The Panel’s remit

The Panel’s terms of reference

1.   The murder of Daniel Morgan in March 1987 was a personal tragedy for Daniel’s family. In the intervening 26 years, there have been five successive police investigations but no one has been successfully prosecuted or convicted for the murder; and in March 2011 the Metropolitan Police acknowledged “the repeated failure of the MPS to confront the role played by police corruption in protecting those responsible for the murder from being brought to justice”.

2.   In these circumstances, the Government is committed through the work of the Independent Panel to a full and effective review of corruption as it affected the handling of this case and of the treatment of the family by the police and other parts of the criminal justice system. The Metropolitan Police support this review through the Panel process.

3.   The purpose and remit of the Independent Panel is to shine a light on the circumstances of Daniel Morgan’s murder, its background and the handling of the case over the whole period since March 1987. In doing so, the Panel will seek to address the questions arising, including those relating to:

  • police involvement in the murder;
  • the role played by police corruption in protecting those responsible for the murder from being brought to justice and the failure to confront that corruption; and
  • the incidence of connections between private investigators, police officers and journalists at the News of the World and other parts of the media and alleged corruption involved in the linkages between them.

4.   In order to achieve this purpose, the Independent Panel will:

(a) engage with members of the family and take their views into account at all stages in relation to the methodology of its work and the results of its work;

(b) obtain and examine all relevant documentation from all relevant bodies, governmental and non-governmental alike, including but not limited to papers held by;

  • The Metropolitan Police;
  • The Hampshire Police;
  • The Crown Prosecution Service and the Attorney General’s Office;
  • The Police Complaints Authority (as it was then);
  • The Independent Police Complaints Commission;
  • Southwark Coroner’s Court; and
  • The Home Office.

(c) interview and receive relevant information from individuals who are willing to provide that information;

(d) brief members of the family through a final report which would be made available first to the family and then to the public at large;

(e) explain in the final report what the relevant documentation and information reveal about the nature and extent of police corruption in relation to the handling of this case; and

(f) make any recommendations which the Panel concludes should be made as a result of its work, including recommendations for any further investigation or inquiry.

5.  The principles of the Independent Panel’s work will be:

(a) full, genuine and effective participation of the family at all stages of the Panel’s work including genuine and full consultation and briefing throughout the process and payment of legal costs incurred on behalf of the family to this end;

(b) “the family first” in terms of the release of the Panel’s findings and its report;

(c) exceptional and full disclosure to the Panel of all relevant documentation including that held by all relevant Government departments and agencies and by the police and other investigative and prosecuting authorities;

(d) maximum possible disclosure of documentation and information by the Panel to the family.

6.   The Independent Panel will present its final Report to the Home Secretary who will make arrangements for its publication to Parliament.

7.   It is envisaged that the Panel will aim to complete its work within 12 months of the documentation being made available. In the meanwhile, it is also envisaged that the Panel will brief the family incrementally, both on the progress of its work and on its emerging findings. The Panel will finalise these and other aspects of its work after three months when it has been able to assess the scope of its work and the desirability and practicalities of incremental disclosure.

Return to top of page