View Single Post
Old 10-02-2010, 01:01 PM #10
Shasown's Avatar
Shasown Shasown is offline
Account Vacant
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: In my house.
Posts: 9,351
Shasown Shasown is offline
Account Vacant
Shasown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: In my house.
Posts: 9,351
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by angus58 View Post
It will be a gross abuse of power if mps try to hide behind parliamentary privilege to avoid prosecution. They are not above the law and shoud be prosecuted for what is, after all, fraud. The fact that several MPs have repaid the overclaimed expenses because they were ordered to should not excuse them from prosecution.
I cant really see the defence of Parliamentary Priviledge standing up in court given that the priviledge they are talking about was primarily introduced to prevent the Sovereign's interference in the running of parliament. It also allows MP to be able to speak in parliament without fear of an action for slander. It wasnt introduced to allow MP's to escape criminal justice. It was intended that offences within and against the parliament be tried by the parliament

However if they do use it as a defence and that defence is allowed, then the next logical step is for Parliament to convene an MP's court to try them. Would they submit to that knowing some of the possible punishments.

Using a 1690 principle to defend themselves against a modern charge wouldnt it render them to a 1690 punishment if found guilty.

http://www.oldbaileyonline.org/static/Punishment.jsp

I think it might be mildly amusing to see an MP getting flogged then branded, or even hung, publicly of course.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vanessa View Post
Thanks.I just didn't want to make a fuss.

Last edited by Shasown; 10-02-2010 at 01:14 PM.
Shasown is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote