A celebrity is set to learn whether a High Court injunction to prevent the publication of allegations of inappropriate sexual activities will be granted. The individual, identified only as PPT, is arguing that publishing the claims by ITN and The Guardian would violate his human rights by endangering his life and exposing him to inhumane or degrading punishment.
Mr Justice Nicklin is scheduled to deliver his decision at London's High Court on Tuesday afternoon. The case hinges on an "unprecedented" argument that the celebrity's life would be at "very likely" risk if the allegations become public.
During a two-day trial, the court heard that media outlets had interviewed over 100 individuals, including 30 first-hand witnesses. These sources reportedly claim the celebrity "abused his status" to target young women over an extended period. Unlike previous celebrity privacy cases, PPT's argument does not claim a breach of privacy but rather relies on Articles 2 and 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which protect the right to life and prohibit torture or degrading treatment.
PPT strongly denies the allegations and fears a "trial by media." His legal team stated that upon being informed of the claims in May, he entered a state of "extreme panic" and expressed suicidal intentions. He reportedly attempted suicide in May and again in July after absconding from a secure hospital. His counsel accused the media outlets of being determined to publish "regardless of whether he dies or spends months in psychiatric detainment."
Conversely, lawyers for ITN and The Guardian described PPT's argument as "unprecedented" and questioned the court's role in assessing the causes of suicidal ideation. They contended that the state's duty of care to PPT is discharged by mental health services and that the obligation to keep him safe rests with his hospital.
The media outlets' legal team argued that the journalists' research suggests the celebrity "abused his power...to prey on young women for sexual purposes over an extended period." They believe publication would contribute to an important public debate about the misuse of power by men against women. The court is expected to rule on the injunction at 2 p.m. on Tuesday.