“Mandelson is pulling a Starmer. Trying to gag the press.”
Peter Mandelson has asked UK news organisations to stop contacting or photographing him as political and media scrutiny mounts over his past relationship with Jeffrey Epstein and his former role in sensitive diplomatic discussions involving the Chagos Islands.
Late on Friday evening, a notice circulated to editors through Independent Press Standards Organisation and the Press Association news wire, stating that Mandelson did not wish to engage with the media and invoking clauses of the Editors’ Code covering privacy and harassment.
The advisory, issued on 6 February, said IPSO had been contacted by a representative acting on Mandelson’s behalf. It added that his representatives requested journalists “do not take photos or film, approach, or contact him via phone, email, or in person,” and asked that any requests for comment be directed to a nominated intermediary whose details were redacted in the version circulated to newsrooms.
The memo drew particular attention to Clause 2, which concerns privacy, and Clause 3, which restricts persistent questioning or pursuit once an individual has asked journalists to desist unless this can be justified in the public interest.
“We are happy to make editors aware of his request,” the IPSO note said, adding that editors could contact the regulator to discuss any potential code issues.
The move comes amid continuing political fallout over Mandelson’s appointment as UK ambassador to Washington and his subsequent departure from the post, as well as growing debate about the government’s handling of negotiations over the future of the Chagos Islands.
Opposition politicians and campaign groups argue that Mandelson played a significant role in shaping Britain’s diplomatic approach to the United States and Mauritius over the territory and are calling for greater transparency about what was discussed in private meetings. They have also pressed for fuller disclosure of what he told ministers during vetting for the ambassadorial role.
Some critics say the attempt to limit direct media contact risks fuelling further controversy, particularly given the wider public interest questions now being raised about his activities while in office.
Government figures have insisted that decisions on Chagos were taken collectively by ministers and through established processes, and that any former officials involved were operating within agreed mandates. Mandelson, through previous statements, has rejected wrongdoing and said he had answered questions put to him during vetting truthfully, claims that are now being examined by parliamentary committees and, separately, by police.
The latest IPSO notice does not prevent journalists from reporting on matters already in the public domain, but it signals that Mandelson is seeking to avoid direct engagement with reporters while investigations and political rows continue.
Editors are ultimately entitled under the Code to continue pursuing stories they believe are justified in the public interest, provided they can demonstrate that such reporting meets the regulator’s standards.
A former Conservative Minister told the Conservative Post: “Mandelson appears to be attempting to shut down scrutiny at the very moment serious public-interest questions are being asked. He may dislike the attention, but accountability comes with public office, particularly when matters of national security and diplomacy are involved. The public is entitled to answers.”
Another former MP said: “Mandelson is pulling a Starmer. Trying to gag the press. He can’t handle accountability. It’s pathetic.”
Columnist for Daily Mail, Andrew Neil thanked the National for publishing the gagging notice writing on X: “Thank you for publishing in full. Means we can be sure of ignoring it in its entirety.”
For now, Mandelson has declined further comment.
