Examination of Witnesses (Question Numbers
560-579)
DEPUTY ASSISTANT
COMMISSIONER JOHN
MCDOWALL
MBE AND CHIEF
SUPERINTENDENT ED
BATEMAN
23 NOVEMBER 2009
Q560 Chairman: Mr McDowall?
Deputy Assistant Commissioner McDowall:
I do not believe it would have been necessarily easier. It is
a very clear process to undertake and it could be a matter of
consent for a magistrate to either provide the warrant or not.
It is different, clearly, but I am not sure it is necessarily
any easier.
Q561 Ann Coffey: It is a more difficult
process. You have to apply for a warrant, you have to go to court,
you have to get a hearing. That is much more complex than somebody
signing a consent to search an office, is it not?
Deputy Assistant Commissioner McDowall:
It is actually a practice that we are very familiar with and well
versed in. Actually, probably the harder thing was working with
a scenario that we had not encountered to our experience.
Q562 Ann Coffey: Sorry, I do not
quite understand what you are saying.
Deputy Assistant Commissioner McDowall:
Sorry, ma"am. What I am saying is that actually, we are quite
used to going to court and getting warrants.
Q563 Ann Coffey: I am not disputing
that you are used to going but this is a very particular circumstance
for a warrant because it involves going to court to ask to search
a private office in the parliamentary estate of a Member of Parliament.
It is not the usual run of applications for warrants, is it? You
might not have known what the view would have been of that application
as it is so unusual. In the context of that, it is much simpler
to get a consent, is it not?
Deputy Assistant Commissioner McDowall:
The information laid before the magistrate to acquire the warrant
we would have hoped would have been sufficient to merit the signing
of the warrant by the magistrate. If it were not the case, then
we would have accepted that we could not have conducted the search.
This was a fairly straightforward process in the sense that it
was just a walk across Parliament Square to—
Q564 Ann Coffey: I do not think an
application for a warrant to search a Member of Parliament's office
is an everyday event.
Deputy Assistant Commissioner McDowall:
No, of course not.
Q565 Ann Coffey: You just walk across
the yard and get a warrant and come back and search the office
and this is another day's work done. Even you, Mr McDowall, have
to accept it is quite unusual circumstances in the course of the
police's work.
Deputy Assistant Commissioner McDowall:
Yes, of course it is. Of course it is unusual, yes.
Ann Coffey: That is the point
I am making, that it is in those circumstances easier to get a
consent.
Q566 Chairman: Did you at any time
consider that there might be issues of privilege involved?
Deputy Assistant Commissioner McDowall:
Yes, sir.
Q567 Chairman: Did you have legal
advice about that?
Deputy Assistant Commissioner McDowall:
Yes, we did.
Q568 Mr Howard: You had overall responsibility
for the operation, Mr McDowall, but obviously there were a number
of layers between you and the officers who actually came to the
Palace of Westminster and were present at the meetings to which
Mr Bateman has referred. To what extent did you involve yourself
in this question of whether there should be a warrant or whether
there was consent?
Deputy Assistant Commissioner McDowall:
The issue of warrant and consent I think was discussed in the
Gold Group that was chaired by Assistant Commissioner Quick. In
fact, there were two Gold Groups chaired by the then Assistant
Commissioner and that was, I think, one of the issues that was
addressed, and at that point we were still, I think, taking legal
advice as to what our powers included and what they did not include.
On the issue of whether we would go for a consensual basis for
a search or whether we would go for a warrant, I think we decided
that, because of our knowledge of section 8 of PACE and its workings,
there would be a requirement placed upon us by the magistrate
ultimately to explain what efforts had been made to acquire that
consent, and that is the point that we then came and tried to
acquire that consent. The first issue was raised probably on the
20th, possibly the 21st. I am not sure.
Q569 Mr Howard: You have used the
word "we"; what I am asking is to what extent you personally
were involved in the decision to ask for consent rather than to
go for a warrant.
Deputy Assistant Commissioner McDowall:
My recollection is that I was aware that that was the course of
action we were going to take and I was content for that course
of action to take place.
Q570 Mr Howard: Did you say at any
time—perhaps you would not have regarded it as your place
to do so in view of the layers which existed between you and those
who worked in the Palace—"You have to make it clear
under the provisions of PACE that consent need not be given"?
Deputy Assistant Commissioner McDowall:
No. I would have expected that to have been made clear. I would
have expected it to have formed part of those discussions, certainly.
Q571 Mr Howard: You would have expected
the provisions of PACE to be followed?
Deputy Assistant Commissioner McDowall:
Yes.
Chairman: Gentlemen, thank you very much
indeed. We are most grateful to you both. Perhaps I should just
say that Mr Quick's appearance has been postponed. He will appear
before the Committee on another occasion but we will adjourn the
Committee for a moment or two so that we can change the dramatis
personae. Once again, thank you for your attendance and for your
evidence.
| 
