A cross-party group of MPs and peers including a former national security adviser are taking legal action against Boris Johnson over his government’s refusal to order an inquiry into Russian interference in UK elections. The group filed a claim in the high court in an attempt to force the prime minister to carry out an independent investigation or public inquiry. It is the first legal action of its kind over alleged national security failures.
The move follows the publication in July of the Russia report by parliament’s intelligence and security committee (ISC). It found that the government and its intelligence services had failed to investigate Kremlin meddling in the 2016 EU referendum vote – a “hot potato”, as the ISC put it. The ISC urged Downing Street to carry out a full inquiry and to put in place a legislative framework to prevent future interference by foreign states. No 10 turned down the request. It argues there is no evidence of successful disruption by Moscow. The parliamentarians are now seeking a judicial review. They argue that the government’s inaction breaches its obligation under article three, protocol one of the European convention on human rights. This requires genuinely free elections to take place. The high court claim names Johnson as defendant. It is being backed by Lord Peter Ricketts, the government’s first national security adviser between 2010-12 under David Cameron, and the former chair of the joint intelligence committee (JIC). In a witness statement, Ricketts said he was “very surprised” the government had not sought evidence over Russian interference in the Brexit vote, nor carried out “a post-referendum assessment of Russian attempts to influence elections in the UK”. He added: “Given the importance of knowing the extent of past Russian interference in assessing the risk for future elections, I do not understand why the government would choose not to investigate.” Ricketts said there was a “considerable and growing body of evidence” that Moscow had actively interfered in other western elections, including the 2016 US presidential election and France’s 2017 presidential vote. Ensuring the integrity of British elections was a key national security issue, he said. Six peers and MPs have joined the claim. They include the Lib Dem Lord Strasburger, cross-bencher Baroness Wheatcroft, Labour’s Ben Bradshaw and Chris Bryant, the Green MP Caroline Lucas and Alyn Smith, the SNP’s foreign affairs spokesperson. “The Russia report raised a series of deeply troubling questions,” Smith said. “We don’t know if the UK spy agencies were caught napping over Russian interference and didn’t take it seriously, or if the spooks were given tacit instruction [by politicians] not to look into this.”
Johnson refused to release the Russia report before last year’s general election. It found “credible evidence” the UK was a target for “political influence operations” and “disinformation campaigns” carried out by Vladimir Putin’s operatives. Details were hidden in a classified annex. Lord Strasburger described Lord Ricketts’ support for the action as “very significant”, stressing: “He was about as senior as it gets in the intelligence community and if he is worried about the government’s refusal to investigate, we all should be”. Baroness Wheatcroft, a former Conservative peer, called the government’s failure to investigate “shameful”. She said there was “no doubt that the internet has opened the way for widespread potential interference in the electoral process from malign forces and that Russia has tried to exploit that opportunity”. All the Citizens, a non-profit organisation, has joined the application. The government has 21 days to respond, with a hearing unlikely before spring.