Examination of witness (Questions 800
- 819)
TUESDAY 3 NOVEMBER 1998
MR
TIM
SPICER,
OBE
Chairman
800. Within the United Kingdom law?
(Mr Spicer) Within the United Kingdom law.
801. Was it not clear from early November
that the Order in Council makes illegal any supply of arms to
any of the parties?
(Mr Spicer) Obviously I have had the benefit of
reading it since, but at the time I did not actually know of its
existence and I did not feel that there was any need to investigate
any further the question of what the sanction interpretation was
and whether it had been interpreted any further under United Kingdom
law.
Mr Mackinlay
802. On p36, paragraph 5.14 of the Legg
Report, it says: "Mr Penfold was aware of Branch Energy,
Executive Outcomes and Lifeguard and their presence and operations
in Sierra Leone. As mentioned in paragraph 4.8, before taking
up his appointment, he had [Penfold] visited Branch Energy. However,
although Mr Spicer says he was also present on that occasion,
Mr Penfold does not recall meeting him. Mr Penfold says that he
only become aware of the existence of Sandline and Mr Spicer in
October, as a result of the publicity about their activities in
Papua New Guinea, and that it was not until December that he learned
that they were linked to Branch Energy and Executive Outcomes."
Have you got any comments to make on that?
(Mr Spicer) I was actually present at the meeting
and I do recall it but not in any great detail and I recall meeting
Mr Penfold. In fact, he gave me his card which had his previous
post on it and we had a brief discussion saying that we would
maintain contact. As to comments on the employment of companies
other than my own, I would not wish to comment.
803. Is Executive Outcomes a company you
are connected with?
(Mr Spicer) No, it is completely separate from
Sandline. There is a mis-appreciation which we have to continue
to point out which is that they are in some way connected; they
are not. Having said that, I know the people that work in Executive
Outcomes extremely well, but they are a separate company.
804. I understand you were concerned that
GCHQ may have eavesdropped your conversation with President Kabbah
in August 1997. Is that so?
(Mr Spicer) I would not be concerned about any
eavesdropping by agencies of this government, but I feel it my
duty, if I am talking about matters relating to a client of government,
not specifically referring to any particular agencies, to point
out that if you are talking about this on an open line it is pretty
insecure.
805. IBIS is the marine arm of your company,
is that correct?
(Mr Spicer) No.
806. What is IBIS?
(Mr Spicer) It is a separate company. It is an
aviation company that in the past has provided aviation support
to Executive Outcomes. I believe it is still in existence. It
is a South African company and I have no corporate relationship
with it, but if I needed helicopters or aviation and they had
a suitable aircraft I might consider subcontracting to them.
807. Were they involved in the Sierra Leone
operation?
(Mr Spicer) No.
Chairman
808. I want to ask you about your relations
with Mr Penfold. Did you use our British High Commissioner in
any way as a conduit to President Kabbah?
(Mr Spicer) No, I do not think I would describe
any of my relations or discussions with Mr Penfold as using him
as a conduit. I think he was obviously a very interested party
and I know that he was in exile with President Kabbah and was
very supportive of him, but my direct relations with President
Kabbah were through my own contacts.
809. Were there times when you gave information
to Mr Penfold in the hope or assuming that that would be passed
to President Kabbah?
(Mr Spicer) I think there were occasions prior
to our direct involvement in the period between May 1997 and January
1998 when we had access to information that might be of use to
President Kabbah and the people loyal to his government or to
ECOMOG and it may be that some of those items of information were
passed to Mr Penfold.
810. But you had no clients at that time.
What was your motive, since you were not employed by President
Kabbah, in passing such information to him?
(Mr Spicer) I had known President Kabbah for some
time, since really he was elected into office and we had on-going
discussions about a number of things prior to the coup. We also
had a number of assets in place in Sierra Leone that could be
helpful and I just felt it was my duty, considering he was the
democratically elected leader of the country and therefore his
government was the rightful government, to try and assist them
with information. I also felt it my duty given British government
policy and in being supportive to President Kabbah to try and
pass on that information, if it was of use and to the detriment
of the junta.
Sir John Stanley
811. Mr Spicer, this Committee has had access
to the full range of key documents that are listed in Annex D
to the Legg Report and also the telegrams which are listed in
Annex E. The documents contain a series of internal reports inside
the Foreign Office in London and a series of telephone conversations
which you had with officials in the Africa Equatorial Department,
in which from at least May of 1997 you relayed to officials in
that department in London information of military and indeed intelligence
nature based on information that you were gleaning from your own
operations and presence in Sierra Leone. Would you agree that
was the case, that you made a whole series of such reports to
Foreign Office officials in London?
(Mr Spicer) Yes, that is correct.
812. Could you tell the Committee why you
did so? Was it that you were seeking to ingratiate your company
with Foreign Office officials aware that there was a potential
business opportunity around the corner, which of course did materialise
as far as your company is concerned—I make that point in
case it sounded pejorative and as I think those of us who have
been inside the government machine are well aware, people of all
business walks of life seek to ingratiate themselves with officials
and Ministers as part of their business work—or was it that
you were simply exercising your patriotic duty, as you saw it,
to convey this information to Foreign Office officials?
(Mr Spicer) I can say quite clearly that I felt
it was my duty. I have worked for the government virtually all
my adult life and I feel that if there is information available
which should be passed to the government that I come across in
the course of my business activities I ought to pass it and it
is my duty to do so. I also would not pretend that there was no
attempt to ingratiate[4]
Sandline with the Foreign Office. It was a matter of duty. We
are a commercial organisation and we were clear that this was
a piece of business that we would be very glad to have, but the
Foreign Office did not play a role in that at all. If we were
going to get into business it would be with President Kabbah.
The passage of information in the period May to January was purely
because we felt we ought to pass it on. The junta in Sierra Leone
are a pretty unpleasant bunch and they were doing some pretty
unspeakable things to their people and the sooner they were ousted
the better in my view.
813. What was the date when you first made
Mr Penfold aware that you had concluded a contract with President
Kabbah which involved the supply of arms—and I stress the
supply of arms?
(Mr Spicer) I would have to consult my documents
for the precise date,[5]
but I believe that I had a conversation with him some time in
early December indicating that President Kabbah was interested
in us becoming involved in assisting him get back into the country.
I do not know whether that conversation actually specifically
mentioned arms and ammunition, but it was quite clear that it
involved military operations and therefore the implication was
that that in itself would involve the procurement of arms and
ammunition. I am more sure that the matter was discussed specifically,
i.e. arms and ammunition, military equipment, at a meeting we
had on the 23rd December.
814. I was coming to that meeting. That
was the meeting in London with yourself, Mr Buckingham and Mr
Penfold over lunch, was it not?
(Mr Spicer) That is right.
815. At that meeting did you provide Mr
Penfold with a copy of the actual agreement that Sandline had
concluded with President Kabbah?
(Mr Spicer) Yes.
816. You are in doubt about that?
(Mr Spicer) I am in no doubt about that.
817. You physically handed it to Mr Penfold
and he took it away with him?
(Mr Spicer) Yes.
818. Can you confirm that that agreement
specifically referred to arms being supplied by you to President
Kabbah?
(Mr Spicer) Again I would have to refresh my memory
by reading the document, but I am very clear that it referred
to the procurement of military equipment. I am not sure whether
it said arms and ammunition, I would have to refer to the document.
It certainly would not have said non-lethal equipment.
819. Would you have any difficulty in providing
a copy of that document to the Committee?
(Mr Spicer) I would like to take advice on that
because it is a contract between myself and a sovereign head of
state.[6] I personally
do not have a problem with it, but I think I should check out
of courtesy.
4 Note by Witness: I adopted Sir John Stanley's
word "ingratiate" in my reply but this is not a word
that I would normally use, sounding, as it does, somewhat demeaning.
My expression would have been "appear helpful [to the Foreign
Office]". Back
5
Note by Witness: I have now consulted the relevant documents
and can confirm that it was over lunch on 23 December 1997 that
I first made Mr Penfold aware that I had concluded a contract
with President Kabbah. This had occurred during the morning
of that day when President Kabbah had returned his part of the
contract to me by facsimile. The agreement between President Kabbah
and Blackstone was signed by Mr Saxena in Vancouver at 7.45 am
(3.45 pm London time). Back
6
Note by Witness: I confirm that, if the Committee obtains
President Kabbah's consent, I will provide a copy of the contract. Back
| 
