David Leppard and Robert Winnett
2 for 1 tickets to Singin' In The Rain, this coming Monday. Book now
Police investigating alleged corruption by Britain’s biggest defence company sought access to Downing Street’s computer system to trawl for e-mails sent by and to Jonathan Powell, Tony Blair’s chief of staff.
They suspected that Lord Powell, his brother, an adviser to BAE Systems, the firm at the centre of the inquiry, was lobbying Downing Street aides to have the investigation stopped.
They approached officers investigating the cash for honours scandal, which had access to Downing Street e-mails, to see if they could trace e-mails between the Powell brothers.
They were looking for evidence that individuals might have tried to influence the outcome of the police investigation.
This weekend, Charles Powell, a former foreign policy adviser to Margaret Thatcher, said he had discussed the investigation with “senior government officials” and that it was “perfectly possible” these included his brother.
Access to the e-mails was denied for legal reasons. However, arms campaigners are expected to press the government for full details of the exchanges in a High Court hearing later this year.
The revelation is another setback for Jonathan Powell, Blair’s most senior aide, who has been interviewed by Yard detectives investigating separate claims that there was an attempt to pervert the course of justice in the cash-for-honours inquiry.
Jonathan Powell played a key part in the events leading up to the government’s decision to halt an investigation by the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) into whether BAE Systems paid bribes to senior members of the Saudi Arabian royal family.
The bribes are alleged to have been paid by BAE to encourage the Saudis to continue buying fighter jets in a £40 billion arms deal known as Al-Yamamah.
Lord Powell, his older brother, said he had “occasionally” spoken to both BAE and the Saudi royal family on aspects of the investigation.
A Downing Street spokesman insisted yesterday that Jonathan Powell did not discuss the case with his brother. “The fact that they are brothers is therefore totally irrelevant.”
The decision to halt the probe into BAE was taken on the grounds that it would harm Britain’s national interest – a claim that Lord Powell said last week he had previously “flagged up” to senior government officials.
After the SFO investigation was halted, detectives became suspicious about BAE’s connections to No 10 staff, notably Jonathan Powell.
The Sunday Times has established that Ministry of Defence fraud squad officers held a meeting with Scotland Yard’s cash-for-honours team – led by Assistant Commissioner John Yates – late last year.
A senior Whitehall official disclosed that the fraud squad suspected that Lord Powell was acting as a “back channel” to lobby his brother and other government officials to get the police inquiry stopped.
Lord Powell became an adviser to BAE Systems in 2003 – at about the time concerns were first aired over alleged bribery in the awarding of the £40 billion contract to BAE by Saudi Arabia.
Lord Powell also acts as an adviser to Wafic Said, who helped to broker the Saudi deal.
One Whitehall official familiar with the case disclosed that the SFO ran a trace on a mobile telephone belonging to Sir Richard Evans, the former BAE chairman who was interviewed twice – in 2005 and 2006.
The official said: “They [the detectives working with the SFO] sent an officer to see the Yates team. They suspected there could be documents that showed that Evans had access to Downing Street. We knew Evans called Lord Powell and we suspected there was a back channel.”
The sources said the Yates team told the SFO the Yard did have the right to tap into the Downing Street servers.
However, it was only allowed “limited access”, enabling them to search for key words – after legal approval had been given. But the Yard said that it would be “illegal” for them to provide the Ministry of Defence police with access to No 10 e-mails.
Lord Powell said he had discussed the SFO inquiry with “senior officials” in the MoD and the Cabinet office – understood to be a reference to Sir Gus O’Donnell, the cabinet secretary.
But Lord Powell said he could not recall if he had discussed the matter with his brother.
“It’s perfectly possible. If you were told that, then you can print it. I mean I honestly can’t remember...We discussed all sorts of things.”
He added that the contents of discussions with members of his family were “sacrosanct”.
Under the Shawcross procedure, the government can drop a criminal investigation if the attorney-general decides it is not in the national interest.
Lord Powell added: “I do remember talking to senior officials about Shawcross. I flagged it up but I can’t say I was very original in doing so. I don’t remember speaking to Jonathan about the Shawcross exercise. I can’t absolutely swear that I never did, but I don’t think so.”
Tony Blair and Lord Goldsmith, the attorney-general, relied on the precedent when announcing that the two-year criminal inquiry into the Saudi arms deal was being dropped last December.
Critics accused the government of bowing to Saudi “blackmail” and making the decision on economic grounds.
The move caused outrage. It was one of the few times the Shawcross procedure has been used to abandon a criminal investigation in the national interest since 1951.
The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development criticised it and American diplomats issued a formal protest. Last week the Swiss federal prosecutor announced a criminal investigation into secret bank accounts said to have been linked to BAE’s Saudi arms deal.
The decision to drop the probe is being challenged in an application for a High Court judicial review filed by antiarms company campaigners.
The court action, due to be heard in the summer, is now expected to probe the involvement of the Powell brothers.
Both men were closely involved in the chain of events that led to the decision to drop the corruption investigation.
Jonathan Powell chaired key meetings with O’Donnell and others to steer Downing Street strategy after the Saudis threatened to end the arms contract and suspend diplomatic and intelligence ties.
The Sunday Times reported last month that Jonathan Powell was facing the possibility that he may be charged with perverting the course of justice in the cash-for-honours affair.
He is thought to have attended a meeting at which Lord Levy, Blair’s chief fundraiser, and Ruth Turner, director of government relations, discussed how to “handle” the cash-for-honours inquiry.
Powell’s name is one of up to five that appears in the police file being considered by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS).
The disclosure that the SFO tried secretly to access the confidential Downing Street computer system will infuriate No 10, which is bracing itself for the CPS decision on whether anyone will be charged. It is expected in the next few weeks.
A Downing Street spokesman said yesterday: “Jonathan Powell was not involved in the decision not to prosecute, which was handled by civil servants. He did not discuss the case with his brother. The fact that they are brothers is therefore totally irrelevant.”
Scotland Yard and the MoD said they could not comment.
Enjoy screenings of all the classic films you love, plus take advantage of two-for-one tickets
Have you ever dreamed of owning your own racehorse or a beautiful painting?
Enjoy comfort, safety, space and great design. Plus enter our great competition
Times Online's new TV show helps you make the right decisions for your pet
Are you California dreaming? Explore the wonders of the Golden State. Also enter our fantastic competition
Do you have what it takes to be a Times photographer?
Your brain is capable of more than you might think...
Find out to make the most of your money with our wealth management guides
Need help with your property? We have an entire how to guide - buying, selling, letting, moving, to help you
We are seeking entries for the inaugural Sunday Times Best Green Companies Awards
Enjoy some wonderful inspiring wildlife moments
An interactive preview of the brand new For Your Eyes Only exhibition

Love Sudoku? Play our brand new interactive game: with added functionality and daily prizes

Are you irritable when you return from work? Drained of emotion? You could be suffering from boreout
Prepare for some shock and awe, petrol lovers. Despite the greens trying to wipe it out, the car is about to offer us the most exciting year ever
We've trawled the brochures and websites to find this summer’s best holidays for every taste and budget

Overseas contacts and local business information

Everything you need to know, own or do

Direct from the farms
2007/07
£57,500
South East England
2007/07
£40,995
South East England
2006/06
£41,995
South East England
Great car insurance deals online
£40-55k+benefits+uncapped commission
Morgan Keating
South East
Up to £30,000
GLE
London
£
c£75,000 + executive benefits
Morgan Keating
London and South
Unpaid with travel expenses
Network Rail
Globrix, the property search engine
Visit Times Online Property for homes for sale or rent
Residential development site with planning permission
£1,500,000
Mortgages, bank accounts & money transfers to help you buy abroad
Dinarobin Hotel Golf & Spa 7 nights
From £1830 per person – saving £530.
Walking & multi-activity holidays in Cauterets. Stylish self-catering apartments.
From 350€ for 7 nights.
SAVE 25% on Sandals Luxury Resorts
Great travel insurance deals online
Contact our advertising team for advertising and sponsorship in Times Online, The Times and The Sunday Times. Search globrix.com to buy or rent UK property.
© Copyright 2008 Times Newspapers Ltd.
This service is provided on Times Newspapers' standard Terms and Conditions. Please read our Privacy Policy.To inquire about a licence to reproduce material from Times Online, The Times or The Sunday Times, click here.This website is published by a member of the News International Group. News International Limited, 1 Virginia St, London E98 1XY, is the holding company for the News International group and is registered in England No 81701. VAT number GB 243 8054 69.
Naturally, the people who agree the bribe add a bonus for themselves... It would be silly not to!
Cash Speaks Louder, KL, Malaysia
Rot starts at the top. The charlatans and chancers running the country should be held as accountable as the rest of us would be if we had broken the law. No one is above the law. If the people in charge are allowed to get away with it then why should anyone else obey the law. Leaders should set a good example. That is the best way to control crime and anti-social behaviour.
Chie, Tokyo, Japan
Dear Sir,
Being 62 years of age with three grandchildren I feel sad to see what a nation we have become - no integrity, no ethics or standards, etc. It's just about making money, do anything to be get in the limelight and staying there. Shifting your position on everything and avoiding anything where poeple have to be called to account and above all pursue power and grandeur.
What can our children, and grandchildren, indeed future generations take as the touchstones of the British nation - we seem more concerned about who is wearing what, who is sleeping with whom and what is the most recent episode of the current reality TV show. If we were in a position to build our nation from a new start point what would we include as the cornerstones - I hope nothing of the things we currenlty regard as important.
graham, benflleet,
Bill, WInchester: "Does anyone really care whether BAE paid a bribe? Wouldn't the police time be better spent protecting the average man on the street from increasing levels of violent crime instead?"
Er yes. I care rather a lot. Firstly we're talking tens of millions of taxpayers' money going in illegal bribes.
I'm sure you'd be the first to believe in thieves being punished. We're just talking about highly sophisticated thieves here.
And it should not be a case of either / or. Next we'll be letting off the one-off rapist to make prison space for the serial attacker. Oh I forgot, this government is already issuing cautions to suspected rapists.
Emily, London,
A. Good Morning, brother. Thanks for calling.How are you?
B. Can't say, not allowed. How about you?
A. It would be a crime to reply.
B. It is to be hoped that these intrafamilial bilateral discussions of issues of potential mutual benefit can result in a positive outcome.
A. Even knowledge of these discussions could give rise to external interest.
B. We're safe.
A How so?
B. Against the national interest to reply, or disclose why.
A. So its all arranged then., with plausible deniability built-in.
B. Yes, see you at teatime.
martin brighton, sheffield,
What's happened to the past/last/ongoing(?) police investigation re the Cash for Peerages matter? Or is this latest just another farcical attempt to make us believe that we live in a free, democratic and accountable country?
Endless inquiries, investigations and commisions .. what a nice little earner for those involved.
Robert, Buckfastleigh, Devon.
Does anyone really care whether BAE paid a bribe? Wouldn't the police time be better spent protecting the average man on the street from increasing levels of violent crime instead?
At least the contract would provide a relatviely secure future for BAE and its employees and maintain relations with the Saudi's (at least we don't have to go into a needless war to have access to their oil).
Bill, Winchester,
Little wonder this government wishes to be exempt from the 'freedom of information' act.
Peter Day, Doncaster, Yorkshire
Perverting the Course of Justice is not a high theshold to meet. Case Law states that, quote, ..."The boundaries of the offence are uncertain but it clearly includes the following:
Fabricating, concealing or destroying evidence with intent to influence the outcome of judicial proceedings, civil or criminal whether or not they have yet been instituted ..... " End Quote
Now does that sound familiar in any way ?
John, Woking, Surrey
My understanding of the root of this issue is that 1 or more members of the Saudi govt "needed" financial persuasion before opting for the BAE deal. Such practices appear to be quite common when pte companies seek to do business with govts. One or more corrupt officials in such cases can hold the economic viability of the company concerned (and all of its employees) in the palm(s) of their hand(s) so to speak. The real criminality lies surely on the side of those misusing political power for personal ends. Business taints itself when entering such deals, but it doesn't seem unreasonable to me for those so placed to simply pay the entry fee with one hand and build it into the overall cost of the project, when so much can hang in the balance. The UK govt having decided, with good cause, to unhook BAE should have ensured that those who sought to bring about that reasonable outcome were cleared, and pointless police effort ended, for the sake of consistency.
jim, Glasgow,
My government corrupt? It's all Blies!
Ronald E. Watts, Nicosia, Cyprus
Now, what will happen if the USA investigates, as they say they will, and then requires extradition as the investigation unfolds? Can I hear the sound of roosting chickens to be followed by some serious egg on face?
Bruce, UK, Malvern,
Looks like scraping-bottom-of-barrel time.
A.D. Osborne, Hastings, England
Great to feel good by being holier than thou. How many jobs would have gone with the loss of of such a contract.
Giving "bungs" is par for the course in many countries and differing cultures.
Britain is no different!!!!
David F., Leiria, Portugal
We are told by a Downing Street spokesman that Jonathan Powell did not discuss the case with his brother. The fact that they are brothers is therefore totally irrelevant.
It might therefore seem strange that when his brother is asked the same question directly, Lord Powell seems far less certain of this sweeping ascertain: Its perfectly possible. If you were told that, then you can print it. I mean I honestly cant remember...We discussed all sorts of things.
Lord Powell then claims that the contents of discussions with members of his family were sacrosanct. How so? Neither of the Powell brothers are elected MPs (who have seen fit to exempt themselves from public accountability).
Well done The Sunday Times, you seem to have brought to light another grubby skeleton in this executives darkest closet; shame on the whole of them.
Edwin Thornber, Bucharest, Romania