BAE’s corruption allegations – make them face up to it this time
October 7th, 2009Corporate fraud 4 CommentsIt was a sad day for British justice in 2006 when Tony Blair intervened to halt investigations into allegations that BAE Systems, the UK’s largest defence contractor, had paid bribes to officials in Saudi Arabia in order to be awarded lucrative contracts in that country.
Britain should not make the same mistake twice, and assurances on the part of Gordon Brown that his government will not intervene with investigations into similar allegations against the company relating to its dealings with the governments of Tanzania, the Czech Republic, South Africa and Romania are more than welcome.
(After a six year investigation, Britain’s Serious Fraud Office (SFO) announced on October 1 that it had sought consent from the Attorney-General to have BAE prosecuted with respect to these latter allegations.
The case currently rests with the Attorney-General, who will decide whether or not the evidence against BAE is sufficient at this time so as to take the case to court)
Saudi saga was a disgrace – don’t repeat it
The Saudi debacle in 2006 revolved around an investigation into allegations that BAE had made illegal payments (bribes) to officials and members of the royal family in Saudi Arabia in exchange for a large arms contract.
That investigation was abruptly shelved following personal intervention on the part of Tony Blair. Although national security concerns were sighted as the primary reason, there is little doubt that that action was driven by concerns over complications with regards to Britain’s relationship with the Saudis, who had threatened: (a) to pull out of an agreement with BAE to provide for the provision of new fighter aircraft – at the cost of up to 50,000 British jobs; and (b) to withdraw its cooperation in respect of the war on terror in the event that the investigation continued to proceed (refer article).
(The sensitivity on the part of the Saudis with respect to that investigation revolved around what any probe into BAE in this regard may reveal and expose with regard to the Saudi government’s own practices)
Hold them to account this time
That decision represented a shocking mistake, one which Britain should not repeat with regard to the allegations at hand.
These allegations should be handled in the appropriate manner – on their merits through the proper legal process without any form of political interference whatsoever.
Yes, these matters are sensitive. Risks to military operations and national security in the event of leakage of sensitive information should not be treated lightly, and any embarrassment on the part of foreign governments with regard to practices which are exposed as a result of any trial will certainly complicate relationships with key allies from Britain’s point of view.
But this is no reason for interference with regard to legal proceedings against BAE. Surely there are ways from which to hold the company to account without divulging sensitive military information, for example, by conducting some aspects of any resulting trial in secret or by expunging trial documents containing sensitive information from public record.
Moreover, concern about upsetting foreign governments should never deter countries from due and proper investigation of their own resident companies. The day any nation allows bullying or intimidation from foreign governments to prevent it from holding its own citizens and organizations to account is a sad day for that nation – no foreign relationship is worth that price.
If they’re so innocent – let them prove it
BAE claims that it has never made illegal payments of any kind. To be fair, they may not turn out to be guilty.
If so, they have nothing to hide – nor the foreign governments with whom they deal. Thus they would have no problem proving their innocence through the proper legal process.
But innocence should be established by proper legal proceedings, not political intervention.
If BAE is to avoid facing court, it should be because of a genuine belief on the part of the Attorney-General that there is insufficient evidence to support the case against them – NOT because British politicians cower to intimidation from foreign governments.
Gordon Brown should keep to his word, and he and his ministers should stay right out of this affair and simply let justice run its proper course.

Recent Comments