The UK’s fraud commission is facing an investigation after a court ruled that it was unfair.

The British Attorney General has investigated a corruption case against the Serious Fraud Office after a court ruled that the Anti-Corruption Commission had denied that a former oil and gas chief executive was guilty of criminal misconduct.

The intervention of Suella Braverman, the attorney general, followed the decision of the Court of Appeals to overturn the decision of Ziad Akle, a former Unaoil senior oil and gas consultant, who had been in prison for five years last year. . The court found that Akle was “unjustly sentenced” after the SFO “violated security”.

The court decision and the intervention of Braverman put forward Lisa Osofsky, the head of the anti-corruption agency, who had been under pressure after coming to strongly criticize her case with Judge Akle last year.

Following the verdict of the judge, the council he announced an independent investigation into the handling of the case but suspended until an appeal is lodged. On Friday night, the commission said in a statement that the inquiry into the investigation had been substantiated by the attorney general.

In a statement, Braverman said he was “deeply concerned” about the decision and would “immediately consult with the director of the Serious Fraud Office”. The Attorney-General is responsible for appointing the SFO leader. The commission declined to comment on Osofsky’s position.

In a landmark decision, the SFO was challenged by three judges for allowing David Tinsley, a Miami investigator representing Unaoil’s founding family, which was at the center of the agency’s corruption investigation, to intervene in the case.

Osofsky and other SFO colleagues met and exchanged messages with Tinsley, who worked for the Ahsani family, during the Unaoil investigation. Tinsley told Osofsky and the SFO that he could persuade Akle and Basil Al-Jarah, another suspect, who did not represent him, to plead guilty to the charge in return for his client’s reduced costs.

U.S. prosecutors, who were conducting a similar investigation in Unaoil, eventually protected talks with brothers Saman and Cyrus Ahsani, in 2019. Their father, Ata Ahsani, handed a $ 2.25m fine to US officials and did nothing, according to a Friday ruling.

The judges stated: “Tinsley was the last person the SFO would allow, or even cause, him to engage in seduction. [Akle and Basil Al-Jarah] confession. ”

He can understand why Osofsky “should be prepared to have the first meeting with Tinsley”, however [did] I do not understand ”how he and his SFO colleagues felt it was appropriate to let him go and take Akle’s case seriously.

The SFO also denied evidence in its telephone meetings with Tinsley, the court found. There was a “failure to disclose which severely hampered security”, according to the ruling.

The judges ruled that the agency’s “refusal” to provide Akle’s legal team with details of those who linked to Tinsley was “a serious failure of the SFO to comply with its mandate”, though they did not believe it was a deliberate concealment. He also said the failure was “unfortunate especially because some of the records had the potential to embarrass the SFO”. The council denied the opportunity to try Akle again.

Campaigners have asked people to investigate what happened. The anti-corruption group Spotlight on Corruption said: “This is a very serious matter for SFOs, adding that” it should bring about a period of independent review and guidance by the judges on what went wrong, and who caused it. “

One of Akle’s judges, Jonathan Pickworth, asked Osofsky to step down, describing his “unofficial” position.

The judges denied another plaintiff, Paul Bond, a former SBM Offshore sales manager, one of Unaoil’s clients, to appeal. He was one of three people found guilty along with Akle. His lawyers are set to appeal his conviction after Friday’s ruling.