BBC spent £350,000 on legal battle to keep report on its 'biased' Middle East coverage secret



Report examined corporation's coverage of Israeli-Palestinian conflict

The BBC has been accused of a cover-up after spending almost £350,000 on a legal battle to suppress an internal report about bias in its Middle East coverage.

A seven-year campaign to gain access to the 2004 document, which examined the corporation’s coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, ended in defeat yesterday after the Supreme Court ruled it could remain secret.

Lawyer Steven Sugar, who passed away last year, made a Freedom of Information request in 2005 for disclosure of the 20,000-word Balen Report.

Report: The case centres around an investigation into claims of bias in BBC coverage of the Arab-Israeli conflict. The BBC has won the right not to publish the report (file picture)

But the corporation argued it was exempt from revealing information it held for the purposes of ‘journalism, art or literature’.

After years of courtroom battles and Mr Sugar’s death, his widow Fiona Paveley continued on his behalf.

Her lawyer, Michael Levey, said the family were ‘considering their options’ after the Supreme Court dismissed the latest appeal after ruling the report was ‘outside the scope’ of the FoI Act.

By September 2010, the BBC had spent £270,000 on the case, but senior insiders admitted this had now increased to as much as £350,000.

Legal battle: The BBC has spent hundreds of thousands of pounds in the case in a bid to suppress the report

Probe: BBC veteran Jeremy Bowen who is the Middle East Editor

The broadcaster’s reluctance to reveal the details of the dossier – which was compiled by Malcolm Balen, a senior journalist and editorial adviser at the BBC – has led to speculation that it was highly critical.

Lord Janner of Braunstone, chairman of the Britain Israel Parliamentary Group, said last night: ‘What have they got to hide?’

Tory MP Mike Freer, vice-chairman of the All Party Parliamentary Group Against Anti-Semitism, added: ‘This is the worst of all outcomes.

‘It fuels suspicion they have got something to hide.’

A spokesman for the BBC insisted it did not have anything to hide about its Middle East coverage but had pursued the case to defend its right to protect information about its journalism.

He added: ‘We welcome the Supreme Court’s judgment, which will ensure that the BBC is afforded the space to conduct its journalistic activities freely.

‘Independent journalism requires honest and open internal debate free from external pressures. This ruling enables us to continue to do that.’