Three Labour MPs at the centre of the expenses scandal tried to wriggle out of a criminal trial yesterday.
Although charged at Westminster magistrates’ court with claiming a combined total of almost £60,000 in fraudulent expenses, they insisted the courts had no jurisdiction over them.
Elliot Morley, David Chaytor and Jim Devine argued that, under the 321-year-old Bill of Rights, they could be judged only by the House of Commons.
At first, they declined even to stand in the dock – until told in no uncertain terms by the judge that they must.
Labour MP Elliot Morley Labour MP David Chaytor Labour MP Jim Devine
Their astonishing stance brought immediate criticism that, even after widespread public outrage, MPs ‘still don’t get it’.
But the three MPs – who deny the charges brought under the Theft Act – said they were not putting themselves above the law by claiming that trying them in a criminal court would infringe Parliamentary privilege, one of the founding principles of the UK constitution.
It was created in 1689 to protect MPs’ freedom of speech after the civil war and upheavals of the 17th century.
Protestors outside the court, one dressed as Guy Fawkes and another as a pig, likened their statement to Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein refusing to recognise the court that eventually found him guilty of murder.
The Taxpayers’ Alliance called it ‘a disgraceful attempt that shows MPs still think they deserve special treatment despite everything that has happened’.
The hearing, the first to result from the expenses debacle, lasted just 15 minutes before the case was sent to Southwark Crown Court on March 30.
The MPs ‘unequivocally and steadfastly maintain their innocence,’ their counsel told Chief Metropolitan District Judge Timothy Workman.
The three initially sat at the back of Court One, avoiding the indignity of standing in the dock.
But Judge Workman rejected an application by their barrister Julian Knowles that they should remain in the well of the court.
He ordered them to file into the dock, a glass-fronted section of the bleak, crowded room in which countless criminals, drunks and shoplifters have stood before.
Tory peer Lord Hanningfield, who appeared separately, was also sent to Southwark Crown Court after denying wrongly claiming expenses.
The court was told he would also argue he was covered by Parliamentary privilege. All four were given unconditional bail.
The three MPs and the 69-year-old peer are accused of stealing money by abusing the Parliamentary allowance system. It took the clerk nearly ten minutes to read all the charges.
They covered allegedly false claims involving houses, overnight allowances and stationery and carry jail sentences of up to seven years.
But Mr Knowles maintained that to prosecute them for their Parliamentary activities ‘would infringe the principle of the separation of powers, which is one of the principles which underpins the UK’s constitutional structure.’
He said the principle meant that ‘whatever matter arises concerning the workings of Parliament-should be dealt with by Parliament.
Mr Knowles added: ‘These principles mean that it is for the House of Commons alone to decide whether the conduct of Mr Morley, Mr Chaytor and Mr Devine has been such as to call for sanction.’
He stressed that the three were not claiming to be above the law because Parliamentary privilege was part of the law.
Their argument concerned the process by which the allegations against them were determined.
RELATED ARTICLES
- EVs pollute 1850 times more than Fossil Fuel cars according to new study
- UK Warns that China is Preparing for Total Nuclear War with the West
- Jacob Rothschild Dies At Age 87
- UK Government-Funded Study Found Virtually No Dental Benefit From Fluoridation
- UK Elderly Couple Ordered in a Council Letter to Sell Their House as its Needed to House Migrants
Loading ...
Something you don’t hear about is the two former Labour government ministers on the Operation Ore list of suspects. This is a criminal investigation into CHILD PORNOGRAPHY and their credit card details were found on a CP WEBSITE shutdown in the US.