The Privy Council set out its reasons for supporting Chief Justice Richard Ground's original ruling that Bermuda's media should not be banned from reporting extracts of a leaked Police dossier on the Bermuda Housing Corporation scandal.

Though the trial ended in late October the written judgments were not made public until yesterday.

In it Lord Justice Scott held that the public interest in the freedom of the media to disseminate information relating to elected officials overrode the public interest in maintaining the confidentiality of documents relating to a police investigation into allegations of corruption.

And his Lordship noted the Chief Justice had "conducted the balancing exercise impeccably and the Court of Appeal were right to dismiss the appeal".

Last year former Attorney General Philip Perinchief and Commissioner of Police George Jackson asked for a media gag after ZBM television news broadcast extracts from the Bermuda Police Service (BPS) files on the BHCinvestigation on May 23, and the Mid-Ocean News published stories on June 1 containing further details.

According to the extracts published by the Mid-Ocean News, Premier Ewart Brown, former Premier Jennifer Smith, former Minister Renee Webb, construction boss Zane DeSilva and others were investigated by Police looking into allegations of corruption at the BHC.

When the probe concluded in 2004, the then acting Director of Public Prosecutions Kulandra Ratneser said many of those investigated could only be accused of bad ethics.

Mr. Ratneser also said some of those investigated escaped prosecution due to Bermuda's antiquated corruption laws

In the written decision delivered yesterday his Lordship stated: "There was no doubt that the allegations... are in their nature defamatory of those against whom they are made. Some may also represent breaches of confidentiality or of the rights of privacy to which the individuals concerned are entitled.

"But the individuals, the targets of the allegations, are not parties to this litigation."

His Lordship said the "critical issue is whether the public interest that can be asserted by the BPSin preserving the confidentiality of their investigative material should trump the public interest in the freedom of the press to place before the public of Bermuda material of the sort disclosed..."

And his Lordship said they agreed with Chief Justice Richard Ground's statement: "The (BHC) allegations are not gratuitous, in that there is some evidence to support them, as set out in the material so far reported.

"Nor do the allegations concern the private personal life of those concerned.

"They touch upon their conduct in office. In those circumstances I think that the public interest is genuinely engaged, and this is not a case of the public being officiously interested in matters which do not concern them."

The local courts were "far better placed than their Lordships to strike that balance" than the Privy Council and his Lordship said they would not "substitute" the Chief Justice's ruling unless he had erred in law.

His Lordship added that because there was no evidence that members of the press had participated in the removal of the documents from the BPS the circumstances of the removal were not relevant.

To read the full written decision go to the opinion page