THE DAILY TELEGRAPH: A senior MP has demanded a parliamentary inquiry into Britain’s £43 billion arms deal with Saudi Arabia after a leaked US diplomatic cable disclosed the full case against BAE Systems, the defence contractor.
The Serious Fraud Office dropped the investigation in December 2006, after intense diplomatic pressure from the Saudis. BAE was fined by US authorities last year after it admitted a relatively minor charge of making false statements. It faced no action in Britain over the Saudi allegations and until now the full details of the case have been kept secret.
However, a US cable given to the WikiLeaks website and obtained by The Daily Telegraph discloses the strength of the investigators’ case. Written four months after the collapse of the investigation, it shows the SFO had evidence that:
:: BAE paid £73 million to a Saudi prince who had “influence” over the Al-Yamamah defence contract and that there were “reasonable grounds” to believe another “very senior Saudi official” received payments;
:: The contractor was being covertly investigated by the SFO for carrying out a “potential fraud” against a government department;
:: BAE allegedly circumvented anti-bribery laws by making “substantial payments” to overseas agents employed by the Saudi government;
:: Sir Sherard Cowper-Coles, then British ambassador in Riyadh and now a BAE Systems’ director, “had a profound effect” on the decision by Robert Wardle, then SFO director, to end the investigation.
It also details outrage among Britain’s allies who questioned claims that the case was being dropped on grounds of “national security”.
Last night, Sir Menzies Campbell, the former leader of the Liberal Democrats, called for a Commons investigation.
“This leak tells us how strong a case was available,” he said. “If the information in this document had been before Parliament and the British public, there is no way that the Labour government could have influenced the termination of the investigation.
“The particular issue which will cause a great deal of annoyance is the fact there was prima facie evidence that a government department had been subjected to fraud. If prosecution is no longer possible, it is open to the Commons’ business innovation and skills committee to conduct a full investigation.” >>> Christopher Hope, and Steven Swinford | Saturday, March 12, 2011
