WASHINGTON/LONDON, Jan 22 (Reuters) - The lawyer for an

Israeli private investigator said for the first time publicly on

Wednesday that her client is being prosecuted over allegations

that he was hired by an Exxon Mobil ( XOM ) lobbyist to hack

emails of environmental activists.

The disclosure came in a court filing in Westminster

Magistrates Court in London, where U.S. authorities are seeking

permission to extradite Amit Forlit, who was arrested at

Heathrow Airport last year.

Forlit's U.K.-based lawyer, Rachel Scott, told the court

U.S. authorities have charged Forlit "with a conspiracy to carry

out computer hacking against individuals and entities involved

in (or directly associated with) environmental activism."

That hacking campaign, Scott wrote, "is alleged to have been

commissioned by DCI Group, a lobbying firm representing

ExxonMobil ( XOM ), one of the world's largest fossil fuel companies."

In November Reuters reported Forlit was wanted by the U.S.

Department of Justice in connection with an espionage campaign

targeting environmentalists seeking to hold Exxon legally

accountable for its impact on climate change.

It was the latest in a series of cases uncovered by Reuters

where hackers are alleged to have played a key role in swaying

legal battles, a topic of increased law enforcement concern

worldwide.

The Justice Department, which has not made its

indictment public, declined to comment. Forlit has previously

denied being involved in hack-for-hire work.

Exxon said the oil company "has not been involved in, nor

are we aware of, any hacking activities" and that, if there were

hacking involved, "we condemn it in the strongest possible

terms." DCI Group said the allegations that it commissioned the

hacking operation were false, adding that it directs all of its

employees and consultants to comply with the law. Scott did not

immediately return a message seeking further details on the

extradition case.

In the filing, she noted the U.S. indictment uses codenames

to represent the various parties. Scott said it was important to

identify the companies by name so the U.K. court could

understand who was involved and what was at stake.