Dominic Raab says in his resignation letter as deputy prime minister it is “important to keep my word”, but adds the inquiry into bullying claims against him sets a “dangerous precedent”.
In the lengthy two-page letter to Rishi Sunak, he reveals that senior lawyer Adam Tolley upheld two of the eight allegations against him.
The prime minister received the report on Thursday and had been considering the findings since – here’s the full letter from Mr Raab, which Sky News’ deputy political editor Sam Coates refers to as “bitter” and “personal”.
Here are both Mr Raab’s resignation letter and the prime minister’s “sad” response.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:52
Sam Coates on the different standards of etiquette within the workplace
“Dear Prime Minister,
“I am writing to resign from your government, following receipt of the report arising from the inquiry conducted by Adam Tolley KC. I called for the inquiry and undertook to resign, if it made any finding of bullying whatsoever. I believe it is important to keep my word.
“It has been a privilege to serve you as deputy prime minister, Justice Secretary and Lord Chancellor. I am grateful to have had the opportunity to work as a minister in a range of roles and departments since 2015, and pay tribute to the many outstanding civil servants with whom I have worked.
Advertisement
“Whilst I feel duty bound to accept the outcome of the inquiry, it dismissed all but two of the claims levelled against me. I also believe that its two adverse findings are flawed and set a dangerous precedent for the conduct of good government.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:34
Why has Raab resigned?
“First, ministers must be able to exercise direct oversight with respect to senior officials over critical negotiations conducted on behalf of the British people, otherwise the democratic and constitutional principle of ministerial responsibility will be lost. This was particularly true during my time as foreign secretary, in the context of the Brexit negotiations over Gibraltar, when a senior diplomat breached the mandate agreed by cabinet.
“Second, ministers must be able to give direct critical feedback on briefings and submissions to senior officials, in order to set the standards and drive the reform the public expect of us. Of course, this must be done within reasonable bounds. Mr Tolley concluded that I had not once, in four and a half years, sworn or shouted at anyone, let alone thrown anything or otherwise physically intimidated anyone, nor intentionally sought to belittle anyone. I am genuinely sorry for any unintended stress or offence that any officials felt, as a result of the pace, standards and challenge that I brought to the Ministry of Justice. That is, however, what the public expect of ministers working on their behalf.
“In setting the threshold for bullying so low, this inquiry has set a dangerous precedent. It will encourage spurious complaints against ministers, and have a chilling effect on those driving change on behalf of your government – and ultimately the British people.
“Finally, I raised with you a number of improprieties that came to light during the course of this inquiry. They include the systematic leaking of skewed and fabricated claims to the media in breach of the rules of the inquiry and the Civil Service Code of Conduct, and the coercive removal by a senior official of dedicated Private Secretaries from my Ministry of Justice private office, in October of last year. I hope these will be independently reviewed.
“I remain as supportive of you and this government, as when I first introduced you at your campaign leadership launch last July. You have proved a great prime minister in very challenging times, and you can count on my support from the backbenches. Yours sincerely, Dominic Raab.”
Sunak accepts resignation with ‘great sadness’
Image: Rishi Sunak’s letter to Dominic Raab
The prime minister has accepted Mr Raab’s resignation with “great sadness” and issued his own response.
He said there were “shortcomings” in the way the bullying allegations were dealt with which have “negatively affected everyone involved”. Here’s his response to Mr Raab in full.
“Dear Dominic,
“Thank you for your letter notifying me of your decision to resign from your position in His Majesty’s government as deputy prime minister and lord chancellor and secretary of state for justice. It is with great sadness that I have accepted your resignation.
“When I became prime minister in October last year, I pledged that the government I lead would have integrity, professionalism and accountability at every level. The ministerial code requires ministers to uphold the highest standards.
“When formal complaints about your conduct in different ministerial posts were submitted last year, I appointed at your request an independent investigator to conduct a full investigation into the specific facts surrounding these complaints. Adam Tolley KC has now submitted his report and I have carefully considered its findings, as well as consulting the Independent Adviser on Ministers’ Interests.
“As you say, you had – rightly – undertaken to resign if the report made any finding of bullying whatsoever. You have kept your word. But it is clear that there have been shortcomings in the historic process that have negatively affected everyone involved. We should learn from this how to better handle such matters in future.
“But your resignation should not make us forget your record of delivery in both this government and previous administrations. These achievements should make you extremely proud.
“Most recently as secretary of state for justice and lord chancellor, you have put the rights of victims at the heart of our criminal justice system through our landmark victims and prisoners bill, as well as increasing sentences for violent criminals, reforming the probation system, and pushing forward the biggest prison-building programme this country has seen in over a century.
“As foreign secretary, you were a major driving force of the 2021 Integrated Review, conceiving and delivering the Indo-Pacific tilt. I know the personal drive you also displayed to create the UK’s new independent sanctions regime and in our response to the undermining of human rights and democracy in Hong Kong.
“During the COVID crisis, you stepped in when the then prime minister was hospitalised. You provided the country – and your cabinet colleagues – with reassurance and leadership at a moment of profound national concern. As chancellor at the time, I was struck by the collegiate way in which you handled this most difficult of challenges.
“I will always be grateful for your steadfast personal support during last year’s Conservative Party leadership contest from the day you introduced me at the launch to the last day of the contest. The subsequent dedication, commitment and loyalty with which you have discharged your responsibilities as deputy prime minister has been typical of your belief in public service.
“I look forward to receiving your support from the backbenches as you continue to passionately represent your constituents of Esher and Walton. Thank you for your service to this and previous governments and I wish you and your family every possible success for the future. Yours sincerely, Rishi Sunak.”
Australia’s prime minister was met with boos and insults when he arrived at a Bondi Beach vigil for victims of last week’s gun attack.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese was booed when his name was announced on the stage set up in front of the crowd – amid anger that the premier hasn’t done more to tackle rising antisemitism in Australia.
In contrast, New South Wales Premier Chris Minns’s name was greeted with cheers and a standing ovation.
The premier was thanked for his leadership and for not missing “a funeral, synagogue service, or an opportunity to be with the Jewish community this week”.
Before going to the vigil, Albanese had announced a review of the country’s police and intelligence agencies a week after the deadly Bondi Beach gun attack.
Albanese said the review, led by a former chief of Australia’s spy agency, would probe whether federal police and intelligence agencies have the “right powers, structures, processes and sharing arrangements in place to keep Australians safe”.
Authorities invited Australians to light a candle on Sunday evening, the start of the eighth and final day of the Jewish festival of lights, “as a quiet act of remembrance with family, friends or loved ones” of the victims.
Image: Australia’s Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and his wife arrive at a Bondi Beach attack vigil
An evening memorial event at Bondi Beach will take place under a heavy police presence, including officers carrying long-arm firearms, police said in a statement.
A minute’s silence was also held at 6.47pm (7.47am UK time).
Earlier this week, around 700 people on paddle boards and surfboards took to the sea at Bondi Beach, forming a huge circle in a show of solidarity.
A minute of reflection
As the heat of Sydney’s summer started to drop away, thousands of people came out to Bondi to support the Jewish community in a day of National Reflection.
They covered the hillside above Bondi. A sea of people standing in solidarity.
There was a minute of silence, though it felt much longer as the usual din of Bondi faded away to stillness.
People hugged each other, sat quietly and there were also tears.
It has been a confronting and deeply emotional week for the Jewish community in Bondi, as they struggle to comprehend the scale of the tragedy that has struck them.
The rest of Australia has struggled too. People are shocked that a mass shooting could happen in this normally peaceful country.
People are angry that the strict gun laws failed to keep firearms out of people with extremist ideology.
Jewish people are angry at the government for failing to curb a rise of antisemitic attacks since the Israel-Gaza war started.
After the memorial I spoke with three of Sydney’s Jewish rabbis from the Emmanuel Synagogue. They said that when it comes to hate speech and antisemitism “words matter”.
But there are few words of comfort to offer a community still so shaken and raw from the massacre of one week ago.
Gaps in the system
The attack exposed gaps in gun-license assessments and information-sharing between agencies that politicians have said they want to plug.
Albanese has announced a nationwide gun buyback, while gun safety experts say the nation’s gun laws, among the world’s toughest, are full of loopholes.
Authorities believe the gunmen were inspired by Islamic State.
“The ISIS-inspired atrocity last Sunday reinforces the rapidly changing security environment in our nation.
“Our security agencies must be in the best position to respond,” Albanese said in a statement, adding that the review would conclude by the end of April.
Albanese has been under pressure from critics who say his centre-left government has not done enough to curb a surge in antisemitism since the start of the war in Gaza.
The prime minister has since vowed to strengthen hate laws in the wake of the attack.
On Saturday, the government of New South Wales, which includes Sydney, committed to introducing a bill to ban the display of symbols and flags of “terrorist organisations”, including those of Islamic State, Hamas and Hezbollah.
Authorities say Islamic State flags were found in the car the attackers took to Bondi.
One of the alleged gunmen, Sajid Akram, 50, was shot dead by police at the scene.
His 24-year-old son Naveed Akram, who was also shot by police and emerged from a coma on Tuesday, has been charged with 59 offences, including murder and terrorism, according to police.
Several victims of Jeffrey Epstein have told Sky News that the incomplete release of the files relating to the dead paedophile financier have left them feeling shocked, outraged and disappointed.
Thousands of files relating to Epstein, who died in prison in 2019 while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges, were made public late on Friday – but only a fraction of them have been released so far, with many heavily redacted.
‘Nothing transparent about release’
Marina Lacerda, a Brazilian-born survivor who suffered sexual abuse by Epstein as a teenager, expressed her disappointment over the incomplete release, calling it “a slap in our faces”.
“We were all excited yesterday before the files came out,” she told Sky News presenter Anna Botting.
“And when they did come out, we were just in shock, and we see that there is nothing there that is transparent. So it’s very sad, it’s very disappointing.”
Ms Lacera said she had just turned 14 when she met Epstein before “our relationship, our friendship I should say” ended when she was 17.
More on Jeffrey Epstein
Related Topics:
There is nothing transparent about Epstein files release, Marina Lacerda says
“At that point, he had made it very clear to me that I was old, that I was no longer fun for him. So, he booted me out, and I was no longer needed for him,” she said.
The Department of Justice (DoJ) suggests that 1,200 victims and their families have effectively been shielded from view in the released documents.
Ms Lacera said: “From what I know, [the number of Epstein victims] is over a thousand, but that’s just what the DoJ can collect or the FBI can collect, but I presume there may be more than that.”
Image: Marina Lacerda spoke outside the US Capitol in favour of the Epstein Files Transparency Act. Pic: AP
‘No way it’s not a cover-up’
Ashley Rubright met the late sex offender when she was just 15 in Palm Beach and was subject to abuse over several years.
Asked about her dissatisfaction with yesterday’s government release and if there was a sense of a cover-up operation, she noted that there had been knowledge of Epstein’s crimes “for so, so long”.
“There’s no way that there’s not a cover-up – what it is, I don’t know,” she told Sky News’ US correspondent James Matthews.
“I just hope that nobody’s allowed to fly under the radar with their involvement.”
Ashley Rubright says ‘there’s no way there’s not a cover-up’
Regarding the extent of the redactions, she said: “I’m so not shocked, but let down. Disappointed.
“Seeing […] completely redacted pages, there’s no way that that’s just to protect the victims’ identities, and there better be a good reason. I just don’t know if we’ll ever know what that is.
“We’ve been left behind since day one. That’s why I think we’re all fighting so loud now, because we’re tired of it.”
Image: Ashley Rubright speaks at a rally in support of Epstein victims. Pic: Reuters
‘He wanted to man-handle me’
Another survivor, Alicia Arden, told Sky News that she met Epstein in a California hotel room in 1997 for an audition, when she was a 25-year-old model and actress.
“He let me in and he started looking over my portfolio, which is customary to do in a talent audition, and then he insinuated, ‘oh, you should come closer to me and let me see your body’,” she said.
Epstein then started “taking off my top and my pants and touching my rear end and my breasts”.
“He goes, ‘let me come over here and spin for me and let me man-handle you. Let me man-handle you.’ And I got very nervous and started to cry. I said, ‘I have to go, Jeffrey. I don’t really think this is gonna work out’,” Ms Arden said.
“He got a phone call and I was crying in front of him. And he said, ‘I have this beautiful girl in front of me and she’s very upset’. I said ‘I’m gonna leave’ and he offered me $100 and I said ‘I’m not a prostitute’.”
Image: Alicia Arden
She said she went to the Santa Monica Police Department to file a report.
“That was as difficult, and I’m like shaking telling you, but as difficult as being in the hotel room with him because they weren’t supportive at all about it,” she said. Her redacted report was included in previous files.
‘Epstein was a monster’
Asked what she thought about Epstein now, she said: “He’s a monster […] and just horrible. I mean, I’m trembling thinking about him and talking about him.
“If I could do anything, I’m happy I got the police report filed. If they would have pursued him and maybe gone over the hotel [where he was] essentially living, then I could have maybe saved the girls. I’ve always thought that.”
Image: Ms Arden’s redacted police report. Pic: AP
Ms Arden does not believe she has seen justice as one of Epstein’s victims.
“I want to see all of the files come out. I want all of the men in there or women that were trafficking these girls, and they shouldn’t be able to walk around free and not pay for if they did something,” she said.
“They should be actually arrested if they’re in the files and it’s proven that they did horrible things to these girls, and they should lose their jobs, their lives, their homes, their money, and pay for what they did, and it was all supposed to come out, and it hasn’t.”
Image: Jeffrey Epstein died in prison in 2019 while awaiting trial on federal sex trafficking charges
‘I feel redeemed’ by file release
Maria Farmer, who made a complaint to the Miami FBI in 1996 in which she alleged that Epstein stole and sold photos she had taken of her 12- and 16-year-old sisters, expressed gratitude for the release of the files.
“This is amazing. Thank you for believing me. I feel redeemed. This is one of the best days of my life,” she said in a statement through her lawyers.
“I’m crying for two reasons. I want everyone to know that I am shedding tears of joy for myself, but also tears of sorrow for all the other victims that the FBI failed.”
Image: Annie Farmer holds a photo of herself and her sister, Maria Farmer, when they were victims of Epstein. Pic: AP
A positive-leaning reaction also came from Dani Bensky, who said she was sexually abused by Epstein when she was 17 years old.
She told Sky News’ US partner network NBC News: “There is part of me that feels a bit validated at this moment, because I think so many of us have been saying, ‘No, this is real, like, we’re not a hoax’.
“There’s so much information, and yet not as much as we may have wanted to see.”
‘It is not over’
Lawyer Gloria Allred, who has represented several Epstein victims, told Sky News about the partial release on Friday: “It’s very disappointing that all of the files were not released yesterday as required and, in fact, mandated by law.
“The law didn’t say they could do this over a period of time, it didn’t say that weeks could go by.”
Image: Lawyer Gloria Allred
Deputy attorney general Mr Blanche said additional file disclosures can be expected by the end of the year.
“But that’s not what the law says. So clearly, the law has been violated. And it’s the Department of Justice letting down the survivors once again,” Ms Allred said.
The lawyer labelled the incomplete release of the files a “distraction”, adding: “This is not over, and it won’t be over until we get the truth and transparency for the survivors.”
The tranche of material was released just hours before a legal deadline in the US following the passing of the Epstein Files Transparency Act – and at the same time as a US strike targeting Islamic State fighters in Syria.
The US deputy attorney general, Todd Blanche, said the justice department was continuing to review the remaining files and was withholding some documents under exemptions meant to protect the victims.
Epstein files release has become ‘a political football’
Meanwhile, the justice department has defended the redactions made in the released files.
“The only redactions being applied to the documents are those required by law – full stop. Consistent with the statute and applicable laws, we are not redacting the names of individuals or politicians unless they are a victim,” it quoted deputy attorney general Mr Blanche in a post on X.
The Trump administration has claimed to be the most transparent in history.
Captivate
This content is provided by Captivate, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Captivate cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Captivate cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Captivate cookies for this session only.
In a statement, the White House claimed the release also demonstrated its commitment to justice for Epstein’s victims, criticising previous Democratic administrations for not doing the same.
But that statement ignored that the disclosures only happened because Congress forced the administration’s hand with a bill demanding the release, after Trump officials declared earlier this year that no more Epstein files would be made public.
Initial searches for Trump’s name within the Department of Justice search function returned nothing, while the presence of former president Bill Clinton, on the other hand, was everywhere.
It is PR strategy 101 – front-load the release of documents with the Democrat stuff and save any possible Trump content for a soft landing sometime between Christmas and New Year.
By that time, the public will have softened its focus on the story – it’s what the festive season does.
The presence of celebrity in the latest release might also feather Trump’s bed.
It’s clear that iconic superstars like Mick Jagger and Diana Ross were courted by Epstein as innocents, ignorant of his criminality. To see them in the files cements a narrative of a monster who lured the unsuspecting into his orbit.
We support Jagger and Ross as treasured icons, so we remind ourselves that simply being included in the files doesn’t equate to wrongdoing or knowledge of it. In turn, it shapes an empathy around the predicament that will extend to Trump and, perhaps, the benefit of any doubt.
Of course, not everyone will see it that way – the people who see a cynical exercise in delay and obfuscation, constituting a gross insult to the Epstein survivors at the heart of the story.
Image: Jeffrey Epstein and Michael Jackson. Pic: US DoJ
For all the talk (by the Trump administration) of a tight time scale and a willingness to act transparently, survivors and their supporters point out that Donald Trump could have published all the Epstein files long ago, never mind drip feed them with wide-ranging redactions.
Not to have done so is an affront to them and an attempt to evade accountability.
For all the talk about the release of the files, their significance is undermined by the lack of context. We are shown pictures and documents that reflect the life of a thoroughly unpleasant individual who inflicted suffering on an industrial scale. But with redactions, and without explanations, we are left having to join the dots in an effort to establish criminal behaviour and blame.
It is a level of uncertainty surrounding the Epstein files and a source of dissatisfaction to survivors, for whom justice further delayed is justice further denied.