Complaints are over decisions on two articles, one of which referred to ‘the Muslim problem’

This article is more than 2 years old

This article is more than 2 years old

The Independent Press Standards Organisation is facing the first legal challenges to its rulings, including one over a column in the Sun that referred to “the Muslim problem”.



The threat of bringing the press watchdog, founded in 2014, before the courts raises fundamental questions about media regulation and Ipso’s public accountability.

One of the challenges is being brought by Rachel Elgy, an expert in equality training and a part-time student, who complained about a comment piece by Trevor Kavanagh, the Sun’s former political editor.

Ipso ruled in October that the column did not breach accuracy or discrimination clauses in the editors’ code of practice. It said Kavanagh “was entitled to speculate on the validity of the status of refugees entering Germany, and the reference to ‘a million more so-called refugees’ was clearly presented as his speculation”.

Kavanagh was a member of Ipso’s board when he wrote the article last summer and during its consideration of the complaint. His position prompted claims that the organisation was biased in his favour.

The Sun article led to a fierce backlash when it was published, with more than 100 MPs from major parties signing an open letter to the paper, criticising the piece for using “Nazi-like language” regarding the Muslim community in Britain.

Kavanagh subsequently apologised for causing offence, saying: “I can honestly say it never occurred to me that this could be interpreted as a play on ‘the Jewish problem’ and I will happily apologise to anyone who is thus offended.”

Elgy has begun a crowdfunding appeal to pay for her judicial review challenge. She told the Guardian: “It feels like journalists regulated by Ipso feel they can say anything and they are protected. It ends up with them seeming to be above the law.

“A press standards organisation should be finding where journalists are not upholding good standards. That should be [its] role.”



Her claim alleges that Ipso’s ruling is flawed because the article was inaccurate, discriminatory and could incite hatred. It says Ipso’s conclusions were flawed under its code and inconsistent with previous rulings.

Another legal challenge is being prepared against Ipso’s ruling on the Sunday Times’ reporting of a public meeting organised last year by the Balfour Apology Campaign. It has not yet come to court.



Ipso declined to comment on the judicial reviews. In its decision rejecting the complaint over the Sun article, the regulator said: “The board has no role in the consideration of individual complaints, which are adjudicated on by the complaints committee. Mr Kavanagh played no part in the consideration of this complaint.”

Kavanagh stood down from the Ipso board at the end of 2017 after serving two years of a three-year term.