POL00027210
POL00027210
POST OFFICE BOARD
Decision Paper
Author: JANE MACLEOD Date: 21 March 2016
Context
1. In January 2016 the Post Office Board approved the new prosecutions policy.
However the Board challenged whether the policy should be published on the
Group website.
2. This paper summarises the views and recommends that the policy should be
published.
Questions addressed in this report
4. What are the arguments for and against publication of the policy?
5. What is market practice??
Conclusion
6. There is no direct requirement for POL to publish a prosecution policy if it chooses
to bring private prosecutions, and therefore there is no direct sanction against
Post Office for failing to publish its policy.
7. Nevertheless in the interest of transparency and consistent with Post Office’s
values, I recommend that the policy should be published, although I suggest that
we rename the policy as the ‘Enforcement Policy’ as it does anticipate outcomes
in addition to formal prosecution.
What are the arguments for publication?
8. Publication is consistent with:
e The principles of fairness, consistency and transparency in approaching the
serious matter of criminal prosecutions; and
e the terms of the policy itself, whose objectives include that it “inform the
public and our commercial partners of the general principles Post Office
Limited will use to guide its criminal enforcement decisions” (para.3.1.3).
9. Even if there is no direct sanction for failing to publish, the potential adverse
impacts of not publishing include:
° public criticism that POL is not being transparent. As a central purpose of
prosecutions is to deter wrongdoing, then an election not to disclose the
prosecutions policy, as a minimum, does not support that objective, and
may raise questions as to why we would not disclose the fact or the
underlying principles, of the policy.
Strictly Confidentiat Board Intelligence Hub template
POL00027210
POL00027210
POST OFFICE PAGE 2 OF 2
. increased risk of judicial review over any decision to prosecute. The fact
that we have developed a policy, made it publically available via the
website, and make prosecution decisions in accordance with that policy, will
support POL being able to demonstrate that any specific decision to
prosecute is rational and properly taken when benchmarked against a freely
available policy.
What are the arguments against publication?
10. The main risk of publication is that it draws attention to Post Office’s practices
and as a result encourages further adverse publicity from those who are
monitoring developments in relation to Sparrow and the alleged failings of the
Horizon system.
11. This may be compounded if relatively few prosecutions eventuate due to
concerns over Post Office’s ability to rely on evidence obtained from Horizon.
12. Reactive communications plans have been drawn up should questions be raised
as to the purpose of the policy.
What is market practice?
13. The recommendation from Brian Altman QC, former First Senior Treasury Counsel
(the country’s most senior practising prosecuting barrister) was that the policy
should be published on the website. Mr Altman is aware of the ‘Sparrow’ cases
and has advised in relation to a number of issues connected with ‘Sparrow’.
14. In addition to the CPS (the Director of Public Prosecutions is required by statute
to publish a Code for Crown Prosecutors), there are a number of other
organisations (public and private) which conduct prosecutions. As a sample, the
following publish their policies on their websites:
e Transport for London
. RSPCA
e Train companies, which are required by their franchise agreements to
protect revenue from ticket sales (e.g. Northern, Cross Country,
Thameslink)
. Local authorities (e.g. London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham,
Manchester City Council, Lambeth Trading Standards), and
e BIS Criminal Enforcement team (which “work[s] to deter fraud in companies
and by bankrupts”).
Input Sought
The Board is requested to note the options and endorse that on balance, publication
of the policy on Post Office’s website is consistent with Post Office’s values and the
objectives of the policy.
Strictly Confidentiat Board Inteligence Hub template