The Supreme Court on Thursday granted permission for the three former defendants in the Operation Delhi case to disclose expert evidence which they say undermines claims levelled against them, and represents “a first opportunity to set the record straight”.
Ben Cooper, KC, said his clients – John Perez, Thomas Cornelio and Caine Sanchez – had faced repeated references during the McGrail Inquiry to claims they had “sabotaged or hacked” the national security system “with serious consequences”.
But an expert witness report prepared for the Crown showed the access “may have been legitimate system administration” as the three had always maintained, and not sabotage, Mr Cooper said.
In a statement on behalf of his clients, he said the “repeated allegations” may have “fuelled public suspicion” and “misled” the public to thinking they are guilty of the charges brought, when “this is not the case”.
Mr Cooper said the three men had applied to have the charges against them dismissed and had prepared detailed written arguments on why the Crown’s own evidence did not show the commission of any criminal offence.
“Because competition, even with Blands, is not an offence in Gibraltar,” Mr Cooper said in the statement.
But the case against the three men was discontinued by the Attorney General, Michael Llamas, KC, in January 2022, before the dismissal application could be heard.
At the time, Mr Llamas said there was sufficient evidence to proceed to trial but cited “matters in the wider public interest” for his decision to stop the case. Those reasons have never been made public.
But the decision to discontinue the case also deprived the Operation Delhi three of an opportunity to present their arguments in public and have them fairly and properly adjudicated upon, Mr Cooper said.
The Supreme Court’s decision on Thursday relates to an independent expert witness report of Dr Paul Hunton, which was served on the three men by the Crown in the criminal proceedings as unused material.
Chief Justice Anthony Dudley’s decision allows the report to be disclosed subject to redactions proposed by the Attorney General.
“The Hunton Report was the only potentially admissible evidence which the Crown had in respect of the principal computer misuse offences, which were themselves a key ingredient of the misconceived charge of conspiracy to defraud,” Mr Cooper said in the statement.
“The Hunton Report was prepared solely on information provided by the complainant, Bland Limited, and on the incorrect premise that the NSCIS belonged to Bland and not HMGoG.”
“The report followed a series of careful briefings of the expert by the RGP and by Bland employees.”
“Nonetheless, the Crown’s own expert, whose evidence was pivotal for the success of the prosecution, in fact undermined the Prosecution’s case, concluding that what had occurred may have been legitimate system administration — as my clients had consistently maintained since their arrests in 2019.”
“We were not able to refer to or disclose this expert evidence until the order was made by the Chief Justice today.”
“It is an important application of the principle of open justice and provides my clients with a first opportunity to set the record straight.”