P.M. angry about funeral incident

Press, Volume CXV, Issue 33965, 4 October 1975, Page 1

P.M. angry about funeral incident

(New Zealand Press Association) WELLINGTON, October 3. The Prime Minister (Mr Rowling) tonight called the incident involving a Security Intelligence Service agent at the funeral of Dr William Sutch yesterday “incredible and deplorable."

Mr Rowling said the full facts of the incident had not yet been determined, but there was no doubt that “an intolerable intrusion” had been committed on the family’s private grief.

The Prime Minister issued a statement on the incident shortly after his return from Auckland this evening after a brief meeting with the Deputy Prime Minister (Mr Tizard).

Obviously angry, he had little to add to his written statement, except to say there was a clear clash between the version given by the director of the 5.1.5., (Brigadier H. E. Gilbert) and the witnesses who had laid a complaint of assault against the agent involved. The question woul< be decided by a police inquiry. In his statement, Mr Rowling said: “I find the whole incident incredible and deplorable. “I do not yet know the full story but tn any event I offer my deepest sympathy to the family of the late Dr Sutch.

"Whatever the facts, an intolerable intrusion on the grief of the family has been committed. ‘The S.I.S. has assured me that the agent allegedly seen taking photographs of the mourners had no camera in his possession. On the other hand, witnesses say that he was seen taking photographs. “Clearly only a thorough police inquiry can determine the truth of the case. •‘I am bound to accept the assurance of the Director of Security that the agent involved in this incident was not assigned to check on those attending Dr Sutch’s funeral.

‘Serious error’ "He apparently was passing by, on returning from some other assignment, and stayed, on his own initiative, to watch. “Nevertheless, that seems to me to be a serious error of judgment which cannot pass without comment. “I have asked for a full and detailed report from the Director of Security.” Mr Rowling said the incident underlined "the desirability of having a thorough and fair investigation made into the functions of the 5.1.5.” "I am confident that the] Ombudsman (Sir Guy Powles) will perform that task to the full satisfaction of the country. “I have no doubt, too, that] he will have in mind the important principle that the privacy of individuals must

not be invaded except in cases where the security of the nation is clearly involved.” Asked if the police would direct their inquiries at whether the agent was taking photographs, Mr Rowling told reporters that the purpose of the assault complaint was that the agent was taking photographs. "It is very much an integral part of the complaint." Mr Tizard said the complainants had alleged that the assault was made as they tried to get the agent’s coat open, on the ground that the agent was concealing a camera. “Now this doesn’t square with the statement that they saw him with a camera, taking photos. We don’t know what the truth is.”

Mr Rowling said he had not yet asked for the agent

involved to be suspended, and had no intention at present of asking for him to be suspended during the course of the inquiries. Embarrassed However, the Prime Minister said, he would leave his options open “until 1 find out just a little bit more.” Asked if the S.I.S. embarrassed him at times, Mr Rowling said: “I would have thought the answer to that was contained very much in the opening comments (of his statement).” But he did not know whether it was the service, or the action of an individual.

Mr Rowling said he did not expect the police investigation to take very long, but did not expect any further developments over the week-end Mr Tizard said: “The re-

port we’ve had is that he had no camera, that for most of the time he actually had his coat buttoned up. and that the attempt was being made to pull his coat open. “Now if he’d had his camera in his hand there was no need to pull his coat open, and if he was carrying a camera you would think he wouldn’t have been able to button his coat around it, because it was said to be a large one with a telephoto lens,” Mr Tizard said. Mr Rowling said he would not “speculate or. something where there are two separate reports which are diametrically opposed as far as the contents are concerned in relation to the existence or non-existence of a camera. It would be irresponsible to comment.” Mr Tizard said the agent was “a man who was supposed to have been involved in the trial of Dr Sutch. You would have thought that common taste would have dictated that he stay away from the funeral.”