DOCSLIB.ORG

Leveson Inquiry: Letting the Judges Take the Hard Decisions?

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Leveson Inquiry: Letting the Judges Take the Hard Decisions? Leveson Inquiry: Letting the Judges Take the Hard Decisions? The Leveson inquiry was quick and cheap by the standards of public inquiries. Compendious in length, it was intended as a solution to the problems posed by press malfeasance – but its reception merely reaffirmed pre- existing political sentiment. Chris Hanretty reports. n 29 November last year, Leveson: first, that the decision to breakdowns or controversies are Lord Justice Leveson pre- hold an inquiry can be understood simply more numerous. Osented his report on the cul- with reference to common theories Nevertheless, we can hazard some ture, practices and ethics of the press of blame avoidance; second, that the generalisations about the factors to Parliament. Leveson had been cost and length of the inquiry were that make public inquiries more asked to undertake an inquiry by limited compared to other similar in- likely. Using a carefully curated cata- the Prime Minister following claims quiries; third, that the nature of the logue of calls for inquiries, Raanan that a private investigator working inquiry demonstrated the increasing Sulitzeanu-Kenan has been able to for the News of the World had hacked judicialisation of British politics; and identify three factors that make an the phone of murdered schoolchild fourth, that reactions to the inquiry inquiry more likely: if the govern- Milly Dowler. Leveson concluded were strongly conditioned by initial ment is popular at the time; if the that the British press had too often attitudes towards regulation of the issue is salient; and if the original acted in an ‘outrageous’ fashion and press and party politics. This does not target of blame is remote from the that the existing system of press help us to predict the likely fate of government. These three factors all self-regulation was inadequate. Leveson’s recommendations, but it feed into politicians’ calculations. Leveson concluded that there was Politicians had should make us realise that this issue Other things being equal, politicians no evidence of widespread police developed will not go away. would rather not call public inquir- corruption, despite a sequence of ‘too close a ies, because to call a public inquiry poor decisions relating to the initial is to admit that something has gone investigation into hacking at the relationship Blame Avoidance wrong on the government’s watch. News of the World, but found that with the press’, That is, the government loses from politicians, as a group, had devel- Leveson found The initial decision, subsequently acknowledging problems. Popular oped ‘too close a relationship with revised, was to appoint an inquiry governments are happier taking a the press’. into the narrow issue of phone hacking. short-term loss by acknowledging The report made 92 recom- Understanding decisions to set up a problem. Salient issues are those mendations. Some were relatively such inquiries is devilishly difficult that are foremost in the public mind uncontroversial (for example, those because of the problem of nega- and for which immediate relief is of concerning amendments to the Data tive cases – instances where it was greatest benefit. Remote concerns Protection Act and civil damages). conceivable that an inquiry might are issues where the long-term risk Others – in particular, the recom- have been established, but where for the government of a castigatory mendation that a system of press no inquiry resulted. We know, for report is limited. self-regulation have a statutory example, that the rate at which How does this help us under- underpinning – proved far more public inquiries are established has stand Cameron’s 6 July decision contentious. increased from roughly one per to establish a public inquiry into Though the publication of the re- year until 1980, to a peak of four phone hacking? Certainly, the issue port lacked the theatre of earlier pub- per year in the period 1997–2001. was extremely salient – the media lic hearings, the inquiry as a whole From this trend, however, it is dif- likes to talk about itself, and the was an important political event. ficult to say whether we have more hacking of a dead girl’s voicemail It was not, however, sui generis. public inquiries because politicians is an act so ghoulish it is unlikely Leveson belongs within a particular increasingly favour public inquiries the issue would have dropped off genus (judicial inquiries) and species as their preferred ‘mechanism for the agenda. The primary targets of (inquiries under the Inquiries Act ascertaining the facts after any major blame – News International editors 2005). Such taxonomic rigour helps breakdown or controversy’ (Burgess, and executives – were socially close us understand several points about 2011), or because major (perceived) to the Prime Minister, but they were 8 Political Insight The Leveson inquiry into the culture, practices and ethics of the press was established following claims that the News of the World had hacked the phone of murdered schoolchild Milly Dowler. Reuters more remote than a minister. In terms of has now placed him in a rather more dif- If we assume that Part Two of the inquiry popularity, the combined vote share of ficult position. The initial instinct to avoid is a dead letter, then we must conclude both government parties was above the or deflect blame generated pressures that, it that the inquiry has completed its work average for the period Sulitzeanu-Kenan seems, were difficult for the Prime Minister at breakneck pace. The average duration investigated. So, based on the factors that to resist. of inquiries under the Inquiries Act 2005 have been found to explain the establish- (including on-going inquiries, but exclud- ment of public inquiries, it would have ing ‘converted’ inquiries) is two years and been perfectly understandable for Cameron Cost ten months. The shortest inquiry (into to have set up a narrow inquiry into phone an explosion at the ICL plastics factory in hacking. Strictly speaking, the Report is incomplete, Glasgow) concluded in one year and seven Of course, we did not get an inquiry into since it deals only with the first part of the months. This compares with one year and phone hacking, but rather an inquiry into Inquiry’s terms of reference (‘to inquire six months for Leveson. The costs of the something broader: the culture, practices into the culture, practices, and ethics of inquiry (approximately £6 million) are ap- and ethics of the press. This mission creep the press … and make recommendations’). proximately half those of the long-running arose in the week following the PM’s initial Leveson himself was ‘quite unable to say inquiry into the Mid Staffordshire NHS decision to grant an inquiry. Both the terms when it might be possible to even consider Foundation Trust. The speed with which of reference and the assessors to the in- Part Two’, which deals more narrowly with Leveson reported is certainly unlikely to quiry were agreed between the three party criminal conduct at News International and deter politicians from calling for similar leaders. Clearly it was in the opposition’s its investigation by the Metropolitan Police. inquiries, a process that seems to invite interest to broaden the scope of the inquiry The lack of a Part Two is perhaps for- ever-greater judicialisation. to include more general matters, since it tunate, given that this instalment is over believed that this would have embarrassed one million words in length. This is three- the government and led to the resignation fifths of the length of the final report of the Judicialisation of Jeremy Hunt. It is less clear why the decade-long Bloody Sunday Inquiry, but Prime Minister should have agreed to an still four times longer than last year’s long- The Leveson inquiry demonstrated the inquiry along these lines – particularly since est court judgment (the hugely expensive increasing judicialisation of British poli- a broader inquiry with a prospective remit Berezovsky v Abramovich). tics. Judicialisation, in this context, means April 2013 9 50 Leveson, something only satisfied by the 45 Negative latter. Politicians, indeed, seem fonder of the phrase than judges or legal academics: Positive 40 one author, writing in 1940, described it 35 Neutral as ‘one of a number of pseudo-analytical expressions deriving from false premises as 30 to the separation of powers’. Legal senti- 25 NEWS ment has not warmed over time. Leveson raises issues about judicialisation 20 that are different from common lamenta- 15 tions about human rights jurisprudence. Number of editorials If difficult decisions involving normatively 10 sensitive issues are systematically turned 5 over to judges, what do we need politicians for? 0 April 11 May 11 June 11 July 11 March 11 Reactions January 11 October. 11 February. 11 September. 11 November.December. 11 11 FIGURE 1 Editorial attitudes towards the Leveson inquiry. The reception given to the Leveson Report Source: Noelle De Guzman, ‘Leveson Editorials: Defending Press Freedom – or Press Interests?’ LSE Media Policy Blog. by newspapers was more negative than the reception given it by politicians; this in turn was more negative than the recep- both the ‘expansion of the province of elements at play, it is difficult to imagine tion given to the report by the public (see the courts or the judges at the expense of anyone other than a judge having the level Figure 1). As far as the national newspapers the politicians’, and ‘the spread of judicial of trust necessary to resolve competing nor- were concerned, the Guardian and the Fi- decision-making methods outside the ju- mative claims without giving the appear- nancial Times (combined daily circulation in dicial province proper’ (Tate & Vallinder, ance of doing anything other than finding October 2012 of approximately 493,000) 1995). The first aspect of this can be seen a sensible solution to a technical problem.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Response to the Government Consultation on the Leveson Inquiry and Its Implementation
    Response to the Government Consultation on the Leveson Inquiry and its Implementation Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................... 2 The commencement of section 40 ............................................................................. 4 Option (a): Government should not commence any of section 40 now, but keep it under review and on the statute book ..................................................................... 4 Option (b): Government should fully commence section 40 now ............................ 5 Option (c): Government should ask Parliament to repeal all of section 40 now ...... 8 Option (d): Government should partially commence section 40, and keep under review those elements that apply to publishers outside a recognised regulator ... 10 Option (e): Government should partially commence section 40, and ask Parliament to repeal those elements that apply to publishers outside a recognised regulator 11 The impact of section 40 .......................................................................................... 13 The impact of section 40 on the press industry .................................................... 13 The impact of section 40 on claimants .................................................................. 19 The purpose of section 40 ........................................................................................ 22 Part 2 of the Leveson Inquiry ..................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Leveson Inquiry Into the Cultures, Practices And
    For Distribution to CPs THE LEVESON INQUIRY INTO THE CULTURES, PRACTICES AND ETHICS OE THE PRESS WITNESS STATEMENT OE JAMES HANNING I, JAMES HANNING of Independent Print Limited, 2 Derry Street, London, W8 SHF, WILL SAY; My name is James Hanning. I am deputy editor of the Independent on Sunday and, with Francis Elliott of The Times, co-author of a biography of David Cameron. In the course of co-writing and updating our book we spoke to a large number of people, but equally I am very conscious that I, at least, dipped into areas in which I can claim very little specialist knowledge, so I would emphasise that in several respects there are a great many people better placed to comment and much of what follows is impressionistic. I hope that what follows is germane to some of the relationships that Lord Justice Leveson has asked witnesses to discuss. I hesitate to try to draw a broader picture, but I hope that some conclusions about the disproportionate influence of a particular sector of the media can be drawn from my experience. My interest in the area under discussion in the Third Module stems from two topics. One is in David Cameron, on whose biography we began work in late 2005, soon after Cameron became Tory leader. The second is an interest in phone hacking at the News of the World. Tory relations with Murdoch Since early 2007, the Conservative leadership has been extremely keen to ingratiate itself with the Murdoch empire. It is striking how it had become axiomatic that the support of the Murdoch papers was essential for winning a general election.
    [Show full text]
  • For Parties to Merger
    Karen Bradley MP Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport Dear Secretary of State, The National Union of Journalists (NUJ) notes your statement of 3 March 2017 inviting suBmissions in relation to the proposeD full merger of 21st Century Fox Inc anD Sky plc. We welcome your statement of the same Date that you are minDeD to issue a European Intervention Notice on the Basis there may Be puBlic interest concerns, as set out in the Enterprise Act 2002, which warrant further consiDeration. The NUJ strongly supports an investigation By Ofcom into the proposeD merger, which poses a significant threat to meDia plurality anD Broadcasting stanDarDs. We Believe the merger woulD undermine the puBlic interest anD that referral for investigation unDer Section 58 of the Enterprise Act 2002 is essential. The NUJ is the voice for journalism anD for journalists across the UK anD IrelanD. It was founDeD in 1907 anD has 30,000 memBers. We are an affiliate of Both the European FeDeration of Journalists anD the International FeDeration of Journalists (IFJ). We represent journalists working at home anD abroad in all sectors of the meDia, incluDing staff, stuDents anD freelances – writers, reporters, eDitors, suB-eDitors, photographers, illustrators anD people who work in puBlic relations. As a union we have a strong commitment to the concept of meDia Diversity. Any inDiviDual, family or company which Dominates the meDia lanDscape is funDamentally Damaging to Democracy. In examining the proposeD merger, Ofcom woulD have to consiDer the already unsatisfactory situation prevailing in the UK, where the provision of radio anD television news is restricteD to the BBC anD two Dominant players in the commercial sector.
    [Show full text]
  • Hacking Affair Is Not Over – but What Would a Second Leveson Inquiry Achieve?
    7/10/2019 Hacking affair is not over – but what would a second Leveson inquiry achieve? Academic rigour, journalistic flair Hacking affair is not over – but what would a second Leveson inquiry achieve? July 25, 2014 3.57pm BST Author John Jewell Director of Undergraduate Studies, School of Journalism, Media and Cultural Studies, Cardiff University On we go. Ian Nicholson/PA In the latest episode in the long-running saga that is the phone hacking affair, Dan Evans, a former journalist at the News of the World and Sunday Mirror, has received a 10 month suspended sentence after being convicted of two counts of phone hacking, one of making illegal payments to officials, and one of perverting the course of justice. Coming so soon after the conviction of Andy Coulson and the acquittal of Rebekah Brooks and others, one could be forgiven for assuming that the whole phone hacking business is now done and dusted. Not a bit of it. As Julian Petley has written: “Eleven more trials are due to take place involving 20 current or former Sun and News of the World journalists, who are accused variously of making illegal payments to public officials, conspiring to intercept voicemail and accessing data on stolen mobile phones.” We also learned in June that Scotland Yard had officially told Rupert Murdoch of their intention to interview him as part of their inquiry into allegations of crime at his British newspapers. The Guardian revealed that Murdoch was first contacted in 2013, but the police ceded to his lawyers’ request that any interrogation should wait until the Coulson–Brooks trial had finished.
    [Show full text]
  • A Better Death in a Digital Age: Post
    Publishing Office Aims and scope Abramis Academic ASK House Communication ethics is a discipline that supports communication Northgate Avenue practitioners by offering tools and analyses for the understanding of Bury St. Edmunds ethical issues. Moreover, the speed of change in the dynamic information Suffolk environment presents new challenges, especially for communication IP32 6BB practitioners. UK Tel: +44 (0)1284 700321 Ethics used to be a specialist subject situated within schools of philosophy. Fax: +44 (0)1284 717889 Today it is viewed as a language and systematic thought process available Email: [email protected] to everyone. It encompasses issues of care and trust, social responsibility and Web: www.abramis.co.uk environmental concern and identifies the values necessary to balance the demands of performance today with responsibilities tomorrow. Copyright All rights reserved. No part For busy professionals, CE is a powerful learning and teaching approach that of this publication may be reproduced in any mate- encourages analysis and engagement with many constituencies, enhancing rial form (including pho- relationships through open-thinking. It can be used to improve organization tocopying or storing it in performance as well as to protect individual well-being. any medium by electronic means, and whether or not transiently or incidentally Submissions to some other use of this Papers should be submitted to the Editor via email. Full details on submission – publication) without the along with detailed notes for authors – are available online in PDF format: written permission of the www.communication-ethics.net copyright owner, except in accordance with the provisions of the Copyright, Subscription Information Designs and Patents Act Each volume contains 4 issues, issued quarterly.
    [Show full text]
  • United Kingdom
    Sousa, H., Trützschler, W., Fidalgo, J. & Lameiras, M. (eds.) (2013) Media Regulators in Europe: A Cross-Country Comparative Analysis Braga: CECS, University of Minho ISBN: 978-989-97244-7-1 pp. 180 -191 United Kingdom ALESSANDRO D’ARMA Communication and Media Research Institute CAMRI, University of Westminster [email protected] 1. LEGAL FRAMEWORK The main media and communications regulatory body in the UK is the Office of Communications (Ofcom), with offices in London. Ofcom is a statutory body, organizationally separated from government and operating at arm’s length from it, created by the Office of Communications Act 20021. Its main powers and functions were conferred on it by the Communications Act 20032, which sets out no less than 263 separate statutory duties3. Ofcom is accountable to Parliament to which it reports on its activities annually. As will be detailed below, Ofcom has regulatory duties across most of the ‘converging’ electronic communications sector, often in an advisory capacity to government in areas such as media ownership rules and public service broadcasting, and is in charge of implementing and enforcing legislation. Other Acts of Parliament under which Ofcom operates include the Broadcasting Acts 19904 and 19965, the Human Rights Act 19986, the Enterprise Act 20027, the Wireless Telegraphy Act 20068, and the Digital Economy Act 20109. There are other governmental and non-governmental bodies that have powers and duties in relation to media and communications matters. The two main government depart- ments with policy responsibilities over media and communications are the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) and the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS).
    [Show full text]
  • Whittingdale and the Ex-Dominatrix: Conspiracy of Silence Or
    Whittingdale and the ex-dominatrix: conspiracy of silence or provided by LSE Research Online View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk CORE goobrought to you by d press behaviour? blogs.lse.ac.uk/polis/2016/04/13/whittingdale-and-the-ex-dominatrix-conspiracy-of-silence-or-good-press- behaviour/ 2016-4-13 This is the original version of an article that appeared in Newsweek on 13.4.16. The John Whittingdale ‘dominatrix’ story is a classic case study of the eternal balancing act between the right to privacy and the public interest in disclosure. In practice this is rarely a purely ethical or editorial decision. Inevitably, legal, political and taste issues will come into play. The circumstantial details are vital. Yes, ‘publish and be damned’ but in a country without a First Amendment, there has to be a justification. In the highly competitive UK newspaper market editors hate to spike juicy tales of politicians and former sex workers. Yet, in the febrile debate over British journalism that has followed the Leveson inquiry into phone-hacking we find ourselves in the intriguing situation where the advocates of restraint, such as the pro-regulation campaigners at Hacked Off, are urging publication of details of the private love life of an unmarried individual. John_Whittingdale There is a good reason to publish this story now. The suspicion is that when some newspapers knew about it back in 2013/14 they did not run with it because they feared pushing the Secretary of State responsible for media regulation into implementing Lord Justice Leveson’s suggestions for statutory oversight of the UK press.
    [Show full text]
  • MOD100024092 the Leveson Inquiry
    WITNESS STATEMENT OF JOANNE KATHLEEN ROWLING I, JOANNE KATHLEEN ROWLING, of Schillings 41 Bedford Square, London, WC1B 3HX WILL SAY as follows:- 1. I make this statement as a Core Participant in the Leveson Inquiry as chaired by the Rt.Hon Lord Justice Leveson ("the Inquiry"). I am an author, professionally known as J.K. Rowling. My ’Harry Potter’ series of novels were (initially) published over the years 1997 - 2007 and have enjoyed a great deal of commercial success. The novels have also been adapted into a series of feature films. The first film in the series premiered in 2001 with the final film being released worldwide in July of this year. As a result of those successes, for which I am very grateful, I have gone from being what I would describe as ’an ordinary person’ to someone who is - to an extent - ’famous’. The purpose of this Statement is to try to explain some of the experiences I have had as a result of my rise in prominence. MOD100024092 The Leveson Inquiry Before describing some of those experiences, I would like to stress that I do not want to be involved in the Inquiry as a result of any personal vendetta against the press. I have none. On the contrary, I acknowledge and support the vital role that the press plays as part of a free and democratic society. As an author I strongly believe in freedom of expression. I believe that the right to be informed and to share ideas is essential. If I had not been able to freely express my ideas over the years I would not be in the privileged position that I am today.
    [Show full text]
  • Feral Beast": Cautionary Lessons from British Press Reform Lili Levi University of Miami School of Law, [email protected]
    University of Miami Law School University of Miami School of Law Institutional Repository Articles Faculty and Deans 2015 Taming the "Feral Beast": Cautionary Lessons From British Press Reform Lili Levi University of Miami School of Law, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.miami.edu/fac_articles Part of the Communications Law Commons, and the Comparative and Foreign Law Commons Recommended Citation Lili Levi, Taming the "Feral Beast": Cautionary Lessons From British Press Reform, 55 Santa Clara L. Rev. 323 (2015). This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty and Deans at University of Miami School of Law Institutional Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Articles by an authorized administrator of University of Miami School of Law Institutional Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. TAMING THE "FERAL BEAST"1 : CAUTIONARY LESSONS FROM BRITISH PRESS REFORM Lili Levi* TABLE OF CONTENTS Introdu ction ............................................................................ 324 I. British Press Reform, in Context ....................................... 328 A. Overview of the British Press Sector .................... 328 B. The British Approach to Newspaper Regulation.. 330 C. Phone-Hacking and the Leveson Inquiry Into the Culture, Practices and Ethics of the Press ..... 331 D. Where Things Stand Now ...................................... 337 1. The Royal Charter ............................................. 339 2. IPSO and IM
    [Show full text]
  • Submission from IPPR to the Leveson Inquiry: Module 4
    Submission from IPPR to the Leveson Inquiry: Module 4 The IPPR welcomes this opportunity to contribute to Module 4 of the Leveson Inquiry’s deliberations: Recommendations for a more effective policy and regulation that supports the integrity and freedom of the press while encouraging the highest ethical standards. The main part of this submission draws upon a public attitudes survey commissioned by IPPR in late May 2012 into trust, impartiality and ownership in UK media. We hope the Inquiry will find the responses to this survey a helpful insight into how public attitudes are shaping up on some of the key issues the Inquiry is tackling as it draws together its evidence and analysis under Module 4. Background The IPPR’s Next Generation Media Project is focused mainly on producing a set of clear principles to shape and underpin future media policy. This is necessary both in response to the collapse of public trust following the phone hacking scandal and in the face of longer-standing challenges posed to traditional regulatory systems around the world by the disruptive effects of convergence in digital media content and platforms. The project will cover the areas of regulation and ownership and aims to bring some consistency to the rules that would apply both to traditional and new media forms as they converge. The Next Generation Media project starts with a recognition that there are competing policy priorities in this space. We believe it is important to focus on what is do-able, as well as what is desirable, within the technological constraints of a globalised media marketplace, the economic constraints of sustaining a valuable industrial sector which is in some cases struggling to survive – never mind grow and develop – and the democratic constraints on how far Parliament can go (or will be prepared to go) in limiting freedoms of expression and action in increasingly open public forums.
    [Show full text]
  • At Inquiry, Rupert Murdoch Defends 50-Year Record 25 April 2012, by RAPHAEL SATTER , Associated Press
    At inquiry, Rupert Murdoch defends 50-year record 25 April 2012, By RAPHAEL SATTER , Associated Press could swing elections. "We don't have that sort of power," he testified. Murdoch was being quizzed under oath before an inquiry run by Lord Justice Brian Leveson, who is examining the relationship between British politicians and the press, a key question raised by the phone hacking scandal that brought down Murdoch's News of the World tabloid in July. Revelations of widespread illegal behavior at the top-selling Sunday publication rocked Britain's In this image from video, News Corp. chairman Rupert establishment with evidence of media misdeeds, Murdoch appears at Lord Justice Brian Leveson's inquiry police corruption and too-cozy links between the in London, Wednesday April 25, 2012 to answer press and politicians. Murdoch's News International questions under oath about how much he knew about - the tabloid's publisher - has been hit with over 100 phone hacking at the News of the World tabloid. Murdoch is being grilled on his relationship with British lawsuits over phone hacking and dozens of politicians at the country's media ethics inquiry, while a reporters and media executives have been government minister is battling accusations he gave arrested. News Corp. privileged access in its bid to take over a major broadcaster. (AP Photo/Pool) Showing little equivocation, Murdoch batted away challenges to his ethics by inquiry lawyer Robert Jay. (AP) -- News Corp. chairman Rupert Murdoch said Asked whether he set the political agenda for his Wednesday that his globe-spanning TV and U.K.
    [Show full text]
  • Ofcom) 13 July 2016
    2016 Annual Colloquium on fundamental rights Public consultation on "MEDIA PLURALISM AND DEMOCRACY" Response from UK Office of Communications (Ofcom) 13 July 2016 Ofcom is the independent public regulatory authority responsible for implementing the AVMS Directive in the UK. We have over 10 years’ experience of media content regulation and we are a converged regulator with responsibilities for telecommunications, spectrum and postal services. We welcome the opportunity to contribute to this important consultation and look forward to discussing the topics outlined here in more detail in the future. We have answered the questions where our expertise is most relevant. For any questions about this response, please contact Maria Donde ([email protected]) B. Media freedom and pluralism 5. In the context of media freedom and pluralism, what should be the role of the State, if any, in the regulation of media? What should be the role of self-regulation? In the UK, all three models of media regulation (statutory, co- and self-regulation) are used. There are benefits in having a mixed approach, but also some challenges. Ofcom’s experience in regulating a number of sectors and working with a variety of statutory, co-regulatory and self-regulatory bodies suggests there are some core principles of effective regulation that are shared by all models. These principles are set out in our response to Question (7), below. In the UK, an inquiry into the regulation of the press conducted throughout 2011 – 2012 (the “Leveson Inquiry”) considered all forms of media regulation. Ofcom was asked to contribute to that Inquiry.
    [Show full text]