Individuals may be prosecuted under Section 5 if they disclose secret information damaging to international relations which they know is protected under The Official State Secrets Act.

Felstead explains that “A disclosure is held to be ‘damaging’ if it is likely to endanger the interests of the UK abroad, seriously endanger the protection by the UK of those interests or the safety of British citizens abroad.”

He asserts that the informaion allegedly contained in the leaked memo could be of important public interest and keeping such information secret could in fact be damaging in itself: “the information apparently contained in this memo clearly raises questions of public interest … Indeed, it could be suggested that the lack of openness of the government in this case does more harm to national security than good.”

The public interest issue is an important one since in Felstead's view it could be a line of defence for any newspaper prosecuted under Section 5.  

The author then questions whether the prosecutions associated with the memo are in fact politically expedient: "One wonders whether the prosecutions have more to do with political expediency than a genuine attempt to safeguard the national interest."

Importantly, Felstead's article recalls a Labour government white paper on freedom of information published in 1997, which included the following statement: "Unnecessary secrecy in government leads to arrogance in governance and defective decision-making. The perception of excessive secrecy has become a corrosive influence in the decline of public confidence in government."

Source: Guardian Unlimited