corruption by some police officers; and, as we have just discussed, the failure of our political system over many, many years to tackle a problem that has been getting worse.”

The prime minister said he wanted the forthcoming inquiry to be as “robust as possible – one that can get to the truth fastest and also get to work the quickest, and, vitally, one that commands the full confidence of the public.”

***

The phone-hacking scandal also implicated a key figure of Cameron’s inner circle, Andy Coulson. During his tenure as opposition leader, Cameron appointed Coulson – the editor of the News of the World from 2003 to 2007 – as the Conservative Party’s communications director. Coulson resigned as News of the World editor over the phone-hacking scandal.

Coulson then stepped down as Downing Street director of communications on 21 January 2011 over the continued media coverage of the scandal.

In a subsequent commons statement on 20 July, Cameron set out the remit of the inquiry and addressed the controversy regarding his appointment of Coulson.

The prime minister told MPs: “I have said very clearly that if it turns out Andy Coulson knew about the hacking at the News of the World he will not only have lied to me but he will have lied to the police, to a select committee, to the Press Complaints Commission [PCC] and, of course, perjured himself in a court of law.”

He added: “More to the point, if that comes to pass, he could also expect to face severe criminal charges.”

The inquiry’s terms of reference were divided into two parts. Part one would see Leveson inquire into “the culture, practices, and ethics of the press”, including the “contacts and the relationships between national newspapers and politicians, and the conduct of each.”

It would also make recommendations “for a new more effective policy and regulatory regime which supports the integrity and freedom of the press, the plurality of the media, and its independence, including from government, while encouraging the highest ethical and professional standards.”

Part two would inquire “into the extent of unlawful or improper conduct within News International, other newspaper organisations and, as appropriate, other organisations within the media, and by those responsible for holding personal data.”

In his opening statement, delivered on the morning of 14 November, Lord Justice Leveson said he fully considered freedom of expression and the freedom of the press to be “fundamental to our democracy” and “fundamental to our way of life”.

He added: “But that freedom must be exercised with the rights of others in mind.”

He referred to his first public comments upon the announcement of the inquiry on 13 July, coinciding with Cameron’s first statement.

Leveson had said: “The inquiry must balance the desire for a robustly free press with the rights of the individual, while, at the same time, ensuring the critical relationships between the press, Parliament, the government and the police are maintained.

“The press provides an essential check on all aspects of public life. That is why any failure within the media affects all of us. At the heart of this Inquiry, therefore, may be one simple question: who guards the guardians?”

Clip.

Hearings for the first modules of the inquiry, running from November 2011 to February 2012, focused on the relationship between the press and the public. The inquiry heard emotional testimony from victims of press intrusion, including Milly Dowler’s parents, Sally and Gerry Dowler, as well as from high-profile figures such as Hugh Grant, Steve Coogan and J. K. Rowling.

Newspaper proprietors, including Rupert Murdoch and James Murdoch, also appeared before the inquiry – as well as figures from journalism and broadcasting, like Jeremy Paxman, Alastair Campbell, Piers Morgan and Ian Hislop.

Clip.

Subsequent modules examined the relationship between the press and the police, and finally, the relationship between the press and politicians. The inquiry gathered testimony from four former and sitting prime ministers, from John Major to David Cameron.

During his appearance before the inquiry, Cameron was challenged over his text conversations with former News International chief Rebekah Brooks.

Clip.

Cameron was read a text that Brooks, the editor of the Sun from 2003 to 2009, had sent to him on 7 October 2009 – the day before he was due to deliver his keynote address to Conservative conference. The message was also sent a week after the Sun had endorsed his party.

Brooks texted: “I am so rooting for you tomorrow not just as proud friend but because professionally we’re definitely in this together!”

She added: “Speech of your life? Yes, he Cam!”

Cameron dismissed any suggestions of impropriety over the common cause identified in Brooks’ messages.

He told the inquiry: “I think what it means is that we were, as she put it, we were friends, but professionally we as leader of the Conservative party and her in newspapers, we were going to be pushing the same political agenda.”

Brooks, in her own evidence to Leveson, said the prime minister sometimes signed his texts “LOL… until I told him it meant laugh out loud”.

Cameron denied the claims made by his predecessor, Gordon Brown, that he had entered into a deal with News International over its media policy in return for its papers’ support. The prime minister said Brown had “cooked up an entirely specious and unjustified conspiracy theory” which was “absolute nonsense from start to finish”.

He declared: “There was no overt deal for support, there was no covert deal, no nods and winks. There was a Conservative politician, me, trying to win over newspapers, trying to win over television, trying to win over proprietors – but not trading policies for that support.”

Clip.

Cameron also refuted the claim put to the inquiry by Coulson, his former communications director, that he had only been asked once by his boss about the extent of his knowledge of phone hacking at the News of the World when he was appointed in 2007.

On 4 July 2014, Coulson was sentenced to 18 months in prison, having been found guilty of one charge of conspiracy to intercept voicemails.

***

Leveson’s 2,000-page final part one report was published on 29 November 2012.

The inquiry found that the editors’ code that underpinned the previous system of regulation had “simply been ignored”.

Summarising the evidence placed before the inquiry, Leveson stated: “This has damaged the public interest, caused real hardship and, also on occasion, wreaked havoc in the lives of innocent people.”

Leveson said: “There have been too many times when, chasing the story, parts of the press have acted as if its own code, which it wrote, simply did not exist.

“This has caused real hardship and, on occasion, wreaked havoc with the lives of innocent people whose rights and liberties have been disdained.”

Clip.

Leveson concluded that the existing self-regulatory body, the Press Complaints Commission, had failed and recommended a new, independent regulatory body that would have state recognition through new law.

He emphasised that it was “essential that there should be legislation to underpin… and facilitate its recognition in legal processes”

In his statement to the commons on the report, Cameron stated his support for Leveson’s recommendations which were “designed to break the perception of an excessively cosy relationship between the press and the police”.

However, the prime minister expressed “serious concerns and misgivings” regarding the prospect of implementing the changes with legislation.

He said: “The issue of principle is that, for the first time, we would have crossed the Rubicon of writing elements of press regulation into the law of the land. We should be wary of any legislation that has the potential to infringe free speech and a free press. In this House, which has been a bulwark of democracy for centuries, we should think very, very carefully before crossing that line.”

Cameron said that he was “not convinced at this stage that statute is necessary to achieve Lord Justice Leveson’s objectives.”

The prime minister announced that he had invited the deputy prime minister, Nick Clegg, and the leader of the opposition, Ed Miliband, to join cross-party talks.

Responding to Cameron’s statement, Miliband said he would seek to convince the prime minister “and this House of Commons that we should put our faith in the recommendations of Lord Justice Leveson that were delivered to us today.”

Clegg issued his own statement, in which he stated that a “free press does not mean a press that is free to bully innocent people or free to abuse grieving families.”

He expressed his support for Leveson’s “core proposal… namely, a tougher system of self-regulation, supported by new independent checks recognised in law”.

The cross-party talks eventually resulted in a compromise acceptable to all three main parties.

As a result, a Royal Charter on the self regulation of the press was set up in 2013. The charter led to the creation of the Press Recognition Panel (PRP), as a fully independent body with the purpose of carrying out activities in relation to the recognition of press regulators, in November 2014.

The government legislated to incentivise publishers to become a members of a regulators recognised by the PRP. Under section 40 of the Crime and Courts Act 2013, publishers that had not joined a recognised regulator faced paying the legal costs of both sides of a case taken against them.

The media industry expressed significant opposition to the proposals.

Publishers roundly signed up for oversight from the Independent Press Standards Organisation, known as IPSO, which did not seek recognition from the PRP. A small number of publications have joined Impress, a recognised regulator.

The 2019 Conservative Party manifesto, citing “ free speech”, said section 40 sought to “coerce the press” and vowed to repeal it.

The Media Act 2024 repealed section 40, which was never enacted or enforced.

***

Part two of the Leveson inquiry was initially delayed due to concurrent criminal investigations being conducted by the Metropolitan Police, as part of operations Weeting, Elveden and Tuleta.

The 2017 Conservative Party manifesto said that part two would be dropped entirely.

The manifesto stated: “Given the comprehensive nature of the first stage of the Leveson Inquiry and given the lengthy investigations by the police and Crown Prosecution Service into alleged wrongdoing, we will not proceed with the second stage of the Leveson Inquiry into the culture, practices and ethics of the press.”

Matt Hancock as culture secretary fulfilled this manifesto vow in March 2018, when the government formally axed part two of the inquiry.

In a commons statement, Hancock argued that the “media landscape today is markedly different from that which Sir Brian looked at in 2011.”

He added: “Sir Brian [Leveson], who I thank for his service, agrees that the Inquiry should not proceed on the current terms of reference but believes that it should continue in an amended form.

“We do not believe that reopening this costly and time-consuming public inquiry is the right way forward.

“Considering all of the factors that I have outlined to the House today, I have informed Sir Brian that we will be formally closing the Inquiry.”

The 2024 Conservative manifesto stated: “We oppose state regulation and control of the press, including any attempt to bring forward Leveson 2 or re-open the Royal Charter on self-regulation of the press.”

The Liberal Democrat manifesto was the only main party electoral platform that committed to proceeding “with part two of the Leveson inquiry.”