The Commissioner of Police, Richard Ullger, was quizzed on Tuesday over allegations that former police officers received inducements in exchange for negative statements against Ian McGrail, his predecessor in the post whose controversial early retirement is being investigated by the McGrail Inquiry.
During oral evidence to the Inquiry, Mr Ullger was asked about a report he made to the Governor in early 2021 after receiving information from “a confidential source” that three ex-police officers were intending to make allegations of professional misconduct against Mr McGrail, and that he had “serious reservations about their integrity”.
Mr Ullger at the time also informed Mr McGrail, who described the information in a witness statement to the Inquiry as “a suspected conspiracy against me”.
Mr Ullger said he informed Mr McGrail “…principally for his safety.”
“I feared that something could happen to Mr McGrail,” he said, adding “physical as well”.
According to Mr McGrail’s witness statement, the information provided by Mr Ullger suggested jobs had been promised in the public service in exchange for “…information, whether true or not, about me, to maliciously tarnish my reputation before or during the Inquiry.”
Mr Ullger told the Inquiry the three officers had since been investigated and charged in connection to a judicial review, with the matter now before the courts.
Questioned by Julian Santos, counsel for the Inquiry, Mr Ullger said 22 police officers – an inspector, seven sergeants and 14 constables – had left the RGP under whistleblower protections, with 18 of them receiving job offers in the public service and the other four retiring.
All had made statements to the Inquiry, though only one statement had been accepted as relevant by its chairman, Sir Peter Openshaw.
Four of the officers were going through a disciplinary process at the time – these were discontinued when they left - and one constable was being criminally investigated, Mr Ullger said.
“Do you know of any officers being offered monetary payments?” Mr Santos asked.
“Without going into too much detail? Yes,” Mr Ullger replied.
The Commissioner said the whistleblower departures had placed the RGP under “massive” strain, especially as it was dealing with the impact of the Covid pandemic, the fallout following the fatal collision at sea and working to address recommendations made by His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire and Rescue Services [HMICFRS].
The RGP was never consulted on these transfers, the Inquiry heard.
Mr Ullger said too that the RGP was never contacted by the Government departments that were taking on the former officers, and was never asked about “the calibre” of those officers or whether they had any pending disciplinary matters.
“Those are questions that you may have to pose to other people, but I just don't have any idea what was happening with people from my workforce,” Mr Ullger said.
“Do you know of any other jobs that were offered apart from these 22?” he was asked at one point by Adam Wagner, the lawyer for Mr McGrail.
“No,” Mr Ullger replied.
The Commissioner was later questioned on this point by Sir Peter Caruana, the lawyer for the Government parties including the Chief Minister, the then interim Governor and the Attorney General.
In an exchange on the procedure that had been followed with the whistleblowers, Mr Ullger said the RGP was “not part of the public sector” and would have expected to manage in-house any personnel issues arising from any disclosures.
“If there was a genuine need, and I'm not asking you to accept that there were genuine needs here, [but] if there was a genuine need to redeploy an officer out of the RGP for whistleblowing reasons, that could only be elsewhere in the public sector, could it not?” Sir Peter Caruana asked.
“Possibly, yes,” Mr Ullger replied.
‘SHOCK’
Mr Ullger was asked about the reaction within the RGP when it became known that Mr McGrail was to retire early.
He said the senior command team could not understand what was happening, adding it was “sudden” and “did not make any sense”.
The Commissioner said that prior to that moment, there had been no complaints or concerns raised about Mr McGrail, who he regarded as an ethical, hard-working officer and his “best friend”.
“His request to retire early was a shock to us, and we failed to really understand the entirety of the ask, or even the justification in doing so,” Mr Ullger said.
“That remains my position, and I believe our position.”
“We certainly did not see it coming.”
“There were no obvious or less obvious warning signs or letters, which made it that much harder to understand or comprehend.”
“And it did raise concerns at senior management or command level.”
“Perhaps this inquiry may eliminate the matter and allow us to understand matters better.”
Mr Ullger said that while the RGP was dealing with a number of “critical” incidents at the time – the collision at sea, Operation Delhi and the HMICFRS report - it was also doing “a lot of good work” including close liaison with foreign law enforcement agencies on organised crime and counter-terrorism.
“We were doing a lot of good stuff, and it was under his command that a lot of good stuff was happening,” he said.
“So, to see an individual go, who always had, or has, the Royal Gibraltar Police at his heart, to see him go the way he did, was heart-breaking.”
Mr Ullger recalled something Mr McGrail had told the RGP senior management team before he left.
“He said that the Royal Gibraltar Police was more important than him and he expected us to take it forward,” Mr Ullger said, choking with emotion.
“Did you feel that you could fulfil your duties without fear or favour going forwards?” Mr Santos asked.
“We had to,” Mr Ullger replied.
The Commissioner said he enjoyed a good relationship with the Gibraltar Police Authority, the Governor, the Minister for Justice and the Chief Minister.
Mr Santos asked: “Do you have any concerns that the RGP's independence suffered as a result of Mr McGrail's retirement?”
Mr Ullger replied “…it's this public inquiry that's to determine that.”
‘UNINFLUENCED’
Mr Ullger said he had not been directly involved in Operation Delhi, though he had been kept abreast of developments during conversations with Mr McGrail and other senior officers.
Operation Delhi was a police investigation into the alleged “hacking and sabotage” of the National Security Centralised Intelligence System [NSCIS], and into an alleged conspiracy to defraud Bland, the private company that operates the system.
At the time Mr Levy was a suspect in Operation Delhi, though he was never arrested or charged.
The Inquiry had previously heard that Hassans held a stake in 36 North, the company at the heart of the police investigation, and Mr McGrail’s lawyers have alleged that Mr Levy and Chief Minister Fabian Picardo, as partners of Hassans, the latter on sabbatical, stood to gain financially from the alleged fraud.
Mr McGrail claims that after police sought to execute warrants at the office and home of Mr Levy on May 12, 2020, he was placed under intense pressure by Mr Picardo and Mr Llamas to steer the investigation away from Mr Levy, and that he was eventually “muscled out” out of his job.
The allegations are firmly denied.
Mr Ullger expressed regret that RGP officers had not executed warrants on May 12, 2020, that they had obtained for the offices and home of James Levy, KC, the senior partner at Hassans.
“I think one of the biggest failings in our investigation was not executing that warrant, sir, and it's been a matter that we've discussed on a few occasions in our debriefs,” Mr Ullger said, acknowledging that not executing the warrants had been one of the options the RGP had planned on the day.
“We would have achieved things had we executed the search warrant that we didn't on the day,” he added.
Questioned by Sir Peter Caruana, Mr Ullger agreed that after Mr McGrail retired, Operation Delhi “continued its normal course” without, as the lawyer put it, “inappropriate external interference”.
“The investigation continued as any other investigation would continue,” Mr Ullger told the Inquiry.
The Inquiry heard that some months later, a report was prepared by the senior investigating officer on whose advice Mr Levy was no longer deemed a suspect.
“And are you satisfied that that was a properly made decision, uninfluenced by improper pressures from outside?” Sir Peter Caruana asked.
“Yes, sir,” Mr Ullger replied.
MCGRAIL’S MISSING COMPUTERS
The Inquiry heard that Mr McGrail had taken some documents when he left the RGP, even though this was not allowed, and that some had been destroyed.
It is not clear what was in those documents, the Inquiry was told.
It also heard that neither Mr McGrail’s desktop computer nor his laptop had been located after his retirement, and neither did the RGP have back-up copies of what was on them.
Mr Ullger said he did not know what happened to either the documents or the IT equipment and that efforts continued to trace them.
In other evidence, Mr Ullger spoke too of the “fraught” relationship between senior RGP managers and the Gibraltar Police Federation, a situation in his view largely down to the Federation’s then chairman, Maurice Morello, who he described as “a very difficult person” and “something of a rebel”.
Mr Ullger said the RGP had long faced claims about bullying but had also focused great effort on addressing them, adding too that there was often a generational issue, with younger officers uncomfortable in a uniformed, disciplined body.
Asked about Mr McGrail’s leadership style, Mr Ullger said: “I wouldn't say that people would think that his style was bullying.”
“Certainly, Mr McGrail was a no-nonsense person. He demanded respect from people, and I agree entirely with that.”
Earlier in the day the Inquiry heard from Superintendent John Field, the Gold commander on the day of the fatal collision at sea on March 8, 2020.
He described the “intense” hours after the collision during which he and his team tried to piece together what had happened.
Early evidence including coordinates from the Guardia Civil pointed to the collision occurring in Spanish waters, but Mr Field said police had initially believed the chase started in British waters.
It was only on March 25 that the RGP was finally able to independently confirm that “the interception, the pursuit and the collision had all taken place in Spanish waters”.
The Inquiry continues and resumes on Thursday.