Zimpapers Logo

On a balmy evening in 2007, the Tunisian wife of an Italian industrialist introduced a high-flying Scottish banker at Barclays to the Anglophile prime minister of Qatar — the sort of nexus of celebrity, power and money that takes places every summer on Sardinia’s Costa Smeralda.This encounter proved more important than most. Just over a year later, as the worst financial crisis in a generation created havoc across the industry, Barclays was suddenly under threat and in desperate need of outside funding.

Roger Jenkins, then head of Barclays’ principal investing group, would be the one to secure it. Over the course of 2008 he masterminded two deals with a man he met in Sardinia the previous summer: Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim bin Jabr al-Thani, at the time Qatar’s prime minister and chair of the country’s sovereign wealth fund.

Known as HBJ, he would help pump a total of £6,1bn into the bank. The goal was to save it from government ownership, even as its rivals Royal Bank of Scotland and Lloyds Banking Group were bailed out. The plan worked.

But nearly a decade later, the long shadow of that emergency funding still hangs over the bank.

Today, those frantic cash-raising efforts are at the centre of the only UK criminal case from the crisis era in which senior bank executives face the possibility of charges.

Side arrangements that Barclays promised to Qatar have prompted a litany of litigation and investigations over whether Barclays properly disclosed fees paid to the Qataris – and whether it secretly loaned them money to then reinvest in the bank.

The side-deals include a one-page agreement that was never approved by the bank’s board. As well as criminal and regulatory inquiries, Barclays is also facing a whistle blowing claim from one of its most senior bankers at the time, who has co-operated with investigators.

There is also the $1bn lawsuit filed by a financier with Gulf connections over side deals. The bank denies wrongdoing and is contesting all the cases.

“Would it be in the bank’s best interest to move on from all of this? Self-evidently, yes,” says one senior bank source. But not at any price.”

Those matters are now coming to a head. The Serious Fraud Office has pledged to make a charging decision in the criminal case, which the bank has codenamed Cadmium, by the end of March.

Mr Jenkins is a suspect in the case and has been interviewed under caution – when individuals are read their rights – as have former chief executives John Varley and Bob Diamond and a handful of top managers.

If senior executives are charged, Barclays risks a corporate prosecution because the executives could constitute a “directing mind” of the company under UK corporate criminal liability laws.

Lawyers for Mr Diamond, Mr Varley and Mr Jenkins declined to comment. Barclays said it could not comment, citing continuing legal matters.

The Financial Conduct Authority, meanwhile, has reignited its own parallel investigation after determining four years ago that Barclays should pay a £50m penalty for disclosure violations. The timing could not be worse. Eager to cement its post-Brexit future, the UK is again hoping to persuade Qatar, which still retains a 6 per cent stake in Barclays, to open its coffers and is welcoming a delegation for an investment conference at the end of this month.

Qatari investments top £35bn in the UK, according to the Qatar-UK Business and Investment Forum. That includes trophy assets such as the Shard, the 1,000ft tower that looms over the City of London, and iconic institutions such as Harrods and Claridge’s.

Last week, Mr Diamond’s new firm teamed up with QInvest, whose board is headed by one of HBJ’s sons, to launch a bid for Panmure Gordon, the City stockbroker.

A separate £72m fine meted out by the FCA on Barclays in 2015 underscores the continuing Qatari influence on the bank. In 2011-12, Barclays skirted money-laundering controls to land a £1.9bn transaction dubbed the “elephant” deal.

The client accounts at the heart of that case were connected to HBJ and his relatives, according to five people familiar with the situation, though the bank’s failings were procedural and the clients were not suspected of wrongdoing.

Meanwhile, even though Barclays is still committed to the Gulf region, the bank’s own strategy there has in effect been put on hold until the various matters are resolved, according to a bank official, who, like the dozen other individuals to whom the Financial Times spoke, would only do so anonymously because of legal sensitivities.

HBJ, who stepped down as prime minister in 2013, and Qatar Holding, a subsidiary of Qatar Investment Authority, the sovereign wealth fund, are not suspected of wrongdoing in the investigations and are not part of investigators’ focus.

Lawyers for both HBJ and Qatar Holding declined to comment. HBJ told the FT last year that Qatar did everything in the “right, legal way”.

He added that Barclays represents “a good investment. I regret the noise. We thought we had helped the British economy at a bad time and that someone would thank us for it.”

Qatar is still sensitive about how the case looks, according to one City official. “The big question is what attitude the Qataris are taking now with the British government.” Yet any attempt by the UK government to intervene in the case would rile the SFO. — Financial Times