Former Mid and East Antrim chief faces prosecution over alleged deleted emails
A solicitor of Ms Donaghy added she will 'vehemently contest these three technical offences'.
Northern Ireland's Public Prosecution Service (PPS) on Friday confirmed that it has taken a decision to prosecute two people following a police probe into the alleged deletion of emails related to a freedom of information (FOI) request at the council in 2021.
An anti-Northern Ireland Protocol sign close to Larne Port (Liam McBurney/PA)
It comes after a BBC Spotlight programme reported police searches of the council offices in October 2021 and April 2022 were connected to an alleged attempt to delete correspondence around a decision to withdraw council staff involved in post-Brexit trade agreement checks at Larne Port.
During a time of political tension over the introduction of an 'Irish Sea border', a number of staff were temporarily removed from the posts for their safety following alleged threats from loyalist paramilitaries.
Department of Agriculture staff were also withdrawn from the port on February 1 2021 amid security concerns.
However police later said they were not aware of any credible threats.
A PPS spokesperson said one individual is being prosecuted for three offences under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, and a second individual is being prosecuted for one offence under the same Act.
'The charges relate to offences allegedly committed in April 2021 and June 2021,' they said.
In total four individuals were reported on a police investigation file submitted to the PPS for consideration.
The PPS said a senior prosecutor carefully considered all the available evidence and applied the test for prosecution before taking decisions in relation to the four reported individuals.
'It has been determined that the available evidence in relation to the other two reported individuals is insufficient in order to provide a reasonable prospect of conviction and therefore the test for prosecution is not met in relation to them,' they said.
Belfast solicitor Kevin Winters of KRW Law (Liam McBurney/PA)
Solicitor Kevin Winters said Ms Donaghy has an outstanding High Court legal action against the council alleging discrimination.
'Today we received notification that she will be prosecuted on three counts of allegedly concealing records, aiding and abetting another person to erase or conceal a record and attempting to erase or conceal a record contrary to FOIA and other legislation,' he said.
'Our client denies any wrongdoing during her time in office and will vehemently contest these three technical offences.
'Central to her defence will be very strong allegations of investigative bias over the manner in which this inquiry has been conducted.
'Those same allegations have been the subject of a long-running complaint to PONI, the out workings of which will feature in any trial, if one is ever directed.'
He added: 'Anne Donaghy has an impeccable record and service working for the council.
'She wants to put on record her sincere thanks for the all the support she has received from former colleagues in council and beyond in the wider community.
'Our client takes a lot of strength from this and knows it will serve her well going forward when confronting what are essentially contrived politically motivated allegations.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Western Telegraph
7 minutes ago
- Western Telegraph
Nicola Sturgeon's ‘political instinct' to back a united Ireland
However, the former Scottish first minister insisted the issue of Northern Ireland's future is for people there to decide. She stressed that was the case because she said she could 'get bit prickly if people from outside Scotland start to say what's best for Scotland'. However, speaking to the Nolan Show on BBC Radio Ulster, she stated: 'My political instinct would be in favour of a united Ireland. 'But that's not a matter for me.' Ms Sturgeon continued that as a supporter of Scottish independence, she believes that 'Westminster governance has not served Scotland well', adding that she is 'not sure it will have served Northern Ireland well'. The former SNP leader said: 'I think what Brexit did to Northern Ireland and has done to Scotland is probably an example of the downsides of Westminster governments.' However, she that 'detailed assessments' over whether the province's future should be in the UK or as part of a united Ireland were 'for people in Northern Ireland to make'.
Spectator
an hour ago
- Spectator
White House joins TikTok – despite US ban looming
To the Land of the Free, where Donald Trump's administration has been busy, er, setting up a TikTok account. The White House has joined the social media platform this week, despite plans by the United States to ban the app in just under a month over security concerns. The profile has so far posted three videos and amassed 116,700 followers. You can't blame them not making the most of it while they've got it, eh? The White House set up a verified account on the Chinese platform on Tuesday, posting its first video of Trump clips with the caption: 'America, we are back! What's up TikTok?' A second video shows cuts of the White House building itself, while a third has pasted together some of Trump's snappiest reactions. The page's descriptor reads: 'Welcome to the Golden Age of America.' Not that the site's users appear to feel much warmth towards the account. Already the comments sections are filled up with anti-Trump images, remarks about the Epstein files and, um, confusion about why the account has been set up in the first place. The Chinese-owned platform sparked alarm in the US after the FBI, amongst others, suggested the site could be used by the Chinese government to harvest data and interfere with social cohesion in America. The company has strongly denied these accusations, but that hasn't prevented US politicians from voting to ban it. Trump himself has gone on something of a journey with the site, however – first trying to outlaw TikTok during his first term before staging a volte face before last November's election and pledging to prevent a federal ban. After he won the 2024 election, Trump signed an executive order to put off the ban until April while his administration looked for someone to buy it. The President signed another extension, delaying the ban until 17 September. He admitted last year that he believes his presence on the site has helped him win over younger voters, remarking in December: 'I have a warm spot in my heart for TikTok.' It's one method of strengthening US-China relations… Trump's team have worked with social media giant Meta to push campaign material on Facebook, and the President even owns his own social media platform – his beloved Truth Social. Could this new account be a hint the social media savvy US leader may try and further delay a ban on TikTok?
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Revealed: Starmer's EU fish surrender could cost up to £6bn
Sir Keir Starmer's Brexit reset deal risks handing the EU up to £6bn of British fish, official data suggest. Under the agreement struck by Labour in May, EU fishermen will get guaranteed access to UK waters for another 12 years, until 2038. The Telegraph can reveal that this could be worth up to £6bn to the EU in British fish, based on estimates provided to ministers before the deal was signed. Nigel Farage, the Reform UK leader, has said he will rip up the deal if he becomes prime minister. He told The Telegraph: 'It is truly astonishing that we have given away a huge sum of money. 'We've massively damaged our own industry, stopping future investment in return for absolutely nothing, and our coastal communities feel totally betrayed.' In February, three months before the agreement was struck, officials from the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs provided ministers with an analysis of the 'economic benefits and concerns of re-negotiating fisheries policies with the EU'. The Telegraph has seen an extract of the memo, released under freedom of information laws, which states that the EU took between £400m and £500m of landings from UK waters in 2023. This suggests that, by extending EU access for another 12 years, Sir Keir has signed away up to £6bn worth of British fish. The Government rejected the estimate, insisting it did not make sense to project the figure from 2023 on to future years because of potential variations in quotas and market prices. While Sir Keir guaranteed the EU access to British waters until 2038, the UK retains the right to negotiate the amount of fish that Brussels can land each year. That means it is not possible to predict exactly how much EU fishermen will take from UK waters on an annual basis, making the £6bn figure a rough projection. However, Mike Cohen, the chief executive officer of the National Federation of Fishermen's Organisations, described it as a 'fair and realistic' estimate. He told The Telegraph: 'The EU has consistently taken around £500m of fish from UK waters annually for a number of years now. 'There is no realistic prospect of renegotiating quota shares, because the only bargaining chip the UK had to negotiate with was access to our waters and the Government has given that away. 'In reality, the only way that the EU will take less value than that is if the fish stocks shrink and quotas are reduced for everyone. £6bn over 12 years is a fair and realistic estimate in my opinion.' The memo seen by The Telegraph, sent to Steve Reed, the Environment Secretary, and Daniel Zeichner, the food security minister, stated that the ability to fish in UK waters was 'hugely significant' for the EU fleet. It added: 'We know around 1,500 EU vessels have licenses to fish in the UK EEZ as of January 2025, and that about 17 per cent of the EU's total landings volume and 7-9 per cent (£400m-£500m) of their total landings value comes from UK waters (2023).' The document also reveals that ministers were told Britain could benefit from reducing EU access to UK waters, albeit only by a 'small' amount. It stated: 'There will possibly be small positive impacts to the UK if access to UK waters was reduced for EU vessels, notably the 6-12nm zone... 'Fishers could be more profitable if a reduction in competition means reduced cost/effort to catch their fish. For UK fishers in the area, this is [a] clear deliverable, and they will likely feel they are better based on [a] combination of economic and socio-political factors.' Mr Cohen said he would be 'fascinated to know' who came up with the suggestion that reducing EU access would only provide a 'small' benefit to the UK, describing it as 'poor advice'. He added: 'It is certainly not our view. If EU boats were excluded, we would have significantly more freedom to manage the fish resources in our waters, to ensure their long term sustainability. 'It would also mean that there was far more room for UK boats to work in: something that will become an increasing problem with the government's plans for enormous expansions of offshore wind farms and marine protected areas. 'This would have benefited our smaller inshore fleet most of all: the sector that has the best potential for sustainable growth.' Coastal communities 'betrayed' Downing Street has said the fishing deal will add £9bn to the economy by 2040 by linking the UK more closely to the EU's food, veterinary and energy markets. But critics described it as a betrayal of Britain's coastal communities, who were promised that Labour would take back control of UK waters from Brussels as part of Brexit. Sir John Redwood, the former Tory environment minister, said: 'This needless giveaway of our fish will cost us more than just the lost £6bn of fish sales over 12 years. There are all the lost jobs in fishing, supporting fishing boats and food processing as well as the lost tax revenues.' A government spokesman said: 'This is a made up figure and not based on any policy that we have with the EU, or would have had under the previous deal. 'Under the previous Brexit deal, EU boats were provided de facto guarantees to UK waters beyond 2026. 'The deal we have secured means we can continue to decide and agree annually the amount EU vessels can catch in our waters, and gives UK fishing communities long-term certainty and stability.' Government sources said it was not possible to forecast the value of EU catches in UK waters for 2026–2038, as this depends on annual quota negotiations, catches of non-quota species and market prices.
