Page:Formal Complaints about the Conduct of The Right Honourable Dominic Raab MP, Deputy Prime Minister, Lord Chancellor, and Secretary of State for Justice.pdf/39

 (3) The MoJ Additional Complaints

164. All of the MoJ Additional Complaints were submitted in the period between 25 November 2022 and 13 December 2022, after the announcement of the investigation and its extension to include the DExEU Complaint.

165. There are five MoJ Additional Complaints. Some were submitted by senior (SCS level) policy officials and others by private office officials, both SCS and non-SCS level.

(4) Findings of fact

166. At the time of the DPM's appointment, he had identified a number of serious problems which required attention. He considered that the department required significantly more in the way of oversight and accountability.

167. The DPM's policy priorities included the Bill of Rights and reform of the parole system. The DPM perceived what he described as 'cultural resistance' to these, amongst other, policies. This perception was regarded by the civil servants concerned as highly contentious and was emphatically rejected by many, particularly in view of the obligation to give informed and impartial advice. It was not necessary for me to resolve this dispute because the relevant findings of fact about the DPM's behaviour are not affected by the question whether he was or was not correct to have held this perception. Accordingly, for the purpose only of the analysis which follows, I have made my findings of fact on the assumed basis (but without concluding) that the DPM's perception was well-founded.

168. Most of the media reporting related to the investigation has concerned the MoJ. I could not form any reasoned view as to the source or sources within the MoJ of the media reporting. I did not regard it as appropriate to give less weight to all of the evidence in respect of the MoJ Complaints because some unidentifiable individuals, who may or may not also have participated in the investigation, had also chosen to engage with the media on an anonymous basis. However, in view of general concerns arising from such engagement, I have had regard in my findings to the following factors: the potentially prejudicial effect to the DPM of media reporting; the risk that allegations were prompted or embellished by exposure to such reporting or by unwitting influence arising from knowledge of another person's complaint; and whether and the extent to which the subject-matter of the MoJ Complaints was discussed by individuals making, participating in or supporting the MoJ Complaints (or other Complaints).