Fans Wait For Giggs As Paper Fights Gag

Ryan Giggs was a notable absentee from a Manchester United training session
this morning after finding himself at the centre of a media storm.

Father-of-two Giggs, 37, was not thought to have an injury but was not present for the open session at the club's Carrington training complex.

He has become embroiled in controversy after Liberal Democrat MP John Hemming used parliamentary privilege to name Giggs as the Premier League player who took out an injunction.

Team manager Sir Alex Ferguson, busy preparing for the Champions League final on Saturday against Barcelona at Wembley, refused to answer questions about his veteran midfielder.

At one point during a news conference he was asked about the importance of Giggs to his team.

However, it was immediately obvious the United boss was not interested in discussing the Welshman's woes.

"All the players are important to us," he said.

Minutes later Sir Alex Ferguson was caught on a Sky News microphone banning the reporter from the build-up to the league final, apparently for asking the question about Giggs.

Ferguson's curt response comes a day after the law on injunctions was thrown into turmoil when Giggs was named in the Commons as the married footballer at the centre of a controversial privacy case.

Meanwhile, The Sun continues to fight the gagging order in the High Court in London to get an injunction against it lifted.

Speaking in the Commons, Mr Hemming said: "With about 75,000 people having named Ryan Giggs on Twitter, it is obviously impracticable to imprison them all."

Mr Bercow immediately took the MP to task over his comments, telling him that "occasions such as this are occasions for raising the issues of principle involved, not seeking to flout for whatever purpose".

Earlier Prime Minister David Cameron said banning newspapers from naming such stars while the information was widely available was both "unsustainable" and "unfair".

He has written to the chairman of the Commons Justice Committee Sir Alan Beith and the chairman of the Commons Culture, Media and Sport Committee, John Whittingdale, asking them to convene a joint committee of both houses to consider the issues of privacy and the use of injunctions.

Mr Whittingdale had previously told MPs: "You would virtually have to be living in an igloo not to know the identity of at least one Premier League footballer who has obtained an injunction.

"The actions by thousands of people of posting details of this on Twitter are in danger of making the law look an ass."

Mr Hemming explained that he decided to name Giggs to prevent people being jailed for gossiping about him.

The Birmingham Yardley MP said in a statement: "When he sued Twitter, it was clear what he was doing. He was going after the ordinary people who have been gossiping about him on Twitter.

"To prosecute someone for contempt of court is quite a serious step. It comes with an up to two-year jail sentence.

"I have spoken to people of ordinary means who have received these injunctions.

"I have also spoken to people who faced jailing in secret hearings and who were subject to anonymity orders themselves - this is a really oppressive system."

He said Giggs should be "held to account", adding: "Before he sued Twitter, there was no public interest in naming him.

However, when his lawyers decided to go on a 'search and destroy' against the ordinary people who gossip on Twitter, he had taken a step that should not be done anonymously.

"In Burma they jail people for criticising the king and people here are up in arms. "Here they threaten to jail people for criticising a footballer and the lawyers say I should not name the footballer."

Last week, Mr Hemming said a review by senior judges of the use of injunctions was an "attempt to gag the media in discussing the proceedings in parliament" and was "a retrograde step".

Asked whether the Prime Minister thought Mr Hemming was wrong to use parliamentary privilege to name the footballer at the centre of the row, David Cameron's official spokesman said: "I don't think it is for the Government to comment on individual cases."

On Monday The Sun newspaper challenged the order twice, saying it was time for courts to "do the right thing".

But, rejecting the newspaper's latest attempt to lift the anonymity order, Mr Justice Tugendhat said it was important to remember the law of privacy was not concerned solely with secret information, but also with intrusion and harassment.

The name "has been repeated thousands of times on the internet, and News Group Newspapers now want to join in", the judge said.