Keith Vaz, who has
been leading an inquiry into private investigators suspected of hacking
and other illegal practices. Photograph: Linda Nylind for the Guardian
The names of law firms, insurance companies and others linked to
rogue private investigators suspected of hacking and other alleged
illegal practices may not be released because they could compromise a
police investigation, the chairman of the Commons home affairs select
committee has said.
Keith Vaz, who has been spearheading an inquiry into private investigators' practices, told Radio 4's Today programme he wanted to reveal the names of the organisations on the list and could do so using parliamentary privilege, but had been told by the information commissioner and the Metropolitan police that they could be interested in investigating the 94 businesses and individuals on the list compiled by the Serious Organised Crime Agency (Soca).
The identities of the firms involved have not yet been revealed, although Vaz's committee has released a breakdown of the sectors they work in, including law, oil, rail services and the security industry.
Twenty-two law firms used private investigators convicted of illegally obtaining information, MPs have said.
Others on the list include celebrities, eight financial services firms and 10 insurance companies.
Vaz told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "I don't think that parliament should be part of a 'secret squirrel' club where we are given a list that is important and should be in the public interest and we are not able to publish it.
"The reason that we can't publish it at the moment – though I am consulting with members of the committee and we will come to a view on this – is because we are told that both the information commissioner and the Metropolitan police may be interested in investigating the 94 companies, firms, individuals that are on the second list."
A final decision on whether to release the names would be taken when the committee published its report, he said.
"The deadline, if you like, is when we publish our report into private investigators, we would like to be in a position where we publish the entire list. But we don't want to compromise any investigation that the Metropolitan police may or may not be involved in."
Vaz said Soca and the police would appear before the committee on 3 September to update members on progress. "We want to be responsible," he added.
Controversy over Soca's refusal to name the rogue operators' clients has grown in the past few weeks as it emerged that blue-chip companies may have inadvertently used investigators who used illegal techniques.
There have been calls for the firms to be named and investigated in the same way as the News of the World executives and journalists were following the phone-hacking scandal.
The list suggested that private investigators often subcontracted work to each other – 16 clients were other private investigation agencies.
It was put to Vaz that the police could keep the committee "stringing along forever", and he said: "That is the balance. This list has been around for a number of years and nobody has done anything about it."
He added: "Frankly, what it just needs is somebody to go along to the 94. This can be cleared up quite quickly. You should ask the firms involved did they know that the rogue investigators were getting illegal information, were they acting illegally? If yes, then you have to consider criminal liability. If no, then you cross them off. These companies, individuals and firms don't even know they are on this list."
Vaz added: "The real root of all this, of course, is we need to regulate about private investigators. We recommended this a year ago, it's not happened and hopefully the government will finally join the debate by doing something about it."
Keith Vaz, who has been spearheading an inquiry into private investigators' practices, told Radio 4's Today programme he wanted to reveal the names of the organisations on the list and could do so using parliamentary privilege, but had been told by the information commissioner and the Metropolitan police that they could be interested in investigating the 94 businesses and individuals on the list compiled by the Serious Organised Crime Agency (Soca).
The identities of the firms involved have not yet been revealed, although Vaz's committee has released a breakdown of the sectors they work in, including law, oil, rail services and the security industry.
Twenty-two law firms used private investigators convicted of illegally obtaining information, MPs have said.
Others on the list include celebrities, eight financial services firms and 10 insurance companies.
Vaz told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "I don't think that parliament should be part of a 'secret squirrel' club where we are given a list that is important and should be in the public interest and we are not able to publish it.
"The reason that we can't publish it at the moment – though I am consulting with members of the committee and we will come to a view on this – is because we are told that both the information commissioner and the Metropolitan police may be interested in investigating the 94 companies, firms, individuals that are on the second list."
A final decision on whether to release the names would be taken when the committee published its report, he said.
"The deadline, if you like, is when we publish our report into private investigators, we would like to be in a position where we publish the entire list. But we don't want to compromise any investigation that the Metropolitan police may or may not be involved in."
Vaz said Soca and the police would appear before the committee on 3 September to update members on progress. "We want to be responsible," he added.
Controversy over Soca's refusal to name the rogue operators' clients has grown in the past few weeks as it emerged that blue-chip companies may have inadvertently used investigators who used illegal techniques.
There have been calls for the firms to be named and investigated in the same way as the News of the World executives and journalists were following the phone-hacking scandal.
The list suggested that private investigators often subcontracted work to each other – 16 clients were other private investigation agencies.
It was put to Vaz that the police could keep the committee "stringing along forever", and he said: "That is the balance. This list has been around for a number of years and nobody has done anything about it."
He added: "Frankly, what it just needs is somebody to go along to the 94. This can be cleared up quite quickly. You should ask the firms involved did they know that the rogue investigators were getting illegal information, were they acting illegally? If yes, then you have to consider criminal liability. If no, then you cross them off. These companies, individuals and firms don't even know they are on this list."
Vaz added: "The real root of all this, of course, is we need to regulate about private investigators. We recommended this a year ago, it's not happened and hopefully the government will finally join the debate by doing something about it."
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment