Police find no breaches of confidentially at CCA

Police had carried out what it called a ‘scoping exercise’ in relation to two high-profile incidents linked to Civil Contingencies Authority chairman Peter Ferbrache.

One was a message allegedly sent by his daughter on the digital messaging system WhatsApp on the morning of Saturday 23 January, apparently forecasting the second Covid lockdown announced later that day.

The other was in relation to an email sent by hotelier David Nussbaumer, detailing likely dates for the island to come out of the lockdown and ease restrictions.

Bailiwick Law Enforcement said yesterday afternoon that it had uncovered no breach of section 22 of the law, which relates to confidentiality.

It said that no formal complaint had ever been made and the inquiries did not constitute a formal investigation. But officers had ‘pursued all legitimate and proportionate lines of enquiry to establish whether there is any evidence that a breach took place’.

Information gathered was independently reviewed by the law officers, who advised that further investigation was not warranted.

Law Enforcement said its position would be reviewed if new evidence came to light.

Deputy Ferbrache said yesterday: ‘I knew that I had done nothing wrong.’

He said the whole matter had been stirred up ‘deliberately’ and ‘cynically’. He was also disappointed that his family had been drawn into the inquiry.

‘This is the clearest vindication one could expect to get in the circumstances,’ Deputy Ferbrache said.

‘I am pleased with what’s happened but also angry that people have sought to use what has turned out to be nothing for their own political and other advantage.’

Deputy Gavin St Pier has pursued these alleged breaches with questions in the States and published the content of the WhatsApp message on social media last month.

Bailiwick Law Enforcement added that while a police investigation into a self-isolation breach, which has already seen two people linked to the Farmhouse Hotel convicted in the Magistrate’s Court, had not identified any link to a breach of confidentiality of the Civil Contingencies Law, elements of this investigation were still ongoing, and it would make no further comment on that investigation.