A CHEMICAL-weapons watchdog has denied “sexing up” a dossier to blame the Syrian government for a chemical attack in Douma, insisting that those who leaked information into the public domain are not genuine whistleblowers.

The Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) has been accused of covering up evidence under political pressure and manipulating information to say that President Bashar al-Assad launched a chemical attack against his own people in April 2018.

But a series of leaked emails and testimony from OPCW whistleblowers has highlighted inconsistencies between their findings on the ground and the chemical watchdog’s final report.

Initial doubts were cast when it became known in May 2019 that a dissenting engineering report by Ian Henderson had been inexplicably omitted from the OPCW document.

Mr Henderson, who has decades of experience working with the OPCW, led a team which found a higher probability that two chemicals cylinders had been put in a building manually rather than dropped from a Syrian government helicopter.

Crucially, the area was under the control of jihadist groups at the time of the alleged attack.

But rather than commenting on the details of such leaks, the OPCW had said that it was investigating the unauthorised release of the document.

The chemical watchdog today revealed the outcome of its six-month-long investigation, which found that “two former OPCW officials violated their obligations concerning the protection of confidential information related to the [investigation].”

OPCW director General Fernando Arias said that this was due to the unauthorised disclosure of “highly protected information” to those who “did not have a need to know.”

The report, seen by the Morning Star, says that an individual carried out investigations regarding the placing of the gas cylinders against the advice of his superiors and leaked the results to unnamed sources.

Another individual, who had raised concerns that the conclusions in the Douma report were inconsistent with the findings of scientists and investigators, was found to have breached confidentiality.

The OPCW insisted that the person did not have full access to the information, as their employment with the organisation was terminated in August 2018 — seven months before the final report was released.

It accused the former OPCW investigator of trying to influence the outcome of the investigation up to a year after he left. The report suggests that he discussed confidential information with OPCW staff which he did not have the right to know.

Mr Arias insisted that those blamed for the leak were unable to accept that their views were not confirmed by evidence and “took matters into their own hands,” thus breaching their obligations to the OPCW.

“I stand by the conclusions of the final Douma report,” he said.