Treasury investigates how it helped ‘warlord’ sue reporter

THE Treasury could close a loophole to stop oligarchs circumventing sanctions to pay their legal fees amid reports a Russian “warlord” capitalised on the process to target a British journalist.

James Cartlidge, the Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury, confirmed the Government was revisiting its approach “in light of recent cases”.

It comes after media website opendemocracy reported that a Treasury team issued licences to allow lawyers to help Yevgeny Prigozhin, the head of the Kremlin’s mercenary Wagner Group, launch legal action against investigative reporter Eliot Higgins in 2021, while the Russian oligarch was subject to sanctions.

Responding to an urgent question in the Commons, Mr Cartlidge said he would not comment on that specific case, as per “long-standing custom”. However, he did confirm the Government had put the system under review.

As it stands, it is possible for sanctioned individuals to apply for a licence from the Treasury’s Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI) to access their funds to cover legal fees.

Mr Cartlidge said OFSI assesses applications “solely on a costs basis”, with the final outcome of any given case rightly decided by the courts, rather than ministers. “I can confirm, in light of recent cases and related to this question, the Treasury is now considering whether this approach is the right one, and if changes can be made without the Treasury assuming unacceptable legal risk and ensuring that we adhere to the rule of law,” he said.

Labour claimed the Government had given a “waiver for a warlord” to pursue legal action, which it said was designed to intimidate critics of Mr Prigozhin.

Alicia Kearns, Tory chairman of the foreign affairs committee, urged the Government to “commit to looking at whether we need to introduce ministerial oversight” of the process.

Former Cabinet minister David Davis said people “of course” have the right to representation if they are defending themselves in court. But he argued no such “fundamental” right exists for those seeking to “destroy somebody else or shut down free speech”.

Mr Cartlidge said that, in general terms, even those “we find distasteful” should have the right to legal representation, as it is a “fundamental tenet” of British democracy.

“Let’s not forget, even at the Nuremberg trials, people who had committed the most heinous crimes in the history of the Western world were legally represented,” he added.