Richard Hatfield: Kelly 'did not need to consent to be named'
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.A senior Ministry of Defence official said yesterday Dr David Kelly had "no veto" over his name being released to the press and that his consent was not needed.
Richard Hatfield, personnel director of the MoD, said he had explained to Dr Kelly that his identity might be revealed "in stages" after a press statement was issued referring to him anonymously.
Mr Hatfield admitted to the Hutton inquiry that Dr Kelly had never been told he would be consulted before his name was confirmed to the media. Mr Hatfield also accepted that he did not follow an instruction from Sir Kevin Tebbit, the MoD's permanent secretary, that he should assess "Kelly's readiness to be associated with a public statement that names him".
Mr Hatfield said: "The honest answer is that I did not focus on the precise wording of that paragraph ... I very clearly explained that Dr Kelly should be clear at some stage he would need to be publicly associated with his actions and stand by it. I did not read it as asking me to clear an early statement which named him. I did not, of course, do so."
Mr Hatfield interviewed Dr Kelly twice, on 4 July and 7 July, after he came forward to admit he had met Andrew Gilligan. The scientist's widow has accused the MoD of "betrayal" by naming him despite assuring him he would not be identified.
During examination by the MoD's counsel, David Lloyd Jones QC, Mr Hatfield conceded he had not at any stage asked for Dr Kelly's consent for his name to be made public. "In the circumstances I was envisaging, in which the MoD might make it public, I did not and do not believe that I required his consent," he said.
Mr Hatfield said that in the case of a credible approach from the media, or in putting Dr Kelly forward for the Foreign Affairs Committee, there was no way that the MoD could fail to reveal his name. "[There was] certainly no reason to give him a veto," he said.
Mr Hatfield said he went through the statement "paragraph by paragraph" at about 4pm on 8 July, adding: "I got his explicit consent to it." Dr Kelly made no suggestions or comments, he told the inquiry.
He said he might have suggested that his identity could be released in stages, with him initially being referred to by a description.
Mr Lloyd Jones asked if the issue of Dr Kelly's pension was ever raised, or if it was ever at any risk. Mr Hatfield replied: "Never, none whatsoever." Dr Kelly's security clearance was also in no way affected, he said.
Mr Hatfield said the fact that Dr Kelly was being encouraged to go to Iraq confirmed that security clearance was never an issue.
Paul Waugh
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments