Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Jack Straw (Labour) in the House of Commons on Monday, 1 February 2010. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill.


Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill

Colleagues will know—it is a well-trodden path—that if someone was convicted of a serious offence, they would normally come within the automatic disqualification. Let us say that the penalty imposed by the criminal courts was less than the 12 months in prison that would require automatic disqualification. Let us say that someone was acquitted in a criminal court but the facts had been admitted and the acquittal rested on a technical matter, or that the facts had been admitted but the extent of the mens rea—the individual's guilt—was challenged and the jury decided on balance to acquit them. The jurors are saying that the person is not guilty, according to the criminal standard of proof; they are not saying that the person is innocent.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
505 c52 
Session
2009-10
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Complaints Disciplinary proceedings Criminal proceedings Appeals Capital gains tax Conduct Allowances Constitutional and administrative law House of Lords House of Commons Disqualification Income tax European Parliament members Inheritance tax Domicil Overpayments Pay Public appointments Pensions Members Members' interests Ministers Peers Parliament Pension funds Standards Taxation Committee on Standards and Privileges Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority Commissioner for Parliamentary Investigations
Legislation
Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill 2008-09 to 2009-10
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk