Examination of witness (Questions 860
- 879)
TUESDAY 3 NOVEMBER 1998
MR
TIM
SPICER,
OBE
Mr Heath
860. Your business is providing military
services which on occasions includes arms supply. Is it not a
wise dictum for anybody in that business to understand the legal
requirements before actually supplying arms?
(Mr Spicer) As a general principle yes. As I have
said before and have said in the past, I was very clear that the
sanctions were aimed at the junta, not President Kabbah and therefore
I did not feel it necessary to investigate any further, particularly
after I had had conversations with government representatives.
861. But was it not an extraordinary omission
on your part or on the part of your legal advisers not to wish
to actually see what British law said on the issue rather than
basing it on what is not law, the United Nations Resolution?
(Mr Spicer) If you look at some of the track record
of pronouncements on this particular problem, the sanctions against
Sierra Leone, I believe there are three Foreign Office press releases—I
may not be accurate on the number—that state specifically
that the sanctions were aimed at the junta. It does not refer
to Sierra Leone, it refers specifically to the junta. If you combine
that with what I would call the picture being portrayed by government
in its overt activities with President Kabbah, inviting him as
a special guest to the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting,
making statements that he was the rightful head of state, then
I felt that it was clear to me—and you can criticise, with
the benefit of hindsight, for not delving further into it—that
what we intended, in other words the support of President Kabbah
as opposed to the junta, was absolutely right and legal.
Chairman
862. Had you seen the Foreign Office press
releases?
(Mr Spicer) I had seen I believe one of them,
but they were around.
863. They were around but we are talking
about your knowledge, and you say you were basing it on Foreign
Office press releases.
(Mr Spicer) I think one of them was brought to
my attention in my office and I was fully aware of President Kabbah's—
Ms Abbott
864. Who brought it to your attention?
(Mr Spicer) Somebody in my office. I do not remember
who.
Mr Heath
865. I am sorry: you wished to say something
else? No. What does seem extraordinary to me, and we may have
to leave this unresolved, is that you were clearly aware of Government
policy, and Government policy was stated on a number of occasions
as being in support of the peaceful return of President Kabbah
to power in Sierra Leone, and yet the very simple expedient of
discovering what the British law said about arms supply to Sierra
Leone was something that passed your company by.
(Mr Spicer) We have talked about my understanding
of the main thrust of British policy, in other words by peaceful
means, and I think I have answered that question, but once I was
having the sort of conversations I was having with Foreign Office
officials, then I think it is reasonable to assume that that policy
may have changed or there may have been a sea change because of
the circumstances of what was going on in Sierra Leone.
866. Your understanding would be that, were
there any encouragement, either tacit or overt, to be given from
Government sources to you in providing arms and military assistance
to Sierra Leone, that would override the provisions of British
law as set out in the Order in Council?
(Mr Spicer) I can only answer from my own point
of view, not as a general answer to that question. As far as I
was concerned, what we were doing was not illegal for the reasons
I have outlined.
867. And there was no doubt in your mind
at any stage on that matter?
(Mr Spicer) Absolutely not.
868. So it would be quite incorrect to suggest
that at any time you were advised to prepare what I should term
the Matrix Churchill defence of ensuring that the Foreign Office
were aware of your intentions so that that could be quoted in
your defence were any action ever to be taken?
(Mr Spicer) I am sorry; I do not quite understand
the question. Could you repeat it again?
869. What I was asking you in simple terms
was, given that you had no suspicion that what you were doing
might be illegal, therefore there was no contention at any time
that it was helpful in circumstances in which it were to be investigated
by Customs and Excise or any other instrument of Government, that
you had established a relationship with Government and that they
were aware of your activities?
(Mr Spicer) No, there is absolutely no question
of that at all. It never occurred to us that we would be investigated
by Customs and I think my concern, on the day on which Customs
came to our office and to my house as reflected in my telephone
call, or my attempted telephone call, first of all to the High
Commissioner and subsequently Mr Murray, indicates that it was
a complete surprise to us. We were completely open with what we
had been doing and the fact that we were being investigated by
Customs in my view was extraordinary.
870. When you had your meeting with Mr Murray
you were quite clear that he understood your intention with regard
to the supply of arms and you I think made reference earlier to
the fact that you would not have used the term "non-lethal";
is that correct?
(Mr Spicer) That is correct.
871. Were you surprised at all in that case
that his understanding was that the arms that you were proposing
to supply were non-lethal, that you had intended to use those
in circumstances in which you inevitably would be using them in
the face of a highly armed military junta?
(Mr Spicer) I think it is inconceivable that anybody
could have gone away from that meeting on the 19th thinking anything
other than what we were going to do. I say that because I am very
clear that we discussed arms, we did not discuss non-lethal weapons
and, as you say, it would be ludicrous to suggest that we were
going to take on the junta with non-lethal weapons, and there
was also discussion about the length, the type of campaign that
we were envisaging and the concern that it might produce, with
questions in the House.
872. That is a very interesting point and
one I would like to come on to. You quoted I think to Sir Thomas
Legg when you saw him words that you attributed to Mr Murray,
which I will quote: one thing that would exercise people's minds
in the Foreign Office would be the prospect of a long drawn out,
bloody campaign that would prompt organisations such as Amnesty
International to ask questions in the House of Commons. You will
appreciate that is an entirely damning statement if it can be
substantiated. Was it your view that the greatest concern in the
Foreign Office was not adherence to either British law as it stood
or to the so-called ethical foreign policy, but to the way it
would be seen by the outside world and particularly those people
who had an interest in human rights matters?
(Mr Spicer) I cannot comment for the Foreign Office
on what is of concern to the Foreign Office because I do not work
for the Foreign Office.
873. What is your perception?
(Mr Spicer) All I can do is report to you on the
facts of what was discussed in that meeting and, as I said to
Sir Thomas Legg, it was words to that effect. I would not be specific
on each word. It was certainly words to that effect.
874. One final area I would like to ask
you about is the role of Mr Rupert Bowen. He was attached to your
company as a consultant. With what purpose?
(Mr Spicer) Mr Bowen has a very considerable knowledge
of Sierra Leone. He has lived and worked there for, prior to the
coup, two years. He knows a vast number of people at all levels
and is particularly well known, and I believe liked, by President
Kabbah. It was inconceivable to me not to try and co-opt him for
this project and to make him my liaison officer in Conakry with
President Kabbah's government.
875. He also has a history of involvement
with the intelligence services, has he not? Was that part of his
value to your organisation?
(Mr Spicer) Mr Bowen as you say used to work for
one of the intelligence services and of course his experience,
in the same way as I would employ somebody with a military background
for this particular role, was important to me.
876. And were his contacts with the intelligence
services used at any time in your actions in Sierra Leone?
(Mr Spicer) Mr Bowen as far as I am aware had
no contact with any intelligence service. His function was purely
to liaise with President Kabbah's government and also on occasion
with the High Commissioner and other British officials who were
in Conakry, purely as part of this operation.
877. So in explicit terms on your understanding
Mr Bowen during the period in question had no contacts with any
intelligence services?
(Mr Spicer) That is correct.
Sir Peter Emery
878. Mr Spicer, you made it clear, and I
just want to follow some questions from Sir John and Mr Heath,
that the agreement that was signed and that you saw Mr Penfold
put into his pocket, you had no reason to believe would be restricted
to Mr Penfold but would be made available to members of the Foreign
Office?
(Mr Spicer) It was really for Mr Penfold's information.
It is up to Mr Penfold what he chooses to do with that document.
879. I do know that, but you made, and the
records are in annexe D, something like 18 different contacts
or calls with the Foreign Office between the 27 May 1997 and the
15 April 1998. In all of these you were quite willing that any
information that you gave should be made available to officials
and to Ministers?
(Mr Spicer) Yes, I was very happy in those cases
for any information to be passed on. What I cannot comment on
is what Mr Penfold either did with it or intended to do with it.
| 
