Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

Expenses claim four 'not above the law'

  • Comment

An appeal brought by Tory peer and former Essex CC leader Lord Hanningfield and three ex-Labour MPs facing trial over allegations that they fiddled their expenses was not an attempt to “take them above the law”, three of the country’s top judges have heard.

David Chaytor, Elliot Morley, Jim Devine and Lord Hanningfield, who are all on bail, are asking the Court of Appeal to overturn a ruling earlier this month that they are not protected from prosecution by parliamentary privilege.

Lord Chief Justice Lord Judge, sitting in London with Master of the Rolls Lord Neuberger and Sir Anthony May, heard that the four - who all deny theft by false accounting - also did “not suggest that MPs are immune from the criminal law by reason of their status as MPs”.

Nigel Pleming QC, for Chaytor, told the packed court: “This is not an attempt to take these defendants above the law. It is to ensure they, and indeed other members in a similar position, are adjudicated by the correct law and the correct body.”

The central submission on their behalf was that any investigation into their expenses claims and the imposition of any sanctions “should lie within the hands of Parliament”. The decision under appeal was made by Mr Justice Saunders, sitting at Southwark Crown Court in central London, which resulted in the four having to face Crown Court trials. They will all face separate trials pending the outcome of the appeal.

He rejected the argument that they were protected by parliamentary privilege and should be dealt with by Parliament alone. It was said by the defendants that submitting an expenses form was part of the proceedings of Parliament, and therefore protected by parliamentary privilege.

Mr Pleming told the court that the men submitted that “they have immunity from prosecution arising solely from the performance of their functions, or acts ancillary to the performance of those functions, as MPs when they were MPs”.

Lord Hanningfield, who is also known as Paul White, 69, of West Hanningfield, near Chelmsford, faces six charges of making dishonest claims for travelling allowances.

Each of the four defendants, who are all on unconditional bail, face separate criminal trials, pending the outcome of the appeal.

  • Comment

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions.

Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.