MPs examining whether Boris Johnson misled Parliament regarding Partygate refute suggestions that the investigation is “unfair.”
The Privileges Committee is investigating the former prime minister’s statements regarding Covid rule violations.
Lord Pannick, a government-hired attorney who examined the committee’s methodology, deemed the investigation “fundamentally flawed.”
According to the committee, Lord Pannick had a “systemic misunderstanding of the legislative process.”
If the committee decides against Mr. Johnson, he may be suspended from the House or even lose his seat.
The committee is investigating whether he obstructed the Commons by claiming that pandemic guidelines were adhered to during lockdown events at No. 10, which resulted in subsequent Covid fines.
The committee ruled last month that it would not be necessary to prove that Mr. Johnson intentionally deceived MPs to establish that he committed “contempt of Parliament” by impeding its work.
Mr. Johnson might be summoned to the committee in the fall to account for his earlier statements to lawmakers.
Lord Pannick stated in his legal opinion that the fear of contempt proceedings for unintentional errors would have a chilling effect on members of parliament.
The committee, however, rejected this as “entirely inappropriate and itself deceptive.”
The independent crossbench peer stated that the committee’s approach is incongruous with previous decisions in which intent was considered and that the method would be declared “illegal” if proven in court.
He criticized the committee for receiving anonymous testimony and argued that Mr. Johnson should be informed of the charges against him.
Lord Pannick’s view, according to the committee, was “based on a systematic ignorance of the legislative process and incorrect comparisons with criminal law.”
It rejected Lord Pannick’s request that Mr. Johnson is represented by an attorney who would cross-examine witnesses and speak on his behalf.
The committee stated in a statement that it “does not have the power to allow counsel to speak at a hearing and undertake cross-examination, and it would require a vote by the House to allow this.”
In April, following a series of revelations regarding events held in and around Downing Street while Covid restrictions were in place, the Parliament opted to initiate the investigation.
Later, an official investigation determined that rules had been broken, and a police probe led to the fining of 83 individuals, including Mr. Johnson.
The prime minister has acknowledged that past statements to Parliament, in which he asserted that all regulations had been followed, have since been proven to be false, although he considered them to be accurate at the time.
He denied intentionally deceiving lawmakers.
