Brexit boss linked to cable leak

The British press defies the threat of prosecution, publishing a second tranche of leaked diplomatic cables.

Nigel Farage and Brexit Party chairman Richard Tice both called for Kim Darroch to be sacked.

The British press yesterday defied the threat of prosecution by publishing a second tranche of leaked diplomatic cables from the British envoy to Washington criticising Donald Trump.

It was revealed yesterday that Brexit Party chairman Richard Tice was in a relationship with journalist Isabel Oakeshott, who broke the story last week, reporting envoy Kim Darrch had branded Mr Trump “clumsy and inept”, forcing the envoy’s resignation when the President said he would not work with him.

British security sources said a suspect had been identified for the leaks amid “panic” in Whitehall that a “pro-Brexit Kim Philby” figure has been trying to undermine officials not deemed supportive enough of leaving the EU.

Scotland Yard and the intelligence services believe a civil servant with access to historical Foreign Office files mounted a ­recent raid to steal the material.

As police closed in on the mole, friends of Oakeshott, 45, said she and Mr Tice, 54, had been in a relationship since last year.

British editors were warned by Scotland Yard on Saturday they could face criminal charges if they published leaked cables from Sir Kim. However The Mail on Sunday yesterday published a cable from Sir Kim last year saying Mr Trump abandoned the Iran nuclear deal in an “act of diplomatic vandalism” because it was agreed by his predecessor Barack Obama.

London Metropolitan Police Assistant Commissioner Neil Basu warned on Saturday that publication of the cables may be a breach of the Official Secrets Act with “no public interest defence”.

Mr Basu’s remarks prompted an immediate attack from both Conservative party leadership candidates Boris Johnson — a former journalist — and his successor as foreign secretary Jeremy Hunt.

Isabel Oakeshott

Mr Johnson said any prosecutions for publishing leaked documents would have a “chilling effect on public debate”.

“In my view there is no threat to national security implied in the release of this material. It is ­embarrassing, but it is not a threat to national security,” he said.

“It is the duty of media organisations to bring new and interesting facts into the public domain. That is what they are there for.”

Mr Hunt last week chaired a British-led Global Conference of Media Freedom with human rights lawyer Amal Clooney in London, where Australian Federal Police raids on journalists were highlighted as encouraging oppressive regimes to double down on media freedoms.

“I defend to the hilt the right of the press to publish those leaks if they receive them and judge them to be in the public interest: that is their job,” Mr Hunt said.

The latest memo to be disclosed was said to have been written by Sir Kim in May last year following a visit to Washington by Mr Johnson as foreign secretary in a last-ditch attempt to persuade the Trump administration not to abandon the Iran deal.

Under the terms of the agreement — still supported by Britain, France and Germany — international sanctions on Iran were eased in return for Tehran accepting curbs on its nuclear program.

Sir Kim told Mr Johnson: “The outcome illustrated the paradox of this White House: you got ­exceptional access, seeing everyone short of the President; but on the substance, the administration is set upon an act of diplomatic vandalism, seemingly for ideological and personality reasons — it was Obama’s deal.

“Moreover, they can’t articulate any ‘day-after’ strategy; and contacts with State Department this morning suggest no sort of plan for reaching out to partners and allies, whether in Europe or the region.”

Mr Basu insisted the Met had “no intention” of trying to prevent the publication of stories in the public interest. He said the focus of the inquiry by the counter-terrorism command — which investigates breaches of the OSA — was “clearly on identifying who was responsible for the leak”.

However, he said they had been advised any further publication of the cables “now knowing they may be a breach of the OSA” could also constitute a criminal ­offence — to which there was no public interest defence.

The Mail on Sunday said it was publishing the latest leaked details — despite the threat of prosecution — because “a free press is vital to our democracy”.

Additional reporting: PA, the Sunday Times