I write to offer you my condolences for the hurt inflicted on you and your family by the disclosure of your private life. I must admit I was one of those who broke the injunction and I would like to explain why.
Firstly I have no truck with sectarian factionalism rife in sports and I disclosed your identity not because I disliked your club or liked another. I also care very little for your status in are national life, I have no normative view if this is a positive or negative thing, Indeed, it is your unimportant status that has worried me the most.
You see Mr. Giggs I actually believe you have the perfect right to privacy, I see very little public interest in your personal life, however, I do believe the best judge of this is the market (if it sells newspapers) and not the courts. I also care very little about the life of the lady in question but I care a great deal about her freedom to speak and the functioning of law.
You see, Mr. Giggs your little injunction made the freedom of speech and the freedom of press secondary to the freedom of privacy (not from the state) but from the populace. You and you alone reduced the freedom of people to think, write and speak as they would otherwise choose. You chose to do this via a method used by corporations and who knows else to protect themselves from the proper function of a free media and the free judgment of people.
We were rapidly approaching a situation where people where going to charge and possible imprisoned in secrete and for breaking an injunction they could not know about on about an unknown person. This would mean people would be disappeared for breach of secrete laws and I am sorry Mr. Giggs your privacy is not worth that! Indeed I am sure if you weighed the harm this revelation has had upon your children against the harm a state empowered with such a system could inflict upon them I am sure you would have leaked your own name.