- Former minister Chris Robertshaw demands Tynwald investigation.
- He wants Chief Constable called as a witness.
- Civil claims expert James Heath condemns serious police failings – and calls for internal investigation.
- The prominent London solicitor says Jonathan Haywood could have grounds to sue.
- Court judgment confirms Attorney General’s Chambers initially represented police.
- Raising questions for outgoing Attorney General Walter Wannenburgh KC.
Pressure is mounting for an official investigation into the unlawful police raid on a Manx businessman’s home.
A former government minister has demanded parliamentary scrutiny.
A prominent lawyer called for an internal probe into the police and Attorney General’s office.
Former minister Chris Robertshaw and civil claims lawyer James Heath have joined calls for accountability.
The moves follow the High Court’s ruling that police unlawfully searched Jonathan Haywood’s home and seized family possessions.
The case, first reported by IoM Today, saw Deemster Andrew Corlett describe the operation as something of a ‘fishing expedition’.
He ordered the return of seized belongings and deletion of extracted data.
Manx Radio reported that a less intrusive production order should have been sought.
James Heath said: ‘There needs to be a full internal investigation, at the very least, to make sure that this never happens again.’
He added: ‘The judge, or Deemster, is absolutely scathing in his remarks about the actions and failings of the police in this case.’
He said police had ‘over-stepped the mark, failed to follow the correct procedure, made submissions to the court that contained glaring errors’.
Heath believes Haywood has good grounds for suing the Chief Constable and his force.
Robertshaw warned that he had raised precisely these dangers in Tynwald years ago when discussing warrants involving small businesses operating from domestic premises.
‘It is saddening that this is exactly what we have witnessed here,’ he said.
‘I will be very disappointed if Tynwald’s Constitutional, Legal Affairs and Justice Policy Review Committee does not pick this up with a view to ensuring this cannot happen again.’
He added: ‘I fully expect that their inquiry would include calling the Chief Constable himself as a witness.’
The Tynwald committee has responsibilities covering constitutional and justice matters.
QUESTIONS FOR ATTORNEY GENERAL
The controversy also raises questions about the involvement of the Attorney General’s Chambers, headed by Walter Wannenburgh KC.
Paragraph 18 of the judgment confirms that Chambers initially represented the Chief Constable before being replaced by private law firm Callin Wild.
Under the Attorney General’s statutory responsibilities, the office oversees government legal work.
Haywood has directly criticised Chambers:
‘The Constabulary and the Attorney General’s Chambers portrayed me and my regulated cryptocurrency business customers as suspicious without any reasonable grounds to do so.’
Wannenburgh’s retirement was announced in April.
Oliver Helfrich succeeds him in January 2027.
But it remains unclear what oversight Chambers exercised over the warrant application and subsequent litigation.
The latest controversy comes against a background of repeated criticism of the Attorney General’s Chambers during Walter Wannenburgh KC’s tenure as a senior Crown law officer.
Wannenburgh served as Solicitor General from 2015, became Acting Attorney General in early 2022 and was formally appointed Attorney General that October.
In February 2024, an independent review by Richard Wright KC exposed serious failures in Chambers’ handling of the Rosalind Ranson whistleblowing litigation.
Disclosure practices fell far below required standards, according to the report.
The review concerned failings spanning a period before and during Wannenburgh’s leadership of Chambers.
The department’s handling of the case contributed to a litigation defeat that resulted in an award of almost £3.2 million.
Subsequent controversies concerning the Lord Street litigation and Manx Care employment tribunals arose while Wannenburgh was Attorney General.
First Deemster Andrew Corlett criticised a proposed £500,000 document-review exercise in the £90 million Lord Street case, declaring that the estimate ‘makes a mockery of litigation’.
The latest Haywood judgment raises questions about whether lessons from previous criticism of the government’s legal operations have been adequately implemented.
Haywood, who has not been charged, says the raid destroyed a business built over a decade.
He also wants an inquiry into why his misconduct complaint was reportedly downgraded to ‘customer dissatisfaction’.
The Department of Home Affairs told Manx Radio that it was considering the judgment and preparing legislation to improve police complaints procedures.
Expose News has separately examined concerns surrounding AGC litigation, MONEYVAL and island governance.
Deemster Corlett found police failings reflected a lack of rigour rather than deliberate misconduct.
A prominent Manx businessman told Expose.News: ‘The question now is whether Tynwald will investigate how the unlawful raid happened – and whether police, and government lawyers will be called to explain their actions.
‘At a time when the Isle of Man’s governance and financial-crime framework are under international scrutiny, continued uncertainty at the top of Attorney General’s Chambers is untenable.’
