Is there any evidence that BAT has engaged in document destruction?
The companys apparent willingness to destroy potentially damaging documents was revealed in 2002 in an Australian legal case iv v and its rationale, as indicated by whistle blowers, vi raises further concerns about the long-term integrity of the collection while maintained by BAT: It was obvious to everyone ‘in the know’ what the strategy was. That is, its purpose was to get rid of all the sensitive documents but do so under the guise of an innocent housekeeping arrangement and to ensure that all relevant documents that were not destroyed or removed from the jurisdiction were properly (legally) privileged. vii The US Department of Justice is taking allegations of document destruction so seriously that in 2004 it deposed Andrew Foyle, a partner at BATs legal firm, Lovells, on the companys policy of “document retention”, based on concerns that BAT has engaged in the illegal destruction of company documents.
