British Visas

Revealed: US firm issues British visas... and MPs were not told

By JASON LEWIS

Millions of visas allowing foreigners to enter Britain are being issued by an American company and a High Street travel agent rather than British diplomats.

The system – never officially announced to Parliament – means that instead of filling in a form at a British embassy and facing an interview by diplomatic staff, visa applicants are directed to commercially run ‘official’ offices around the world.

And hundreds of thousands of applicants simply fill in a form on a website run by the US company.

The home of 'Mr Visa', Mike Laphen, who heads the American company reponsible for issuing thousands of British visas

The two private firms are responsible for dealing with about 80 per cent of the 2.75 million visa applications every year, two million of which are successful.

A Mail on Sunday investigation has revealed that the new system – quietly introduced over the past two years – has been beset by problems, including one company’s staff selling visas. Critics fear it is fuelling the numbers of people who come to Britain and overstay after their visas expire, adding to the estimated one million illegal immigrants already in the country.

And tonight Opposition politicians called for a return of face-to-face interviews with British diplomats to help secure the UK’s borders against bogus applicants and potential terrorists.

The revelations will add to the discomfort felt by Gordon Brown last week when he faced criticism for making misleading statements about immigration figures.

The Mail on Sunday can reveal that business people, foreign government representatives, students and tourists in 109 countries all have to apply for visas through the two firms rather than through the embassies.

The American outsourcing firm, Computer Sciences Corporation (CSC), also runs an advice hotline charging large fees payable by credit card in dollars to help applicants complete visa forms, but which is described as ‘completely useless’ in a Government report.

Details of its five-year deal, or the cost to the taxpayer, have never been officially announced by the Government. But last week the firm announced a similar ten-year contract with the US State Department, worth £1.8 billion.

Virginia-based CSC has opened visa application centres in 14 countries and is running websites and call centres covering 87 others. Its so-called WorldBridge Service uses no diplomats or other British Government staff.

Under attack: Prime Minister Gordon Brown delivers a speech on immigration in Shoreditch, east London, last week

A similar service is offered by VFS-Global, part of the Swiss-based travel firm Kuoni, better known for its luxury package holidays.

It is the firms’ staff, most of them employed locally, rather than highly trained immigration officers and diplomats, who the Foreign Office says it ‘entrusts . . . with the sensitive process’ of scanning people’s fingerprints and faces for encoding in the new biometric visas and to filter ‘risky’ individuals.

They then forward applications to Home Office officials in London, who have the final say on whether a visa should be issued.

But the system has been hit by problems. An official Home Office inspection of the WorldBridge visa office in Rome last year found that it replied to customers’ concerns about delays with ‘unhelpful’ and ‘generic’ wording.

And a Home Office report in December pointed out ‘higher level criticism’ of WorldBridge staff who, it said, were polite but ‘had no information and were completely useless on an expensive phone line’.

It said that ‘their absence of understanding of the application process was made apparent with conflicting answers from one call to the next’, and that staff were ‘scared to tell me something [in case it wasn’t correct]’.

The phone line, the only official visa advice available, costs $14 (about £9) for every call, payable by credit card.

The Home Office report concluded: ‘With regards to the negative experiences of seeking assistance, WorldBridge Services was mentioned more often than any other organisation.’

How it used to be: A queue for visas at the British Embassy in Sofia, Bulgaria, in 2007

WorldBridge began taking over visa applications from the Foreign Office two years ago, opening its first office in Jamaica in May 2007.

Last year CSC had a turnover of £10.5billion – clients include the US Navy, Nasa and BAe Systems, Britain’s biggest defence contractor. Kuoni Travel’s VFS-Global also issues visas for Britain and around 30 other countries with offices in Africa, the Middle East, China and Japan.

It says it ‘serves diplomatic missions by managing all the administrative and non-judgmental tasks related to the entire life-cycle of a visa application process, enabling diplomatic missions to focus entirely on the key tasks of assessment and interview’.

But last year, a member of the firm’s staff issuing visas for Britain in Pakistan was arrested for allegedly taking £22,000 in bribes to obtain visas for eight people. He absconded before he could be sentenced.

Two years ago, the company faced a Foreign Office investigation into an alleged breach of security in its online application facility, which led to the system being shut down.

The new services exist despite increasing concerns over ‘scam’ colleges, where no courses are taught, but which last year enabled a group of alleged Al Qaeda terrorist plotters to get student visas to come to Britain.

Critics say that removing immigration officials from the sharp end of the visa system has been a disaster and that it is now a ‘tick-box system’ open to huge abuses.

It is claimed that many bogus applicants who would have been spotted by immigration officers, are now able to easily circumvent the system

Sir Andrew Green, a former British Ambassador and Director for the Middle East in the Foreign Office, says that in the past, many bogus applicants would have been spotted by immigration officers. Now they are easily circumventing the system.

Sir Andrew, who runs the pressure group Migration Watch, said: ‘The crucial interview with experienced staff has been rep-laced with a system where, as long as you say the right thing on the forms and have the right doc-uments, your application will be approved.’

Shadow Home Secretary Chris Grayling said: ‘It is a revelation to discover that so much of the visa system is now controlled by two private companies.

‘We have argued for a long time, particularly given all of the fraud issues surrounding student visas, that there should be far more face-to-face interviews of applicants by British diplomatic staff.

‘This is the only way to ensure that applicants coming to the UK are who they say they are. This is much too important an issue not to get right.’
It is also claimed that the WorldBridge system is costing British businesses millions of pounds in lost contracts.

An employee allegedly took £22,000 in bribes

This was dramatically illustrated by the experience of senior Iraqi government officials who were trying to travel to the UK to discuss multi-million-pound deals with British firms.

The Mail on Sunday has learned that the Mayor of Baghdad, the Governor of Baghdad and the Minister of Agriculture were forced to wait more than five days in Amman, Jordan – the location of their nearest WorldBridge office – to get visas to come to Britain to sign a helicopter deal.

But while their applications were being examined by WorldBridge, they decided to travel to France instead and bought six Eurocopters, worth £1.3million each, to use for spraying date palms.

Meanwhile, the Iraqi Minister of Transport, ‘furious at the treatment he had received in Amman when trying to get visas’, also struck a deal with a French firm for the proposed Baghdad Metro – a contract potentially worth billions of pounds.

Last night, Shadow Foreign Secretary William Hague said: ‘If struggling British businesses are losing out to European competitors because the Government can’t run an efficient visa operation in Baghdad, then that raises serious questions and must be put right.’

A service is offered by VFS-Global, part of the Swiss-based travel firm Kuoni, better known for its luxury package holidays

Last night the Home Office and the Foreign Office both claimed the other was responsible for the contract with CSC. Neither could say whether any Minister had announced the new system to Parliament or spoken publicly on the reasons behind the decision.

Mark Sedwill, head of the UK Border Agency’s international group, says he is proud of the new system.

In a CSC newsletter, he explained: ‘Five years ago, we were operating like most countries do now. If you wanted a visa, the theory was that you went into an embassy, filled in a paper application, handed over the money, did an interview and then supposedly got a verdict.

‘It sounds great in theory, but not in practice – in the [Indian] sub-continent in particular we had queues of several thousand people.’

He added that by outsourcing the ‘frontline interface’ to CSC, the Home Office was ‘focusing our resources on decision making... that allows us to put more time and attention into risk profiling’.

Yesterday a Home Office spokes-man denied there had been any secrecy in outsourcing the visa application process.

He said: ‘This process would have involved publicising the tender through officially recognised European Journals.

‘We categorically do not use private companies to make decisions on visa applications. They collect the information and pass it on to the UK Border Agency to make the decision. We use these companies to cut down on the queues at the embassies. It helps to make the process run more smoothly.’

Mr Visa’s £5 million lifestyle

The man who heads the American company responsible for issuing thousands of British visas is Michael W. Laphen, a former National Security Adviser to President George W. Bush.

Mr Laphen is paid more than $1million (£671,000) a year as chief executive and chairman of CSC, the owner of WorldBridge. His total annual ‘compensation’ package is worth more than £5million.

Riches: Michael and Rosemary Laphen

He and his wife, Rosemary, who helps run a local charity, live in a six-bedroom, four-bathroom, colonial-style mansion set in two acres of lawns in Great Falls, near the firm’s base in Virginia.

The £2million house boasts three garages, a library, a two-storey family room, a basement ‘rec’ room, a bar, an exercise room and a wine cellar.

The couple also own a £1.6million holiday home at the exclusive Mirasol Country Club in Palm Beach, Florida.

Drugs Tsar's links to aristocrats group lobbying to liberate laws on mind-bending drugs

By JASON LEWIS

The Government’s new drugs tsar is listed as an adviser to a shadowy foundation run by an aristocrat lobbying to liberalise laws on mind-altering drugs.

Professor Les Iversen is head of the official Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD), which is currently at the centre of the debate over regulating mephedrone – known as M-Cat or Meow Meow.

But the Beckley Foundation, a controversial charity campaigning against anti-drug regulations, claims he is one of its key advisers.

The foundation is run by Amanda, Lady Neidpath – dubbed Lady Mindbender – who admits using drugs herself, including cannabis and LSD, and says one of her two children has also been a heavy user.

Controversial: Lady Neidpath, pictured at her mansion, says she uses drugs herself

Professor Iversen – the third senior Government drugs adviser to be linked to the organisation – does not declare his connection to it on the Home Office’s register of interests.

Last night he claimed he no longer had anything to do with the organisation, but its website yesterday still listed him as one of its panel of 13 scientific advisers. The listing was most recently updated last month.

Lady Neidpath, 67, said yesterday: ‘He, like many important people in this field, agreed to be on our advisory panel. We don’t meet, but Professor Iversen has never asked me to remove him from our scientific advisers list.’

Last night one senior Tory MP called on the professor to resign as head of the ACMD.
Critics say the Beckley Foundation, operating out of a secluded 16th Century Oxfordshire manor house, is committed to legalising drugs under the guise of ‘studying consciousness and altered states’.

The foundation says its work is to ‘direct and support world-class research into the practices used to alter our conscious states, and the policies that seek to regulate some of these practices’.

In 2003, Professor Iversen wrote a paper for the foundation comparing the effects of alcohol and cannabis, and concluded that alcohol was more dangerous. It led him to question why cannabis was illegal when alcohol was not.

Clash of roles? The Government's new drugs tsar, Professor Les Iversen, is listed as an adviser to the controversial Beckley Foundation

At the time, he said: ‘Cannabis should be legalised, not just decriminalised, because it is comparatively less dangerous than the legal drugs alcohol and tobacco.’

But Professor Iversen now says this is no longer his position. He said: ‘That was a view I had in 2003 and a great deal has happened since then.

‘As a scientist it is only right that I should be guided by the best available evidence. As the evidence develops in the drugs field, it is to be expected that individuals will refine their judgments.’

However, his association with the Beckley Foundation publicly continued until at least 2005, when he gave a speech on The Medical Potential Of Cannabis at a seminar for the organisation at the House of Lords.

The event was hosted by Lord Mancroft, the Conservative politician and former heroin addict.

Described as ‘the most knowledgeable parliamentarian on the subject of drugs’, the Eton-educated peer has been the chairman of the Addiction Recovery Foundation since 1989 and is also chairman of the Drug and Alcohol Foundation.

Study: Professor Iversen's book abotu using marijuana in medicine

Lord Mancroft supports prescribing heroin on the NHS, saying it could ‘stabilise the lives of those addicts dependent on an ever-growing black market’ and has called for a major rethink in drug-control policy, saying: ‘You can’t ban these drugs because people want them.’

Last night, an ACMD spokesman said: ‘Professor Iversen has presented to the Beckley Foundation. However, he is not employed by them.

'Professor Iversen has presented the evidence concerning the harms of cannabis to the Beckley Foundation in an adviser capacity.

‘Professor Iversen has publicly stated that he fully supports the report that the ACMD produced in April 2008 concerning its consideration of cannabis. The ACMD believe that cannabis is a harmful drug and poses a real threat to the health of those who use it.’

Last month the Beckley Foundation called for the reintroduction of LSD for medical use. It paid for a series of clinical trials to study its effects on the human brain.

In 2008, the foundation published a 226-page document – the Global Cannabis Commission Report – examining the use, prohibition and control of cannabis.

The report, which cost the charity more than £80,000, was launched at the House of Lords and urged the lifting of criminal convictions for use or possession.

Lady Neidpath was brought up in the Oxfordshire manor house from which the Beckley Foundation operates.

Her foundation publicly says it examines links between drug use and creativity, as well seeking to provide a scientific base for changing current drugs laws.

Lady Neidpath, who admits taking cannabis and psychedelic drugs including magic mushrooms, mescaline and LSD, has said: ‘I have always considered myself my own best laboratory.’

She does not think cannabis is harmless, although she believes it is ‘a lot less bad’ than tobacco or alcohol.

And she says that if cannabis was authorised, it could be properly labelled, and Government-controlled.

Her husband Jamie – Lord Neidpath – was a close friend of the Queen Mother and a regular at parties on the luxury Caribbean retreat of Mustique with Princess Margaret and her lover Roddy Llewellyn.

Now in his 60s, he also features in Andy Warhol’s diaries as part of the artist’s louche New York set.

Last night Lady Neidpath confirmed she still considered that Professor Iversen was a scientific adviser to her organisation.

She said: ‘I have a great admiration for him. I think he is an excellent person to head up the Government’s drugs advisory committee.

‘The last time I asked him to talk at one of our seminars he said he couldn’t because of his Government role. I completely understood.’

She added: ‘He has never asked me to remove him from our advisers list but I suppose if people now make a great fuss about it he may ask me to remove his name.’

The revelations about Professor Iversen and the Beckley Foundation come after Eric Carlin, a member of the ACMD, resigned following the decision to ban mephedrone.

Yesterday Mr Carlin, who has attended seminars run by the Beckley Foundation, said Ministers had pledged to ban the drug to appear to be ‘acting tough’ in the run-up to the General Election.

He said experts were being ignored and the advisory council was ‘not doing its job’.
Two former Government drug tsars are also involved in the Beckley Foundation.

Co-director Mike Trace, who for four years under Tony Blair was Britain’s deputy drugs tsar, quit a UN post after it was revealed that he intended to use it to try to promote making cannabis and other dangerous drugs legal across the world.

Mr Trace fell out with his bosses at the UN Office on Drugs and Crime after his attempt to set up a pressure group devoted to the cause of legalising drugs was made public.

In November, Professor David Nutt, a scientific adviser to the foundation, was sacked as head of the ACMD after insisting that the use of alcohol and cigarettes poses a greater danger than cannabis and ecstasy. Home Secretary Alan Johnson said he no longer has confidence in his policy advice.

Professor Nutt last week said mephedrone – the so-called ‘legal high’ known as Meow Meow – should be handed out in nightclubs rather than banned. He argued that doling out small amounts of the drug with guidance on its use would be ‘safer’ than banning it.

Professor Iversen became the new interim chairman of the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs in place of Professor Nutt in January.

The retired Oxford University professor of pharmacology is a specialist in neuropharmacology, the study of how drugs or chemicals affect the brain and nervous system.

In 1998, he acted as the key specialist adviser to a report into cannabis by the House of Lords’ respected Science and Technology Committee which concluded that the Government should allow doctors to prescribe cannabis for medical use but said the ban on recreational use of cannabis was justifiable.

He wrote a book, The Science Of Marijuana, detailing the advances made in understanding marijuana and the balance between benefits and risks of using the plant in medicine.

Cannabis has never been legalised for medicinal use in the UK – but Professor Iversen has been at the heart of the debate over its classification.

He was a member of the committee when it recommended downgrading cannabis from Class B to Class C in 2004. He was still a member when former Home Secretary Jacqui Smith reversed that decision in 2008.

Last night, former Tory Home Office Minister Ann Widdecombe called on Professor Iversen to resign as head of the ACMD.

She said: ‘The fact that he was prepared to lend his name to a body pushing for softer policies on drug use means he should not be advising the Government on this issue.’

Activists jet 12,000 miles - to climate change meeting

By JASON LEWIS
Last updated at 10:53 PM on 27th March 2010

Climate change activists opposed to air travel are travelling to a conference in South America...by plane.

Campaigners from Climate Camp -- who helped blockade Heathrow at the height of the summer holidays in 2007 -- face claims of hypocrisy having decided to send two members to an international meeting in Bolivia to discuss ‘transnational protests’ against climate change.

The 12,000-mile round trip to the Climate Change and Mother Earth’s Rights conference next month involves changing planes at least twice.

Campaigners for climate camp are travelling to a conference in South America - by plane

The flights will generate about eight tons of carbon dioxide greenhouse gases.

The money for their tickets -- at least £1,200 for an economy fare -- is being paid for by donations to Climate Camp from people opposed to flying and airport expansion.

One of the campaigners making the trip is Agnes Szafranowska.

Ms Szafranowska, a Canadian who now lives in London, organises Climate Camp workshops and was involved in the Great Climate Swoop on Ratcliffe power station in Nottingham last October.

Police arrested ten people before the protest began on suspicion of conspiracy to cause criminal damage.

Some 1,000 people took part, and security fencing around the plant was pulled down. Police made 56 arrests and a number of people were injured, including one policeman who had to be airlifted to hospital.

Ms Szafranowska failed to answer questions sent to her by email, other than to say that Climate Camp were preparing a statement.

The group’s Press officer did not return calls.

Google forced to remove pictures of secret military bases from Street View

By Jason Lewis, Mail on Sunday Security Editor

Google was last night forced to remove images of some of Britain’s most sensitive military and security bases from its Street View service.

The website admitted that it had ignored signs warning that photographing the sites breached the Official Secrets Act.

The installations included Special Boat Service and Special Air Service bases, a Government atomic weapons research centre, top-secret Government eavesdropping centres and MI5 headquarters across Britain.

Secret's out: Google Street View picture of the SBS base in Poole, Dorset, with a sign warning that photography is banned under the Official Secrets Act

MI5's Loughside station, visible through the trees from this Belfast housing estate

Some of the locations could be useful to terrorists or hostile foreign governments – and are so secret we cannot report what they are.

The Google map site previously contained information only on major British cities, but now has images of almost every street.

Among the locations which can be examined is RAF Menwith Hill, near Harrogate.

Also featured is Hanslope Park near Milton Keynes, known as Her Majesty’s Government Communications Centre (HMGCC). It is home to MI6 officers who analyse data from Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) in Cheltenham and Menwith Hill.

The vehicle entrance into Thames House, MI5 headquarters in Westminster, is another highlighted location.

And on a quiet Belfast housing estate, a glimpse through the trees highlights the Security Service’s new Loughside headquarters, where MI5 monitors Irish dissident terror groups.

A view of the SAS Counter Terrorism training centre in Pontrilas, Herefordshire, shows an aircraft used for special forces exercises.

The outside of the new ORION Laser Research Facility at Aldermaston, the atomic weapons research centre in Berkshire, is also on display.

Bizarrely, a picture of the SBS depot in Poole, Dorset, includes a warning sign.

Highlighted in red are the words: ‘Prohibited place within the meaning of the Official Secrets Act. Loitering, photography, sketching forbidden.’

Last night a Google spokesman said: ‘If mistakes are made we will remove the images. We’re unaware of any official concerns about security, but are happy to discuss any issues as they arise.’

It's terror check chaos as dozens miss US flights

By Jason Lewis
Last updated at 8:28 AM on 07th March 2010

Controversial anti-terrorist restrictions imposed on Britons travelling to the US have led to scores of people missing their flights since they were introduced six weeks ago.

The Electronic System for Travel Authorization (ESTA) requires all passengers without a visa to complete an online application form before they leave for America.

The form should be completed three days before travelling – but airlines flying to America, including British Airways and Virgin Atlantic, report that some passengers are still turning up for flights without having filled one in.

A senior BA manager said: ‘Those who “forget” run the risk of not travelling. Staff may be able to help to complete it at the airport, but passengers run the risk of not getting the approval back from the US authorities before the departure.

Controversial anti-terrorist restrictions imposed on Britons travelling to the US have led to scores of people missing their flights

‘If they do not, they will not travel. There have been many cases where this has happened.’ Passengers without the ESTA can attempt to apply at airport internet cafes in the hope that their application will be approved in time to make their flight.

A spokesman for Virgin Atlantic said: ‘We are getting around a dozen of these problems every day. Some people are not aware that completing these forms is a requirement rather than voluntary.’

Most airlines and travel agents alert passengers to the new ESTA requirements when they buy their tickets, but the onus is on the traveller to complete the application on the US Department of Homeland Security’s website.

The process is free but the US will soon begin charging up to $17 (£11.24) per person – adding almost £60 to the cost of a trip to the US for a family of five.

All passengers have to give the authorities their name, address and passport details and reveal if they have had

any sexually transmitted diseases, including gonorrhea and syphilis.

They are also asked for details of any serious mental illness they have suffered and about drug abuse and criminal convictions.

But US citizens flying to Britain do not have to complete similar travel documents, apart from filling in a normal landing card, as every non-EU citizen has to do.

A spokesman for ABTA, the travel agents’ association, said: ‘The onus is on passengers to ensure they get this approval.

‘We would also encourage people travelling to the US over the next couple of years to get their ESTA now before they have to start paying.’

Cronyism row as Gordon Brown hands globetrotting role to former Scottish leader Jack McConnell

By Jason Lewis, Mail On Sunday Whitehall Editor
Last updated at 12:44 AM on 07th March 2010

Gordon Brown was facing accusations of cronyism last night after it was revealed that ex-Scottish Labour leader Jack McConnell spent nearly £70,000 of taxpayers’ money travelling the world as a Prime Ministerial envoy.

The little-known role was invented for Mr McConnell – a former maths teacher who has no diplomatic background – after Labour lost the Scottish elections to the SNP.

With the Prime Minister’s backing, he visited 15 countries in his first ten months in the job, travelling business class and staying in top hotels.

New role: Gordon Brown offered Mr McConnell the job to prevent a by-election that would have weakened Labour in Scotland

Last night, politicians attacked Mr Brown’s ‘judgment’ over the appointment, saying it came as the Government was cutting the number of British embassies.

The former Scottish First Minister is not paid for his role as ‘the Prime Minister’s Special Representative for Conflict Resolution Mechanisms’, but he still draws his £57,000 salary as a member of the Scottish Parliament.

More...

• Fury over Gordon Brown’s ‘cynical’ letter to murder victim’s local paper: PM accused of playing politics over killing of Huddersfield shopkeeper

Mr McConnell had been due to step down as an MSP after Labour’s defeat in Scotland in 2007 to become Britain’s High Commissioner to Malawi.

But at the last minute Mr Brown offered him the new role to prevent a by-election that would have further weakened Labour in Scotland.

The Foreign Office said Mr McConnell was doing a good job and had helped improve ‘the effectiveness of the United Nations’ peace-building architecture’.

A spokesman added: ‘The role did not exist before Mr McConnell was given it. The role of special envoy tends to be unique to the person appointed, drawing on their experiences and skills.’

But his travels have yet to take him to Iraq and Afghanistan, despite Britain’s lengthy involvement there.

And intriguingly, the UN’s website mentions Mr McConnell only once – when he hosted a dinner for then Secretary-General Kofi Annan in 2005.

In contrast, the site mentions Mr Brown 841 times and Tony Blair 904 times. No10’s website also has no mention of Mr McConnell’s envoy status.

Despite his low profile, Mr McConnell spent £11,200 on trips to the United States, £8,650 for five nights in Brazil, £4,600 for three nights in Japan, £3,540 for three nights in Chile and £4,000 for two nights in Egypt. He has also visited Belgium, Bosnia and Ethiopia.

Last night the Foreign Office said the total cost of his trips between October 2008 and November 2009 was £69,060. However, it refused to reveal details of where Mr McConnell stayed on security grounds.

David Lidington, Tory foreign affairs spokesman, said: ‘This raises serious questions about Gordon Brown’s judgment. We know this role was a consolation prize when Labour ran scared of a by-election. But it is a very costly consolation prize for the taxpayer.’

Mr McConnell did not respond to requests for a comment last night.

Binyam torture: Now Blunkett and Straw facing questions over role of MI5

By Jason Lewis, Security Editor

THE Government is facing new questions over whether Cabinet Ministers sanctioned MI5's involvement in the alleged torture of former Guantanamo Bay detainee Binyam Mohamed.

MI5 must seek permission from a Secretary of State for involvement in activities abroad which would be illegal in Britain. And now Liberal Democrat Home Affairs spokesman Chris Huhne is demanding to know if then Foreign Secretary Jack Straw or Home Secretary David Blunkett gave approval. Writing to current Home Secretary Alan Johnson, he said: 'The implications are most serious. If authorisation was given, then Blunkett or Straw approved criminal activity contrary to our public policy against torture. If it was not, the Security Service has proved to be out of political control. Which is it?' An MI5 officer known as Witness B who interviewed Mr Mohamed, 31, at Guantanamo Bay is facing a criminal investigation into alleged complicity in torture.

Recently released documents show the Ethiopian-born UK resident was subjected to sleep deprivation and other 'torture' techniques, and that MI5 knew of his treatment.

The Intelligence Services Act 1994, which governs MI5's activities, says: 'If a person would be liable in the UK for any act done outside the British Islands, he shall not be so liable if the act is one which is authorised by the Secretary of State.' Last week one of the country's most senior judges, Master of the Rolls Lord Neuberger, restored a paragraph he had previously edited from a judgment in order to criticise MI5's role in Mr Mohamed's treatment.

He said the Security Services claimed they 'operated a culture that respected human rights' and 'denied they knew of any ill-treatment of detainees interviewed by them whilst detained by the US Government'.

He added: 'In this case that does not appear to have been true...some officials appear to have a dubious record relating to involvement ... with the mistreatment of Mr Mohamed when he was held at the behest of US officials.' The judge said he particularly had in mind Witness B, who had appeared in the case in which Mr Mohamed's lawyers were trying to get him freed, prior to his eventual release in February last year.

The MI5 officer stopped giving evidence in case he incriminated himself. He is now the subject of a criminal inquiry but Lord Neuberger added: 'The evidence suggests there were other [officers].'

'Implications are serious'

Detectives trawl DNA database 60 times a year - hunting for criminals' relatives

By Jason Lewis, Mail on Sunday Security Editor

In the system: Police seaches have raised new concerns over database

New concerns have been raised about the use of innocent people's DNA in police investigations.

Figures obtained by The Mail on Sunday show that detectives are ordering weekly searches of the DNA database for people with no immediate connection to any crime.

The searches are used when crime scene DNA samples produce no direct match on the system.

Investigators then trawl millions of other records looking for a partial match, which might indicate that the suspect is related to an innocent person on the system.

The 'familial DNA searches' raise new questions about the increasing number of innocent people's records being held on the DNA register.

This is because a partial match could lead to police launching a background investigation and even a surveillance operation, targeting an innocent person while searching for a family member.

The method has led to the conviction of several criminals but campaign groups and information watchdogs have raised concerns about data protection and human rights.

The genetic profiles of about one million people - including children - who have never been convicted of a crime are still being kept on the National DNA Database despite a European human rights ruling that 'blanket' retention of suspects' data is unlawful.

The samples are taken from witnesses in criminal investigations - to rule them out as suspects - or from people who are arrested but not convicted.

Campaigners argue that only convicted criminals should have their DNA kept on the system, but the Government and police have so far fought all attempts to remove large numbers of innocent people's profiles.

Now figures obtained by The Mail on Sunday show that police have searched the DNA records for innocent people 363 times in the past six years.

Police rules limit the use of this kind of search to the most serious crimes - although full details of the constraints for its use have not been made public.

But an average of 61 searches a year - more than one a week - suggests that the keeping of innocent people's records is seen as essential by police.

It was expected that the profiles of such people - 925,000 at the last count - would be destroyed in response to the ruling by the European Court of Human Rights. But police are adding more people to the system all the time.

The National Policing Improvement Agency says the figures, which show 73 'familial DNA searches' in the past two years, demonstrate it is not routinely used.

It said that 'familial searches are not a standard procedure' and could only be approved by an officer with at least the rank of Assistant Chief Constable.

'Familial searching of the DNA database will be restricted to the most serious crime investigations only,' it added.

A document released by British Transport Police reveals 'it conducts familial searches...on an intelligence-led basis only for serious crimes'.

This would mean that where a familial search identified an individual on the database who partially matched a crime scene profile, the investigators would launch a full-scale background inquiry into their family.

Several court cases have hinged on this evidence. The first conviction was in 2004 when a Surrey man was convicted of manslaughter and jailed for six years after he was linked to a crime scene via a close relative's DNA profile.

The offender had thrown a brick from a motorway bridge - the object crashed through the windscreen of a lorry and struck the driver, who suffered a heart attack and died.

Last night Helen Wallace, of GeneWatch, urged caution over the searches. She said: 'This should never be used as a routine technique and there should be far more transparency and oversight about when and where the police are ordering these kinds of searches.

'We have no objection to its use in investigating serious unsolved crimes but the guidelines for its use have never been published so we have no idea where the police draw the line.

'There is a real danger of mission creep. We need to know when and where these searches are being used and its use needs to be severely restricted.'

The Home Office has introduced a 'proportionate response' to demands that the DNA profiles of innocent people be removed from the system.

It recommends a six-year limit for retaining the DNA of most unconvicted adults. Unconvicted 16 to 17-year-olds will have samples held for six years over a serious offence and three years in other cases. Unconvicted children under 16 would face a three-year limit.

Repeat offenders or people convicted of serious crimes will have their DNA profiles held indefinitely.

Ring of Steel

Police terror budget cut by millions after Ring of Steel blunder

By Jason Lewis
Police forces across the country have had millions of pounds of counter-terrorism funding cut after a secret audit revealed they were spending the cash on other things.
In one instance, the City of London Police was receiving £3.7million for a so-called ‘ring of steel’ that no longer exists. And Kent Police has also lost a huge sum allocated for anti-terror work that it was using to pay for community support officers.
The disclosures come after The Mail on Sunday revealed how millions of pounds of anti-terrorism cash had been used to pay for luxury London apartments for senior officers. Forces were supposed to be using the funds for equipment and specialist staff to combat the threat of terrorism.

Target: The Baltic Exchange in the City of London after being destroyed by an IRA bomb in 1992

City of London Police has been receiving millions of pounds from the Home Office to fund a ‘ring of steel’ that was introduced to protect key financial institutions in the wake of an IRA bombing campaign in the Nineties.
It consisted of manned sentry boxes, road blocks, concrete barriers and chicanes on roads into the Square Mile.
But the barriers have been largely dismantled during the past ten years and replaced with 190 CCTV and number-plate recognition cameras.
This largely automated system was used to assist the Metropolitan Police investigation into the Islamic terrorist attacks on July 7, 2005.
But the audit of the City of London Police’s terror funding suggested that this system was now a general policing tool rather than a counter-terrorism measure.
The review, by the Association of Chief Police Officers’ (Acpo) Terrorism Committee, which distributes £33million of counter-terrorism cash on behalf of the Home Office, has now cut £3.7million – or six per cent – from the City of London force’s budget.

Guard: The ring of steel has been largely dismantled during the past ten years and replaced with 190 CCTV and number-plate recognition cameras

Last month, the City of London Police Committee was told by its officials that the ‘pressures upon resources/funding must be recognised ... [because of] the particular exposure of the City Police to changes in its grant for Dedicated Security Posts (DSPs)’.
When first asked about the cut, City of London Police refused to discuss the issue. But in a statement last night it said: ‘The City has received DSP funding since the 1990s due to its history as a terrorist target.
‘We have been advised we will lose some funding because of a change in funding criteria, but protecting the City from terrorism remains a top priority for the force.’
Meanwhile, Kent Police has had its anti-terror budget slashed after the Acpo audit revealed much of the money was being used to pay part-time community support officers.
Kent Police admitted yesterday that it was losing the funding. This follows a behind-the-scenes row in which the force insisted that it saw the part-time officers as essential for its anti-terrorism strategy.
A spokesman for the force said: ‘Kent Police’s DSP funding covers a range of activities relating to counter-terrorism, including the policing of ports. Kent Police works with its partners to prevent terrorism in addition to fighting serious and organised crime and stopping illegal immigration at our ports.
‘Part of our counter-terrorism strategy involves work within our communities, both to raise awareness of any potential threats and to gain information. We have been advised that our funding will be reduced and this will affect our ability to carry out work in these important areas.’
Last night, an Acpo spokesman confirmed that the review of counter-terrorism funding was continuing.
He said: ‘On behalf of the Home Office, Acpo’s role is to provide these funds to police forces to be spent on counter-terrorism and national security work.
‘Within that area, each force is best placed to decide how these resources should be deployed in the most cost-effective and efficient way.’
The move comes as Acpo faces questions about its own future and whether it is the right body to oversee Britain’s police forces. The organisation is a private company which describes itself as a ‘brand’ and is already under fire for its commercial activities.
Last year, The Mail on Sunday disclosed that it was:

• Selling information from the Police National Computer for up to £70, even though it pays just 60p to access the details.
• Marketing ‘police approval’ logos to firms selling anti-theft devices.
• Operating a separate private firm offering training to speed-camera operators that is run by a senior officer who was banned from driving.
• Acpo president Sir Hugh Orde has pledged to reform the organisation.

£3m cost of keeping 12 terror suspects on control orders

By Jason Lewis

Abu Qatada was put on a control order in 2005. Last year he was awarded compensation after it was ruled his detention without trial breached his human rights

The cost of keeping 12 terror suspects on controversial control orders has risen to almost £3million a year.

The suspects, who have not been convicted of any crime but are believed to be linked to international terrorism, are living under legal restrictions imposed by the Home Secretary to protect the public.

The order restricts their movements and they are only allowed to use a telephone at their home, from which calls are closely monitored.

They have to give up their passport and can be banned from using any public transport.

Critics say this system is akin to house arrest with no end and punishes the suspects’ families. But security officials believe the orders are effective and prevent suspects meeting other extremists.

New figures obtained by The Mail on Sunday show the average cost of maintaining these orders last year was £225,633 for each suspect – £2,707,600 in total. This is in addition to the £8million in legal fees the Government has paid defending the system.

The Home Office spent an extra £7,856 on line rental and telephone bills for the suspects. Ten of the 12 are also receiving State benefits.

Since the system was created in 2005, 45 people have been subject to the controls.

So far, six foreign nationals held under the restrictions have been deported.

The Law Lords have limited the time that someone can be forced to stay in their own home to 16 hours.

In 2007, they rejected a claim that control orders amounted to a criminal punishment without a fair trial. And last year, the Lords set out rules for the use of intelligence material after a judgment on secret evidence from the European Court of Human Rights.

The judges said that some of those under control orders had been denied a fair hearing because they did not know the gist of the case against them.

The Home Secretary imposes the restrictions on the advice of MI5 but little of the intelligence it gathers can be put in the public domain.

Now in jail, Abu Qatada, accused of being Al Qaeda’s ambassador to Europe, was put on a control order in 2005.

Last year, he was awarded £2,500 by the European Court of Human Rights after judges ruled his detention without trial breached his rights.

Millions of anti-terror cash spent on luxury London flats for police chiefs

By Jason Lewis

Britain’s most powerful police body, which is run as a private business, has spent millions of pounds meant for counter-terrorism work on luxury London flats for senior officers.

The spending on an undisclosed number of apartments in the Westminster area is understood to be about £1.6million a year.

The money is taken directly from taxpayers’ cash given to the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) by the Home Office to tackle the terrorist threat across Britain.

Priority: Assistant Commissioner John Yates has ordered a review

The funding – £33million last year – is supposed to be used to beef up regional police forces’ anti-terrorism response and pay for crucial equipment and facilities.

Instead, ACPO’s Terrorism & Allied Matters (TAM) committee, headed by Assistant Commissioner John Yates, has used millions of pounds from the budget to pay for flats.

Last night ACPO refused to disclose how many apartments it was paying for, or who was receiving the perk, but all are said to be well-appointed homes close to Scotland Yard.

ACPO insists they are ‘occupied’, but two well-placed sources told The Mail on Sunday that officers only occasionally stay in them.

Local estate agents say the cheapest two-bedroom flats in the area cost £400,000 to buy or at least £300 a week to rent. But with the officers requiring a ‘secure location’ the flats are said to cost substantially more.

ACPO is already under fire for its commercial activities. Last year The Mail on Sunday disclosed it was:

• Selling information from the Police National Computer for up to £70 - even though it pays just 60p to access the details.
• Marketing ‘police approval’ logos to firms selling anti-theft devices.
• Operating a separate private firm offering training to speed-camera operators, which is run by a senior officer who was banned from driving.
  

The news led to questions about ACPO’s central role in policing, writing rules on police operations, as well as campaigning on key issues such as the proposed 90-day detention for terror suspects and the DNA database.

ACPO president Sir Hugh Orde has pledged to reform the organisation, admitting its role as a private firm paid millions a year by the taxpayer to effectively run the nation’s police forces was uncomfortable.

Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary, the police watchdog, went further, saying its ‘status as a private limited company cannot continue’.

ACPO's central London base, near Scotland Yard

The new revelations are expected to increase the pressure for the reform or abolition of the organisation.

ACPO’s terrorism committee budget is supposed to be separate from the organisation’s other activities.

But the revelation it is spending anti-terrorist money on perks for senior officers now puts this part of its work under the spotlight.

Last night Mr Yates, who headed the cash-for-honours inquiry in 2006, attempted to justify the need for the flats and said they would be sold should they no longer be required.

‘A massive amount of work was instigated post-9/11 to ensure that the UK had a national structure in place to tackle terrorism.

This work required a vast amount of resources to ensure that a national counter-terrorism strategy was put in place.

As a result, staff seconded to ACPO TAM were entitled to accommodation while working in London. This structure is now in place and as a result a review has been conducted of ACPO TAM, including the requirements for staff accommodation.

‘All the properties for seconded staff are occupied and leases would be relinquished at the earliest opportunity if a property became vacant.’

But privately Yates is understood to be horrified anti-terrorist cash has been used in this way.

He has ordered an internal review to examine how the counter-terrorism money is being spent to ensure that ‘resources are used more cost effectively’ in future.

Sources say the accommodation issue is a high priority and future secondees to the body will have to make alternative housing arrangements when they are required in London.

One senior police source said: ‘The flats are all over Westminster, like an address book for the well-heeled. They are empty most of the time because there is no need to use them.

‘No politician will ever say this but the terrorism budget is over-stuffed. Every year they have a huge under-spend which they lavish on things that are not needed. These flats were bought out of this under-spend.’

Patrick Mercer, a former Tory Homeland Security spokesman, said: ‘Every penny allocated to counter-terrorism is precious. It therefore disappoints me taxpayers’ money is being used in this way.’

Security company axed after leak of MPs’ expenses files

By Jason Lewis

Key Man: Former SAS officer John Wick, who sold MPs' expenses files

A security firm responsible for guarding some of Britain’s most sensitive Government documents, including the two Iraq War dossiers, has been axed following the damaging leak of the MPs’ expenses files.

The move comes after a long-running internal investigation into who released the damaging material which led to Ministerial resignations and a police fraud inquiry.

Security company SLS Limited – which employs Royal Marines on leave from the Navy who have Ministry of Defence security clearance to carry out guard duties – oversaw the MPs’ expenses project.

But it was told its contract was not being renewed shortly after John Wick, the former SAS officer, sold the MPs’ expenses files to the Press.

It is understood the firm is considering legal action over the move and sources close to the investigation say they have been used as ‘a scapegoat’.

But the affair raises major concerns about the handing of sensitive material by Parliament and The Stationery Office (TSO) – the privatised firm employed to print all Government material.

It is understood that SLS Limited warned TSO bosses that the MPs’ expenses documents were not being sufficiently protected months before they were leaked.

Its advice for Whitehall to classify the material as ‘secret’, ‘restricted’ or even ‘confidential’ was ignored.

Following the decision, The Mail on Sunday has discovered there were a string of security blunders at the TSO. They include:

• CCTV cameras monitoring comings and goings in the secure room where the expenses data was handled were wiped every 28 days.
• Claims the ‘back-up’ portable hard drive containing all the MPs’ scanned expenses records was left out on a desk for a number of days after the operation had been closed down for the Christmas break.
• A TSO manager mistakenly took home overnight the keys to the security cabinet where the back-up hard drive, back-up tapes and passwords were kept – breaking security rules.
• TSO managers ordered staff to work over weekends even though there was no security team on duty to prevent the MPs’ records being copied.
  

In June 2008 – at the start of the project – SLS warned the TSO the decision not to classify the MPs’ expenses paperwork as secret or confidential left it open to a theft, especially as it was to be scanned in and stored electronically.

Documents obtained by The Mail on Sunday show SLS boss Terence Steans wrote to the Government printer’s head of security, warning: ‘Protectively marking this information seems like common sense...as it is clearly very sensitive (and) contains personal data of individuals within the Government and every member of the House.’

He added: ‘Who can say just what the impact of a leak would be...’

But TSO officials and Parliament ignored the warning and only used specialist security when staff were working with the material.

It is understood the expenses paperwork was regarded as ‘personal information’ and could not be given a Government security caveat.

The TSO paid for security when staff were scanning the MPs’ receipts into the system and making redactions ordered by Parliament to remove sensitive financial information from the records they intended to publish.

Outside office hours the material was overseen by two security guards on contract to the TSO. The guards kept the keys to the two locked cabinets used to store the material.

How the Mail on Sunday reported the expenses scandal

SLS had recommended that the expenses data should be protected using the Cabinet Office standard for all classified documents and that there should have been round-the-clock security.

The rules would also have allowed the TSO and Parliament to call in MI5 to investigate if a leak occurred.

But implementing the procedures would have been very expensive.

When the project began a team of Royal Marine commandos from SLS controlled all access to the two secure rooms being used to scan and edit the MPs’ expenses files.

All staff entering and leaving were logged in and out and body searched. But outside office hours there was no specialist security in place.

The biggest alleged security breach came in November 2008 when the office was locked up for Christmas.

A senior official who had been on sick leave returned to work. During a check of the secure rooms he discovered the back-up hard drive – which contained a complete record of all the MPs’ expenses in an unredacted form – left unguarded on a desk.

It would have been a simple task to connect the hard drive – which had no encryption or passwords – to a laptop computer and copy all the data.

Sources close to the TSO denied it was responsible for leaking the material and said an internal investigation had found no evidence of wrong-doing.

They confirmed CCTV footage monitoring the secure rooms where the work was carried out was wiped after 28 days but that all footage recorded immediately before the material was leaked was ‘secure’.

The source denied that work was done on the the MPs’ material when no security was in place but confirmed that on ‘one occasion a trusted senior manager’ had been allowed to work alone to meet a deadline.

The source said: ‘There has been a full examination of the system and the TSO is confident the breach that led to the leak of the MPs’ data did not occur while it was in the possession of the TSO.’

SLS Limited refused to discuss the affair and its axeing. It said: ‘We cannot discuss this matter due to client confidentiality.’

The House of Commons confirmed its own investigation was continuing.

The TSO said: ‘We do not comment on security matters.’

For sale: Personal details of millions of Ladbrokes gamblers, offered to the MoS by a mysterious Australian

By Jason Lewis, Mail on Sunday Security Editor and Sandra White In Melbourne
Last updated at 7:21 PM on 24th January 2010

Denial: Dinitha Subasinghe at his home in Melbourne

The confidential records of millions of British gamblers who bet with top bookmaker Ladbrokes have been offered for sale to The Mail on Sunday.

The huge data theft is now at the centre of a criminal investigation after this newspaper was given the personal information of 10,000 Ladbrokes customers and offered access to its database of 4.5 million people in the UK and abroad.

Last night we alerted Ladbrokes to the damaging security breach and handed the customer files to the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO), Britain's data watchdog, which immediately began to investigate.

The records include customers' home addresses, details of their gambling history, customer account numbers, dates of birth, phone numbers and email addresses.

Ladbrokes last night also called in the police and began contacting customers to reassure them that their credit card details, passwords and other financial information were safe.

The database was offered for sale by a mysterious Australian. He claimed to be a computer security expert who had worked at Ladbrokes in Britain.

During protracted negotiations via email and in one phone call, the man, who gave his name only as 'Daniel', claimed to represent a company based in Melbourne, Australia.

The company, DSS Enterprises, is run by Dinitha Subasinghe, a Sri Lankan-born IT expert.

Last night, Mr Subasinghe denied any involvement in the data theft. He designs websites and also runs a wedding planning business with his British-born girlfriend Charlene King.

Australia's companies house describes Mr Subasinghe as a 'sole trader'. His recent work has involved designing websites for estate agents in Melbourne, but he also lists Ladbrokes and the UK Ministry of Defence as clients.

He said yesterday: 'I have no access to any Ladbrokes database or any other information. I provided analytical services to them for 18 months during 2007 and 2008.'

Mr Subasinghe said he had been on holiday in the UK in November and still kept in touch with a couple of Ladbrokes staff on a social basis, and added: 'Unless my name, my signature, my fingerprint is on anything, it has nothing to do with me.

'I had a call from a senior person at Ladbrokes this morning. I did not take the call. I don't know what they are ringing me about.'

The Mail on Sunday received an email from 'Daniel' yesterday saying that he was ending the negotiations and warning us against passing his details to the authorities.

David Smith, the ICO Deputy Commissioner, said last night: 'The ICO takes breaches of individuals' privacy very seriously. Any organisation which processes personal information must ensure that adequate safeguards are in place to keep that information secure.

'We are grateful to The Mail on Sunday for bringing this security breach to our attention and will be contacting Ladbrokes to establish how it occurred and to find out what steps it will be taking to ensure that such a breach cannot happen again.

'We are particularly concerned that up to 4.5 million customer records containing personal information are allegedly for sale. Stealing personal data and selling it is a criminal offence. We will investigate whether an offence has been committed.

'We are determined to stamp out the unlawful trade in personal information and have recently urged the Government to introduce a custodial sentence for people convicted of buying and selling personal details.'

The Mail on Sunday was first approached by 'Daniel' - using the email address 'theinsidescoopuk' - earlier this month. He claimed to have worked as an IT security consultant for Ladbrokes two years ago. He said he had been passed the data by a 'relatively junior' employee, who was trying to sell it on.

'Daniel' claimed that his initial intention was to tip off Ladbrokes about the security breach, but he then decided it would be better to contact the media.

Last night Ciaran O'Brien, head of PR at Ladbrokes, said: 'We have been informed that a person connected to our organisation has offered certain details from a customer database to The Mail on Sunday.

'This is a criminal act and we are working with the police, the ICO and the newspaper to identify and apprehend the culprit.

'We are in the process of contacting customers to apologise for this breach in security and to reassure them that everything is being done to protect their personal information.

'Importantly, we do not believe that customer accounts or banking data can be accessed.'

BBC admits 'We were wrong to let the BNP insult soccer's Ashley Cole'

By Jason Lewis, Security Editor
Last updated at 1:16 AM on 17th January 2010

The BBC has admitted breaching its editorial guidelines after The Mail on Sunday revealed how two leading BNP activists were allowed to make unchallenged ‘racist’ statements on a flagship news broadcast.

A special edition of Radio 1’s Newsbeat programme introduced the two interviewees as ‘young guys who are members of the BNP’ but failed to say the pair were, in fact, key members of the far-Right party’s leadership.

The activists – identified at the time only as Joey and Mark – went unchallenged when they claimed black England footballer Ashley Cole was not ‘ethnically British’.

BNP members said east London-born Ashley, pictured here with wife Cheryl Cole, was 'not ethnically British'

They also spoke of him ‘coming to this country’, even though Cole was born in East London.

Now the BBC’s Editorial Complaints Unit has ruled that BBC Newsbeat was wrong not to reveal the two men’s standing in the BNP, and that their views should have faced ‘rigorous challenge’.

More...

• How the BBC's 'impartial' professor of journalism 'improved' his rival's Wikipedia biography
• BBC's Sonia Deol is forced off Facebook by Sikhs furious over TV film
• Former Today editor Rod Liddle under fire over 'racist' posts on football supporters' website

The ruling on the October 2009 broadcast was published last week.

Newsbeat was ‘reminded of the need to ensure listeners have enough information to assess the status and credentials of interviewees’.

And programme editor Rod McKenzie was instructed to discuss with his team ‘the need for rigorous challenge within interviews of this kind’.

Party officials Joey Barber and Mark Collett pose as 'BNP supporters' for Radio 1 Newsbeat but they have senior roles in the organisation

The ruling added: 'The concept of British ethnicity, introduced by the interviewees in connection with the example of a black, British-born footballer, was not tested in the way its controversial character called for.’

The complaints unit confirmed The Mail on Sunday’s disclosures that ‘at the time of the interview, one of the interviewees was the BNP’s publicity director and the other ran the record label which promotes and sells BNP CDs’.

The Mail on Sunday established the men were Joseph Barber, also known as Joey Smith – who runs the BNP’s record label Great White Records – and Mark Collett, the party’s head of publicity.

A BBC News spokeswoman said: ‘We note the findings.’

MoD threat to ruin Royal Marine hero who threw himself on Taliban grenade

By Jason Lewis, Mail On Sunday Whitehall Editor
Last updated at 10:03 PM on 09th January 2010

Proud: Matthew Croucher with his George Cross at Buckingham Palace

The Ministry of Defence threatened to bankrupt a Royal Marine war hero by forcing him to pay back money earned from his memoirs.

Lance-Corporal Matthew Croucher - who was awarded the George Cross by the Queen after throwing himself on a Taliban grenade to save his comrades in Afghanistan - was facing months of investigation by senior military staff for telling his story.

And the part-time soldier, who volunteered to go to the war zone, was told by the MoD that he would have to pay back the money he earned from writing about his exploits - around £90,000.

Yet within hours of The Mail on Sunday first contacting the MoD, officials backtracked and said L/Cpl Croucher had been cleared and would face no further action.

The MoD originally claimed the book, Bulletproof, published in September, broke military regulations banning serving men from being paid for writing about their careers.

The ban was brought in after the publication of a series of controversial military memoirs, including books by former SAS soldier Andy McNab and General Sir Peter de la Billière, Britain's commander in the 1991 Gulf War.

The MoD launched an official investigation and forced L/Cpl Croucher, a Royal Marine Reserve who is paid by the military only when he is on active service or exercises, to give evidence to senior naval officers.

He was also warned he would face further questioning at another hearing in Whitehall and told that if the inquiry found against him, he would have to repay the money or face being dismissed from the Marines.

Sources close to the soldier said: 'Matt wrote this book on his own time. He was paid an advance and used that money to live and also set up his own business, a security company supplying ex-Royal Marines to act as consultants and bodyguards.

'He does not earn his living from the military. He is only paid by the MoD when he is called up for duty. When he was writing the book it was his job and his only source of income.

'By asking him to pay the money back, they left him fearing ruin. He is a loyal Marine. If they told him to pay back the money he would - even if they forced him into bankruptcy.'

Frontline memoir: The book was written in L/Cpl Croucher's own time

The source added: 'Matt got permission from his commanding officer. He sent the book to the MoD's D-Notice Committee to make sure he was not revealing any secrets. Then out of the blue - on the eve of publication - the bureaucrats in Whitehall put Matt under formal investigation.

'He has been devastated. He does not want to upset the military. He is a loyal soldier.'

L/Cpl Croucher, from Birmingham, served three tours in Iraq and one in Afghanistan. He is a member of 40 Commando, which is based at Taunton in Somerset, and serves in the Commando Reconnaissance Force.

He was recommended for the George Cross after his heroism two years ago when he threw himself on a booby-trapped Taliban grenade to save three comrades during a search of a suspected bomb-making compound.

Miraculously, he escaped with just a nosebleed – his rucksack and body armour took the force of the blast.

L/Cpl Croucher later said: 'All I could hear was a loud ringing and the faint sound of people shouting, "Are you OK? Are you OK?" Then I felt one of the lads giving me a top-to-toe check. Blood was streaming from my nose. It took 30 seconds before I realised I was definitely not dead.'

When The Mail on Sunday first contacted the MoD this weekend, a spokesman confirmed it was investigating L/Cpl Croucher over his book deal.

He said military regulations banned serving soldiers from being paid for writing about their exploits, adding that there were issues of copyright and questions about whether other soldiers featured in photographs in the book had given their permission.

He said: 'There is a question about whether military regulations were followed.'

But within hours the MoD said, 'Things have moved on,' and issued another statement saying L/Cpl Croucher had been cleared. It added: 'An investigation has concluded that Corporal Croucher had followed the correct procedure. No disciplinary action will be taken. Any suggestion that he must repay any money is false.'

But the MoD failed to respond to questions about when the decision had been taken.

Last night a spokesman for L/Cpl Croucher said he was still waiting to hear from the MoD and had not been told the investigation against him had concluded. The spokesman said: 'Matt is working with the MoD to resolve this matter.'