Thank you, convener, and thank you for the opportunity to come to speak about our report on counter-corruption.
As members are aware, the report was requested by the Scottish Police Authority—that identifies its interest in the matter. I recognise the commitment from the chair and the chief constable, since our report was published, to accept and take forward all our recommendations.
I will give some background, if I may. HMIC’s role is independent, and my role is to look at the effectiveness and efficiency of policing in Scotland. My focus is very much on adding value, and my task is really to identify improvements in policing and not to apportion or identify blame. The reports are written in that spirit.
I highlight that we have had full access to all the information relative to the counter-corruption unit and in particular to the circumstances surrounding its investigation of the leak of information to journalists. As part of that, we have had access to protected information that people provided on a confidential basis. There is an understanding that that information will be kept confidential and that I will not breach any trust or confidence or identify any sources or indeed covert techniques or tools that have been applied.
My starting point on counter corruption is that Police Scotland needs an effective counter-corruption capability, which must have the same ethical standards as the rest of Police Scotland, must conduct itself in the same manner as that in which the rest of Police Scotland conducts itself, and must be subject to effective scrutiny.
I am aware of the committee’s interest in the matter. In particular, we took the opportunity in our review to look at Police Scotland’s wider investigation into the circumstances surrounding the alleged leak of information, as a case study.
A key point at the start of our evidence today is the need to keep in focus the reinvestigation of the murder of Emma Caldwell. The Sunday Mail article on 5 April raised public awareness of Emma’s murder and raised legitimate questions about the initial investigation from 2005 to 2007. That article prompted Police Scotland to review the case and the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service to instruct a reinvestigation.
We took the opportunity to look into that, as part of our review. We found that the reinvestigation is well resourced, has an experienced senior investigating officer, and has no staff who were involved in the previous investigations. It is also applying a modern approach to witnesses and forensics. Importantly, there is robust governance and oversight of the inquiry, which is also provided by the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service. For me, as we go into more evidence, it is important that the public and especially the family have confidence in the integrity of the reinvestigation. I hope that our report will provide that.
It is not true to say that Police Scotland put all its efforts into finding the source of a leak, to the detriment of the Emma Caldwell investigation, as some of the media speculated at the time. I think that our review has shown that Police Scotland acted quickly, undertook a review and has a robust investigation in place. It is also important to recognise that the reinvestigation is live, and it is not helpful to speculate about suspects or in a way that might compromise the proceedings.
In part 1 of the report, we did not review—or we have not commented on—the Interception of Communications Commissioner’s Office’s findings specifically in relation to the applications. IOCCO published a memo and submitted supporting documents on 17 June, which we consider to be particularly helpful, in that they place in the public domain for the first time a full account and the extent of the commissioner’s criticism. Therefore, we did not find it necessary to provide that level of detail in our report, and we relied fully on the IOCCO determination.
We are aware that Police Scotland has conceded that the communications data authorisations were obtained in contravention of the 2015 acquisition and disclosure of communications data code of practice, and that the people who are affected by that have a real remedy through the Investigatory Powers Tribunal hearing in July. Again, it is important that our report does not compromise the integrity of those proceedings.
I am conscious of the time, but I would like to take a few more minutes, if that is okay, convener.