In the face of Conservative Manifesto, UK Govt plans to keep SFO running and independent
The Serious Fraud Office will remain independent and will continue to undertake its own investigations and prosecutions, says Baroness Williams of Trafford.
In the face of plans stated by the Conservative Party in its Manifesto to fold the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) as a part of efforts to improve intelligence sharing and bolster the investigation of serious fraud, money laundering and financial crime, the UK Government stated on Wednesday that the SFO will remain independent.
During a debate at the House of Lords on December 13, 2017, Baroness Chakrabarti asked Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Statement by Baroness Williams of Trafford on 11 December announcing plans for a new National Economic Crime Centre hosted in the National Crime Agency, how they intend to safeguard the independence of the SFO.
Baroness Williams of Trafford replied:
“The Serious Fraud Office will remain independent and will continue to undertake its own investigations and prosecutions. The new powers will give the National Crime Agency the ability to task the Serious Fraud Office with opening a specific investigation, but only with the agreement of the Attorney-General and the Home Secretary. The Serious Fraud Office will be a key partner in the National Economic Crime Centre.”
Regarding the contrast between her latest statement and the contents of the Conservative manifesto, Baroness Williams of Trafford said:
“In terms of the manifesto, we need to continue to look at all options to improve our response to tackling economic crime—but, yes, the SFO will remain independent”.
What is seen as one of the major failures of the SFO is the collapse of the trial against ex-traders Stylianos Contogoulas and Ryan Michael Reich, accused of rigging the Libor rate. Stylianos Contogoulas and Ryan Michael Reich were acquitted by a jury at Southwark Crown Court in April this year following a retrial.
In June this year, the House of Lords heard the statement of Lord James of Blackheath who criticized the way UK regulators and authoritative bodies have handled LIBOR-related issues. Lord James highlighted the sequence of four LIBOR cases which have passed through the High Court in the preceding 18 months. There have been 15 prosecutions, five convictions, two cases where the juries have failed to agree and eight acquittals. As a result, he said, there are “so many confusions and unresolved issues from this process and our parallel LIBOR market in Europe, called Euribor, is complaining so much that it may seek to shut us out and take the entire market, to our significant financial detriment.”
Lord James also criticized the SFO over the “experts” it provided with regards to LIBOR-related trials. He noted that the expert witness provided by the SFO had broken down in the fourth trial, and had confessed that “he did not know the first thing about LIBOR, had never worked a day in the LIBOR market and had been given coaching by the SFO as to what to say to convince the jury”.
