Get all your news in one place.
100’s of premium titles.
One app.
Start reading
The Independent UK
The Independent UK
Holly Evans

Ex-Mail on Sunday editor says allowing hacking and blagging of senior politician would have been ‘crazy’

Sir Simon Hughes alleges he was targeted by unlawful information gathering by journalists at Associated Newspaper Limited (PA) - (PA Archive)

A former senior editor at the Mail on Sunday has said that claims that he had been informed of phone hacking by a private investigator and knew stories were sourced through these means was “false”.

Chris Anderson, 63, was employed by Associated Newspapers Limited as associate editor from 1999 to 2008, and told the High Court that he would have been “crazy” and “nuts” to commission a story in 2006 on politician Sir Simon Hughes, having known it was obtained through unlawful means.

He was questioned over his contact with Greg Miskiw, formerly of News of the World, who is alleged to have passed on information obtained from convicted hacker Glenn Mulcaire regarding the identity and address of Sir Simon’s boyfriend, known as HJK.

Sir Simon, former deputy leader of the Liberal Democrats, is one of seven people – including the Duke of Sussex, Sir Elton John, Baroness Doreen Lawrence, Liz Hurley and Sadie Frost – suing ANL over allegations of unlawful information gathering.

In his written evidence, Mr Anderson denied any knowledge of Mulcaire at the time, or any relationship with Mr Miskiw, who provided tips to the Mail on Sunday.

He said: “I was certainly not aware of this at the time, nor did Mr Miskiw tell me of this. Had Mr Miskiw ever said to me that the information had been obtained by unlawful means, I would not have accepted it.

Barrister David Sherborne (pictured) cross-examined Chris Anderson on Tuesday at the High Court (PA) (PA Wire)

“I would have extricated myself from discussions with him and put out a bulletin to department heads not to use him again. I never asked Mr Miskiw to use any unlawful means to obtain information for TMOS.”

In cross-examination, emails between him and Mr Miskiw refer to the presence of a photographer outside HJK’s property, and that he had been “answering the phone in his flat”.

Insisting that he had no awareness of unlawful information gathering, he told the court: “I would have been breaking the law for the sake of a middle-of-the-book, back-of-the-book page lead, there was nothing in it for me and I wouldn’t have done it anyways because it was against the law. It’s nuts honestly.”

Mr Anderson also denied Mr Miskiw’s later claims in a 2018 Byline Investigates article that he had been informed that they were able to carry out “hacking” and that he had known some of the articles had been sourced that way.

He said: “Mr Miskiw never said anything like this to me. This claim is false, as is the claim that I would have gone along with such a suggestion. I would not have gone along with such a proposal with anyone under any circumstances.”

On Monday, the former editor-in-chief of the Mail on Sunday said that stories about celebrities and royals could come from “hangers-on” who would brief journalists or speak “indiscreetly” to others who would.

Peter Wright, the editor of the newspaper between 1998 and 2012, said in his written evidence that during his tenure: “I was never informed by anyone working for me that a story had been sourced by way of phone hacking, tapping or bugging”.

The journalist, now editor emeritus of ANL, said in his written evidence that in the “political, royal and showbiz worlds” journalists cultivated sources at social events.

Mr Wright continued: “Included in these contacts would be the numerous cronies and hangers-on who, like moths to a flame, are drawn to the social circles of celebrities and royal figures, all too ready to ‘big themselves up’ and bask in reflected glory, or even earn some money, by passing information to journalists.”

The editor described these contacts as “part of the lifeblood of Sunday newspapers”, including for diary sections.

He continued: “So, for example, the Duke of Sussex, like any royal, was surrounded by a large number of staff, friends and hangers-on, many of whom briefed journalists, either directly, or by speaking indiscreetly to third parties who had their own contacts with journalists.”

Mr Wright said that when an article quoted “a royal insider” or “palace sources”, this was “a simple statement of fact” rather than a cover for unlawful acts.

ANL has strongly denied wrongdoing and is defending the claims brought by the group.

Sign up to read this article
Read news from 100’s of titles, curated specifically for you.
Already a member? Sign in here
Related Stories
Top stories on inkl right now
One subscription that gives you access to news from hundreds of sites
Already a member? Sign in here
Our Picks
Fourteen days free
Download the app
One app. One membership.
100+ trusted global sources.