Gibraltar Picardo Inquiry: Chief Minister Faces Criticism in Report

Published: 24 December 2025. The English Chronicle Desk. The English Chronicle Online.

Gibraltar’s political landscape was carved into sharp relief this week as a long‑awaited public inquiry delivered devastating scrutiny of the Chief Minister’s conduct during a live criminal investigation. In a detailed report published Tuesday, retired high court judge Sir Peter Openshaw Q.C. concluded that Fabian Picardo engaged in a series of interventions that crossed fundamental boundaries between government and police independence when officers were executing a search warrant at a prominent law firm. The inquiry found that Picardo’s actions, described in the report as “grossly improper” and “sinister”, were aimed at protecting a close personal associate and business partner, James Levy KC, who was under police investigation related to an alleged plot involving the national security intelligence system. The report leaves little doubt that the Chief Minister’s conduct was driven by deeply personal interests and demonstrates how blurred the lines between power and loyalty had become in Gibraltar’s small, interconnected community.

Across the Mediterranean, Gibraltar has long prided itself on maintaining solid legal and democratic standards as a British Overseas Territory, but the revelations from the McGrail Inquiry have shaken that reputation. The central episode took place on 12 May 2020, when Royal Gibraltar Police officers were at Hassans law firm with a search warrant tied to allegations of hacking, sabotage, and fraud concerning the National Security Centralised Intelligence System. Sir Peter Openshaw’s report revealed that, instead of allowing the police action to proceed without government interference, Picardo summoned the police commissioner Ian McGrail to his office in a “towering rage” and berated him in an attempt to halt or influence the investigation. The judge characterised this confrontation, and other contacts with police and legal representatives, as “grossly improper attempts” to interfere with legitimate policing functions — a serious breach of democratic norms.

The report also detailed how Picardo shared confidential material with Levy’s legal team, including his understanding of advice from the Director of Public Prosecutions and internal police disciplinary regulations. Sir Peter described these disclosures as “sinister”, noting that they appeared calculated to shield Levy from lawful scrutiny rather than protect the public interest. Although Levy was never charged and effectively exonerated, the perception of undue influence cast a long shadow over the entire episode, exposing deeply rooted conflicts between personal relationships and the responsibilities of public office.

Perhaps most troubling for Gibraltar’s governance culture were the inquiry’s findings about the broader consequences of Picardo’s conduct. While the police operation itself continued as planned, the fallout contributed to the early retirement of McGrail, who stepped down a month after the contentious meeting. Sir Peter found that McGrail felt “unfairly and unlawfully compelled” to retire because of the pressure placed on him by the Chief Minister and the then interim Governor. He further concluded that the procedures leading to McGrail’s departure were seriously flawed and procedurally defective, with key safeguards ignored or misapplied. McGrail’s own legal advisers have since asserted that the report vindicates his claim that he was effectively forced out of office.

The inquiry also cast light on the intricate web of financial and professional connections entwining Picardo, Levy, and the law firm Hassans. Both men held equity in 36 North Limited, a company at the heart of the disputed contract and subsequent investigation, with Hassans owning a significant stake. These relationships intensified concerns about conflicts of interest and raised questions about the propriety of a sitting chief minister engaging so deeply in matters touching on his own economic interests. Sir Peter observed that such conflicts presented “a very high risk” to the impartial execution of public duties, reflecting on how informal relationships within Gibraltar’s close‑knit society can undermine accountability and transparency.

Despite the seriousness of the criticisms, the report stopped short of finding that Picardo’s actions resulted in tangible interference with the police operation and did not recommend criminal charges. The judge acknowledged that, technically, the search warrant execution was not obstructed and that no conspiracy to remove McGrail was proven. Nevertheless, the inquiry underlined that impropriety and the appearance of impropriety mattered for maintaining public trust. In this respect, Sir Peter’s reflections emphasised that what might once have been dismissed as informal interactions in a small community are now rightly seen as incompatible with modern standards of governance and accountability.

In response to the report, Picardo insisted that he believed he acted with Gibraltar’s interests at heart and that he had been misled by the then police commissioner. In a ministerial statement, he welcomed parts of the report that he interpreted as vindicating his actions and said the government would adopt the inquiry’s recommendations to strengthen institutional oversight. However, he also signalled his intention to challenge some of the criticisms, claiming that certain findings were legally unfair or contradictory. His willingness to contest the report’s conclusions illustrates the degree of division and controversy that this episode has sparked in Gibraltar’s political and legal circles.

The reverberations from the McGrail Inquiry extend beyond individual reputations. They have prompted calls for clearer procedures to manage conflicts of interest, reinforce the independence of law enforcement, and ensure that political leaders respect boundaries that preserve the rule of law. Many commentators argue that the inquiry’s findings should lead to a renewed focus on institutional reforms to prevent similar tensions in the future. Meanwhile, public confidence in Gibraltar’s leadership and legal structures faces a critical moment of reckoning. For citizens and observers alike, the inquiry represents a reminder that the integrity of democracy hinges not only on legal compliance but also on the perception and acceptance of ethical conduct at the highest levels of government.