GSD says police reform is necessary, but slams CM for ‘misrepresenting’ McGrail Inquiry findings  

The GSD acknowledged on Monday that police reform was necessary and said it would consider the substance of the White Paper published by the Government and comment on it “in due course as appropriate”. 

The Opposition was reacting to plans for a deep reform of the framework for police governance that seeks to strengthen democratic accountability for strategic and resourcing decisions, while protecting the operational independence of the Royal Gibraltar Police.  

In doing so, however, the GSD was critical of statements made by Chief Minister Fabian Picardo to GBC on the proposed reform, which stems from the recommendations of the McGrail Inquiry. 

The party said it was “extraordinary” for Mr Picardo to suggest the reform was necessary “because the police didn’t work well and was not ‘answerable or transparent’ or because a former Commissioner lied to him.” 

“This misrepresents the core facts before the McGrail Inquiry and is a jaundiced view of the evidence and findings of the Inquiry,” the Opposition said in a statement. 

“It is regrettable that in his attempt to recover his image the Chief Minister seeks to hijack the White Paper presentation on such an important issue of reform for his own false narrative.” 

In the statement, the GSD said the McGrail Inquiry found that the Chief Minister acted in a grossly improper way on several occasions and that he attempted to interfere in a live criminal investigation several times. 

Inquiry chairman Sir Peter Openshaw also found that Mr Picardo “deliberately and cynically” misled the Police Authority and acted in a “sinister” way, the GSD said. 

The party also highlighted the Chief Minister’s indirect beneficial interests through his law firm in 36 North, a company that was competing for the national security contract and featured in the inquiry’s examination of the Operation Delhi search warrant. 

Those criticisms are not new and have already been the subject of earlier fierce exchanges between the Government and the Opposition that will likely continue in the run-up to the next general election. 

The Government, for example, has repeatedly underlined that Sir Peter Openshaw, while starkly criticising the Chief Minister in his report, found that there was no actual interference in the police operation. 

The Chief Minister is challenging the criticisms made of him in the Inquiry report in a judicial review due to be heard next month. 

He is calling on the Supreme Court to make a declaration that they were “unlawfully arrived at” and “legally invalid”, alongside any further relief the court thinks fair including an order that they be set aside or quashed.   

The application for judicial review is being resisted by lawyers for Sir Peter Openshaw, who described it as an “extremely unusual” application with little prospect of success. 

The Chief Minister has also highlighted that he told the Inquiry that the security contract was initially going to be transferred by agreement to 36 North but a dispute arose over ownership of the underlying software. 

He told the Inquiry that on learning of that dispute, he ordered that the contract should remain with Bland, the company that still operates the system. 

The Inquiry chairman found too that there was no improper interference in the police investigation by Hassans or its senior partner James Levy, KC, who was the subject of the Operation Delhi search warrant, or proof of any conspiracy involving the law firm or its senior partner. 

Mr Levy was never arrested or charged and was exonerated at the end of a police investigation that continued its normal course, the report noted. 

Separately, Sir Peter Openshaw also concluded that there was no evidence showing Mr McGrail had lied to the Chief Minister, even if Mr Picardo was convinced that had been the case. 

In the statement on Monday, the GSD insisted conflicts of interest were central to the Inquiry and to the chairman’s assessment of attempts to interfere in the investigation and the “abuse” of Police Authority procedures that led to former police Commissioner Ian McGrail’s retirement. 

It further called on Health and Business Minister Gemma Arias-Vasquez, who it described as Mr Picardo’s “chosen successor”, to confirm whether she too had held indirect beneficial interests in 36 North, noting that she became a partner at Hassans in 2014 and that by May 2020, according to the Inquiry report, the firm’s partners owned a third of the company. 

“The governance of the police does need reform,” said Keith Azopardi, the Leader of the Opposition.  

“Equally there is a need to deal with the corroding conflicts of interests that have plagued this GSLP government for a long time.” 

“Their weak and unworkable draft conflicts of interest law published earlier this year is further testament to their lack of willingness to deal with abuse and conflicts in a robust way.” 

“What is unacceptable, however, is that the GSLP Government should abuse the presentation of possible reforms in this important area by mischaracterising the reasons for it or using it as an opportunity to rewrite the McGrail Inquiry report.” 

“Mr Picardo’s attempt to do so today is only a more subtle attempt than his also extraordinary and false claim of ‘vindication’ and ‘exoneration’ minutes before publication of the inquiry report only to then go on to judicially review that very same report.”