Examination of Witnesses (Questions 280-299)
ROBERT WARDLE
27 JUNE 2007
Q280 Keith Vaz: The Solicitor General?
Robert Wardle: The Attorney and
the Solicitor, yes.
Q281 Keith Vaz: You have known since
November that there was great interest in the Attorney General's
office on this matter. Did you suspect, when he asked for that
independent legal advice, that the end product of all this would
be that the investigation would be discontinued? Was there a suspicion
in your mind that this might happen?
Robert Wardle: No. Well, it was
well before November. Ever since we commenced the investigation
in 2004 the Attorney has been informed of it, kept up-to-date,
quite properly so, because it is a case of the highest interest.
Q282 Keith Vaz: You have regular
meetings and big cases are discussed at regular meetings?
Robert Wardle: Yes, and it is
also a case where—. The corruption legislation, as I am
sure you know, is particularly difficult to deal with, particularly
overseas.
Q283 Keith Vaz: Have you seen the
legal advice that he obtained? You have received a lot of stuff,
have you not? He showed you the memo from the Prime Minister.
You have seen that.
Robert Wardle: I have not seen
the legal advice, I have certainly not seen the written advice,
although I was certainly present at one meeting with the silk
he instructed.
Q284 Keith Vaz: Does that agree or
disagree with the legal advice that you obtained?
Robert Wardle: I think there was
a difference in emphasis as to how one might approach an investigation.
Q285 Keith Vaz: You put a great deal
of store on the views of the ambassador in Riyadh. Is this Sherard
Coper-Coles?
Robert Wardle: Yes, it is.
Q286 Keith Vaz: Surely the ambassador
in Riyadh, being part of the Foreign Office, would be expected
to say to you that if you proceeded with an investigation it is
going to damage relations between Britain and Saudi Arabia. That
is the role of British Ambassadors abroad.
Robert Wardle: Certainly.
Q287 Keith Vaz: Who are there to
maintain relations between countries, but you seem to be convinced
by him on this.
Robert Wardle: Certainly, because
he is in post, he will know what the reaction will be, whether
that reaction will take place and he, whose business it is to
know these things, can tell me what the effect of that reaction
would be.
Q288 Keith Vaz: When did you first
consult him on this?
Robert Wardle: The 30 November
last year, I believe I met him.
Q289 Keith Vaz: So the Attorney goes
off and gets his independent legal advice, the legal secretary
rings you from Buckingham Gate and says, independent legal advice,
"You ring up the ambassador." This is your initiative,
is it?
Robert Wardle: Not quite, no.
It was a period when I was almost living in Buckingham Gate.
Q290 Keith Vaz: Have you not got
your own offices?
Robert Wardle: Yes, in Elm Street.
I will not say it all melds into one, but it was happening very
quickly. We obviously had this problem. We knew that there was
an issue, that public interest was going to be an issue. The Attorney
was concerned to see whether the case could be run, quite properly.
We were concerned with that, we were looking at it and eventually
we met. I say "eventually", we met with him on 30 November.
Q291 Keith Vaz: How many meetings
have you had. How many meeting did you have with Sherard Cowper-Coles?
Robert Wardle: Three.
Q292 Keith Vaz: Face to face?
Robert Wardle: Yes.
Q293 Keith Vaz: And at each of those
meetings he said, "Woe is me if you carry on with this. It
is going to be really damaging".
Robert Wardle: Basically, yes.
Q294 Keith Vaz: Was there a representative
of the Attorney's chambers at those meetings?
Robert Wardle: The meeting on
30 November was certainly attended by the legal secretary, and
indeed others. That was at the Foreign Office. The meeting on
8 December was just attended by myself and the Assistant Director
Mrs Garlick and the case controller Matthew Cowie, and the last
meeting, which I think was on 12 or 13 December, was attended
by myself, Helen Garlick, Jonathan Jones, legal secretary, and
the Solicitor General.
Q295 Keith Vaz: So, whatever your
view, you had the Prime Minister, the Attorney General, the Ambassador
in Riyadh, basically all these people—the Foreign Office,
the Prime Minister's Office, everyone was saying it had to be
discontinued. You had to go along with this, did you not?
Robert Wardle: Everyone was saying—.
The Attorney was not saying but the Foreign Office was saying,
"This will be the effect. This is the damage". This
happens in cases. Sometimes, for example—
Q296 Keith Vaz: But you said it was
unprecedented?
Robert Wardle: It is unprecedented
in the way it happened, but I am talking about public interest
considerations.
Q297 Keith Vaz: The public interest
takes us to the heart of the question of accountability?
Robert Wardle: Absolutely.
Q298 Keith Vaz: Is it determined
by you or is it determined the Attorney General?
Robert Wardle: On this occasion
it was determined by me.
Q299 Keith Vaz: First.
Robert Wardle: Yes.
| 
