Former Post Office Figure Admits to Using Legal Privilege to ‘Cloak’ Information
Post Office Used Legal Privilege to ‘Cloak’ Information, Former Senior Figure Admits
In a shocking revelation at the Post Office Inquiry, one of the most senior former figures in the organisation has admitted to using legal privilege to ‘cloak’ internal communications.
The inquiry uncovered advice from a lawyer in 2011 suggesting that documents should be marked as privileged and confidential or engineered to appear that way, in anticipation of potential litigation. Angela van den Bogerd, people services director at Post Office Ltd, was found to have instructed colleagues to ensure that all communications were privileged and therefore not disclosable.
When questioned by inquiry counsel Jason Beer KC about whether the Post Office had used claims of legal professional privilege to hide communications, Bogerd initially denied it but later acknowledged that there was a tendency to do so based on the information she had seen during the inquiry process.
The inquiry also revealed that in 2011, four potential litigants emerged following the formation of the campaign group Justice For Submasters Alliance. Emails between Bogerd and a lawyer from Royal Mail Group discussed structuring documents to appear as if their dominant purpose was evidence gathering for litigation, in order to claim legal privilege.
Furthermore, the inquiry delved into the issue of Horizon operator Fujitsu having remote access to branch accounts. If this capability was known, it could render Horizon-related prosecutions unreliable. Bogerd claimed she had no knowledge of remote access before 2011, despite evidence suggesting otherwise.
An email from a Post Office manager in 2010 directly contradicted Bogerd’s claim, stating that Fujitsu could remotely input entries into branches, affecting up to 60 locations. Bogerd claimed not to remember receiving the email, raising suspicions that Post Office managers may have dealt with sensitive issues offline to avoid creating a paper trail.
The inquiry continues to uncover troubling revelations about the Post Office’s practices and the extent to which legal privilege was used to conceal information. Stay tuned for further updates on this developing story.