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


Annex 13

E-mail from the Clerk of the House and Chief Executive to Damian Green MP

  Thank you for your e-mail which I am answering in the same way so that you have a quick response.

I think the first point to make is that the preliminary inspection has removed certain material which all parties have agreed is protected by parliamentary privilege and therefore should not form part of any further proceedings. You are aware of what this material is, as it was communicated to you following the inspection that took place on 22 January. In relation to further material which might attract parliamentary privilege, Officers of the House inspected hard copies of electronic material taken from your office on Monday 30 March and will inspect the remaining electronic material today. After this final inspection I will consider the representations those Officers make to me, and write to you identifying the material to which I have concluded that privilege applies. Consistent with the practice previously adopted, I understand that any privileged material will be returned to you, so that you will be aware of its content.

  In respect of matters you raise in your second paragraph, I have taken advice from the Legal Services Office which does not consider that you would be prevented from commenting on material in a police interview because it might be privileged. It is for you to raise in interview those facts that appear to you to be relevant to the investigation. I cannot comment further on this for the reason that the House is not a party to the investigation.

  Further, I am advised that it is open to you to make representations to the police in an interview to the effect that you disagree with the initial assessment of privilege, as part of your defence. This will be taken into account by the CPS when assessing the admissibility of the evidence against you and whether it meets the CPS charging test. If a prosecution is brought, the question of admissibility of evidence would arise at the trial stage and would be determined by the trial judge. You may like to be aware that in Business Questions today, the Leader of the House suggested that the Attorney General would act as amicus curiae in such circumstances.

  I am of course aware of the Motion before the House seeking reference of the question of applicability to the Committee on Standards and Privileges.

Malcolm Jack

2 April 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