R. v. Ponting

Abstract

The idea behind this article is simple. It is to try and show, first, the reactions of an ordinary citizen when confronted by the majesty of the criminal law and, secondly, how we decided to run a major case of crucial public importance.1 The background to the Belgrano affair is, I hope, fairly well known by now.2 In this particular context all that I have space to mention is that during the early part of 1984 there were a series of long running battles within the Ministry of Defence about how to handle the two year long cover-up of the circumstances surrounding the sinking of the Argentinian warship General Belgrano by a British submarine in May 1982. In my capacity of Assistant Secretary, Head of Defence Secretariat 5, I had been asked by the then Secretary of State, Michael Heseltine, to prepare a 'Top Secret' account of what had really taken place. Because of its high security information and the sensitivity of what it revealed only six copies were made and it subsequently became known as the 'Crown Jewels'. After a great deal of argument, in which I had strongly advocated a new policy of greater openness, I was overruled and it was decided to continue with the cover-up. The crucial events came in July 1984 when the Foreign Affairs Committee of the House of Commons began an investigation into the events surrounding the sinking and the possible linkage with the Peruvian peace plan. The Committee asked for information which, if it had been provided by the Ministry of Defence, would have revealed the cover-up. Advice from another division within the Ministry recommended that the information should not be given to the Committee and that a misleading memorandum designed to head off the enquiry should be sent instead. After a great deal of thought I decided to send copies of two internal Ministry documents that revealed what had been going on and how the House of Commons had been consistently misled to Tam Dalyell M.P., the man who had led the campaign to unearth the truth. He, quite correctly, placed the documents before the Foreign Affairs Committee. The chairman of the Committee, Sir Anthony Kershaw, promptly returned the papers to Michael Heseltine, who then called in the Ministry of Defence police to investigate the leak. What happened when I was first interviewed by the police on 11 August 1984 became the subject of some controversy at the trial. I shall repeat what I told the jury when I was in the witness box under oath. I was told that the leak was not a matter for the Official Secrets Act and that if I were prepared to resign from the civil service that would be the end of