Police Searches on the Parliamentary Estate - Committee on the Issue of Privilege Contents


Annex 11

Letter from the Clerk of the House and Chief Executive to the Shadow Leader of the House

  Thank you for your e-mail of 30 March.

I am sure you will understand that I cannot share confidential correspondence with other parties, anymore than I can share confidential correspondence between myself and a Member with anyone else.

  Having said that, I can tell you that there is in fact very little correspondence between myself and the parties you cite. In December, soon after the seizure of Mr Green's papers, I wrote to the Metropolitan Police warning them of privilege issues that could arise in relation to the material they held. Later, in February, as you doubtless know I wrote to both sets of lawyers, giving them the results of the preliminary inspection of papers to ascertain privileged documents which had been made by officers of the House. Other correspondence has been from, or on behalf of, the Speaker which as you know he has said he expects to be kept confidential.

  However it is important to address your worry that Parliament might deliberately be choosing not to address the matter of privilege. As I have said, the privilege issue was raised early on and a preliminary sift of documents has taken place to remove privileged material from consideration. It has been made clear to parties by Mr Speaker that this is not conclusive and that it is for the House ultimately to decide on its privileges. It has also been made clear that the House is free, at any time, to make resolutions further to that of 8 December 2008 regarding this matter but that it has not done so up to this point.

  The parties also know full well that should the matter go to trial and there is any dispute about admissibility of evidence, the House's interest will be represented by intervention in the usual way by Mr Speaker, acting on advice of the House authorities. As I have told you it is not unusual for privileged material to reach the court and at that stage for its use to be challenged by intervention.

  I understand that your view and that of some other Members is that the privilege issue should be considered by the House before that stage, if it ever occurs. The problem in that case would be that the House would be interfering with a criminal investigation which it has never done in the past. But it is open to the House to do that by Resolution if it wishes. I have advised you of the routes by which that can be done.

Malcolm Jack

31 March 2009



 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2010
Prepared 22 March 2010