Just three weeks ago, Dominic Raab was sitting in Number 10 being offered his old jobs back, after a short hiatus from government thanks to Liz Truss.
But now he has returned to government as justice secretary and deputy prime minister, he is facing questions over his conduct during his previous tenures in the roles, and at other departments too.
Sources close to Mr Raab have hit back at the claims, with a number of his Tory colleagues standing by him as “an excellent and considerate boss”.
However, as accusations continue to emerge, let’s look back at what has been reported so far:
The first claims against Mr Raab emerged on Friday in The Guardian about his stint at the MoJ between September 2021 and September 2022 under Boris Johnson.
More on Dominic Raab
Related Topics:
The newspaper said around 15 senior civil servants in his private office had been offered “respite or a route out” after his return was announced, due to concerns some were still traumatised from working for him.
Multiple MoJ sources also said he had previously created a “culture of fear” in the department, alleging he was “demeaning rather than demanding” with civil servants, and that he was “very rude and aggressive”, adding: “[He] wasn’t just unprofessional, he was a bully”.
Advertisement
But a spokesperson for the department said there was “zero tolerance for bullying across the civil service”, adding: “The deputy prime minister leads a professional department, driving forward major reforms, where civil servants are valued and the level of ambition is high.”
Tomatoes and riot acts
Within hours of the story breaking, two more emerged from Mr Raab’s earlier time at the MoJ.
One in the Sun claimed he had thrown tomatoes from his salad at staff.
And another in the Mirror said he had been given the nickname “The Incinerator” because of how quickly he “burns through” employees.
But the deputy PM’s spokesman called the salad attack claim “complete nonsense” and denied a high turnover of staff in his departments.
All three of the articles also claimed the permanent secretary, Antonia Romeo, warned Mr Raab to treat staff with respect on his return, with one source, who was not in the room at the time, saying she had “read him the riot act”.
On Saturday, a single source told ITV News that the Cabinet Office had been informed about concerns over Mr Raab’s behaviour when he was Brexit secretary in 2018.
The Observer picked up the story, saying a “formal expression of concern” had been sent to a senior official in the Department for Exiting the European Union, alleging “unprofessional, even bullying, conduct of the minister towards his private office”.
But the Cabinet Office told the newspaper it had “no record of any formal complaints” being passed onto them.
Surveys and support
Come Sunday, the focus fell onto Mr Raab’s time as foreign secretary, between July 2020 and September 2021.
A survey was leaked to ITV News showing eight people working in his private office at the time claimed to have been bullied or harassed at work, while 15 staff reported witnessing another person being bullied or treated unfairly.
The results were anonymous, though, so neither the perpetrator nor victim could be identified.
In response, a spokesman for Mr Raab said he had “high standards, works hard, and expects a lot from his team as well as himself”, but that he “worked well with officials” and “always acts with the utmost professionalism”.
As Rishi Sunak travelled to the G20 summit in Bali on Sunday night, he faced questions about the reappointment of Mr Raab, but insisted he did not “recognise that characterisation” of his colleague and was “unaware” of any formal complaints being made against him.
A Number 10 spokeswoman also said: “As the prime minister has said before, people in public life should treat others with consideration and respect. Those are principles that this government will stand by.
“There are established procedures by which civil servants can raise complaints. These processes allow allegations to be looked at and considered with due process and a fair hearing.”
When Monday rolled around, an interview with a former top official at the Foreign Office during Mr Raab’s tenure set tongues wagging again.
Former permanent secretary Lord Simon McDonald was asked on LBC whether the previous days’ bullying allegations were plausible, and he replied: “Yes.”
He added: “Dominic Raab is one of the most driven people I ever worked for, he was a tough boss.
“Maybe they are euphemisms, but I worked closely with him and I didn’t see everything that happened.”
Within hours, there was another story from The Guardian, claiming Mr Raab had been warned about his behaviour towards officials at the Foreign Office on multiple occasions by none other than Lord McDonald.
The paper also alleged that Lord McDonald had several informal conversations with the head of the propriety and ethics team at the Cabinet Office about him between 2019 and 2020 about the issue.
A spokesman for Mr Raab told The Guardian: “Dominic had frequent discussions with his permanent secretary at the Foreign Office about how best to run the department and ensure that it delivered to the highest standard in challenging circumstances such as during COVID.”
Behaviour and high standards
Tuesday and Lord McDonald was back on the airwaves, talking to Times Radio about Mr Raab. He went further than in his LBC interview, saying many colleagues were “scared” to go into the then foreign secretary’s office when he was in charge.
The peer said Mr Raab “was not aware of the impact of his behaviour on the people working for him and couldn’t be made to see that impact”, adding: “Colleagues did not complain to me formally, it was kind of their professional pride to cope, but many were scared to go into his office.”
And he said the minister’s defence was that “he treated everybody in the building in the same way – he was as abrasive and controlling with junior ministers and senior officials as he was with his private secretaries.”
But again, Mr Raab’s spokesman insisted he had “acted with professionalism and integrity in all of his government roles”, adding: “He has an excellent record of driving positive change in multiple government departments by working well with officials.
“He holds everyone, and most of all himself, to the high standards that the British people would expect of their government.”
There was another accusation coming his way – this time from Labour’s Lisa Nandy, who shadowed Mr Raab when he was at the Foreign Office.
She told Sky News she had heard “a number of rumours this was a pattern of behaviour”, adding: “It’s been something of an open secret in Westminster for the last few years there is a problem in the justice department, there was a problem in the Foreign Office – it was apparently particularly directed towards women.
“I think it’s really damning that Rishi Sunak has appointed Dominic Raab to this post knowing that this is potentially an issue.”
But Mr Raab’s spokesman “categorically” denied the allegation, while his team said suggestions he has a woman problem was “nonsense”.
A source close to Mr Raab said: “This is baseless mudslinging with no grounding in reality, and undermines serious cases of bullying and inappropriate behaviour.”
The investigation
Wednesday means Prime Minister’s Questions and, as Mr Sunak’s deputy, it is down to him to stand in while the boss is away at the G20 summit.
But the drama came early as two hours before his appearance, he sent out a tweet, revealing he had written to the PM to request an independent investigation into two formal complaints that had been made against him – one at the Foreign Office and another at the Ministry of Justice.
Mr Raab said he had “never tolerated bullying, and always sought to reinforce and empower the teams of civil servants working in my respective departments”.
But he promised to “cooperate fully” with the investigation and “respect whatever outcome you decide”.
Mr Sunak replied, agreeing this was “the right course of action”, adding: “Integrity, professionalism and accountability are core values of this government. It is right that these matters are investigated fully.”
The Israel Defence Forces (IDF) said it carried out a “precise strike” on Hezbollah’s “central headquarters”, which it claimed was “embedded under residential buildings in the heart of the Dahieh in Beirut”.
The first wave of attacks shook windows across the city and sent thick clouds of smoke billowing into the air.
While Israel stressed it had been a “precise” strike, preliminary figures from Lebanon’s health ministry confirmed at least six other people were killed and 91 were wounded.
Israel said Nasrallah was the intended target and initially there were claims he had survived.
However, after several hours of confusion, his death was confirmed by Israel.
Advertisement
“Hassan Nasrallah will no longer be able to terrorise the world,” the IDF said.
Hours later, a defiant Hezbollah confirmed Nasrallah’s death but vowed their fight with Israel would continue after confirming they had fired upon sites in northern Israel.
“The leadership of Hezbollah pledges to the highest, holiest, and most precious martyr in our path full of sacrifices and martyrs to continue its jihad in confronting the enemy, supporting Gaza and Palestine, and defending Lebanon and its steadfast and honourable people,” they said.
Alongside claiming to have killed Nasrallah, the IDF said it had killed a number of other commanders, including Ali Karaki, the commander of the southern front.
The country’s military said the strike was carried out while Hezbollah leadership met at their underground headquarters in Dahieh.
In the aftermath of the most recent attacks, an Israeli military spokesperson declined to comment on whether US-made Mark 84 heavy bombs were used in the strike against Nasrallah.
“The strike was conducted while Hezbollah’s senior chain of command were operating from the headquarters and advancing terrorist activities against the citizens of the State of Israel,” Lieutenant Colonel Nadav Shoshani said in a media briefing.
He continued: “We hope this will change Hezbollah’s actions.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
6:17
Hezbollah leader killed says IDF
He added the number of civilian casualties was unclear but blamed Hezbollah for positioning itself in residential areas.
“We’ve seen Hezbollah carry out attacks against us for a year. It’s safe to assume that they are going to continue carrying out their attacks against us or try to,” he said.
Meanwhile, Iran said it was in constant contact with Hezbollah and other allies to determine its “next step”, but Reuters reported the country’s supreme leader was transferred to a secure location in light of the latest attack.
Speaking after the attack, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei called on Muslims “to stand by the people of Lebanon and the proud Hezbollah” and said: “The fate of this region will be determined by the forces of resistance, with Hezbollah at the forefront,” state media reported.
Nasrallah’s death will be a blow to Hezbollah as it continues to reel from a campaign of escalating Israeli attacks.
Nasrallah is latest Hezbollah leader to fall
While Nasrallah’s death is certainly the most high-profile of recent attacks, it continues a trend of Israel targeting Hezbollah’s leadership structure.
Also on Saturday, in the early hours of the morning, the commander of the group’s missile unit and his deputy were killed in another Israeli attack in southern Lebanon.
Spreaker
This content is provided by Spreaker, 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 Spreaker 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 Spreaker cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spreaker cookies for this session only.
A Swiss teenage cyclist with “a bright future ahead of her” has died a day after suffering a serious head injury at the world championships.
Muriel Furrer crashed while competing on rain-slicked roads in the junior women’s road race in her home country.
The 18-year-old rider fell heavily on Thursday in a forest area south of the city of Zurich and was airlifted to hospital by helicopter, reportedly in a critical condition.
Race organisers announced on Friday she had died.
They said in a statement: “Muriel Furrer sadly passed away today at Zurich University Hospital.”
The UCI governing body for world cycling paid tribute to her in a statement on its website, entitled “The cycling world mourns the loss of Muriel Furrer”.
It read: “It is with great sadness that the Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI) and the Organising Committee of the 2024 UCI Road and Para-cycling Road World Championships today learned the tragic news of the death of young Swiss cyclist Muriel Furrer.
“With the passing of Muriel Furrer, the international cycling community loses a rider with a bright future ahead of her. We offer sincere condolences to Muriel Furrer’s family, friends and her Federation Swiss Cycling.”
Swiss Cycling said in a post on X: “Our hearts are broken, we have no words. It is with a heavy heart and infinite sadness that we have to say goodbye to Muriel Furrer today.
“We are losing a warm-hearted and wonderful young woman who always had a smile on her face. There is no understanding, only pain and sadness.”
X
This content is provided by X, 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 X 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 X cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow X cookies for this session only.
Furrer is the second Swiss cyclist to die in just over a year after crashing on home roads.
At the Tour de Suisse in June 2023, Gino Mader went off the road and down a ravine during a descent. The 26-year-old died from his injuries the next day.
“Obviously it is another tragic death,” Mr Senn said. “There are a lot of similarities, similar feelings. Today is about Muriel.”
Over the past 18 years Nasrallah has grown Hezbollah in his image, expanding its forces, building its infrastructure and significantly expanding its arsenal.
He wasn’t just the leader of Hezbollah, he was a global figurehead of anti-Israel resistance.
More on Hezbollah
Related Topics:
With Iran’s help, Hezbollah became one of the best armed non-state militaries in the world.
It is now decapitated and in disarray.
Advertisement
During the past decades Israel has also been at work, steadily gathering intelligence on Nasrallah and Hezbollah, building a vast database of information, an effort which arguably distracted them from better understanding the intentions of Hamas.
The intelligence successes of the past days have helped restore Israel’s reputation after the stunning failures on October 7.
Iran and Hezbollah must choose
This is a pivotal moment.
Iran and Hezbollah must now decide how to respond: fight, or backdown.
The strike also killed Ali Karaqi, commander of Hezbollah’s southern front and labelled as the second most wanted by the IDF.
It is still unclear who else died in the strike, but given the location and the presence of top officials, it seems likely that other senior figures would have been eliminated too.
Nasrallah will be replaced.
The assassination of enemy leaders can prove to be a short-term victory because they are often succeeded by someone more formidable than before, as witnessed by the killing of the former Hezbollah leader Abbas al Moussawi in 1992.
He was succeeded by Nasrallah.
The working assumption is that the group will respond with barrages of missiles into Israel, probably targeting Tel Aviv.
But Hezbollah’s command structure has been severely degraded by Israel.
Nasrallah had become isolated as the IDF had steadily killed commanders over a fortnight of scything airstrikes on their compounds in Beirut and elsewhere.
It will probably take time to co-ordinate a response and it will probably be done with Iranian guidance.
Nasrallah might be dead, but Hezbollah isn’t
Hezbollah is badly wounded, not just as a paramilitary force but in the eyes of the Lebanese people, many of whom are angry their country is now facing another period of devastating violence.
This might be a moment for more moderate voices within Lebanon, including the national armed forces, to step in.
As the war escalated over recent weeks, noticeable divisions emerged between Tehran and Nasrallah.
He remained an important ally, however, a trusted advisor to Iran’s Supreme Leader, and this will come as a personal blow to him.
Having resisted the opportunity to get involved so far, Iran might decide the time has come to take the gloves off and deploy what is left of the thousands of missiles they’ve provided Hezbollah with.
Alternatively, after such a difficult ten days, Tehran might conclude that this round of fighting needs to end and pull back with its main proxy still in some shape to rebuild and fight another day.
With such momentum behind Israel, Iran will also be concerned about its own fate and that of its smaller proxies in Iraq and Syria.
Ultimately, the reason for Hezbollah’s existence – to act as insurance against an Israeli attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities – hasn’t changed, but if Tehran calculates its proxies can no longer act as that shield it might try to accelerate its nuclear programme.
Could a ground invasion follow?
The Israeli government has choices of its own: order a ground invasion of southern Lebanon or continue with an air campaign that has delivered such dramatic successes.
There will be strong and compelling voices in Netanyahu’s cabinet urging him to take advantage of the situation and send troops in, but Hezbollah is not defeated, thousands of its soldiers remain and they are likely hiding in the vast tunnel network under the hills across the border.
Even a limited ground invasion risks large loss of life, on both sides, and the potential Israel will be lured into something more prolonged than it intended.
Nasrallah’s death might change the dynamic in Gaza too.
Yahya Sinwar, the leader of Hamas, has clung on and rejected ceasefire attempts in the hope that Hezbollah and Iran would go to war with Israel, dragging its enemy into a multi-front and unwinnable conflict.
That might still happen, but just as Nasrallah became isolated, so too is Sinwar.
The much trumpeted “unity of arenas” has failed to join up.
The Middle East might often look chaotic to outsiders, but there are unspoken rules generally acknowledged and followed by belligerents.
For years Hezbollah and Israel acted within the unwritten but understood parameters of a shadow war.
Then, eleven months ago on 8 October, Hezbollah attacked Israel out of solidarity with Hamas.
Nasrallah tied Lebanon’s fate to Hamas, insisting that Hezbollah would only stop when the fighting ended in Gaza.
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
The rules shifted as the crossfire escalated, but it remained broadly contained within boundaries understood by both sides.
Until two weeks ago, 17 September, when thousands of pagers started exploding across Beirut and Lebanon.
It is possible Nasrallah had concluded that Israel was war-weary, and he overestimated the domestic and international pressure Netanyahu was under to end the fighting.
He might have believed that Netanyahu had neither the will nor the support to open up another front.
He, like so many of us, maybe assumed US influence on Israel would prevail.