Due to the move of the blog to Wordpress posts from Jan 2012 onward will have commenting disabled (when I remember to do it)
Cheers - AE

Sunday, 3 January 2010

Was the Bill of Rights intended for this?

Three Labour MPs being investigated for expenses fraud are arguing that they should not be prosecuted because their suspect claims are covered by parliamentary privilege.

The MPs have hired legal experts to assert that the 1689 Bill of Rights protects them from prosecution.

The lawyers are understood to have sent detailed submissions to police and prosecutors which contend that the House of Commons rule book on expenses is “privileged” and cannot be subject to scrutiny by the courts.

The legal manoeuvre raises the prospect of the case against the MPs being thrown out before it reaches trial or being bogged down for months in legal argument.

Any delay would minimise the damage to Labour in the run-up to the general election.
I'm not sure the delay will make a lot of difference to the election since the result is already known in general terms; a bunch of bastards will certainly win. The interesting thing is that there really is no depth to which the political class won't stoop and no law that is too sacred to be whored for their satisfaction and personal advantage. Defrauding the people who pay for your fucking lifestyles protected by the Bill of Rights? You utterly repellant scumbags.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

I can see advantage here: if the Bill Of Rights is upheld in this regard, presumably it validates the entire act? including my right to bear arms, as an englishman of protestant descent? could be fun...

Related Posts with Thumbnails