NEWSPAPERS risk being “shackled” by new laws which would see them landed with huge legal bills every time they are sued, whether or not they win the case.

Critics have warned the new provisions – contained in amendments to the Data Protection Bill – would threaten investigative journalism and cause “irreparable damage” to the industry.

Now editors from across the country have urged MPs to vote against them and scrap plans for a second, wide-ranging Leveson inquiry into the media.

John McLellan, director of the Scottish Newspaper Society, called on “anyone who values freedom of speech” to contact their MP and ask them to vote down the amendments, which will come before Westminster tomorrow.

Analysis: changes to the Data Protection Bill, redressing the balance or an opportunity for abuse?

He said: “The system of self-regulation introduced and funded by the industry follows the Leveson recommendations with the exception of giving politicians control. What kind of free press cedes control to the very people it is supposed to hold to account?

“Yet these amendments are designed to give politicians with an agenda the ability to shackle publications they don’t like and as such would be little short of an attack on the right of UK citizens to know the truth.”

It comes after the UK Government previously announced it would not push ahead with so-called Section 40 laws – initially contained in the Crime and Courts Act – which would force newspapers to pay both sides’ costs if they are sued in court, regardless of whether they win.

It is estimated striking out just once claim could cost publishers a minimum of £15,000.

The move is aimed at forcing newspapers to sign up to the state-backed regulator Impress, which would shield them from costs if a complainant refused arbitration. Most national newspapers have signed up to the new Independent Press Standards Organisation (IPSO).

UK ministers also confirmed they would drop plans for a second phase of the Leveson inquiry, with Culture Secretary Matt Hancock insisting it would be “costly and time-consuming”.

He previously told MPs: “It’s clear that we’ve seen significant progress, from publications, from the police and from the new regulator. The world has changed since the Leveson inquiry was established in 2011.”

READ MORE: UK Government ditches part two of Leveson inquiry into press standards

However, amendments to the Data Protection Bill mean both issues are now back on the table.

Local newspaper editors from independent weeklies and large publishing companies have come together to criticise the proposals.

In a joint statement, released by the News Media Association (NMA), they said: "Free speech is a fundamental right that underpins many of the liberties we enjoy but, sadly, there exists a concerted and persistent movement to deprive you of these important rights.

“Those with a vendetta against certain newspapers have been lobbying hard to get draconian new laws, which would penalise all publishers, onto the statute books.

“They are trying to use the Data Protection Bill to create a new law, known in the industry as “Section 40-style costs sanctions,” and kick off a vast, sprawling inquiry into the media industry which would drain taxpayer resources.”

They added: “These anti-press curbs do not just represent an attack on newspapers, they represent an attack on our right to know the truth about the world we live in.”

Toby Granville, editorial development director of Newsquest, which owns The Herald, called on MPs to "show their support for local journalism and local newspapers” by rejecting the amendments.

READ MORE: GDPR in focus at event following biggest data shake-up in 20 years

He added: "Local and regional journalism is simply too important to our democracy to be sacrificed."

An anonymous survey of local newspaper editors carried out by the NMA found 92 per cent of respondents did not think another "Leveson-style" inquiry should take place, with the remaining 8 per cent saying they were not sure.

Not one of the 68 who replied to the survey said they thought the inquiry should go ahead.

Supporters of the amendments say they will "address the imbalance of fairness in this country between major newspaper groups and the public".