Court would find probe into whether PM lied over partygate ‘unlawful’
A probe into whether Boris Johnson lied to parliament over the partygate scandal would be found “unlawful” by a court, a top barrister has said.In a published legal opinion commissioned by the government, Lord Pannick – a crossbench peer who sits in the House of Lords – described the Privileges Committee’s approach to its investigation into whether the PM misled MP as “unfair” and “flawed”.
Lord Pannick’s advice states: “We advise Mr Johnson that the committee is proposing to proceed by reference to substantive errors as to the ingredients of contempt and the standard of proof required, and is proposing to adopt an unfair procedure.”But for parliamentary privilege, a court hearing a judicial review application brought by Mr Johnson would declare the committee’s report to be unlawful.”His advice states that “the committee has failed to understand that to prove contempt against Mr Johnson, it is necessary to establish that he intended to mislead the House”.
The top barrister also warned that “the threat of contempt proceedings for unintentional mistakes would have a seriously chilling effect on all members”.Labour MP Chris Bryant, who chairs the privileges committee but is not leading the partygate inquiry having recused himself, dismissed the government-commissioned legal opinion by Lord Pannick as “disgraceful bullying” and “wrong on several counts”.
More from Politics
“Lord Pannick’s bizarre ‘opinion’ has no formal status and is wrong on several counts,” he posted on social media.”Firstly, he fails to mention that the motion that charged the committee makes no mention of ‘intentionally misleading’.
Advertisement
“Nor does he acknowledge that many aspect of standards processes have changed over the years, including the introduction of the right of ministers to correct the record through a written ministerial statement – which was used 200 times last year.”He continued: “It’s time this disgraceful bullying stopped. Let’s hear and see the evidence. If Johnson has a good case to make, he’ll be vindicated. If not, he should take his punishment.”Although Mr Johnson is due to leave Number 10 next week, the Privileges Committee has said it will go ahead with its inquiry into whether Mr Johnson committed a contempt of parliament by telling MPs on several occasions that there were no lockdown-busting parties in Downing Street and across Whitehall.If the committee finds there has been a contempt, it can recommend a sanction on the PM – but it is up to the House of Commons to accept or reject that recommendation.
A probe into whether Boris Johnson lied to parliament over the partygate scandal would be found “unlawful” by a court, a top barrister has said.
In a published legal opinion commissioned by the government, Lord Pannick – a crossbench peer who sits in the House of Lords – described the Privileges Committee’s approach to its investigation into whether the PM misled MP as “unfair” and “flawed”.
Lord Pannick’s advice states: “We advise Mr Johnson that the committee is proposing to proceed by reference to substantive errors as to the ingredients of contempt and the standard of proof required, and is proposing to adopt an unfair procedure.
“But for parliamentary privilege, a court hearing a judicial review application brought by Mr Johnson would declare the committee’s report to be unlawful.”
His advice states that “the committee has failed to understand that to prove contempt against Mr Johnson, it is necessary to establish that he intended to mislead the House”.
The top barrister also warned that “the threat of contempt proceedings for unintentional mistakes would have a seriously chilling effect on all members”.
Labour MP Chris Bryant, who chairs the privileges committee but is not leading the partygate inquiry having recused himself, dismissed the government-commissioned legal opinion by Lord Pannick as “disgraceful bullying” and “wrong on several counts”.
“Lord Pannick’s bizarre ‘opinion’ has no formal status and is wrong on several counts,” he posted on social media.
“Firstly, he fails to mention that the motion that charged the committee makes no mention of ‘intentionally misleading’.
“Nor does he acknowledge that many aspect of standards processes have changed over the years, including the introduction of the right of ministers to correct the record through a written ministerial statement – which was used 200 times last year.”
He continued: “It’s time this disgraceful bullying stopped. Let’s hear and see the evidence. If Johnson has a good case to make, he’ll be vindicated. If not, he should take his punishment.”
Although Mr Johnson is due to leave Number 10 next week, the Privileges Committee has said it will go ahead with its inquiry into whether Mr Johnson committed a contempt of parliament by telling MPs on several occasions that there were no lockdown-busting parties in Downing Street and across Whitehall.
If the committee finds there has been a contempt, it can recommend a sanction on the PM – but it is up to the House of Commons to accept or reject that recommendation.
