Sir Olly Robbins has filed a legal challenge against his dismissal as the top civil servant at the Foreign Office, according to the FDA union. Keir Starmer removed Sir Olly from his position as the chief of the Foreign Office in April due to the Peter Mandelson vetting controversy.
The Prime Minister expressed anger when it was revealed that Lord Mandelson was appointed as Britain’s ambassador to the US despite failing security vetting. Sir Olly, who was the top civil servant at the Foreign Office at the time, faced criticism for overriding advice from UK Security Vetting to allow Lord Mandelson to take up the prestigious role.
Sir Olly claimed that he was pressured to expedite the placement of the Labour veteran in the position and criticized No10 for disregarding the need for vetting Lord Mandelson. He stated to a committee of MPs that vetting Mandelson before his appointment was not guaranteed.
In his submission to the court, Sir Olly argues that the Prime Minister lacked the legal authority to dismiss the Head of the Diplomatic Service and that his dismissal was conducted without a fair process. He also alleges that the reasons provided for his termination were irrational.
Following the Judicial Review request of his dismissal, Sir Olly expressed reluctance in taking legal action, emphasizing that an apology from the Prime Minister would have sufficed. The FDA union criticized the dismissal, stating that it stemmed from a misunderstanding of the vetting process.
Keir Starmer faced significant pressure over Lord Mandelson’s appointment as Britain’s Ambassador to the US, which contributed to his downfall as Prime Minister. Mandelson was later removed from the role after revelations about his connection to Jeffrey Epstein. The Foreign Office’s decision to override UKSV’s security clearance denial for Mandelson was met with controversy.
During an evidence session at the Foreign Affairs Committee post his dismissal, Sir Olly disclosed that Mandelson’s vetting was considered a borderline case. He mentioned that while UKSV was leaning towards denying clearance, the Foreign Office’s Security Department believed the identified risks could be managed or mitigated.
Please note that our website uses cookies and other identifiers to enhance your experience and provide personalized advertising. You can manage your data preferences by clicking the appropriate button on the webpage.