The rabidly pro-Brexit website Guido Fawkes had a field day yesterday with the news that the legal representative of the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) had rejected a call by some MPs, including the LibDem Tom Brake, to get a move on in their year-long investigation into both leave campaigns. Brake, Caroline Lucas and Ben Bradshaw recently applied for a judicial review and yesterday the MPS provided a robust defence to the charge of foot dragging. However, the case has yet to come before a court so no one knows what a judge thinks.
Notwithstanding that, Guido Fawkes assumes the police defence case is the final word. Their headline is: Met Police slam Electoral Commission and demolish latest loony remoaner lawsuit. And of course, the no less rabid readership lapped it up.
All good knockabout stuff. Except, when you read the details it isn't quite like that.
The Guardian (HERE) first reported on 19th June, "The application for judicial review says that it is nearly a year since the Metropolitan police were given evidence connected to the Vote Leave and Leave.EU campaigns and the delays were “exceptional, unjustified and in breach of the proposed defendants’ respective duties".
The MPS letter in response (HERE) said that one of the investigations was “nearing completion”, but was critical of the state of the file provided by the commission in the other.
“The proposed claim [for judicial review] appears to be premised on the assumption that … when the Electoral Commission referred those matters to the MPS it supplied all potential relevant documents,” said the Met’s lawyer. “That assumption is incorrect.”
The commission “did not provide the documentation from its own investigation” and the information provided was not arranged in “a systematic or logical fashion”.
The MPS letter in response (HERE) said that one of the investigations was “nearing completion”, but was critical of the state of the file provided by the commission in the other.
“The proposed claim [for judicial review] appears to be premised on the assumption that … when the Electoral Commission referred those matters to the MPS it supplied all potential relevant documents,” said the Met’s lawyer. “That assumption is incorrect.”
The commission “did not provide the documentation from its own investigation” and the information provided was not arranged in “a systematic or logical fashion”.
“The Electoral Commission’s approach to the gathering and
disclosure of evidence does not appear to the MPS to have complied with
the letter or the spirit of the Criminal Procedure and Investigations
Act 1996 and associated guidance,” said the Met’s lawyers.
The New European (HERE) also report the police response in more measured terms:
"In one of the investigations, police are "nearing the time
when the [Met police] may be in a position to submit a file to the
[Crown Prosecution Service] for early investigative advice". In the
other, however, they say that "the investigation remains outstanding due
to incomplete disclosure from the [Electoral Commission]". The police's
solicitor, Richard Barnes, said they don't know when the material will
be delivered or how voluminous it will be, so can't give an estimate of
how long their recommendations will take.
"So
as not to prejudice the ongoing investigation, they released the
information without specifying which progress applied to Vote Leave and
which to Leave.EU".
In other words, according to the Met, the delays are all down to the Electoral Commission (EC) and not the police. However, the key thing is that one investigation is almost finished and the other is still ongoing.
The EC replied to the MPS letter in a matter of hours:
"The letter from Metropolitan Police lawyers contains a number of
assertions about the work of the Commission which are unfounded,
misleading and incorrect. This a startling argument, put forward as part
of an organisation’s defence of its record on timely investigatory
work. It is also directly contrary to recent positive comment made by
the Metropolitan Police Commissioner about collaborative working between
our organisations. We are writing to her to seek urgent assurance of
her position in relation to this correspondence.”
So, the truth is that the police have NOT demolished the latest loony remoaner lawsuit at all. More importantly both leave campaigns remain under criminal investigation with one case (we don't know which) close to a conclusion where the Crown Prosecution Service will become involved.
This was later reported on the Guido Fawkes website (HERE) albeit in far less sensational terms.
We should not forget that Boris Johnson and Michael Gove were both members of the small 5-person committee that ran the official Vote Leave campaign on a daily basis. It is understandable that the police will take time to review these things but wouldn't it be a fillip to the remain side if criminal charges were brought? Even better if both men were force to appear in court to answer the charges. Has a serving PM ever stood in the dock? How fitting it would be for BoJo to become the first.
I do hope it's keeping him awake at night.
For the record, Vote Leave were first reported to the police in July 2018 (HERE).
