Secret advice, secret device: it's time for Robinson to come clean
10 February 2010
Statement by TUV Leader Jim Allister QC
A week on from Peter Robinson cleared himself on the sole basis of his lawyer’s opinion, and despite the fact several official inquiries are ongoing, where is the Opinion which cleared him on the narrow issue of the Ministerial Code and where are the all important instructions on which it was based?
Why are they being kept secret? What is there to hide? Devices of secrecy and secret devices don’t impress.
I, therefore, repeat the challenge for immediate publication. The only impediment is the legal privilege which attaches to the Opinion, but that belongs to Mr Robinson. So, he can waive it. Counsel has no privilege which requires to be waived.
“It is not, of course, just the Opinion which requires to be published, but the entire instructions from the client on which it was based. Without these the Opinion is incomplete. I note Mr Robinson himself has said that the ‘vindication’ is based on “on the material provided”. Well what is that material? That is key. Remember, it appears the public is paying for the advice sought so, we the public should see it, all of it. Mr Robinson can secure full publication, so why has he not done so?
“Initially, when Mr Robinson announced he was seeking legal opinion it was spun as ‘independent investigation’. As I said at the time seeking counsel’s opinion comes no where close to ‘independent investigation’, but just how investigatory was this exercise? In the process of formulating this Opinion was any surplus material held by the BBC, which was not broadcast, requested and examined? Or, as I suspect, was it merely a regular counsel’s opinion whose boundaries were set by the material provided?
“Yes, it is time for transparency, full transparency on this issue, which we certainly have not had up to now.”
