CM dropped challenge to Openshaw findings ‘because he was going to lose’, GSD says 

Chief Minister Fabian Picardo dropped his judicial review against critical findings of him in the McGrail Inquiry report “because he was going to lose”, the GSD said on Wednesday, adding: “He had no defence to the findings of [Inquiry chairman] Sir Peter Openshaw. It’s as simple as that.” 

The Opposition was reacting after Mr Picardo withdrew his challenge following news that the Royal Gibraltar Police had apologised to Hassans senior partner James Levy, KC, for causing him “personal and professional embarrassment” through the “procedurally flawed” way it applied for warrants to search his home and office in May 2020, during the Operation Delhi investigation.  

Among other issues, the RGP acknowledged that in applying for the warrants, it had failed to set out adequately why a court production order to hand over material might not have sufficed instead. 

Mr Picardo said he had always argued that his response to the events scrutinised by the Inquiry had been in defence of Gibraltar’s public interest, adding that a production order would have disclosed the communications sought by police from Mr Levy while protecting Gibraltar’s standing as an international finance centre. 

Mr Picardo said the Inquiry chairman had rejected his evidence and it was this that had led to the critical findings against him. 

According to the Chief Minister, the RGP’s apology was “finally in line” with the position he said he took to protect the public interest and Gibraltar’s reputation as a finance centre. 

For that reason, it had “become unnecessary” to proceed with his claim for judicial review, which was being resisted by Sir Peter Openshaw. 

For the GSD though, that explanation amounted to “a badly drawn smokescreen”. 

“What we are seeing now is just a heavily manufactured and stage-managed excuse to withdraw a case he could not win,” the GSD said in a statement setting out its views.  

“The apology by the RGP changes nothing of substance and Mr Picardo’s use of it is his badly drawn smokescreen.”  

“It does not cleanse the evidence of conflicts of interests or Mr Picardo’s improper action or the fact that all ministers condoned such action.” 

“For Mr Picardo to claim yet another ‘vindication’ and seek to rewrite history in this sorry saga is proof that he and the GSLP have learned nothing about the truth.” 

“This is nothing more than a deliberate con of the people of Gibraltar and insulting people’s intelligence.” 

“What we are left with are unchallenged findings that Mr Picardo cannot hide from.” 

“Like everybody knows when you withdraw an appeal the original verdict or judgment of a court stands. This is the same.” 

An Inquiry, however, is not a court of law or a tribunal and its purpose is to establish the facts of what happened, why it happened and how to prevent similar events in the future. 

In its statement, the GSD echoed the same message first set out by former police Commissioner Ian McGrail a day earlier, namely that the Inquiry findings were “final and can be treated as final”. 

The GSD highlighted that those findings included that the Chief Minister attempted “grossly improper” interference in a police investigation. 

“The [RGP] apology does not alter the fact that, at the time, there was a live criminal investigation and that Mr Picardo attempted to interfere with it and therefore transgressed the boundaries that a Chief Minister should respect,” the GSD said. 

“Nor does the apology provide a blanket over the findings that Mr Picardo ‘deliberately misled’ the Police Authority or acted in a ‘sinister’ way.” 

It also did not alter the “core facts” that the Chief Minister, through his sabbatical partnership in Hassans and together with other partners, had an indirect beneficial interest in 36 North, the company vying for public services contract at the heart of Operation Delhi, the Opposition said. 

The GSD repeated its longstanding concerns about what it described as Mr Picardo’s inability to navigate conflicts of interest, and that similar conflicts would affect Mr Picardo’s “anointed successor” Gemma Arias-Vasquez. 

The Opposition said it was clear that the RGP’s apology to Mr Levy - who was never arrested or charged and was later exonerated - was not an apology as to the fact that there had been a criminal investigation, nor a recognition that there should not have been an investigation.  

The apology recognised only that the police should have done certain things differently in seeking the search warrants. 

“None of that can legitimise Mr Picardo’s actions,” the GSD said. 

“The inescapable and now unchallenged fact is that at the time this was a live criminal investigation which he attempted to interfere with.” 

In his report, Sir Peter Openshaw had acknowledged there was an argument on possible procedural flaws in the way the warrants had been sought but that did not impact on his critical findings against Mr Picardo. 

“If the apology really positively changed things for Mr Picardo he would have proceeded with his judicial review to seek to change those unfavourable findings,” the Opposition said.  

“The fact that he did not speaks volumes of what he actually thinks would have happened if he had proceeded.” 

The GSD said that for the Chief Minister to argue that he had been exonerated and vindicated was an attempt to “dupe” the community, while the support of Government ministers was “further proof they should be removed from office at the next election if people really want change”. 

“Nothing will change with Gemma Arias-Vasquez at the helm when she supported Mr Picardo’s improper action, continues to do so and is mired in similar conflicts,” the GSD said. 

The judicial review was to have been funded with public money and the GSD, noting that the Inquiry had already cost over £8m, questioned whether taxpayers would “get their money back” now that it had been dropped. 

The GSD also expressed surprise that the Commissioner of Police, Owain Richards, “should naively proceed in a way that has allowed the timings of his actions to be manipulated politically by Mr Picardo ahead of his legal challenge.” 

This was a reference to the fact that the apology was set out in a joint statement from the RGP and Mr Levy sent to the media just after 9pm last Friday night, just days before the judicial review was due to start this week. 

“That is a stunning coincidence if it is accidental,” the GSD said.  

“People will be forgiven to think Mr Picardo was aware of all this well before and behind the scenes ensured it happened before the hearing like a puppet-master.” 

The GSD noted too that the apology was emailed to the media by former Justice Minister Neil Costa, who acted for the RGP in relation to the matters in the apology. 

It said this raised perceptions of conflicts of interest given Mr Costa, according to evidence before the Inquiry, had as Justice Minister attended a briefing also attended by the Chief Minister in May 2019 on the alleged hacking of the national security system and, after stepping down at the November 2020 election, had acted for the Chief Secretary in relation to a disagreement with the then police Commissioner arising from Operation Delhi.  

“Ultimately the effect of the withdrawal of the legal action is that we now have unchallenged findings that Mr Picardo attempted to interfere in a criminal investigation,” said Keith Azopardi, the Leader of the Opposition. 

“The fact that ministers still stand by him and defend the indefensible speaks volumes and shows that there will be no change under a new GSLP leader.” 

“Beyond that the heavily engineered withdrawal is just a further example of a GSLP that will stop at nothing to manipulate the truth.” 

“This insults the people of Gibraltar over and above the outrage that should be caused by a Chief Minister seeking to interfere in a criminal investigation.” 

“It emphasises how badly change is needed to get rid of the terrible conflicts of interests that are corroding our system of governance.” 

“This unseemly saga shines a spotlight on the reality of the Gibraltar we live in where the Government with its resources and tentacles seeks to control everything and is willing to assault institutions in the process.” 

“The presentation of this stage-managed, self-serving and thinly veiled charade will not work because the inevitable consequences of the withdrawal of the legal action are that Sir Peter Openshaw’s findings are final and the conflicts are there for all to see.” 

“But thankfully the people of Gibraltar will have the ability to walk away from all this at the next election and choose real change.”