Nearly 100 years on from the our own famous fight for press freedom, a local councillor has won his own battle over his right to freedom of expression.

In what could be a landmark case, a High Court judge ruled that Clr. Malcolm Calver, who until the recent elections represented Manorbier on Pembrokeshire County Council, had been wrongly censured over 'sarcastic' and 'bitching' comments he had made about community council colleagues on a website he runs.

Clr. Calver challenged the censure, claiming it violated his right to freedom of expression under the European Convention on Human Rights.

His barrister, Robert McCracken QC, said the concept of 'rudeness' had no place when it came to criticising public office holders, who should be 'thick skinned' enough to live with 'sarcasm and lampooning'.

And Mr. Justice Beatson agreed, stating there was "a need for politicians to have thicker skins than others."

As a result, the judge, sitting in Cardiff, set aside the censure by the Adjudication Panel for Wales, who had concluded that Clr. Calver had breached the council's code of conduct by making a series of 'one-sided' remarks that were 'personal' and snide'.

Even though Clr Calver had insisted everything he wrote was true, the Panel said that, if he was so 'utterly disgusted' by his fellow councillors' conduct, he could have resigned, rather than choosing to 'bitch from the sidelines'.

But Mr Justice Beatson found that the panel took "an over-narrow view of what amounts to political expression" despite some of the comments being "sarcastic and mocking."

"The comments were in no sense 'high' manifestations of political expression. But they (or many of them) were comments about the inadequate performance of councillors in their public duties.

"As such, in my judgement, they fall within the term 'political expression' in the broader sense."

He found the Panel's was a 'disproportionate interference' with Clr. Calver's rights enshrined in Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, and concluded: "Clr Calver's application is granted and the Panel's decision must be set aside."

In a statement issued later, Clr Calver said: "Whilst this case has been very stressful, I am pleased that I fought it and consider that there was a very important price at stake, namely freedom of speech.

"The decisions of the council's standards committee in the first instance and the Adjudication Panel for Wales went against me and I was extremely disappointed with these outcomes and with the repercussions they had. So, at not an insubstantial financial risk to myself, I asked for this matter to be debated in the High Court and fortunately common sense prevailed."