Above the salacious attractions to some press, Lord Browne´s activities were very much in the public interest.
Use of company resources is questionable, though small fry in nature. Use of company personnel is more serious, who would refuse a request from the powerful CEO, when asked.
Lord Browne´s breaking of the law is mirrored in the activities of his company seen in Texas and Alaska so not to be ignored.
Finally, the fact that the judge decided not to press the perjury case is questionable. Would this judge have reached the same conclusion if the liar under oath had been a janitor or street cleaner?
Onésimo Alvarez-Moro
See article:
All is vanity. The downfall of Lord Browne, once Britain's most fêted business leader, will occupy the press for weeks to come, and may even, because of its scandalous nature, earn him the footnote in history that his business career, for all its achievements, would very probably not have done.
Yet the hypocrisy being spoken on all sides in this matter is already quite breathtaking. Both the press and Lord Browne are guilty of it in equal measure. This was not a story, as claimed by The Mail on Sunday, pursued in the interests of high-principled public service, but rather that of voyeuristic fascination with other people's sexuality, heavily peppered with a cavalier disrespect for privacy which has become one of the more unsavoury characteristics of the British press.
It is true that the judge, when partially lifting the injunction on publication, did cite a public interest cause in letting it all come out. This concerned the series of allegations from Lord Browne's former partner that he had misused company resources in pursuing his relationship.
See full Article.
Posts
