Charles Gomez, one of the lawyers who represented former Commissioner of Police Ian McGrail, has said that the government has “crossed” constitutional lines and that the rule of law is at risk in Gibraltar.

In a statement sent to the media, Mr Gomez argues that the Government misused parliament during the presentation of a motion about RGP whistleblowers last week. Mr Gomez says the Government "took advantage of parliamentary privilege, immunity from legal challenge, to make vague accusations, innuendos, and serious allegations against a private citizen who had no right of reply.”

A full statement follows:

“As a barrister of longstanding and an officer of the Supreme Court of Gibraltar since 1982, I have sworn to uphold the rule of law in our community. It is in that capacity, but also as a concerned citizen, that I feel compelled to speak publicly and personally about the events of this [last] week, both within and beyond the walls of Parliament.

“To the extent that it may be necessary to declare, I do so openly, I have represented Mr. Ian McGrail, the former Commissioner of Police, since 2020 when he was unfairly and unlawfully pressured out of office by the Chief Minister, the then Interim Governor, and others, as was clear at the time and has now been confirmed beyond doubt by Sir Peter Openshaw’s report.

“What I must address here goes far beyond any single individual.

“This [last] week, Gibraltar witnessed what I believe to be a serious breakdown in the constitutional boundaries that preserve our democracy. The Government, fortified by its parliamentary majority, used the House not to legislate, but to override the essential duties of our police and prosecuting authorities, and to trample the fundamental principle, long cherished in British justice, that it is for the police to investigate, and for the courts to determine legal liability.

“Rather than respecting the distinct roles of the executive, the police, and the judiciary, the Government took advantage of parliamentary privilege, immunity from legal challenge, to make vague accusations, innuendos, and serious allegations against a private citizen who had no right of reply, relying on statements whose provenance and constitutionality was highly suspect.

“This was not merely a misuse of Parliament; it was a misuse of power. Parliament was reduced to a platform for condemnation, of individuals, and of one of our oldest and most respected institutions, the Royal Gibraltar Police, which has served Gibraltar since 1830 and in which many generations of Gibraltarians have served. In the parliamentary chaos, there was even a wild and unsubstantiated claim that there had been a “bloodless coup” (whatever that was supposed to mean) against the Government by persons who were not identified.

"I recognise that many citizens may have found this [last] week’s events difficult to follow. The language was official and the tone was angry and performative, but I urge everyone in Gibraltar to reflect carefully on what took place. When Ministers stand in Parliament and declare, without evidence, that a major police investigation impacting on national security, and involving a government official, was “cooked up”, while also dismissing judicial findings and undermining the work of independent prosecutors, what we are witnessing is not democracy, it is executive overreach.

“Let me offer just one example.

“On 22nd January 2026, Sir Joe Bossano MP, issued a timid and apologetic press release saying that he meant no criticism of the DPP when he said that Operation Delhi had been “cooked up. Yet, it was the very same DPP who according to the Attorney General had assessed the case and found that there were reasonable prospects of conviction of the Delhi defendants and indeed proceeded to charge them with serious offences. This happened long after Mr. McGrail’s departure from the RGP.

“So, which is it? If, as Sir Joe claimed, the investigation was fabricated, then surely the DPP must be included in that accusation. Yet he now says that no such criticism was intended. That position is incoherent. One cannot claim that a prosecution was baseless yet absolve those who pursued it of all responsibility.

“Now, either one believes in the independence and professionalism of the DPP, or one does not. Sir Joe cannot have it both ways. If, as he now claims, Operation Delhi was fabricated, then logically he must be accusing the DPP, who was leading the prosecution, of acting improperly. With respect, Sir Joe’s shifting position is not credible. If the prosecution was “cooked up,” then those who pursued it were complicit in a fraud on the justice system.

“Such contradictions do not merely expose political inconsistency; they undermine public confidence in the administration of justice.

“It is worth remembering too that Sir Peter Openshaw concluded in his Report (see paragraph 11.87 at page 399) that Operation Delhi was a legitimate investigation.

“Those charged in that case were denied their right to defend themselves due to the Attorney General’s unexplained decision to enter a nolle prosequi. Nothing in this statement should be taken as casting doubt on their right to the presumption of innocence. Government Ministers would do well to remember that presumption applies to all.

“And what of the current Commissioner of Police, Mr. Owain Richards?

“Sir Joe rushed to publicly thank the Commissioner for his immediate response to the Motion in Parliament. Yet anyone who read the Commissioner’s statement with care will have seen that it was a measured but clear reminder, that it is for the police, not politicians, to investigate criminal matters; and that many of the issues raised in Parliament had already been investigated or are currently under investigation. That was a quiet but firm reproof. It was a warning against political interference from the Crown’s highest law enforcement officer in Gibraltar. 

“Yet that is precisely what we have seen, and not for the first time.

“The Commissioner might also have gone further. He could have pointed out that by raising such detailed allegations in Parliament, and asserting their truth, the Government seriously risked undermining any future criminal prosecutions. If the Government truly cared about the allegations themselves, rather than using them as weapons to take revenge against its perceived enemies, it would never have taken such a risk. 

“In any healthy democracy, Governments are powerful (the Chief Minister described himself as a “giant” in Parliament this week) but not all-powerful. Their authority is limited by the Constitution. Their conduct must respect the independence of the police, the prosecutors, and the courts.

“The events of this week have broken those limits. The Government acted not as a servant of the law, but as though it were above it. This reflects closely the conduct of the Chief Minister which was found by Sir Peter Openshaw to be “grossly improper” and “sinister”. It demonstrates, as if it needed demonstrating, that the Government has not understood, let alone accepted, the profound seriousness of the findings against the Chief Minister, who interfered with the Op Delhi investigation and failed to fully inform the Gibraltar Police Authority of the background situation so that he could engineer the forcing out of Ian McGrail in service to his personal interests. We now know that his Ministers have not only assented to the Chief Minister’s misconduct, they have internalised it as their way of doing business. 

“And so, we must now ask, as citizens of Gibraltar, if Parliament can be used in this way, to accuse without trial, to condemn without evidence, then what protections remain for any of us?

“We cannot look the other way. This is not about partisan politics, personal history, or private grievances. It is about whether we still live in a city governed by the rule of law, or whether we are drifting toward a system where power is unchecked, principles are ignored, and Parliament becomes a kangaroo courtroom without rules.

“We must all, citizens, lawyers, and public servants, reflect on what kind of Gibraltar we want to preserve.

“If we still believe in British justice, then it is time to defend it.”