BRITAIN: The survival of the British Defence Secretary, Mr Geoff Hoon, in cabinet remained in doubt last night as the family of Dr David Kelly accused him of lying in his evidence to the Hutton inquiry.
And nervousness will persist inside 10 Downing Street about possible criticisms of the Prime Minister, Mr Tony Blair, when Lord Hutton delivers his report on the events leading to the death of the former government scientist in late November or early December. The Conservatives last called for the Prime Minister's resignation.
Mr Jeremy Gompertz QC held Court 73 spellbound yesterday during a closing submission to the inquiry in which he invoked the moral authority of the Kelly family to accuse the Blair government of "a cynical abuse of power" and of "duplicity" in its handling of the former weapons "expert-of-choice".
While delivering a scathing indictment, too, of the BBC and sections of the media, and branding a BBC reporter, Andrew Gilligan, "unreliable", Mr Gompertz told the inquiry:
"The principal aims of the family are: (1) that the duplicity of the government in their handling of Dr Kelly should be exposed; and (2) that the systemic failures at the Ministry of Defence should be identified and remedied so as to ensure, as far as possible, that no one else should suffer the ordeal endured by Dr Kelly."
Mr Gompertz said the Kelly family invited the inquiry to find that the government made a deliberate decision to use Dr Kelly as part of its strategy in its battle with the BBC over the claim that Downing Street had "sexed up" the Iraqi weapons dossier.
This was flatly rejected by counsel for the government, Mr Jonathan Sumption QC, who said the government had every right to disclose Dr Kelly's name as the likely BBC source and could have done so much earlier had it wished.
However, Mr Gompertz said the "hypocrisy" of the denials of a naming strategy by a number of witnesses had been demonstrated by the disclosure of passages from Mr Alastair Campbell's diary.
During cross-examination on Monday Mr Hoon had denied that there was a government strategy to name Dr Kelly. Mr Campbell's diary entries were disclosed to the inquiry immediately after Mr Hoon left the witness box.
While there had been no opportunity to question him about them, Mr Gompertz suggested: "They indicate, with clarity, if accepted by the inquiry, that the Secretary of State's denials of the government strategy put to him were false.
"Indeed they reveal he was an enthusiastic supporter of the proposal to put Dr Kelly's name into the public domain."
Mr Gompertz said an e-mail had emerged as late as Wednesday morning indicating that Mr Blair's chief-of-staff, Mr Jonathan Powell, felt that they should "simply name our man" while leaving it a decision for Mr Hoon.
Mr Gompertz also quoted Mr Campbell's diary entry of July 4th stating: "GH [Geoff Hoon\] said his initial instinct was to throw the book at him, but in fact there was a case for trying to get some kind of plea bargain."
Mr Gompertz offered: "The bargain suggested by the family is that there would be no formal disciplinary proceedings and therefore no risk of loss of employment, pension rights or security status.
"This was provided Dr Kelly gave evidence to the select committees in accordance with the directions or steers with which he would have been provided."
Even if never implemented, Mr Gompertz said, the fact that a plea-bargain strategy was even contemplated showed the direction of thinking of the government in general and of Mr Hoon in particular. Mr Gompertz added that, as a former practising member of the bar, Mr Hoon "would undoubtedly know the distinction between a plea bargain and mitigation."
Mr Sumption said he had no desire to criticise the Kelly family for suggesting a plot or strategy to allow Dr Kelly's name to become public indirectly or by stealth, but insisted these particular criticisms were completely unjustified.
He said: "They take as their starting point the proposition that Dr Kelly was entitled to have his name withheld, and that proposition is wrong. There is no constitutional principle that civil servants are entitled to anonymity.
"The government had no obligation to keep Dr Kelly's name secret, and Dr Kelly had no right to expect them to do so."