MINISTERS are considering a rule change that would be an affront to the freedom of the press, natural justice and the principles of a healthy democracy.

If the new ruling over legal fees is agreed, a newspaper could face the prospect of being sued, winning the case but still being forced to pay both its own costs and those of its opponent.

The fallout would see local newspapers like the Telegraph & Argus become vulnerable to threat from claimants and their lawyers, given courage to pursue weak claims for high fees, since such claimants would no longer be burdened with the usual legal costs of failure.

Such a move has the potential to cause great harm to the newspaper industry, especially struggling regional papers, and would crush investigative journalism.

But this is now a very real prospect after a vote passed in the Lords in the continuing war on the free Press.

Politicians who are in favour of the idea claim to be acting in the interests of Press 'victims' - but the real goal seems to be to force newspapers to surrender 300 years of free speech and to move towards greater State control.

In essence, if newspapers do not agree to submit to a regulator approved by a Royal Charter, they will be punished by having to fund both sides in any libel action, irrespective of whether they win or lose.

The result would be that two newspapers would be treated very differently for an identical 'offence', depending on which regulator they were signed up to.

Editors would have to chose the less of two evils; allow the State to oversee your content or fund weak libel cases against your own newspaper.

There is a genuine risk that such a change could destroy some newspapers and allow rich bullies to financially cripple newspapers for exposing their wrongdoing.