Legal Village

Is Woodhill bugging the tip of the iceberg?

Posted 12/02/2008 by Andrew Holroyd

The Law Society’s headquarters are only 100 yards from Fleet Street so it’s not difficult to imagine the echoes of newspaper editors past barking: “Send for reinforcements! We’re all out of legal correspondents!”

Seemingly every story over the last 72 hours has had a legal dimension. Yesterday saw the first of an expected five-day private hearing to reach a financial settlement between Heather Mills and Paul McCartney – a High Court case that will decide whether she will be a very rich millionaire or, well, a very, very rich millionaire…

Flick to the back pages and UK Athletics has reportedly taken legal advice to see whether disgraced sprinter Dwain Chambers can be barred from the UK team after returning from a drugs ban. They are not alone.

The British Olympic Association has also hit the headlines as its draft contract for athletes representing Britain in the Beijing Olympics included a clause prohibiting any athlete from making political protests against the human rights record of the Chinese Government. (When in Rome …)

Finally - coming hot on the heels of the outrage following the bugging of Labour MP Sadiq Khan - are reports that police officers allegedly authorised the bugging of lawyer-client discussions at Woodhill Prison, Milton Keynes

If proven, this disturbing allegation raises a whole plethora of very serious questions. First, how routine was this practice? Second, who knew about it and for how long? Third - and most important of all - is this practice isolated to Woodhill or is it the tip of an iceberg, part of a far wider conspiracy to pervert the course of justice?

Any bugging of confidential and privileged conversations not only undermines the ability of lawyers to prepare cases for court and give confidential advice, it could also lead to the reopening of any convictions where bugging has been a function. It goes without saying that this would have catastrophic consequences for public confidence in the criminal justice system.

The Law Society’s line is simple and will chime with that of any solicitor. If it becomes apparent that someone who is being routinely bugged is talking to their lawyer, the recording must be stopped forthwith. No ‘ifs’ and ‘buts’. Any transcripts of such conversations must be destroyed.

I am writing to the Lord Chancellor to ask for more information and assurances. If we do not receive satisfactory replies then I believe the calls for a full public inquiry will become irresistible.