Allegations of serious misconduct have been made against Kenneth Deane from Northern Ireland, former Civilian Operations Commander and his Deputy Bert Versmessen as part of a claim that in currently ongoing in London. Both were senior staff members of the European External Action Service, the EU equivalent of the foreign service of State Department. They are not party to the proceedings but are named in court documents.

Unlawfully Accessed Emails

Both Deane and Bert Versmessen are accused of receiving stolen emails and then lying about having received them. The emails in questions were unlawfully accessed by a judge of a EU Member State from the private email account of a judge working in a EU Rule of Law mission. It is also alleged that Bert Versmessen was involved in disciplinary proceedings against a judge after the judge had accused him of misconduct – despite the obvious conflict of interest. Both Deane and Bert Versmessen left the EEAS in 2018.

Allegations that Bert Versmessen Conspired with Investigators

It is alleged that Deane and Bert Versmessen conspired with investigators – Chris Starmans and a former judge of the European Court of Justice, Aindrias O Caoimh – who were appointed to investigate the allegations. O Caoimh is a citizen of the Irish Republic and a former judge of the European Court of Justice. It is alleged that he spent months interviewing peripheral witnesses and ignoring witness central to the case who were largely exculpatory. It is alleged that he refused to interview some witnesses who were wholly exculpatory.

Allegations that Bert Versmessen Conspired with the Disciplinary Board

The case was referred to a disciplinary board. The board comprised only one judge, Kieran Bradley, also an Irish citizen. The other two members of the board were civil servants. One was even employed within the department that brought the proceedings and subordinate to Deane and Bert Versmessen. The panel ignored important exculpatory witnesses. The board ignored exculpatory statements that were given to investigators. The Judge the subject of the disciplinary proceedings was not even present when other, important, witnesses were examined. Instead he was sent a “resume”, as Judge Bradley described it, of their evidence.

Composition of the Disciplinary Panel

An appeals board considered the issue of composition of the panel. One of the members of the appeals board was also an Irish citizen. How is it that with 28 members of the EU an Irish judge is in charge of the investigation, an Irish judge is the only judge on the disciplinary board and an Irish judge is sitting on the appeals board? Coincidence? The President of the European Court of Justice has stated the judges were selected randomly.

The appeal board decided that it was not necessary for the disciplinary panel to comprise a majority of judges. However, and most extraordinarily, the panel did not find a breach of Article 6 of the ECHR even though one of the members of the panel was employed by the EEAS and subordinate to the EEAS staff member who initiated the disciplinary proceedings.

For more information visit our website:- https://www.edward-montague.com.