By Tad Stoner
tad@caymannetnews.com 

London’s Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) has acknowledged having information about the ongoing investigation of corruption within the Royal Cayman Islands Police Service (RCIPS), and that the Governor and Attorney General may form part of the file.

Michael Watters, FCO Desk Officer for the Cayman Islands, in a 4 July letter, refused a local enquiry “in regard to any and all information” about the 3 September break-in at the offices of the daily Cayman Net News, and “any prior knowledge and/or authorisation” of the move by Government officials, “including, but not limited to, the Attorney General and the Governor”.

The break-in, which sparked the launch of a wider corruption probe within the RCIPS, was rooted in 16 allegations of a corrupt relationship between Deputy Police Commissioner Anthony Ennis and newspaper publisher Desmond Seales.

While both men were exonerated, investigations by London’s Metropolitan Police raised wider questions regarding the role of top police and Government officials, seeking to determine who knew what facts at which point.

“I can confirm that the Foreign and Commonwealth Office holds some information relevant to your request,” Mr Watters wrote, saying, however, that “this information is exempt from release … as disclosure would be likely to prejudice the exercise by the investigating team … in ascertaining whether certain individuals failed to comply with the law.”

On 4 July, Senior Investigating Officer Martin Bridger told a press conference that he had “heard the suggestions” of complicity by the Governor and Attorney General, but declined to comment beyond saying the Governor H.E Stuart Jack had given him unimpeded “access to everyone I need” in order, he said, “to get at the truth of the matter”.

Despite further speculation prompted by Mr Watters’ letter, a police spokesman on Thursday, 9 July warned against drawing conclusions about the complicity of top officials.

“It only means that we won’t disclose anything about that case and the ongoing police investigation,” he said, pointing out that authorities were entitled to exempt certain categories of data under the Freedom of Information Act.

“On the other question” regarding the Governor and Attorney General, he said, “I can’t say anything one way or the other.”

The Office of the Governor referred all comment to Government Information Services, which observed only that the original query to the FCO “was pretty wide”, while cautioning against reading anything into it.

“This exemption,” wrote Mr Watters, “requires the application of a public-interest test to determine whether or not the information should be released.”

While acknowledging that “releasing the information we hold would likely increase the public’s knowledge of the investigation to date”, Mr Watters concluded that “it is in the interests of maintaining the integrity of this process that material relating to the investigation is kept confidential so as not to prejudice it while it is still ongoing.

“When the investigating team has completed its investigation it will present its findings to the appropriate authorities … It would also be unfair to those under investigation if information relating to it was released other than as required by the courts.

“For this reason,” Mr Watters finished, “we have concluded that the public interest in non-disclosure outweighs the public interest in disclosure.”