The policeman who leaked counter-terrorism documents was trying to help, says a s h smyth |
|
Aged nought-and-a-bit I had an apnoea attack (that's 99 per cent of a cot death, to you and me), involving all the wrong proportions of breathing/turning blue and a neighbouring nurse who, by curtailing my father's attempt to crack open my infant chest with his fists, doubtless saved my life. The nurse, it transpires, was the wife of a certain policeman, one Thomas Lund-Lack. Tangential stuff, I grant you, but enough to make me think I owe him one.
Mr Lund-Lack is now in the news for breaking the law. He admits that while at Scotland Yard he leaked counter-terrorism documents to The Sunday Times, albeit in a sincere attempt to highlight problems within the intelligence community. It is clear to everyone that he is guilty as charged.
Nonetheless, the case reflects unfavourably on our justice system. Come sentencing next month, Mr Lund-Lack faces a prison term: in |
|
 |
 |
 |
| Important though they may have been, the documents Lund-Lack disclosed were hardly the blueprints to MI6 |
|
|
fact, "misconduct in public office" can carry a life sentence. With murderers and rapists serving only a decade or so, this punishment is utterly disproportionate to the crime. Important though they may have been, these documents were hardly the blueprints to MI6 headquarters (by Vauxhall train station, in case you didn't catch that Bond movie).
Indeed, Mr Lund-Lack actually hoped some good would come of his actions. Naive, undoubtedly; but it's an important mitigation. He was not colluding with enemies of the state (whatever Blairites think of the press), nor was he lining his pocket.
Above all, the case is indicative of our current obsession (only partially justified) with national security. A pattern of prosecutions under the Official Secrets Act demonstrates that the government is determined to make an example of anyone who undermines security policy. Quite right, too. It's just a bit odd that the same government happily leaks confidential information when it is deemed politically expedient. 
FIRST POSTED JUNE 22, 2007
|
