Damian Green: the police, life and Shami Chakrabarti

I’ve consistently argued that ministers, not the police, should be the focus of scrutiny in the Greengate/Galleygate affair. The initial controversy was about the arrest of Damian Green, and search of his office: that’s of course the first any of us outside the Whitehall/Scotland Yard loop knew of the leak investigation – and it was shocking – but the police followed the correct legal procedure in asking persmission to enter the office, and, having been given permission, had no legal grounds to seek a warrant. The entire argument about warrants was and remains a diversion. Yes, there may have been grounds for some concern about the police’s videotaping the search without consent – but even that doesn’t worry me excessively. They ought to ask consent, but videoing searches in principle protects the citizen. I hope one day all police searches will be thoroughly recorded in sound and vision.

But Damian Green’s revelations over the last day or two do make me think again. On Thursday night he told us the police spoke to him in ominous terms about the potential for a life sentence in connection with the leaks he received; and now he’s told the Times that the police looked through his e-mails and digital records using the search words “Shami Chakrabarti”. His full interview is here.

I’ve sympathy for the Greens: it must be awful to have your home turned over like that, and personal things rifled through and photographed. My sympathy is tempered a little, though, by the realisation that this is simply what police searches are like, and that other innocent people, who are not MPs and do not have access to the media to air their complaints, suffer much the same every week. This experience may at least wake MPs up to the reality of intrusive state power and what it means for ordinary people. As for the reference to a life sentence: as Damian Green said, this was absurd. But it was also oppressive and bullying, and reminds us DCI Gene Hunt is not just a fantasy.

The most serious issue here thought is the fishing for “dirt” on Shami Chakrabarti. Why do this? She doesn’t take public stances on rising crime or immigration policy – at least, not about the kind of failings Damian Green wanted to expose and which most of the leaks concerned. So the police presumably thought “Leak Four”, mentioned in para. 16 of the DPP’s statement, might be connected to her. This was the leak to the Sunday Times of a list drawn up by government whips of Labour MPs likely to rebel on 42 day detention for terror suspects – obviously an issue Chakrabarti has campaigned on vigorously.

Of course it may be simply that Chakrabarti is a hate figure among the police: I can well imagine her photograph displayed proudly on canteen dartboards up and down the land. The Met may have needed no political prompting at all to go after someone some of them might enjoy arresting and searching. But all these revelations means that police conduct is an issue, after all. It’s perfectly obvious that the police should never have been investigating “Leak Four” in the first place – and they must account for their decision to investigate Damian Green in relation to it, and explain on what basis they investigated Shami Chakrabarti. Last week’s quick Quick resignation may mean there’s no police figure on whom pressure can now mount. Perhaps we need to insist he disresign, so we can call for his sacking.

The main issue, though, remains the responsibility of ministers – they must show a good reason for calling the police in on that leak, and satisfy us they weren’t using the police against Shami Chakrabarti as well as Damian Green. So you can add to my list of questions Jacqui Smith needs to answer, in the statement she needs to make in the Commons next week, or in subsequent questions, for which ample time must be allowed.

—Why did Jacqui Smith agree that “Leak Four” in particular required the attention of the police, and allow them to be called in to investigate it? What made her think this leak was part of a pattern that might lead to security breaches? Did anyone in Whitehall at any stage suspect leaks were being made to Liberty, or any other prominent opponent of the 42 days policy, for instance David Davis MP – and did ministers know such a link was suspected?

This post first appeared at The Wardman Wire.